Skip to comments.How does society decide what is un-American? (Hurricane strength hurl alert!)
Posted on 04/04/2010 2:15:17 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
When groups such as the Black Panther Party, the Nation of Islam and various other black nationalist organizations appealed publicly for social justice, they were soundly denounced by white America as dangerous radicals and militants.
Fed by a national negative media frenzy, law enforcement created a brutal covert and overt crackdown that included killings, beatings, arrests and destruction of character and property. These actions created a fear that shut down many groups.
While civil rights organizations were meted with similar negativity, they had some liberal white press and philanthropy, even white and Jewish members and martyrs. The entire human rights/civil rights/freedom movement era, particularly during the mid-1960s to 70s, witnessed an ever-growing white backlash.
White America seethed with the sentiment that, If you dont like America, leave it. The clear inference was that America is a white nation, and white people cannot be forced to share it with black people. Any value other than those instilled by white America is therefore un-American, socialist and communist.
The Patriot Act was established by the Bush administration, and it is noteworthy that personal criticisms of former President George W. Bush focused mainly on his misuse of the English language, his alleged botched military record and the possibility that he was being led by former Vice President Dick Cheney.
With the Patriot Act still in effect, white nationalists register no fear of calling President Barack Obama a socialist, a Hitler, a Muslim, when it is clear that he is a Christian. This element of the populace mouths and displays all manner of other inappropriate and unpatriotic slogans.
Is it not un-American to add grist to the mill for our nations enemies abroad? Is it not un-American to both directly and indirectly promote the assassination of President Obama? Id like to have a clear, believable answer to the following question: How does the American citizenry decide what is un-American?
Steaming vitriol spewing from that hodgepodge tea party crowd could possibly spill over as dangerous physical violence. Some very dangerous human viruses are hiding in that gathering movement. Many ultra-conservative groups that spend weekends playing war in the deep woods have attached members to this anti-Obama (actually anti-black) outpouring.
It is quite apparent, from that which we witnessed recently on Capitol Hill, that the Tea Party and Republican U. S. senators and congresspersons are escalating the American divide, reminiscent of pre-Civil War America. Its all about stopping Obama. Clearly, their wholesale rebuke of the health care reform legislation was/is just an attempt to undermine our president, by any means necessary!
White nationalists called black congressmen everything but the children of God, including the N-word, and even spat on one last week as members of the U. S. House of Representatives were about to enter the Capitol Building to vote on President Obamas health care reform bill.
The very thought that citizens or non-citizens could behave like that, let alone toward black officials, is a ramification of values taught and reinforced from infancy to the grave.
What should make black Americans doubly wary of the Tea Party fringe and their Republican allies is that they falsely attest to religion, and they are mostly Christians! How can that be? These people operate out of the same warped logic that allowed their mostly Christian forebears to practice genocide across the Americas, create and operate the Trans-Atlantic African Slave Trade, and discriminate against non-white people the world over.
White America is very proud of its criminality, and all school children must be tested on knowledge of discoverers/conquerors, slave masters/presidents, Indian killers/generals, developers/robber barons, et al.
So, what could possibly be un-American? Oh, I know! To sympathize with Muslim/Arab terrorism. Now clearly, thats un-American. But its alright to be involved in terrorizing your fellow Americans, especially if they are non-white?
When the British decided to quell the Boston Tea Party by firing on its leaders, Crispus Attucks, a leader of African descent, was the first to fall, and the American Revolution was on.
Later, we had the Civil War, which was about the injustice of slavery. Now, could it be that the third and perhaps final phase of Americas internal struggle will be about democracy?
Such being the case, I wonder how America will resolve the question: How does society decide what is un-American?
He must have gotten the idea for this article due to the blatantly UN AMERICAN occupant of the White house.
Ah, someone ought to tell this person that because the Black Panthers stand in front of polling places with nightsticks and intimidate voters, doesn’t make it any less wrong than when Klansmen did it back in the day.
Where's the evidence?
Did that include the murders of members accused of being police or FBI informants?
Like the case that young Hillary was so solicitous about, that she attended the trial herself?
Violence against Panthers like that?
Obama recited the "Azaan", the Call to Prayer, in a New York Times interview with Nicholas Kristof in 2007.
The "Azaan" contains within it the profession of faith called the "Shehada", the recital of which makes one a Moslem in the eyes of the entire Moslem world. Obama knew that from his years in Jakarta with his stepfather and uncle, and his visits to the mosque there.
He recited that Moslem Confiteor with his eyes wide open.
That creates "doubt", Al.
What is a "white nationalist" in your lexicon?
The original Black Panthers were mostly criminal sociopaths who used black berets and politics to mask their illegal activities. They tortured and murdered some of their own members suspected of being police informants. Their spokesman, Eldridge Cleaver, was a convicted rapist.
Malcolm X was murdered by the Black Muslim leadership when he publicly embraced mainstream Islam and rejected the hate philosophy of Elijah Muhammad and his crackpot followers.
There are at least six serious historical errors in this single sentence, any one of which would condemn the utterer as a dunce:
1. The British did not "quell" the Boston Tea Party (1773) by firing on its "leaders".
2. Crispus Attucks was not a leader of the Boston Tea Party.
3. Crispus Attucks was dead at the time of the Boston Tea Party, having been killed at the "Boston Massacre" in 1770.
4. As far as I know there is no infomation as to who was "first to fall" at the Boston Massacre in 1770. Samuel Gray and James Caldwell were also hit in the first volley.
5. Crispus Attucks could not have been the "first to fall" when "the British decided to quell the Boston Tea Party (1773) by firing on its leaders" because he was already dead (1770).
6. The American revolution is generally considered to have started in 1775, with the attacks at Lexington and Concord, and was in no soese at all caused by the killing of Crispus Attucks.
If you ignore the rest of the article, this is actually a very good question.
What does "being American" mean?
What should it mean?
I suspect much of the anger between right and left is based on using the same words with different unexamined meanings applied. Which means both sides assume the other is lying when it uses the words. If people were aware of the different definitions they would have at least the possibility of an intelligent conversation.
It would be a very good idea if anyone who wants to talk about "un-American" behavior be required to provide his definition of "American."
Poor writing on the authors part!
C’mon, you know the drill. In the words of Fat Teddy, “It’s not the evidence, it’s the seriousness of the charge.”
“when it is clear that he is a Christian.”
And exactly where will he be worshiping this Easter Sunday?
He's not only stupid, he's ignorant. At least it can't be said of him that he's educated beyond his intelligence.
Al Calloway - squeaky wheel looking for more grease, so what else is new?
It appears to me that the ultimate “data” for his thesis that the Tea Party people are evil “White nationalists” is the following quote, “(they) called black congressmen everything but the children of God, including the N-word, and even spat on one last week as members of the U. S. House of Representatives were about to enter the Capitol Building”.
It is shocking to think that I now live in a country in which such utterly fabricated Agiprop can be used by one side to drive the public debate. Germany in the 1930’s must have felt like.
For the most part, the great-unwashed masses of society do not decide what is un-American; we have been conditioned to allow the Corporate owned mass media to tell us what is un-American.
Bottom line: Corporations decide what is un-American.
I think it is all about wanting Blacks to dominate America. They only have one card to play.
Real Americans have no trouble deciding what is American. As for Obama voters, they go with what feels good or whatever gives them personally the most loot.
“If people were aware of the different definitions they would have at least the possibility of an intelligent conversation.”
You project an innocence upon the other side of which they are in no way possessed. There is a REASON simple words and historical concepts have meaning other than they deserve in their minds.
The political opportunist NEED THE TEA PARTY!!! Without the Tea Party members raging in the streets and SHOUTING SOCIALISTS, they would not have the "agitation" to work hand-in-hand with their propaganda.
bottom line: We are being played like a fiddle.
Note: Of course if there were no Tea Party groups, they would create some other group to be the "agitation" they need.
Sorry..this race baiting is not going to work. The TEA party is not about race, it’s a peacful movement about freedom for all people across the globe. Get a life and join the free human race, you have more oportunity here as a minority member than any other nation on earth.
Not true. Read David Horowitz's chapter on Black Panther thugs. They brought the crackdown on themselves by their murderous activities.
Wow. I was just going to point out that we live in a republic. :)
I think the issue is real simple.
If you support a Federal government exercising the powers delegated to it under the Constitution and no others, you are an American.
Otherwise, whatever you may be, you are not an American.
Here’s my response to his column on the original website. I suggest we flood this racist fool with as many letters of disgust as we can. Anyway, I wrote:
>>>You wrote: “These people operate out of the same warped logic that allowed their mostly Christian forebears to practice genocide across the Americas, create and operate the Trans-Atlantic African Slave Trade, and discriminate against non-white people the world over.”
Christians were the first people in the history of the world to organize and try and stop slavery. They were disgusted with the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade and worked for more than a century to stop it. Most of the world for most of history accepted slavery as normal.
The Abolisionists were motived by Christianity in their efforts to get rid of slavery in the United States and other Western cultures. You should read what they said at the time, and find out who they were.
The rest of the column is “twisted logic,” indeed.
I can only tell by the choice of words here, but the writer appears to be a hate-filled, racist man, stuffed with selective bile about his own culture and background, disgusted with his neighbors and, apparently, anyone who has less skin pigment than he has. He’s a classic loudmouth bigot, with a short fuse and a narrow worldview. He has my sincere pity.<<<
And if he finds out I’m a Jew... well, I can see the veins popping out on his forehead right now.
Interesting sidenote about his article. I read it this morning and wrote a response at the South Florida Times. There hasn’t been a single response since. I assume that the newspaper just shut down the response section - I find it hard to believe only seven people responded.
Just more proof about the openminded diversity of liberal thought.
When columnists rant and rave about evidently false claims of harassment by Tea Partiers towards corrupt members Democrats, and inflate and distort the past and its connections to the events of today, one can only conclude that they haven’t either a grasp of the facts, or are convinced that their audience also lacks that grasp. Fortunately, a new phenomenon it taking over, the citizens of this country know more than those who purport to report the news. We all watch as the media dinosaur’s death stuggle in the tar pits of their own ignorance.
SNIPPET from post no. 1:
“...organizations appealed publicly for social justice, they were soundly denounced...”