Racist whites must rid themselves of any notion
that all blacks are not their equals in every way.
Posted on 11/25/2014 8:30:01 AM PST by C19fan
For days, large swaths of the U.S. and the globe waited to hear whether the grand jury would indict Office Darren Wilson. For a week, Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon had declared a state of emergency, calling out the National Guard to “maintain peace and protect those exercising their right to free speech.” Today, he repeated the same message.
“Together we are all focused to make sure that the necessary resources are at hand to protect lives, to protect business and to protect free speech.”
(Excerpt) Read more at salon.com ...
whatever.
Yeah Yeah, Wilson was guilty of murder it was just the system getting even for O.J.
Aw hell. I dropped the Scrabble set again.
Lily white Western MA?
Have you been to Holyoke or Springfield lately?
.
Racist whites must rid themselves of any notion
that all blacks are not their equals in every way.
What matters is not proof of guilt, but the seriousness of the charge!
Went to salon to attempt to understand the other side’s argument. They have nothing. They ignore the evidence. All those rioters and black celebrities are stupid for getting upset. This case has zero evidence of racism or police brutality. Brown’s death was 100% due to Brown.
In fact, Trayvon’s case showed more racism than this. Zimmerman followed Trayvon not because he knew he was a suspect but because he looked suspicious. True, that isn’t racist. But it’s more suspicious than a cop getting a bolo with a description of every detail of Michael Brown’s looks, including THE COLOR OF HIS SOCKS and WHAT BOX OF CIGARS HE STOLE. The guy himself could have been white, Asian, blue. His size, his clothing, his hat, his stolen box of exact brand, and his perfectly matching companion let the officer know he was looking at the suspect being sought. Period. And how did Brown respond? A) by refusing to cooperate, and b) by attacking the police. THIS BEHAVIOR caused Brown’s death. His skin color has nothing to do with it.
These celebrities and salon writers are either saying that PEOPLE SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO RESIST AND ATTACK COPS IN THEIR PATROL CARS AND WRESTLE FOR THEIR GUNS or that ONLY BLACK SUSPECTS SHOULD BE ABLE TO.
That is the question to be asked to all the pro Brown people. Should all suspects be able to resist and then attack cops and still live? Or only black ones? If they don’t answer yes to one of those questions, they are illogical.
funny...even the left wingers who comment at Salon are not buying this crap...this comment is my fav:
“angelfish just now
Black justice involves ignoring the robbery, assault, walking in the street, resisting arrest, assaulting a cop, and failing to stop and focusing on the police. It is the same tribal justice that leads to acquittals of OJ Simpson. The Founding Fathers were wise to exclude these folks from juries.”
"Yet, it is hard to imagine that even had the grand jury indicted, that their decision would have much of an effect on the institutional, deeply embedded problem of state-endorsed, police-led racial violence in Ferguson, St. Louis or anywhere else in the U.S."
Don't you just hate that "state-endorsed, police-led racial violence" that we saw last night.
Yeeeeee hawwww! Let’s hear it for White Supremacy, boys! /s
Hampshire College is in the lily white Western Mass and is 70% white.
...my niece went to Hampshire...she came out with a worthless degree and is now ‘married’ to another woman...
The author is still living in the past. Thanks to people like her the past is becoming the present again.
America is being divided. Black (racist) and Blue (liberal) America is living in the past. The past is over. They are free, able to vote, and pursue the American dream just like the other America. Only they fail to recognize their many blessings and opportunities in the greatest nation in the world.
Despite the many social programs and laws enacted for their benefit, they perceive the other America to be composed of whites only with white privileges and prejudices against them.
The other America is composed of white, brown, yellow, red and other races who by their diversity and Republic form of Constitutional government make America the greatest nation in the world.
The author, like the present administration who govern, is not helping to unite America, but is opening old wounds to keep America divided into separate political and racial entities.
I don’t believe “large swaths of... the globe” really care what happened in Ferguson, MO. Why should they?
Most of the article was sheer presumption based only on her poisonous biases. Maybe the article gives her a forum to justify the glop she teaches at the nearly all white college in, I’m guessing here, gender studies.
One example of her wrongheadedness: She castigates the governor and police chief for anticipating violence in the protests, citing that as racism. Did she by chance see the video feeds from Ferguson?
Meanwhile, she’ll dispense her vitriol and venom to her student/victims and help supply the next generation of “protesters.”
The person who wrote this produced zero facts and a non rational argument based on preconceived notions. After taking a look at the article, it is not worthy of comment because you cannot deal with irrational people.
The author maybe should talk about black privilege and where it is leading our country.
That’s funny considering Salons staff and contributors are majority Jews
I also wonder why some posters insist on lumping Jews in the same boat as Christian conservatives being targets of progressives
Given that many if not most of the loudest most influential progressive vanguard in America is indeed Jews themselves
If one must play identity then it would be more accurate to claim progressive in our country hate Israel especially a strong Israel with a conservative leader like Netanyahu
That is very true.
But leftists other than envious blacks hating Jews in general?
A canard.
Whoever controls the meaning of the meaning of the words and memes controls the outcome of the debate. Liberals (er, now “progressives”) have moved the meaning of words without telling anyone else.
In this case, what exactly is meant by the “white” in “white supremacy”? As we can see by asking a related question, what exactly do such people mean by “black”, we can see what, exactly, they mean by “white”.
In short “white” is progressive-speak for conservatives whose values are rooted in WASP culture, that is the culture that the bulk of Americans still hold. And “black” (or “of color”) is progressive-speak for people who support socialism. “White” = conservative values rooted in the Bible and non-”White” are values that are in opposition to those values.
When Nobel Prize winning poet Tony Morrison can write an October 1988 New Yorker article titled “Clinton as the first black president” was “Blacker than any actual black person who could ever be elected in our children’s lifetime,” then what is “black”? In 2009, When the NAACP calls the black conservative Kenneth Gladney, “not black enough”, and “not a brother” then what is “black”? When Time magazine’s Jack White calls Supreme Court Justice Thomas, “the scariest of all the hobgoblins”, saying “Washington seems to be filled with white men who make black people uneasy”, than what is “black”? And when Obama, a man whose mother is Caucasian, and whose father was not fully black, can tell us in his autobiography that in his youth he struggled with his racial identity before *deciding* to be black, what is “black”?
When Bill Maher, during a panel discussion on HBO complains that Obama’s policies are “half-assed” “because he’s only half black.” and that “if he was fully black, I’m telling you, he would be a better president.”, and that “there’s a white man in him holding him back”, than what is “black”? Indeed, what is “white”?
On October 20, 2011, Pam Spaulding at Firedoglake wrote about two prominent Republicans who happen to be black:
“But back to race. I’ll never understand Herman Cain and his relationship to the GOP establishment; like former puppet Michael Steele, they don’t see (or don’t care) how rancid race-based politics in the Republican party has become… [T]he Republican leadership has made its bed with the fundamentalists and nativist know-nothings, making Cain and other black Republicans curious cases that border on self-loathing.” In this context, what exactly is “black”?
CNN’s Soledad O’Brien writes of a private meeting in 2007 with Jesse Jackson in her book, “The Next Big Story.” During the meeting, Jackson complained to O’Brien, whose mother is a black woman from Cuba, that there weren’t any black anchors on CNN. She wrote, “He looks me in the eye and reaches his fingers over to tap a spot of skin on my right hand. He shakes his head. “You don’t count,” he says.” She closed the section with “[t]he arbiter of blackness had weighed in. I had been measured and found wanting.”
When the results of an August 2010 Missouri ballot proposition directing that state to protect its citizens from being forced into ObamaCare were announced and the voter sentiment scored a record for being such a lopsided adoption of the provision. In one county the vote was 92% in favor of the provision. Juan Williams complained on Fox News this was really about race.
Later, in a January 30, 2012 article in The Hill, Williams wrote that when conservative candidates use the words “Founding Fathers” and the “Constitution”, they are speaking in code. He said that when a candidate suggests that black people should demand jobs instead of food stamps, that he is “ “dog whistling” at certain white audiences”, saying this was “the same rhetorical technique of the segregationist politicians of the past...” This begs the question, if a person reveres the Founding Fathers, what race does Williams presume he is?
Dr. Cornel West, whose official web site describes him as “a prominent and provocative democratic intellectual”, was the subject of an article in the May 18, 2011 Washington Post. Reporter Krissah Thompson opened with, “Scholar Cornel West’s scathing critique of President Obama’s liberal bona fides in a series of recent interviews has ignited a furious debate among African American bloggers and commentators.”
More recently, in a review of the movie “Django” published in the December 25, 2012 Boston Globe, critic Wesley Morris complains:
“The movie is too modern for what [Samuel L.] Jackson is doing to be limited to 1853. He’s conjuring the house Negro, yes, but playing him as though he were Clarence Thomas or Alan Keyes or Herman Cain or Michael Steele, men whom some black people find embarrassing.”
The December 18, 2012 New York times carried an opinion piece by Adolph Reed, a professor of political science at the University of Pennsylvania. The occasion was the appointment of Tim Scott, an African American, to fill a vacant Senate seat. The title of the piece was The Puzzle of Black Republicans.
Of Scott, Reed wrote, “...his politics, like those of the archconservative Supreme Court justice Clarence Thomas, are utterly at odds with the preferences of most black Americans. Mr. Scott has been staunchly anti-tax, anti-union and anti-abortion.”
Later, after the general election in November 2014, the NAACP released statement on the outcome and failed to mention that Tim Scott was the first black in the South to be elected to the US Senate. They also failed to mention Mia Love, the first black woman to be elected to the US House from Utah. Both Scott and Love are black.
A study in the April 2014 edition of the authoritative journal Social Psychological and Personality Science found that black students who had white friends were seen as “less black.”
Also, as reported in the April 23, 2014 edition of the Washington Free Beacon, Illinois Democratic Gov. Pat Quinn urged backers to read an article comparing black Republican voters to Jews who collaborated with the Nazis.
Then in May of 2014, Bloomberg writer Francis Wilkinson wrote a piece claiming that Republican Senator Tim Scott of South Carolina, who is black, only became a senator because Republicans “lowered the bar” for his appointment.
In July of 2014, after the Supreme Court’s Hobby Lobby decision, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., fumed, “the one thing we’re going to do during this work period – sooner rather than later – is to ensure that women’s lives are not determined by virtue of five white men.” Only four of the Justices are Caucasian.
On September 15, 2014, talk show host Sean Hannity interviewed Barack Obama’s half brother, Mark Obama Ndesandjo about his new book. While Ndesandjo’s father was Barack Obama, Sr., he has a different mother, Ruth (Baker) Ndesandjo, an American Jew from Boston. Ruth, like Barack Obama’s mother, Stanley Ann Dunam, was Caucasian.
During the course of the interview, Mark Ndesandjo said that he thought Barack Obama was ashamed of Mark’s “whiteness” and that maybe Barack was a little bit ashamed of his “blackness”.
Stop and consider that such an opinion is only possible if “white” or “black” is far more about factors outside of race than about race itself. Does it change your opinion of Mark Ndesandjo’s “race” to know that he trained as a classical pianist, has a MSc. in Physics, and does international consulting in telecommunications and international marketing?
Also in September of 2014, the website of Teach for America said that “math has traditionally been seen as the domain of old, White men,” and asks “doesn’t our premise of 2 + 2 = 4 look awfully naive?”
References to race, and especially to “black”, in all these diverse contexts, is clearly not about “race”. It is about ideology, or more exactly, about socialist ideology. It is the rebuke that these black people refuse to be red.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
