Slashdot Mirror
Woman Behind Pakistan's First Hackathon, Sabeen Mahmud, Shot Dead
An anonymous reader sends word that Sabeen Mahmud, a prominent Pakistani social and human rights activist, has been shot dead. The progressive activist and organizer who ran Pakistan's first-ever hackathon and led a human rights and a peace-focused nonprofit known as The Second Floor (T2F) was shot dead by unidentified gunmen in Karachi. Sabeen Mahmud was leaving the T2F offices with her mother some time after 9pm on Friday evening, reports the Pakistani newspaper Dawn. She was on her way home when she was shot, the paper reports. Her mother also sustained bullet wounds and is currently being treated at a hospital; she is said to be in critical condition.
You think the US is hostile to women in tech?
I hope they find the bastards who did this, but I'm not holding my breath. She seemed like a vibrant, engaging, and intelligent woman. Pakistan will need more people like her to continue the fight against their more regressive, barbaric elements. My condolences to her family and friends.
Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
This is truly a tragic death. I often hear a lot from people in our society (United States) is so aggressive and repressive towards women, which I greatly disagree with. Giving soap operas here about how horrible it is is a disgrace compared to those in places like the middle east, who endure credible death threats and the like everyday. I hope this lady will be remembered, and may her death not be in vain.
Sabeen Mahmud, Anwar Sadat, Theo van Gogh, Pim Fortuyn, Lee Rigby, people in the World trade Center on 9/11, Copts in Egypt, school children in Pakistan, Christian girls in Nigeria, Yzedis in Iraq, Kurds in Syria.
It's almost as though there were some sort of shared transnational ideology behind all of their attacks.
If only our world leaders could somehow deduce the nature of this ideology, name it, and set about creating plans to fight it...
Man here, putting in my two cents under the secure veil of anonymity:
1. Yes, women deserve equal rights and should receive equal treatment.
2. It is not only justified, but beneficial, when feminist groups publicly point out and aspire to correct cultural failings in point 1 above.
3. Encouraging video-game audiences to be displeased with disrespectful treatment of women, and to request better treatment of women from game creators, is exactly the right thing to do.
4. Trying to force game-makers to make products that don't suit the tastes of their primary target audience is exactly the wrong thing to do. It is contrary to good economics, and contrary to freedom.
5. Trying to encourage game-makers to make produces that don't suit the tastes of their primary target audience is silly, and doomed to failure.
On a more personal note.....
I see women every day, both in my professional life and randomly in public (in America). Most of them can't follow me in a real conversation, nor do they care to. The topics that interest them seem vain and insipid to me, and the topics that interest me seem boring or pretentious to them (based on their direct feedback). I have found a few women who are my authentic intellectual equals (and even a few who were my intellectual superiors), but these women have been VERY few and VERY far between. I have had a *much* easier time finding men who are my intellectual equals (or superiors).
So, that is my common, everyday experience of women. Where I want to talk about the problems of our day, they want to talk about shoes or celebrity gossip. Where I want to apply my skills to the creation of new and serious economic value, they are content to organize meetings and run through checklists. Not all of them, by any means. But most of them.
If women truly want to be respected as equals, it may help if feminist groups worked harder on encouraging women to aspire to higher levels of intellectual self-cultivation.
I am sorry if you hate me. I am just reporting on what I see.
some bodyguards kill the people they are supposed to protect, especially in Pakistan when the person being protected in non-Muslim or tries to change stupid blasphemy laws http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/worl...
"The hands that help are better far than lips that pray." - Robert Ingersoll (1833-1899)
But then I saw the cat pictures.
These were, of course, her own cat pictures. It is sometimes the most ordinary things in our lives that speak the loudest, if you are willing to listen.
"Hypatia (born c. AD 350 – 370; died 415[1][3]) was a Greek mathematician, astronomer, and philosopher in Egypt, then a part of the Byzantine Empire. She was the head of the Neoplatonic school at Alexandria, where she taught philosophy and astronomy."
"One day on the streets of Alexandria, Egypt, in the year 415 or 416, a mob of Christian zealots led by Peter the Lector accosted a woman’s carriage and dragged her from it and into a church, where they stripped her and beat her to death with roofing tiles. They then tore her body apart and burned it. Who was this woman and what was her crime? Hypatia was one of the last great thinkers of ancient Alexandria and one of the first women to study and teach mathematics, astronomy and philosophy. Though she is remembered more for her violent death, her dramatic life is a fascinating lens through which we may view the plight of science in an era of religious and sectarian conflict."
I hate these islamic extremists at least as much as anyone here. But it isn't just islam that is capable of such things.
This and no other is the root from which a tyrant springs; when first he appears as a protector - Plato (423 to 327 BC)
Most of them can't follow me in a real conversation, nor do they care to. The topics that interest them seem vain and insipid to me, and the topics that interest me seem boring or pretentious to them (based on their direct feedback).
So your argument is that because they have different interests you're smarter than them? That's not sexist, that's fucking stupid....
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
She wasn't a "SJW", she was actually trying to help effect change in an environment in which women are not only oppressed, but it is distinctly easily visible in most, if not all, walks of life in Pakistan (and other countries with an Islamic majority that isn't too opposed to Sharia law).
SJW's are usually trust fund babies and well-off morons that got bored with collecting tangible things and began collecting stories of oppression as bling. They're charlatans and ideologues, profit mongers and zealots.
Ms. Sabeen Mahmud was far closer to Mahatma Gandhi than any "Social Justice Warrior" (who often, without a shred of humility, compare themselves to Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., Mahatma Gandhi, Malcolm X, or hell (I've yet to see them mention her but she fought for women's rights) Theodora the Empress alongside Emperor Justinian I of the Byzantine Empire).
Everyone lies sometimes, SJW's lie more often.
"Hope is the first step on the road to disappointment."
If you don't care for what other people think or their interests, why would they care about your ideas and interest?
Really intelligent people - those who are smart over the whole range, not just the logic puzzle part, are normally a delight to talk with.
And although they might be smarter than you, and know more about the world, they generally do no tell you so.
I am no friend to Muslims. If all of them were slain, I would not weep a single tear. (Can you hear the 'however' coming up?)
However, back then men were basically either a warlord, a vassal, or a slave. Also, back then it was commonplace to take humans that we now classify as 'children' in marriage. Or if slaves, use them however the master liked, including sexually. They were just slightly smaller meat puppets than all the rest of the meat puppets. The point is, Muhammad was of his time.
It is just as silly and repugnant to use today's moral standards to judge people who lived in far different times, as it is for his followers to keep using those long out-dated moral standards from then in today's world.
The problem is, if there is a "hell" (LMAO), their religion would probably send them to "Heaven" anyway.
If you could reason with religious people, there would be no religious people
Though the Islamists seem to be quite good at it these days, Islamic fundamentalists don't hold a monopoly on using selective interpretation from unreliably transcribed ancient texts as a means to justify bad behavior.
Revolution is the opium of the intellectuals.
as it is for his followers to keep using those long out-dated moral standards from then in today's world.
The problem is that a large portion of the world's population (that is, everyone who follows an Abrahamic religion, which is probably at least half the global population) does exactly this.
That's the whole problem with these religions: they hold up these "holy books" as "the inerrant word of God", and claim that everyone should follow the moral standards contained in them.
No, it's not, it depends on the particular interests. If they have interests such as following the Kardashians and Honey Boo Boo and Duck Dynasty, and you have interests which include baroque music and classical literature, then it's safe to say that you're more intelligent than them.
There's nothing sexist about it. There's no shortage of idiot men who are big fans of Duck Dynasty, and there's relatively few people of either sex who are big fans of more intellectual pursuits like classical literature.
Hey, I know! Why don't we bomb them into a feminist state? Doing what we do best!
"SO we bide our time, waiting for a purer kick to bloom and the future is still bleak, uncertain and beautiful" -GSYBE
If you don't care for what other people think or their interests, why would they care about your ideas and interest?
He's not saying he cares one way or another, it was a personal observation, that somehow he has an easy time finding men who share his more intellectual pursuits, and that women who are intellectual are very rare for him to cross paths with. This is likely due to several factors, including his particular career field and geographic locale.
As an engineer, I generally see the exact same thing. However, I don't think it's because women are generally insipid morons (as I said before, it's easy to find men who are big fans of Duck Dynasty), it's because of my career and where I'm located. If I moved to NYC and worked at the NYPL (public library), I'd probably run across tons of women with zero interest in The Kardashians who would love to instead talk about all kinds of intellectual subjects (probably literature). As an engineer, I run across very few women at all, and most of them are administration or HR people, not known to be groups full of intellectuals (and HR people are, in general, just a bunch of morons, no matter their sex).
I know all about their religions. Good Christians and Jews, the ones who follow their books, do exactly this. It's right there in the Bible: if your children misbehave, you are to stone them. There's countless such examples. Also, women are to be subservient to men. A large number of Christians in America believe this.
Maybe you should look up the No True Scotsman fallacy.
If they have interests such as following the Kardashians and Honey Boo Boo and Duck Dynasty, and you have interests which include baroque music and classical literature, then it's safe to say that you're more intelligent than them.
An interest in Duck Dynasty is not mutually exclusive with an interest in classical literature. I don't much care for the former but we've all got our own outlets for those times when we just want to turn our brains off for a little while. Is watching Duck Dynasty any worse than playing GTA?
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
Sounds like you are the one here that doesn't understand the religions you are talking about.
Learn to love Alaska
I think it's a generality to say that "neither Christians nor Jews do this". Certainly, Christians do this sort of thing at much lower rates.
Jews? It's really ludicrous to even bring up the Jews. Jews don't exist. Numerically, that is.
A third of the world is Christian, roughly. (50% Catholic, 40% Protestant, 10% other, including the Orthodox churches)
A quarter of the world is Muslim, roughly (90% Sunni, 10% Shia)
15% of the world is Hindu, roughly.
Two tenths of a percent of the world is Jewish.
That means for every Jew, there's over a hundred Christians, over a hundred Muslims, around seventy Hindus, thirty five Buddhists,
There's more Sikhs than Jews. The Jews are roughly equal to the number of practitioners of Yoruba, and the Jewish number tends to include more non-religious folks than many of the other groups.
So if all religions were equally likely to incite violence, you'd expect for most violence to be Christian, then you'd expect Muslim, then Hindu, the traditional Chinese practitioners, then Buddhists.... you'd have a long list to get to Jews.
In practice, we hear more about Muslims than anyone, and we do hear about Christians some times. The fact that you don't hear about Jews doesn't mean anything- numerically, they don't exist. If you heard about Jewish violence at the same rate as you hear about Muslim violence, then the Jewish religion would be over a hundred times as violent or something. The fact that there's still some very violent strands of Islam that are extremely active right now is what makes the news, but seriously, Muslims as a group are so massive that it seems hard to make a comparison to billions based on the actions of thousands.
In many ways Anita Sarkeesian is asking for what she's getting. The rape/death threats are uncalled for, but she basically goes around slapping the misogyny label on everything and anything, even when there isn't, and it's just fucking annoying.
For example, she railed against Fox for canceling Terminator: Sarah Conner Chronicles and renewing Dollhouse, when the first is supposedly empowering females and the later isn't. I'm a huge fan of the Terminator franchise, but that show was so lame I couldn't even watch past the first episode. The writing sucked terribly, and the actors totally failed to live up to their characters from the movies, making the show a total let-down, so how does that make it misogynistic to cancel it?
Further, this whole tropes vs women thing is super exaggerated. I remember one time looking at Japanese animation and wondering why all of the characters looked white and not Asian/Japanese. When you look at the history of it, you notice that it isn't because their culture favors being white (like China currently does in many places,) because it still looked that way even during the WWII days when Japan saw themselves as a supreme race/culture and the white people were just a bunch of incompetents that they'd easily conquer in the coming years. It turns out that all human beings draw a mental picture of what the "default human" is, and for Japanese cartoons the default human *is* Asian. So when they draw a cartoon, they don't put much thought into it other than to make it look like a person. Think like how the Simpsons draws their characters as yellow, but in your mind you're thinking "white family." Anyways to the Japanese, white people have big noses, so when they draw people who are supposed to be white, you always see pronounced noses in the artwork, because it's the token "white feature." It's not racist, it's just saying: See this guy? He's white, so you know, you now have a better mental picture of what kind of character he is.
Likewise, with just about everybody in the world, the "default human" is a male. This is even true of female gamers. So when the creator of Pac-Man wanted to show that Mrs. Pac-Man was a female, what does he do? Attaches a token of Japanese girls to her, in this case, a bow. The purpose of the bow is just to say: This is a female, so now you have a better mental picture of what kind of character she is. He had no intention at all of trying to be sexist. (And this isn't even getting into the limits of what you are able to do with those low resolution sprites.)
This guy also says it pretty well:
https://youtu.be/v04IdNPuMlc?t...
Yeah, you need to get over that and try packing up everything and moving somewhere entirely different. You haven't really lived if you haven't ever relocated to someplace very different (and you don't need to go as far as leaving the country and learning a new language; the subcultures in different parts of the US are already very different from each other).
It sounds to me like you're in a place which simply does not have many peers for you, and you're not a good fit for the local culture. I'm in the same place; I (long story) got temporarily stuck in a southeast city that is extremely conservative and has a large military presence, and on top of it I'm separated and trying to date again. I'm like a fish out of water here; there simply isn't anyone here who I have any interest in meeting or spending time with. Luckily, I've gotten a new job offer elsewhere and am relocating within a month, to a place where I think I'll fit in better.
Living in a locale which doesn't fit you can really make you miserable, I've found.
No True Scotsman.
You're just another religionist trying to say that 99.9% of other people in your religion are "doing it wrong".'
Aha, I think I see the problem. You're operating from the assumption that those that disagree with you ideologically are inherently stupid. Does it get lonely on that pedestal you've erected for yourself?
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
If they have interests such as following the Kardashians and Honey Boo Boo and Duck Dynasty, and you have interests which include baroque music and classical literature, then it's safe to say that you're more intelligent than them.
Ummm... no. There is no fundamental difference in the level of intellectual engagement required between enjoying "Duck Dynasty" and "Star Wars," and many Slashdotters (including myself) are raving fanboys when it comes to the latter. Your choice of lowbrow entertainment may be because you are dumb, or it may be because you are smart but looking for an escape that has oooh shiny and doesn't require deep thought. To draw inferences on intellectual capacity based on what TV shows someone watches is just snobbish.
Similarly, "highbrow" tastes don't indicate intellect, they indicate exposure to a different set of influences and pastimes. You probably think being an opera fan indicates higher intelligence than being a death metal fan. But 150 years ago every village idiot in Germany could hum along to Wagner, and Italian beggars could likely recite the works of Verdi. It didn't make you smart back then, and it doesn't make you smart now, it just means you've been exposed to opera while someone else was being exposed to Guns N' Roses or Lady Gaga. There is a strong argument to be made that the popular classical music or classic literature that has survived to this day is of uniformly high quality, and there is probably a good argument as well that appreciating these works properly requires an incisive intellect. But for every classic literature fan I have met with a trenchant insight into the contradictions of Proust, there is another who is just up his/her own ass and wants to make sure everyone knows they bothered to make it through "Dubliners."
So long story short - beware making intellectual judgements based on people's pastimes. Sixty seconds of hearing them talk will tell you far more about their intellect than whether, when you met them, they were holding a copy of Kierkegaard or "Fifty Shades of Grey."
"95% of all Slashdot
First, not in all countries. Second, yes. This over representation is even small part of why "Jewish conspiracies" got traction. If you looked at the tiny Jewish population and the large number of Jewish scientists, mathematicians, etc. it would be fair to draw a conclusion, but much more difficult to pinpoint exactly why (culture, religion, genes, environment).
IMO gefilte fish is nootropic :P
I listen to brutal death metal but i also listen to Tchaikovsky.
Metal has a fair amount in common, musically, with classical music. Metal typically emphasizes complex song structures and virtuosic playing more than other forms of modern music. I'd say country is probably at the opposite end of that spectrum. I like progressive metal like Dream Theater, I also like Bach and Telemann, but I also like Rolling Stones, Boston, AC/DC, etc.
As for all your other interests, none of those carry any kind of political connotations or religious content. None of them indicate that you're a rabid homophobe who thinks the Rapture is coming any day now. Watching Duck Dynasty indicates exactly that. There's nothing wrong with having sexual fantasies or liking different levels of literature and music. There is something wrong (IMO) with watching TV shows or listening to music which pushes moronic religious viewpoints. It's very simple: if you listen to some type of "entertainment" which preaches to you to hate people who were born differently from you, and you buy into this, then you're a moron IMO.
Yes, but poll numbers show Muslims think Jihad in the name of Islam is perfectly potty, just as long as it isn't Muslims getting whacked. Also, Muslims believe political power comes from Allah, most Western (and Christian, I might add) nations believe political power comes from the people. As long as Muslims indulge themselves in this belief of Allah and political power, they will have no problem killing off non-Muslims, and they will never assimilate into Western nations. They will, instead, look at Western nations as nations not yet taken over.
And the Muslim saying, "if Allah wills it" shows just how morally bankrupt they are. They will never lift themselves above dictatorships or dictatorships masquerading as theocracies. And don't bother pointing at Indonesia as a counterpoint, they periodically have pogroms targeting non-Muslims.
There are plenty of women who are fans of classical literature and baroque music. They just tend to cluster in occupations that do not intersect those of the typical Slashdot reader.
Yes, this is exactly my point.
And as a side, those who consider a college degree in humanities or fine arts a waste of time should not be surprised when their co-workers spend time discussing the Kardashians or Honey Boo Boo.
This is true too. Unfortunately a lot of people in technical professions have this mindset. It's not just them either; I've seen that opinion (non-major classes are a "waste of time") from a lot of different people these days. It seems like most college-educated people these days just don't understand the value of a well-rounded education, and are really using college as a glorified trade school. We've really gotten away from the whole reason Universities were created in the first place.
When your holy book says this is the word of God and these are the rules you shall live by, those outdated morals become a problem. We need to find a way to issue updates to the religions of the world. Continuing to use version 1.0 is causing compatibility issues.
I don't particularly relish quoting Sam Harris all day long, but as it happens he has refuted this fairly convincingly:
1. Why is this level of intensity of religious/political violence mostly confined to parts of the Muslim world? Plenty of places on Earth on war-torn, but petty tribalism and profit-seeking warlords are not quite the same thing as people willing to sacrifice their lives for a transnational, transracial, translingual, transcultural set of beliefs.
1a. Where are the Tibetan suicide bombers? They have suffered worse than the Palestinians and other Middle Eastern Arabs. Possibly their different reaction has something to do with their religion being relatively more peace-oriented?
2. Take a look at the biographies of the 9/11 hijackers and many other Islamic terrorists some time. Poverty is obviously not the cause here. Why is the middle and upper middle class so strongly committed to this cause?
No, they aren't. Many of the "reformed" sects are the worst ones. All those fundamentalist Christians aren't part of the old Roman Catholic church (or any offshoots of it), they're offshoots of the Protestant movement. For all its faults, the Catholic church had a good idea, that just letting people read the Bible themselves and interpret it their own way would lead to all kinds of bad things, so they tried to keep people from doing that; the Protestant reformation is exactly what led to fundamentalism. Of course, the root problem is the whole idea that a book is "holy" and sacrosanct; trying to keep people from reading things for themselves is guaranteed to fail eventually.
Anyway, probably at least 1/2 of Protestants in the US are evangelical and/or fundamentalist. Just look at how popular the "Left Behind" books are and various other wacky Christian media warning everyone of the "Rapture". Calling it a "small minority" is ignoring a very large and serious problem in our society, no different than Muslims ignoring their own extremists and then waking up one day to find that ISIS has taken over their city.
The whole area in the middle east is intolerant to accepting people of different faith, ethnic back ground and culture. They claim to be so holy but offer little as examples of peaceful people. They act like the world is thousand of years in the past. No the US is not perfect and the example of perfect will never be achieved because we are human. This is just another example of how little these people have advanced in hundreds of years.
That's islam for you
For all its faults, the Catholic church had a good idea, that just letting people read the Bible themselves and interpret it their own way would lead to all kinds of bad things, so they tried to keep people from doing that
Wait, you don't really believe that shit, do you? You're crazier than the catholics if you do. Keeping people from information is always done to handicap them. True leaders create more leaders. The Catholics only want more followers.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Jews? It's really ludicrous to even bring up the Jews. Jews don't exist. Numerically, that is
That's a ridiculous thing to say. Sure, they very much don't exist in some places, but they are extremely unevenly distributed due to some deliberate and deft political decisions on the part of the UK. They created the nation of Israel and one of the most complicated regions in the world got even more complicated — to the benefit of everyone but the residents of the region where the Jews were installed. And people are still lauding them for their benevolence, which is the most hilarious part.
Tell you what though, go hang out with the Palestinians and share with them your idea that Jews don't exist. You'd better move quickly though, if you want to find any. Those nonexistent Jews are working on making that impossible.
This is not to single out the Jews for bad treatment, just to point out that they are sufficiently numerous to commit atrocities. You know, kind of like Moses' slaughter of all the first-born sons... atrocities are kind of what they do, according to their own alleged history.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
The ones that focus on Islam instead of the real reasons (extreme misogynistic traditions in many cultures)
Islam is an extremely misogynistic tradition. That is the real reason they can't progress their cultures. You can see this at work in every Islamic state. Their culture progresses more slowly, because they've got rules to make that happen. No different from the Amish, except there's enough Muslims to be a problem, and the Amish are grossly outnumbered.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Hitchens says it best:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=...
We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
Quite Right!
To suffer a modern day Inquisition in the US you had to be a damn dirty Commie! (or suspected of being one by the right people). :) happy shiny times for all!!
However, thats not a religion, right? so its all ok
Yet they're amazingly well represented in finance, media, and law.
European culture made sure that they couldn't do anything else. Historically, Jews in Europe were not allowed to be members of a trade-guild, because doing so required making a Christian oath. For city dwellers (i.e. non-farmers), peddling and money-lending were two of the only jobs available until quite recently.
sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
Wrong. It isn't some "tiny subset", it's a huge number of Christians in America who are like this. Look how many American Christians believe in the Rapture. IIRC, that's based on one tiny passage in Revelations. But probably about half of Protestants in this country believe that and watch Christian movies about how the end is near. One such movie is in Redbox kiosks right now. You don't get your movie in a Redbox kiosk nationwide without having a huge number of potential viewers.
One could argue that the Islamic world went through an reverse of the Enlightenment. An unenlightenment if you will. People like to blame the British for screwing everything up (they certainly did not help), but really they were exploiting the repressive and regressive systems held in place by petty tribalism that long predated their appearance.
This is going to be a continuing problem until they figure out how to get some separation between church and state. This separation will be difficult to achieve so long as assassination of potential political rivals remains commonplace. The christian world had the advantage of making the separation back when a King could be reasonably protected against assassination by simply living in a castle and keeping a close eye on his advisers and family. Today with high power sniper rifles and small but powerful bombs available to any random stranger it is much harder to avoid being assassinated.
I read the internet for the articles.
Trolls hook fish. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T...
You drop a baited line, and wait for a bite. That's the origin of the term, not the mythical monster.
Hogwash. Not only do the majority of Muslims* protest against Islamic* terrorism, they are the main target of that terrorism. Not only have they had their reformation, the majority adheres to that reformed form.
Wahhabism* is a form of Islam* that goes against the mainstream.
(* guess what)
It was extremely interesting to visit Prague and visit the Jewish area to read the history. The Jews were constantly being segregated into their own towns or areas in cities and not able to have very many jobs. Since Money Handling was against the law for Christians, the Jews became money lenders, bankers, etc. And in reading the historical plaques and documents, you can see how that 'The Final Solution' was just the culmination of years of persecution and segregation.
Very enlightening.
[John]
Shit better not happen!
malcolm x was a racist bastard, no better than a grand wizard. Why would any sane person want to associate themselves with him?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M...
He was a racist bastard, something he came to greatly regret before his assassinate. Seeing whites and blacks praying together in Mecca, and seeing white struggles for black freedom in Northern Africa made him retract his earlier statements about how whites and blacks could never be at peace together.