There is some interesting conversation in the comments today about racism. As my loyal fans know I predicted all this in April of ’08 when I was blogging for John Nolte at Dirty Harry’s Place, http://dirtyharrysplace.com/?p=1371 (I know I have many fans, just as loyal, who may not have discovered my brilliance until after April of ’08. I highly recommend they follow the link.)
Are there people who judge others based on skin color? Sure. We all know this. Are whites more likely to do this than blacks? It doesn’t appear so. Read the linked post for evidence, or, simply look at President Obama’s polling numbers. His numbers have fluctuated with white voters, based on current events. There is much less fluctuation with black voters. Hmmm… Are rural, small town or southern folk more likely to judge by skin color than urban elites? No. Folks like Chris Matthews, Bill Maher, and the entire staff of the New York Times are obsessed with skin color. This view of the world (racism), is so ingrained in how they think they project it on all of America. They are convinced we all must think as they do too, so they ascribe racism to every action they see across this great land. Unbeknownst to them, most of us are really just trying to figure out how to pay the rent and wondering why we can no longer buy the light bulbs we prefer.
For decades we’ve been told there is a large majority of Americans who are secretly, privately racist. Well, how do you prove or disprove that? The definition states they are secretive about it, so how could you prove the theory wrong? I know I wasn’t secretly, privately wishing ill of anyone, but how do I know what the guy next door is secretly, privately doing?
Well, lately I’ve been asking myself the same question millions of Americans are asking. If a majority of voters elected Barack Obama President, and obviously were not racist on that day (pulling a voting lever in privacy), why would they be racist now? If the folks in Cleveland embraced LeBron James before he publicly made them look like fools why would they judge him based on his skin color now? If O.J. Simpson made millions off endorsements and acting jobs prior to killing his ex-wife, why would his fans hate him for his skin color now? If Tea Party people are racist why do they love Allen West? If FoxNews is run by racists why do they employ more black pundits and reporters than any other major network? On August 28th this year there was a huge news story about two opposing rallies in Washington D.C.. One was hosted by Glenn Beck, the other by Reverend Al Sharpton. Who do both men work for? FoxNews! Yet hundreds of pundits repeat the meme that FoxNews is racist.
We are learning a great deal about racism in this country and we see that some people do not seem able to see beyond race, no matter what evidence is put before them. That truly is racism. I genuinely feel sorry for those people but we can no longer be slowed by them. The rest of us are moving on.
And Floyd makes a crack about the comparitive size of the revolvers in that image in 5-4-3…
I don’ see no revolvers in that picture. They’re holding automatics, ‘pears to me.
“Ching buda bing!
Leave it to RES.
Stinking nitpickers!
…2-1! Nada!
My experience has been since working with the public for so many years, and in a position that allowed me the opportunity to see “it all,” that for the most part people of color, be it brown, black or off-white, orientals excluded, are most likely to be racially motivated toward racism, primarily dislike for all things white. Part of this may be due to the fear whites have for expressing their racial slurs, if any, where the others seem to have no fear when it comes to calling out a white person. I’m not calling it fear per se, but maybe more of a “white guilt” type of feeling.
It is sobering to think that a hundred years ago the idea of a “white” race was held only by the bigots. Most “white” folk circa 1900 would be astounded to hear the Irish mixed in with the Italians, Poles, Hispanics, Scots, Norse (and I venture to say that Lars could advise that the Danes and Swedes would have violently objected to being grouped in with the Norwegians), Greeks, French and myriad other European ethnicities.
Fritz has it right in that the race-hustlers have largely exploited race to focus “colored” resentment and white guilt in order to distract from the real locus of socio-cultural differences. To cite The Right Stuff, they’ve got us focusing on “pussy” when the real problem remains “monkey.”
“Monkey”???
Leave it to Porvaznik!
Toss him a banana daiquiri and get him back to the minkey house!
” minkey house!”
Must be thinking like Clouseau tonight!
Equal opportunity offender, buddy. Don’t you forget it.
Well said. Also, I often think of the immense size of Africa. It is a ridiculously ginormous and diverse country.
And dominated by tribal cultures to a significant extent, yes. My understanding is that most Africans would find being lumped together as “Black” or “African-American” as meaningless and stupid as your 19th Century Dutchman would find being placed in the same category as Albanians.
Good post, serious point well made. One problem with the topic is that we are seeing the use of the word “racism” in an ill-defined manner, encompassing a range from hard-core KKK/New Black Panthers to the sort of mild racial awareness that the national obsession over race imposes on all of us.
The simple facts of the matter are that it is impossible to be indifferent to race in America. Cross-referencing to the Tony Curtis thread, it is as impossible as walking through a pie-fight in a white suit without getting splattered. What I would assert is that it is the racists who are hurling the pies while most of the rest of us are simply doing our best to stay out of the lines of fire. It isn’t racism to be aware of those flying pies and doing one’s best to stay clean; it is “race consciousness” (pie-consciousness?) to try to keep one’s head down.
On the other hand, it is impossible to observe the trends of history in the US and deny the significance of race. The Democrats have played the race card successfully for a century and a quarter, first from one side then from the other. The party which gave us Jim Crow and segregation is now giving us racial preferences and forced busing. And while they’re at it they’re engaged in the shameless moral preening of the ex-sinner who has substituted bragging and hectoring others in place of their prior sinning.
Meanwhile, most of the rest of us are just wishing they’d just shut the eff up and let us get on with our lives, making friends based on shared interests and ignoring the skin color of our friends.
Excellent. I love the pie throwing analogy.
Yes, but I think we’re also seeing that a great many of us have simply moved on. Way on. Greg Gutfeld’s “Red Eye” is a good example. They discuss current events and sometimes current events involve race, but the panel is color blind. Even when blacks are on the panel there is no difference in the tone of the discussion.
My kids and their friends are literally color-blind. Me and my friends are too, but we do interact with a bit of the “walking on eggshells” manner you describe. My kids, though, they’re not afraid of race at all. Nor are their friends, no matter their skin color.
It’s a silly example, but one of the kids was recently talking about his friend’s “Jewfro.” Mrs. Firefly went nuts, “You can’t say that! It’s anti-semetic and racist! You weren’t raised that way!” Well, the kid with the hairdo is Jewish and that’s what he calls it. Most younger kids are way beyond this nonsense, and don’t even understand the hub-bub.
To me, the most interesting thing we have seen in the last two years is how reluctant some people are to give this up, even though we have evidence that it is nowhere near the level it has been portrayed. It’s the same thing with global warming, or hunger or poverty. We hear theories, and then, when research indicates the problem is not as bad as painted the vast majority of us sigh a huge sigh of relief. We’re glad the polar bears really won’t drown and far fewer kids are hungry than portrayed, etc. But there are always a few who are mad at the good news. Some folks just got to have a shibboleth.
Rufus – the most interesting thing is derived from the fact that most Liberals can’t engage in argument (insert clip from Monty Python’s “Argument Clinic” sketch) and rely on trump cards to shut discussion down. Thus the infantile refusal to give up their “race card” blankie and the proliferation of various fill-in-the-blank-ophobe memes.
I agree, but most of the rest of us have moved on to a point where the card no longer works. We see it as a meaningless attempt by a desperate person.
There is no racism. Not there are not those who judge based on skin color, however the particular charge of racism is made at the most stupidest of things that is become meaningless. A white teacher I know wanted to “make a difference”. So she decided to teach in downtown Oakland. There was not a single white student. She was called racist so much by her kids she decided to make them write an essay on why she was racist.
The results were ludicrous. True example, one kid wrote: You are racist because you didn’t let me use the computer. So she approached said student and ask him if he needed a definition on what racism is and an explanation on why he was not allowed to use the computer that day.
This is the end result of progressivism drive to divide the country into warring cultural factions. The powerful sense of entitlement and victimization progressives have caused in these factions (pick your favorite: gender, ethnicity, religion, economic status… or combine them! Collect the whole set!) make them level a charge like racism at the drop of a dirt particle.
Are you in essence saying, “What’s not to like about a one eyed, one legged purple, Hispanic dwarf lesbian?”
When you’re as good at recognizing and pointing out the flaws in people as I am it’s impossible to be racist. They’re just too many good reasons to hate people of all races.
But seriously, it astounds me that otherwise intelligent people cannot see the race-baiting and downright racist attitudes of the left. I almost lost it when I heard a law student refer to Justice Thomas as a “self-hating black man” because he didn’t fit into the mold he thought black people should fit into.
When the deranged daughter was young enough to just be starting to sort people into categories (she was in a “minority-majority” school and having trouble processing the premise that a majority of students attending could be defined as minority students — one reason the daughter is deranged is that she persists in thinking words have meaning) we explained to her that there was no profit to be had in hating people wholesale when they’d quickly enough provide you with ample reason to hate ‘em retail.
And yeah, there is something truly absurd in hearing the enlightened dismiss Justice Thomas for wanting to define himself rather than be forced into the definition imposed on him by the racially obsessed. I guess self-definition is a privilege only allowed the white (and straight) man. All others — women, homosexuals, “coloureds” — must deny their individuality and accommodate to their assigned categories.
You should have lost it. I would have.
“You should have lost it. I would have.”
??? Please elaborate. I find the world too comically absurd to “lose it” over anything less than truly major. Or do you mean “lose it” in the ROTFL sense?
Trying to convince daughter that the world could ever make sense would have been wrong for all too many reasons.
I would have likely gotten angry. There is no arguing black folks Clarence Thomas’ age had a lot of obstacles in their way. When folks minimize their efforts, their ability or their intelligence it makes me angry.
Remember the movie (heck, the novel, too) M*A*S*H, during the football game when one of the 4077th’s lineman gets thrown off because the opposing lineman “called me a [n-word]“? I used to listen to Ken Hamblin on the radio and recall his point that “when they call you that they’re conceding the debate.” You’ve won and they’re trying for a late hit to get you to throw the game.
Getting angry is what they want; I prefer getting even.
Point well made. I hate it when I’m wrong. Floyd, can you ban RES from the comments?
THAT’s the right attitude, Rufus: don’t get mad, get even!
Living well is the best revenge.
Rufus… that picture is insignificant… we know who swings the biggest gun….
Au contraire, mon Frere.
He’s a bad mother….
Shut your mouth!
The idea that anyone should be safe from criticism, merely on account of race/creed/et al, is a meme that bugs me to no end. Now, *that’s* racist.
Figures you’d think that way. You’re a chick. (To be read in best, Phil Hartman channeling Frank Sinatra channeling John McLaughlin accent.)
Wanks disqualifies herself as she’s done ‘em all: Phil, Frank and John.
Can’t understand a word, Porvaznik. It’s all pops and buzzes from where I sit.
Just put a bag over your own head and go about your bizness.
I’m lookin’ at you I’m thinking eight ball, corner pocket.
Steve, kick his ass.
Atta boy Frank!
Keep your hands up, Outlaw.
It’s your choice. You can open for me at the Meadowlands or play the tic toc lounge.
I’ve got chunks of guys like you in my stool.
Rufus, cleanse your audio palate with a little U2′s “Rattle and Hum!”
I get immense pleasure from gigging Floyd about his love for Bono, but I challenge even Floyd to look at the above image (which graced my most recent issue of “The Economist”) and not be at least slightly annoyed.
The caption reads, “Every journey began in Africa. Ali and Bono wear Edun; Ali carries the Louis Vuitton/Edun collaborative bag.”
AH, you’re just jealous, Rufus! I kinda wish I were there with them as well! Sadly at this time in America, there are those not as fortunate as others, but if Bono can turn a buck for an occasional advertising gig…more power to him.
Yeah. It’s for a good cause, that’s for sure. But posing for that ad, with that scarf wrapped around him, just so, and carrying that bag and the guitar… I’m sorry, but you don’t get on Burt Reynolds’ “Man Law” committee doing stuff like that. I didn’t know anything about his wife before I saw the ad and have since done a little Bing’ing. She seems like a real peach. Quite a gal.
Seems to me that I recently saw an article asserting that Bono’s charitable foundation delivers about 1% of its receipts to actual charitable endeavor.
Of course, it takes a lot of money to maintain a mega-star like Bono so that he can shine the light of his celestialness upon the problems of this world, where he deigns to visit. His stellar presence bequeaths a luminance that cannot be measured in mere monetary terms.
I saw that too, RES. The word is his organization isn’t supposed to give a lot to charities, it’s main charter is to get folks to donate to causes that do, but still. I’ll bet most folks who donate to his charity do so because they think the money is going to impoverished folks.
About 25 years ago I remember seeing a “60 Minutes” were the San Diego Red Cross had gotten in a bit of hot water about something. During the program it was mentioned that the head, a woman whose name I forget, was earning $325k a year! 25 years ago! That’s the first time I realized all these folks weren’t simply volunteers. I don’t begrudge someone earning a living, but these charities would have no problem finding volunteers willing to do the same work for free, simply for altruistic reasons. There is no need to pay these absurd salaries.
Remember the scandal, a decade or so ago, over the president of United Way pulling down a million a year with perqs that included several luxury residences (NY, D.C.) and generous expense allowances?
“Just” because an organization isn’t run for profit does not mean it is run efficiently to achieve its purported purpose. And not all “underpaid” public servants are living lives of penury. The first thing about the Clintons that really got my ire (politics is politics, and hypocrisy is to Liberals as the Cross is to Catholics – they don’t rile me) was Hillary’s whinging about how little Bill earned as governor of Arkansas.
Sorry, I remember the ’70s and $35K a year salary wasn’t chump change, although it admittedly wasn’t lavish. But add in the free housing and the $100,000 a year “entertainment” allowance and you see a different picture: effective annual income of approx. $200 – 250K, taxable annual income of $35K. That doesn’t get much sympathy from me.
And it has lead to a rather juandiced perspective on ostensible charities that has seen very little to sweeten it over the years. It is too common for scoundrels to obscure their nefariousness behind vast mists of faux generosity.
A harmless joke about racism can help sort things out here: Joke: “I’m in favor of of racism. Without racism, we wouldn’t know who the fastest driver is!”
Most accept that in the sense that it is intended, that is a really bad pun. But there are many others so enamored with the concept of racism, that they cannot stand any jab against it even this inane. Go figure