Patterico's Pontifications

2/8/2010

Erin Aubry Kaplan, Contributing Editor to the L.A. Times: Now That Reid Is Past the “Negro Dialect” Controversy, Let Me Tell You What I Think of the Word “Negro”

Filed under: Dog Trainer,General,Race — Patterico @ 10:16 pm



Erin Aubry Kaplan, a contributing editor to the L.A. Times Opinion section, writes a column about the anticipated use of the term “Negro” in the upcoming Census. The title of her column is The term ‘Negro’? Color it obsolete:

Though it was the accepted term until the late ’60s, for those born after that, “Negro” is something they never answered to, a word that sounds only slightly less incendiary than “nigger.” Even older blacks tend to use it ironically or sarcastically when they use it at all, as in: “Those Negroes just can’t get it together.” Its taint goes back to slavery, when Southerners paternalistically referred to even free blacks as “our Negroes.” Contrast this unpleasantness with Barack Obama, who has established a 21st century standard of racial consideration that’s figuring into just about every discussion of color these days. To blacks of all ages, “Negro” and President Obama sharing the same era just feels wrong — maybe he isn’t post-racial, but isn’t he at least post-Negro?

This controversy may be new, but the angst about what to call ourselves is ancient. Over the last 40 years, we have self-identified as “black,” “Afro-American” and “African American” in an attempt get out from under the subjugation represented by “Negro” and, before that, “colored.”

. . . . In his civil rights rhetoric, the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. repeatedly infused “the Negro” with urgency and even poetry, turning the isolation and alienation of the phrase into a powerful part of his argument for racial inclusion. Black leaders before him did the same thing with the often pejorative “the colored man.” But that was then, and this is now: “Negro” is officially the last of the oppressor appellations, and for many people it’s past time to retire it for good.

Erin Aubry Kaplan
Above: Erin Aubry Kaplan

Strong stuff. Only slightly less incendiary than “nigger”? A word with a taint, which represents subjugation? An oppressor appellation?

Which leads me to wonder:

Where was Erin Aubry Kaplan one month ago, when it was revealed that U.S. Democrat Senator Harry Reid had in 2008 discussed Obama’s “Negro dialect”?

I’ll tell you where she was: keeping her mouth shut about Reid.

At the time, editors were either not soliciting or not greenlighting Kaplan’s views on the topic of the word “Negro.” Instead, they were unleashing opinion columnist Sandy Banks, who ran interference for Reid with her column titled It’s not Harry Reid who should be apologizing, in which Banks declared:

I think the next apology ought to come from Michael Steele — the light-skinned, dialectically flexible African American head of the Republican National Committee.

Sandy Banks
Above: Sandy Banks

Meanwhile, the news side of the paper carefully portrayed the Reid controversy as nothing more than a series of “attacks” by “Republicans.”

And all along, Erin Aubry Kaplan said nothing.

One suspects that Erin Aubry Kaplan had the same opinion about the term “Negro” last month that she has this month. She thought Harry Reid had uttered a tainted word — an appellation used by oppressors — representing subjugation. A word only slightly less incendiary than “nigger.” Yet, somehow, we didn’t hear from Kaplan — a woman with over 100 published pieces in the paper.

No, we didn’t hear from her . . . at least, not at a time when it would have hurt Harry Reid.

Now that Reid is safe — as safe as he’s gonna get, anyway — it’s now OK for Kaplan to reveal her opinions about the word “Negro.”

She and her editors are, after all, merely following Journalism’s Hypocritical Oath: above all else, do no harm to Democrats.

159 Responses to “Erin Aubry Kaplan, Contributing Editor to the L.A. Times: Now That Reid Is Past the “Negro Dialect” Controversy, Let Me Tell You What I Think of the Word “Negro””

  1. Reid’s not safe. And if he lost his seat, I would laugh my ass off.

    Leviticus (30ac20)

  2. Negro, colored, African-American, black.

    Oh, hell. The only thing too many people in black America ultimately care about is rallying around and protecting liberalism. Race and diversity take a distant back seat to that.

    Mark (411533)

  3. Mark, are you putting them in the back seats again? Racist!

    John Hitchcock (12878f)

  4. I take your whole point Patterico, big time. But can I just point out

    Even older blacks tend to use it ironically or sarcastically when they use it at all

    WHAT???? Does she think we are stupid? They (old, young, teen, 80yr, 2 yr’s) use It ALL THE TIME!!! They also use “nigger” ALL. THE. TIME.

    and african americans engage on a frequent basis, racism of all myriad of races. Chinese, Vietnamese, Mexican’s, african americans have LOTS of cute “ironically or sarcastically” names for these races they use in polite company even.

    Who is this woman kidding?

    Topsecretk9 (ab69ad)

  5. The 2010 Census specifically retained “Negro” to be inclusive:

    [Census officials say] they found some older African Americans identify themselves that way and they’re trying to be inclusive. In a statement, they said: “Results from the census in 2000 showed that a number of respondents provided a write-in response of ‘negro’ when answering the question on race.”

    In fact, in the 2000 Census, more than 50,000 people “chose to write down explicitly that they identified themselves as ‘Negro’ in a section where the census allows people to provide additional information” in addition to those who checked the box “Black, African-Am., or Negro.”

    Maybe this will tell us which is the more important liberal virtue — sensitivity or inclusiveness.

    DRJ (84a0c3)

  6. until such time as the leadership (to use a term loosely) class of the (whatever the approved term is for blacks today)community get as exercised over the internal use of “nigger”, etc in their own culture, as they do over whatever real and/or contrived outrage they are up in arms about today, i’ll continue to be underwhelmed by the “demands” for “action”…..

    do something about the celebration and elevation of misogyny and willful ignorance, the denigration of education, grammar, speech and, most of all, achievement, except in sports, and the championing of learned helplessness and one might discover in a few short years that most of the alleged barriers to success are no longer there.

    of course, should that actually happen, all the race hustlers would have to go get a fing j*b, so we can forget about that ever occurring.

    redc1c4 (fb8750)

  7. I’m tired of being lectured about racism from a predominately racist race.

    Topsecretk9 (ab69ad)

  8. and Patterico? I am betting Erin Aubry Kaplan would tell you that she just knows Reid didn’t mean his racism.

    Somehow black people just know white republicans are racist and white democrats, no matter what racist thing they say or do, aren’t.

    Topsecretk9 (ab69ad)

  9. Wait until Reid loses his re-election bid. Suddenly, the entire race industry in America will tell us that they never liked him and they always thought he had retrograde opinions on racial matters.

    JVW (0bfaec)

  10. I question the timing, bitches!

    daleyrocks (718861)

  11. “I’m tired of being lectured about racism from a predominately racist race.”

    TSK9 – What were you expecting, a freaking beer summit? I’m still waiting for that big national conversation on race, the one Holder says we’re too afraid to have. I think he’s been too busy politicizing the Justice Department to get ready for it.

    daleyrocks (718861)

  12. So when did they change the name of the United Negro College Fund?

    Although I have noticed they tend to just refer to it as the UNCF now days.

    http://www.uncf.org/

    gahrie (9d1bb3)

  13. What about the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People? They haven’t changed their name.

    It’s not racist if it’s full of lefties, I guess.

    wherestherum (d413fd)

  14. This is one of those rare times when a genuine academic approach in seeking a truth is vilified. Negro is absolutely the correct term to use in a census.

    Grievance mongers will move on to the next term in good order. Me? I refuse to condescend to them. Africans are largely of the Negroid race. Period. There is no shame nor is there any pride in the term. It is simply a term of art that is perfectly utilitarian and consistent with a main characteristic of said persons.

    Ed from SFV (f6a87d)

  15. What about the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People? They haven’t changed their name.

    It’s not racist if it’s full of lefties, I guess

    i have it on good authority that the acronym “NAACP” stands for “Negros Aren’t Always Colored People”, as anyone who’s been on the receiving end of discrimination can testify to.

    redc1c4 (fb8750)

  16. In other news, Asian-Americans in north Atlanta have requested the Metro Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority change the name of its Yellow Line to the ‘Gold Line,’ as the former term is racially offensive. (No, I am not making this up.)

    RNB (d95551)

  17. What a sorry society we live in. We have pollution, crime, under-education, hunger, disease, loss of faith; yet we choose to focus on skin color.

    Corwin (ea9428)

  18. Those pictures add a lot to your post.

    imdw (19cd35)

  19. Racists!

    The Emperor (48368e)

  20. Where was Erin Aubry Kaplan one month ago

    They cry wolf, but are silent when they think the wolf is their friend. I am so tired of this faux race rage.

    It’s time for the black community to have some rage at their own social pathologies. It’s time for the truth to be spoken.

    Where are black fathers? Must we take their place for another generation? Isn’t hat one of the driving forces behind big paternalistic government?

    Don’t they want to be free?

    Amphipolis (b120ce)

  21. @ amphipolis.

    No. The paternalism comes from guilt over screwing up their (meaning blacks) grandparents lives for the last 400 years. The recognition of the wrong triggers a very highly developed sense of white man’s burden among the gentry left. And because of the pervasive sense of righteousness (and the rush of the noble cause), they never stop to consider that Frederick Douglass may have been right, that the best thing for the Negro may just be to stop their infernal meddling.

    Hadlowe (0e5260)

  22. This topic is beyond boring. It is Post-Boring.

    HeavenSent (ae267e)

  23. Patterico,

    Awesome post!

    But I think there is something for a group to use a term that ones outside the group are not allowed to use. Something like pet names for couples, some secret inside joke of a profession, or even lover’s role-play with each other. Things that while may be exposed to the light of day, others do not understand or use with permission.

    That having been said, something that is supposed to remain private or taboo in a group, MUST be castigated if it is used outside of the group if it is going to have any power or value in the group. On this front, the race hustlers and poverty pimps get a EPIC FAIL, because they only turn their ire and condemnation on those they disagree with.

    MunDane68 (54a83b)

  24. At one time, the so-called ‘polite’ white society used ‘Nigra’ in place of ‘nigger’. They could not bring themselves to use the more generally accepted term, ‘Negro’.
    However it is the combination of the word used plus the tone and the attitude of the speaker that matters.
    It’s best for all of us to just stop using these terms.

    Tony Ciarriocco (b333d2)

  25. It’s all about George Orwell’s concept of controlling the language.

    Colored people is bad, but people of color is good.

    rbj (65c648)

  26. This is a rather stunning view as well:

    Barack Obama, who has established a 21st century standard of racial consideration that’s figuring into just about every discussion of color these days

    Apparently, the guy who was elected largely on the repeated promise that he was going to heal all our racial wounds has instead opted for demanding that we view every possible public and private concern as racial. Talk about false pretenses.

    brobin (c07c20)

  27. This controversy may be new, but the angst about what to call ourselves is ancient. Over the last 40 years, we have self-identified as “black,” “Afro-American” and “African American” in an attempt get out from under the subjugation represented by “Negro” and, before that, “colored.”

    Try using “American”.

    Lazarus Long (a4f63e)

  28. This controversy may be new, but the angst about what to call ourselves is ancient. Over the last 40 years, we have self-identified as “black,” “Afro-American” and “African American” in an attempt get out from under the subjugation represented by “Negro” and, before that, “colored.”

    Try using ‘American’.

    Lazarus Long (a4f63e)

  29. “Those pictures add a lot to your post.”

    Hanx, imdw!!!

    Your comments add a lot to the conversation here!

    (Mom always said: if you get a compliment, return it.)

    Patterico (c218bd)

  30. Actually, negro is black in Spanish. Latin for black is niger and the feminine gender is nigra, as in substantia nigra.

    I guess we could ask the Spanish to change the word. Too late to ask the Romans about Latin.

    Mike K (2cf494)

  31. We’ll also have to get after that country in west Africa to change its racist name.

    brobin (c07c20)

  32. The issue of group identity for slave-descended black Americans is a very complex and difficult one, without any precedent or comparison to any other group. Yes, we can argue that they are only Americans, just like the Scots-English-Welsh-German mix Americans, who lost their original ethnic identity and became just Americans, but that is too soon after segregation and Jim Crow to be anything but laughable. Maybe in a hundred years.

    nk (db4a41)

  33. What you have here is a broader narrative (“above all else, do no harm to Democrats”) and an example which appears to correlate with that. But apart from said preexisting narrative, there appears to be little evidence of any actual intention to bury this perspective during the Reid controversy.

    To my reading, Kaplan’s article is less about the word “Negro” in public discourse and more about history of African American engagement with that word, as it relates specifically to its appearance on the US Census now. I don’t think its appearance today rather than yesterday is indicative of some sinister political double-standard.

    Tom (04f1d9)

  34. This is a point that has been made time and time again, but bears heavily on this situation: The term African-American or Afro-American is ultimately less likely to be relevant than myself (of Swedish and Norwegian descent) referring to my nationality as “Scandinavian-American”. My ancestors came to America in the 19th Century, When, most likely, did the ancestors of those who refer to themselves as African-American or Afro-American come to this country? (rhetorical question)
    Wait, what is that? Logical perspective on a trite situation? Get over it. Race relations are hurt more by bickering over what labels to apply to OURSELVES instead of spending that energy on things, oh, like… Education, Pregnancy Prevention, Eliminating fraud and abuse within government assistance programs, Crime prevention, and most importantly- personal responsibility. (By the way, those examples are expounded from a conservative/libertarian point of view).

    scott (6c8524)

  35. You would be right, scott, if black people had been accepted as just Americans the moment they were freed, like your ancestors and mine were the moment they came to America. But they were not. Not for a hundred years.

    nk (db4a41)

  36. Slavery stripped them of their heritage. Bigotry stripped of their souls.

    nk (db4a41)

  37. I dunno, to me it seems like Lucy snatching Charlie Brown’s football again.

    We have been well-trained to try to use whatever the correct term is, but it changes often enough that we are likely to end up ‘in the wrong’ whatever we say.

    I’m a mutt. Probably most of us are mutts. Wait, mixed-breed… Heinz 57 is probably verboten.

    jodetoad (7a7b8a)

  38. 10-20 years from now the grievance mongers and victicrats will decide that “African-American” is a degrading, racist, oppressive term and we’ll cook up another “official” term for blacks. When is this society going to mature and get over this racial paranoia? As long as people like Kaplan, Jackson, Sharpton and liberal pundits keep interpreting everything as racist so they have an excuse to get self-righteous and engage in false rage, never.

    Crusty (69f730)

  39. “nk” once again demonstrates their vast knowledge, this time on the subject of American history….

    redc1c4 (fb8750)

  40. I’m a mutt. Probably most of us are mutts. Wait, mixed-breed… Heinz 57 is probably verboten.

    Comment by jodetoad — 2/9/2010 @ 8:42 am
    😉

    When I talk about my mother’s beauty, I stress my Spartan ancestry. When I feel mean, I stress the Mongolian part.

    nk (db4a41)

  41. Thank you, redc14.

    nk (db4a41)

  42. With the current focus in academia and its indoctrination of our kids into the theories of white privelege and structural racism, this stuff is not going away. Obama is an adherent of the structural racism school, which is particularly pernicious but fits liberalism well, with a focus on equal outcomes, regardless of equal opportunities.

    daleyrocks (718861)

  43. You would be right, scott, if black people had been accepted as just Americans the moment they were freed, like your ancestors and mine were the moment they came to America. But they were not. Not for a hundred years.

    Comment by nk — 2/9/2010 @ 8:11 am

    Hmmmmm, I seem to remember signs that said, “No Irish need apply”. Good thing that wasn’t bigotry against white people, Hmmmm?

    Good thing that the Jews were never discriminated against in the US either. Good thing that they were accepted as Americans the moment they came to America. It’s really good that Jews are not still discriminated against in the USA either.

    peedoffamerican (cadcec)

  44. Her husband is Jewish. I wonder if she approves of the word schvartzeh.

    Official Internet Data Office (dc2fe1)

  45. What does the KKK and Jesse Jackson have in common?
    /
    /
    /
    /
    /
    /
    /
    /
    /
    /
    /
    They are both democrats and refer to Jews as Himey’s. Strange bedfellows this makes.

    peedoffamerican (cadcec)

  46. you’re welcome nk: i’m glad you appreciate me mocking your utter cluelessness in regards to American history.

    redc1c4 (fb8750)

  47. We can still LOL at white people right? Like stuff white people like?

    imdw (19cd35)

  48. Comment by Mike K — 2/9/2010 @ 6:50 am

    I was just thinking about picking up some of my favorite dark Mexican beer — African-American Modelo.

    JVW (48d573)

  49. “Taint.” Heh heh.

    Insomniac (1c1152)

  50. And I would give you more credence if you were an American, redc14.

    nk (db4a41)

  51. that’s the only Mexican beer worth drinking….

    redc1c4 (fb8750)

  52. What to call African Americans/blacks/negroes/coloreds/ni**ers? My head is hurting over this argument. Here’s an idea. Call them whatever you call your friends, or co-workers, or relatives, or strangers, or what ever. Sir or Maam, if they’re older. Young man or young lady, if they’re younger
    A fool, knucklehead, buffoon, thief, or thug, if they’re any of those. Wise, prudent, courageous, or hard working, if they happen to be one of those. A character trait, is probably better than a physical characteristic.

    As a matter of fact, I say the only time we need to get into any other physical characteristics is when we’re sending out a bulletin for a missing person or an APB for some hoodlum.

    Me, I prefer black. Not a completely accurate description (I’m more of a rich chocolate) but it will do. I’ve really tried to stop putting people into color categories. Not always successful, but I’ve tried. We have so many ways to describe another human being, is color/race that important?

    Mike Giles (762afa)

  53. We have so many ways to describe another human being, is color/race that important?
    Comment by Mike Giles — 2/9/2010 @ 11:16 am

    It is to a race-hustler. I agree with your way, it’s much better. Race is not a personality characteristic.

    Stashiu3 (44da70)

  54. I find it interesting black people refer to their color based on food and beverages. Rich chocolate, coffee with two creamers, cinnamon brown, caramel, etc. Just goes to prove all black people like food. Or something.

    I’m reminded of a spiel I heard years ago, which went something like this:

    When you people are born, you’re pink. When you’re cold, you’re blue. When you get sunburned or embarrassed or angry, you turn red. When you get sick you’re green. And you call us colored?

    John Hitchcock (9859e6)

  55. … like your ancestors and mine were the moment they came to America.

    Every wave of immigrants had to earn acceptance. Irish, Swedish, German, Scot, Chinese, Japanese.

    Neither your ancestors nor mine got instant acceptance.

    And the emphasis on group identity only delays the process. To be fully accepted as an American you first of all have to want to be.

    LarryD (feb78b)

  56. To be fully accepted as an American you first of all have to want to be.

    which won’t matter a lick if nk, in his infinite wisdom, declares you to not be one…. %-)

    the non-American redc1c4 (fb8750)

  57. Actually, negro is black in Spanish. Latin for black is niger and the feminine gender is nigra, as in substantia nigra.

    Yup. Some other instances:

    In Russian, it’s “negr”.

    In Holland and Germany, it’s “neger”.

    In Haitian Creole, it’s “neg”.

    In Japanese, it’s “neguro”.

    None of these were considerd to be pejoratives until recently, and some still aren’t.

    Subotai (1c05f1)

  58. “We’ll also have to get after that country in west Africa to change its racist name.”

    Cote d’ Ivoire?

    SteveG (909b57)

  59. Close, but no cigar.

    AD - RtR/OS! (ca88dc)

  60. I tend to agree partially with nk but there is a heavy load that black kids carry when they are American born and raised. I teach medical students, a good number of them have been black. The immigrants are totally self possessed and have no hangups. In fact, a lot of the black kids in Ivy League schools doing well are immigrants.

    One of my students was from Eritrea. Her parents got her out during the civil war and they were to South Africa ! That was during Apartheid but it was the safest place in Africa for blacks. They had huge amounts of immigration during white rule.

    She then moved to France, then Guadeloupe and finally to LA where she lived with her grandmother. She was on financial aid and was so broke, she could not afford to buy a laptop, which is required. I loaned her my physical exam instruments.

    She has now graduated and is doing a residency.

    At the same time we had this nice black kid who tried to live at home and go to medical school. By midyear, he was seriously depressed, had lost about 25 pounds and was failing. That year, I had three black kids in my group of six. The other two tried to help him along with some of the other black kids in the class. He failed the year, tried to repeat first year and failed again.

    I was pretty good at working with kids in trouble. The school even assigned kids with problems to my group, I found out. I could never get to him because I am white. Nobody ever said so but he would never open up.

    I had another kid a few years later who I thought for a while might be schizophrenic. He was black but very light skinned. His parents were black panthers in the Bay Area. He could not talk to white patients. One woman was frightened of him and asked him to leave. He wasn’t threatening; he just couldn’t talk. A lot of freshman medical students have trouble with taking a medical history. You’re asking strangers about intimate details. It was more than that in this kid.

    Interestingly enough, I got him to talk to me and I figured out what the problem was. I wrote out a script for him to use. It had all the questions and how to ask them. That helped and he eventually went on and has done fine.

    The race hustlers have made things very difficult for these kids who have potential and it is a lot harder to get an education burdened by all this stuff.

    The interracial animosity has grown a lot during my life. When I was 18, I hung out in a black bar in Chicago. It was about 67th and South Chicago Avenue. My buddy and I used to hang out there and shoot bumper pool for beers. We were the only white guys in there and everybody wanted to play us. Well, it happened we were very very good at bumper pool. We would spend a Friday night shooting pool and walk out at 1 AM never having bought a beer. I never felt any hostility. We even took some of those guys on our high school graduation beach party. I wouldn’t dream of doing something like that now.

    Mike K (2cf494)

  61. I have to wonder if she benefited from the United Negro College Fund? Wutup wit dat?

    Steve (e5c232)

  62. Ah…Erin, who entertained us with her revisionist musings about the Weather Underground being misunderstood idealists, continues to enchant.

    desertmick (85011e)

  63. Suffice it to say you are all racists. Denounced and condemned.

    JD (e9e883)

  64. who dat say we be racist?

    redc1c4 (fb8750)

  65. To be fully accepted as an American you first of all have to want to be.

    Comment by LarryD — 2/9/2010 @ 11:45 am

    And if you try, you get lynched. So maybe after ten generations you stop trying.

    nk (db4a41)

  66. Shameless racists.

    The Emperor (b8e702)

  67. “And if you try, you get lynched. So maybe after ten generations you stop trying.”

    Or you find out you can make some good coin living off the government tit!

    daleyrocks (718861)

  68. When was the last time lynching was even remotely common, nk? How about how many decades ago?

    JD (fdd4e9)

  69. Damn, when did they lynch, Colin Powell, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Kwaise Mfume, Bill Cosby, Eddie Murphy……..and the list goes on and on and on…….

    Musta been a very busy news day to have missed all of these.

    peedoffamerican (cadcec)

  70. How about how many decades ago?

    Comment by JD — 2/9/2010 @ 4:07 pm

    Five, a little less. About the time I was born.

    nk (db4a41)

  71. You really think you can restore the soul of a people lost over three hundred years of slavery and one hundred years of second class citizenship in fifty years?

    nk (db4a41)

  72. You really think you can restore the soul of a people

    I never knew that “a people” had a soul. I thought only individuals had souls.

    Subotai (188635)

  73. @70. Good point nk!

    The Emperor (1f8da9)

  74. Yes, Desiree Rogers, Colin Powell, Clarence Thomas, and Tavis Smiley can now live next to white people. Fifty years ago? They would be living in “High N****rtown” in the North and lynched for being uppity in the South.

    nk (db4a41)

  75. JD, a wiki search says that according to “A Time of Terror” by James Cameron (a black activist who was almost lynched at the time), the last known lynching of a black person was in 1930. If anyone has anything different, please feel free to cite it. Here.

    Stashiu3 (44da70)

  76. Well, I guess I had better get out the rope (sarcasm).

    I live in the country, in Georgia, have five families of blacks that live within a half mile of me. I don’t see any trees sprouting black people yet. Although, I wouldn’t mind seeing my next door neighbor who is WHITE TRASH move the hell away from here. I much prefer the black families, they are nice, hardworking people.

    peedoffamerican (cadcec)

  77. “JD, a wiki search says that according to “A Time of Terror” by James Cameron (a black activist who was almost lynched at the time), the last known lynching of a black person was in 1930. ”

    Did your wiki search reach this page:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lynching_in_the_United_States#World_War_II_to_present

    imdw (8f8ead)

  78. Comment by imdw — 2/9/2010 @ 4:44 pm

    No, there is apparently a difference between confirmed and documented, but then again it’s wiki. Thank you for the cite.

    Stashiu3 (44da70)

  79. “When was the last time lynching was even remotely common, nk?”

    JD – It was well before abortion clinic bombing was an everyday occurrence.

    daleyrocks (718861)

  80. @76.
    Imdw has ten points on accuracy of counter point and reference. Sorry Stach. You scored 5 points.

    The Emperor (ab0f7f)

  81. Get lost lovie. I asked for further and better cites if anyone had one. imdw gave one. I accepted the correction and thanked him. No snark or sarcasm involved, even though I usually dismiss things from him. He made an exception to his usual style and gave a straightforward correction with a link, so I made an exception as well. Nobody won or lost.

    You’re sorry, but it’s not on my account… it’s your own history of dishonesty and bilge. You’re just another second-rater with no value added by your presence.

    Stashiu3 (44da70)

  82. I didn’t ask about individual acts, nk. I asked when it was even remotely common. 2 incidents 40-d0 years ago is hardly even remotely common.

    JD (e19c2d)

  83. Awwww… Stachy did i hurt your feelings? Try being more honest next time. Ok spot? Make honesty your best policy. It always pays, amigo.

    The Emperor (ab0f7f)

  84. About the time I was born.

    you weren’t born nk, so much as inflicted.

    redc1c4 (fb8750)

  85. When were acts of terrorism against the United States by militant jihadists remotely common, JD? I’m not asking for isolated incidents, either.

    nk (db4a41)

  86. Non-responsive, counselor.

    JD (e19c2d)

  87. Lovie – questioning Stashiu’s honesty is rather low, par for the course for you.

    JD (e19c2d)

  88. Buh-bye, The Emperor.

    Patterico (c218bd)

  89. #

    Buh-bye, The Emperor.

    Comment by Patterico — 2/9/2010 @ 5:51 pm

    It’s about time! Thanks.

    John Hitchcock (9859e6)

  90. Will you think less of my argument, JD, if it’s seven decades? http://faculty.berea.edu/browners/chesnutt/classroom/lynching_table_year.html

    It’s not just the isolated incidents, it’s also the terror they inflict in a generation and the generation after. Which was my point with the jihadists.

    nk (db4a41)

  91. Nk – I knew what your point was/is. I just do not see how that is currently relevant to a generation that never experienced that, and the subsequent, and even subsequent generations.

    JD (e19c2d)

  92. When was the last time lynching was even remotely common, nk?

    Depends on the definition of lynching. If it means “any racially driven murder” then it still happens today, with both black and (more often) white victims.

    Wikipedia, with its usual dishonesty, uses an implcit definition of “the racially driven murder of blacks by whites”.

    Subotai (68de0f)

  93. nk, The Emmett Till case was lynching and I remember when it happened. He was a Chicago kid who went to the South and got into a bad situation. Most of the filibusters of the 1930s and 40s (Since it is in the news these days) were by Democrats blocking GOP anti-lynching legislation.

    Mike K (2cf494)

  94. #88 Patterico:

    Buh-bye,

    Thank you.

    EW1(SG) (edc268)

  95. I suppose she is too young and callow to remember or know of things like the United Negro College Fund. Ah well, ignorance outs itself easily, as she demonstrates.

    {^_^}

    JD (847e52)

  96. a mind is a terrible thing to waste, eh JD?

    redc1c4 (fb8750)

  97. JD, #91: …I just do not see how that is currently relevant to a generation that never experienced that, and the subsequent, and even subsequent generations.

    Because terror works.

    Tom (98c376)

  98. Tom,

    Always glad (so far anyway 😉 ) to see you stop by even though we look at things very differently. I haven’t read that one but I’ve heard of it on several occasions. I guess I need to pick up a copy and see what the hubbub is about. Thanks. Always nice to have a different opinion from somebody who works hard to remain civil.

    Stashiu3 (44da70)


  99. Buh-bye, The Emperor.
    Comment by Patterico — 2/9/2010 @ 5:51 pm

    My apologies to jd. @89.

    Comment by The Emperor — 2/10/2010 @ 1:37 am

    ?? I don’t get it.

    no one you know (1ebbb1)

  100. noyk – Big Time Sucking Up!

    daleyrocks (718861)

  101. noyk – Big Time Sucking Up!

    Comment by daleyrocks — 2/10/2010 @ 4:43 am

    Heh. One would think any sucking up do be done would be to Stashiu, whose honesty was impugned…

    no one you know (1ebbb1)

  102. Didn’t Bennett get tarred and feathered for bringinging up one of the topics from that book, Tom?

    JD (788853)

  103. Noyk – lovie is too dense to even figure out what she did.

    JD (788853)

  104. The stupid … it burns, it burns.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  105. JD – Yeah, you must be talking about the “abortion brings down the crime stats” chapter. Pro-choice people are appalled at the apparent notion that aborting kids in poor communities ultimately prevents crime there, while pro-life people decry the conclusion that would seem to support. Thing is, this difficult conclusion is pretty hard to deny in the face of the evidence, and to my knowledge, it’s still the best explanation out there for the particular crime drop that they analyzed.

    But if you’re trying to dispute the argument of one section of Freakonomics by claiming that another section of it was controversial, well, I suggest you check it out for yourself instead. The part I cited was specifically about how the number of lynchings declined dramatically over time, as terror thereof became so ingrained in the collective psyche of the black folks targeted. Terror works because random acts against a community are very effective at changing the culture of the community. Think of the suicide attacks in Israel or Pakistan, or the DC sniper. That sh*t leaves a lasting impression. And each subsequent attack, no matter how infrequent, reinforces the fear paradigm. And the white supremacists know this, which is why you still see nooses and/or burning crosses periodically. The intended message and effect is still powerful.

    Stashiu3 – thanks. I do try. But it certainly helps that Patterico’s Pontifications is a rare exception to the normal ideological blogging experience. In my experience, unlike Free Republic or Daily Kos, respectful dissent is met with argument rather than ridicule or expulsion. It’s a breath of fresh air, and I can reliably get a thoughtful conservative view of current events by following along here.

    Tom (69f10e)

  106. Tom – I was not trying to refute that notion by discrediting another. I was just asking for clarification. I understand how terror is utilized, and would not ever dispute that people during that time period would have justifiably been worried or afraid. At least a couple generations removed still being terrified of being lynched is where I begin to differ.

    JD (6076b7)

  107. Freakonomics and superfreakonomics ought to be required reading. But open debate among people from a broad range of disciplines would be necessary to help facilitate understanding.
    Most people cling to partial knowledge on many subjects. They rely on people they deem knowledgeable to fill in the gaps. Most people do not dig deep enough. (me included)
    Statistics and trends – they can tell the story, and they can lie.
    There is a direct relationship between increased rape rates and ice cream sales. But one does not cause the other.

    Corwin (ea9428)

  108. My first link at my comment #90 seems to be very strict about its definition of lynchings. It seems to be limited to mob action and to victims accused of crimes. It does not include secret murders like Emmett Tills, or church bombings, or whippings, or slap-downs for uppitiness, and all that other good stuff the Klan would do in the middle of the night.

    In addition, lynching was not the only thing that kept black people from felling that they were “just Americans” which is my thesis. Whites Only and Coloreds Only water fountains. Back of the bus front of the bus. No service to black people at the Woolworth’s lunch counter. Black schools and white schools.

    I’m not the one who is ignorant of American history.

    As far as JD’s question, why does all this go into the subsequent generations? Kids learn from their parents and pass what they learn to their children. If black people, born in 1956 like me, were taught to step aside for a white man on the sidewalk and never sass him or they might get slappes or pistol-whipped and the law would never do anything about it, well … what would they say to their children and grandchildren. If a black doctor had to be careful not to treat white people, and not have too nice a house, or too nice a car, or buy his wife too nice clothes, because he might get a visit from the Klan in the middle of the night, how “American” would he feel?

    nk (db4a41)

  109. Negro is the proper ethnic classification for blacks just like Caucasian is the term for whites.

    ParatrooperJJ (8a6914)

  110. In addition, lynching was not the only thing that kept black people from felling that they were “just Americans” which is my thesis. Whites Only and Coloreds Only water fountains. Back of the bus front of the bus. No service to black people at the Woolworth’s lunch counter. Black schools and white schools.

    You’re blurring the lines between a lot of different things there. It’s not the case that “lynching” was a tool of white oppresion against blacks. In some instances it may well have been used that way, but as you admit, it was used against people “accused of crimes”.

    Justice was pretty rough and ready in America up until very recently. Read up on the infamous Bonnie & Clyde – they were ambushed and executed without trial by government agents. Some of the people who were lynched were no doubt innocent victims. Others were guilty of the crimes they were accused of – crimes like murder, assault, and arson.

    Subotai (d9b698)

  111. The part I cited was specifically about how the number of lynchings declined dramatically over time, as terror thereof became so ingrained in the collective psyche of the black folks targeted.

    Speculation piled on top of assumption. Let’s pretend for a second that lynchings were used solely as a tool to oppress blacks. According to your argument, the fact that lynchings are now almost non-existent must mean that “black folks” are now almost completely terrorized.

    Subotai (d9b698)

  112. nk, what? You represent the Squirrel Anti-Defamation League?

    SPQR (26be8b)

  113. My thought, SPQR, is that this is a man who will make a meal of some Klansman who uses that pejorative word against him. 😉

    nk (db4a41)

  114. “#36

    Slavery stripped them of their heritage. Bigotry stripped of their souls.

    Comment by nk — 2/9/2010 @ 8:13 am”

    This is utter BS. Many groups have suffered discrimination and bigotry. In addition to many European immigrants I would point to Asians on the West Coast. They were brought here to build the railroads with no intention of integrating them into society. They suffered legal discrimination and abuse and violence by bigots. When the railroads were done, they did not look to Massa to care for them, they worked hard, sacrificed for the future, and got educations for their children. The community leaders, instead of making excuses for the criminal elements, worked to clean up there own and establish a reputation that others would respect. If a Chinese business man got in trouble the community leaders would cover the debts to preserve their reputation, but the loser would never be allowed to get in that position again.

    Black people did not rise up against slavery or discrimination. It was white Americans who had nothing to fear from slavery that fought and died for their freedom. The writer would possibly have been born into slavery if white people had not fought and sacrificed to free her ancestors.

    It was not black people who passed the laws ending discrimination and allowing black people to vote. It was white people who had no interest except for a love of freedom. I remember the civil rights marches on TV and there were many white people in those marches. Many were the Jews that race hustlers now smear and blame for black failure. Charlton Heston was there when doing so could have ended his career in racist Hollywood. This was the man they called a bigot and said should be shot.

    No one asks the black community to repay this debt, but is it unreasonable to ask them to honor the debt to those who sacrificed so much for their freedom? Instead they support the very people who fought for slavery, Jim Crow, lynchings, and the war on poverty which has done more damage to the black community than the KKK imagined in their wildest dreams. Look at the rapid and stunning progress made by the community between the end of segregation and the war on poverty. Progress in reduction of single motherhood, salary, education, and standard of living.

    You are really sounding and acting like a troll.

    Machinist (9780ec)

  115. Compare the lifestyle of MLK and the race hustlers of today. White people did not pick who the black community idolizes and supports. As long as they choose to hook their wagon to poverty pimps who see them as livestock to be fleeced, they can not expect to get respect from those paying the bills. There are certainly worthy and admirable people to support and follow, but they have to stand on their own and take responsibility for themselves. They can’t live in Mommy’s basement and expect respect from adults. Time to put on the big boy pants and stop whining.

    Machinist (9780ec)

  116. If annoying a peckerwood or two by saying things they disagree with makes me a troll, then I’m a troll.

    Hey, Patterico, have you made Machinist and redc14 the arbiter’s of Patterico Orthodoxy, here?

    nk (db4a41)

  117. If it needs to be said, I am not dragging Patterico into this, just Machinist’s implication that this is a site where you need to be careful what you say.

    nk (db4a41)

  118. I didn’t get that vibe at all from what Machinist said. Why don’t you just ask him what he meant?

    JD (1500d2)

  119. Although Machinist is not all that wrong in thinking that, the way some commenters have been treated lately.

    nk (db4a41)

  120. You are really sounding and acting like a troll.

    Comment by Machinist — 2/11/2010 @ 12:39 am

    Vibe, JD?

    nk (db4a41)

  121. There is no orthodoxy.

    Patterico (063e97)

  122. I did not mention Patterico once. I refereed to your trollish behavior when you act like an ass. I proclaim what religions may be respected and who may be called an American and then claim you are for free speech and speaking truth to oppressors?

    This is the only political site I read or comment at. That is due to my respect for Patterico and the standards he sets. The only complaint I have expressed here is with some commenter’s tendency to through personal attacks at people who don’t agree with the popular opinion, when they present reasonable and rational views. This has nothing to do with Patterico. This is a good example of your “trollish” behavior. You don’t respond to any of the points I made but try to characterize my comment as oppressing you and speaking for Patterico. Isn’t that classic troll behavior?

    Machinist (9780ec)

  123. Well, I came back over to this thread
    To find out what Patterico said.
    His words alone I saw had no meaning
    So I decided to do some up-thread streaming.

    When I found the question that was asked
    I saw the work to which Pat was tasked.
    I deemed it to be an appeal to authority
    Like is rejected by academic majority.

    I usually find nk’s reasoning quite fair
    But this, among others, is really out there.

    John Hitchcock (d09427)

  124. You proclaim… Duh.

    Machinist (9780ec)

  125. Does racism cause leftism? Does a society full of bigotry, legal and cultural — as was apparent over 50 years ago — push people on the receiving end of that bigotry to the left? If it did, 80 to 90 percent of black America in today’s era, instead of still being so mindlessly liberal and pro-Democrat-Party, should be more politically moderate to conservative. But it’s not.

    So much of black America is so infused with and deranged by leftism, that when talking about “blacks” or “African-Americans,” it’s hard to know where liberalism gone beserk begins and race ends.

    The mindless, idiotic ideology of liberalism run amok can be found in societies throughout the world, including those nations (eg, Mexico, Venezuela, Cuba) that are both generally mono-racial and/or where a history of bigotry or slavery is generally non-existent.

    Mark (411533)

  126. Goddamn n*****rs! Liberals, the bunch of them. Can I now come back into the human race?

    nk (db4a41)

  127. “It was not black people who passed the laws ending discrimination and allowing black people to vote. It was white people who had no interest except for a love of freedom.”

    – Machinist

    It may not have been black people who “passed” those laws – which is kind of a funny thing to say, since black people couldn’t… you know… vote yet. And white people weren’t going out of their way to elect black representatives, for some reason.

    One way or another, black people fought tooth and nail to put pressure on the white people who eventually did vote to pass laws which restored the outward manifestations of liberties which out never have been suppressed in the first place. And that’s the larger point: regardless of whether or not there have been other oppressed minorities in the history of this country (and there have been, obviously), there has never been so systematic and recalcitrant an oppression of rights and denial of basic human dignity as there was in the case of black slaves (the only other thing that comes close is the treatment of Chinese immigrants out West; but even that’s a stretch). And it’s kinda weird to see so many people arguing that slavery as an institution was just something unfortunate on par with discrimination against the Irish or the Polish.

    This isn’t about leveling accusations of racism (before JD comes along and exclaims the point): this is about criticizing a mentality that places itself in direct opposition to whatever a supposed enemy group says without first considering the position itself. Thus, we find people arguing against the relative severity of black oppression, when their real problem is simply that Democrats are the ones talking about it in the first place.

    Leviticus (35fbde)

  128. That BS is representative of who, nk?

    JD (292bc3)

  129. Goddamn n*****rs! Liberals, the bunch of them. Can I now come back into the human race?

    Comment by nk — 2/11/2010 @ 10:19 am

    Naggers? Boy, you can say that again about liberals. Welcome back to Patterico.

    A bit late to the party here but more seriously, while Machinist is correct about whites helping blacks out of slavery and into long delayed civil rights, I think nk’s right about the beat-down mentality of African-Americans even after slavery ended, esp in segregated areas of the country. It’s pretty tough to rise up when you are continually abused. And not to speak for nk but that was my understanding of the “soul” part of his comments.

    no one you iknow (196ed7)

  130. I said that we stole a people’s cultural and ethnic heritage and then we denied them being “just Americans” (the way we allowed it with the European “mutts” who likewise lost their original ethnicity) and I am not backing down from it.

    nk (db4a41)

  131. #129 was baseless and uncalled for, nk.

    JD (1d90a6)

  132. no one you iknow ,

    I think the black community was doing much better until liberals decided they could not do it on there own and launched the war on poverty. Out of wedlock births have doubled or tripled and education and two parent homes are worse. The argument for slavery and Jim Crow being the root of the problem is also weak when you look at how many immigrated after those or were born after segregation. It is poverty pimps that are telling today’s young people that they can’t do it and should not have to try. They will never rise above this until they take responsibility for themselves. You don’t get someone off of drugs by making excuses and enabling their addiction. Today’s welfare is a tarbaby that sucks people in and makes them dependent. They will never rise above it until it stresses becoming self sufficient instead of helpless. Encouraging prostitution, drug dealing, gangs, and drug use will not ever lift them out of the ghetto. Only removing color as an identity will do that. What we are doing has made things much worse and continues to do so. It is the cruelest example of liberal misguided thinking I know of.

    Machinist (9780ec)

  133. Leviticus,
    When the Civil Rights Act was passed, black people did vote in most of the country and there were black legislators in DC. It was in parts of the deep South that the Democrats were suppressing the vote. Only there was there the legal discrimination practiced. White activists who went down there to sign up black voters were beaten, arrested, and in a few cases killed. Democrats are talking about race because they use black people to get votes and then send them back to the fields when they are done.

    When California passed Prop 209, who was racist, the people who wanted legal discrimination to be outlawed or the people who wanted the state to discriminate based of skin color? The language almost mirrored the Civil Rights Act. Were the people who passed the CRA of 64 racists? Why were the people who passed the same law for California racist? These were not Democrats.

    Machinist (9780ec)

  134. Comment by Machinist — 2/11/2010 @ 12:04 pm

    You make several good points and it is true that welfare (for people who are able to work, obviously) just teases people along with bare sufficiency to keep them dependent instead of encouraging self sufficiency in the hope of achieving much, much more.

    As far as race goes, though, I think it would be hard to overestimate the long-lingering aftereffects of such systematic abuse and discrimination as existed against black people in this country.

    Of course everyone is responsible for their own actions now, and of course whites now are not to be held responsible now for the actions of racist whites in the past. I think of the analogy of a child who has been abused repeatedly by parents at a time when he is helpless: verbally, physically, sexually, horrifically. Later he grows up. Is he responsible for the morality and consequences of his own actions? Of course. Is it his parents’ fault if he chooses to get addicted to drugs? No,it isn’t. But you’d be hard pressed to say that the internal freedom of this child to make good choices isn’t most definitely inhibited by the aftereffects (physical, emotional etc.) of what his parents chose to do so long ago.

    He can, and he has a responsibility to, struggle to get free of it. But he is handicapped in very real ways and it’s more of a struggle for him than for a loved and unabused child. (This fact of handicap, of course, is what all the reasonable disagreements about exactly how far racial affirmative action should be taken, and how effective it is, are all about).

    no one you know (196ed7)

  135. 134.#129 was baseless and uncalled for, nk.

    Comment by JD — 2/11/2010 @ 11:40 am

    What else could I make of Machinist’s comments, JD?

    nk (db4a41)

  136. That was a completely baseless and uncharitable interpretation, nk. If you have questions about what he meant, why not effin ask him. He has stated pretty clearly what his position is. Nothing in what he wrote suggests that we should call people n*ggerz and then we could all get along. This type of argument is better handled by people named tim.

    JD (bd7f0f)

  137. The n****r was mine. My interpretation from what Machinist said. Not anything Machinist said. I admit say that.

    But blaming black Americans for supporting liberals/Democrats, there’s no doubt that Machinist was saying that.

    nk (db4a41)

  138. Well, either they’re grown ups responsible for their actions (supporting Dems), or they are the children the Dems treat them as, and must be protected from the consequences of the World?

    Are they Free, or are they still residents of the plantation?

    AD - RtR/OS! (011035)

  139. no one you know ,
    With respect Sir, I can not buy the 150 year old trauma by proxy analogy. Anyone under 40 grew up never seeing slavery or Jim Crow, only welfare and affirmative action. They have been pampered, preferred, and had excuses made for them. I saw the sixties, Sir. I saw the rapid progress made and the celebration by people of good will on both sides. This was not what Democrats wanted. You can not exploit a victim if he bootstraps himself up, so they made them dependent children, needing master to provide for them. The changes were devastating. They drove fathers out of the home and rewarded any attempt to become self supporting by cutting the person off of all aid. If progress was being made one could advise more time but I see things deteriorating. As more years go by we see another generation growing up without knowing anyone that is not on welfare. The only people they see working are prostitutes, drug dealers, and gangsters. How do people find their feet after many generations of this cycle? It is the cruelest thing I have seen short of outright genocide. I am more ashamed of this evil than I am of the despicable acts of some regional bigots. The bigot Democrats could not keep them from rising up but liberals have pushed them back generations, even as black men have risen to the highest positions.

    Machinist (9780ec)

  140. Comment by Machinist — 2/11/2010 @ 2:42 pm

    Well…in many respects we are agreed, particularly about the efforts of race-hustlers (Democrats all – sorry, any liberals on here, but it’s true) to use past injustices for personal gain and perceived grievance, even where there is no current objective offense.

    I do think it’s a bit oversimplifying to call it “trauma by proxy”; I really couldn’t put it much better than nk himself did upthread – let me quote the bit he wrote:

    As far as JD’s question, why does all this go into the subsequent generations? Kids learn from their parents and pass what they learn to their children. If black people, born in 1956 like me, were taught to step aside for a white man on the sidewalk and never sass him or they might get slappes or pistol-whipped and the law would never do anything about it, well … what would they say to their children and grandchildren. If a black doctor had to be careful not to treat white people, and not have too nice a house, or too nice a car, or buy his wife too nice clothes, because he might get a visit from the Klan in the middle of the night, how “American” would he feel?

    That seems to me a very reasonable thing to say, and it was all true not too long ago. It takes a long time – no, IMO a few generations are not too long, given what was happening within your lifetime and just before mine. Would you or I be talking to our children about the injustices of a society which made us suffer in a similar fashion? I think we would. Whites built up an almost incalculable negative balance with blacks in this country, for much longer than fifty years. Trust takes a while to build back up.

    Just so I’m not misunderstood, two of my personal heroes are Dr. Condoleezza Rice and Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. Both of these people grew up under segregation and massive discrimination, and through sheer force of will, determination and an absolutely kick*** work ethic instilled by parents/grandfather, overcame injustice to reach the highest levels of government in the land.

    But make no mistake. Their guardians knew well what massive racial disadvantages they’d face, and insisted explicitly that they be twice as good as white people at whatever they did so that discrimination would not touch them. Not everyone has the enormous strength of will, optimism and faith in the American process despite the evidence around them than the Rices or the Thomases. It will happen. But conservatives are already doing what’s right – emphasizing personal merit and colorblindness. Nothing but time will build the trust level back up to Euro-immigrant levels IMO. Just as if an abusive parent repents and starts doing it right, you cannot expect the child to suddenly trust. This is all the more true the longer the abuse has been going on.

    (and, not that it matters but since you’re being so polite, I’m a ma’am, not a sir 🙂 )

    no one you know (1ebbb1)

  141. Not everyone has = not everyone had

    no one you know (1ebbb1)

  142. “Well…in many respects we are agreed, particularly about the efforts of race-hustlers (Democrats all – sorry, any liberals on here, but it’s true) to use past injustices for personal gain and perceived grievance, even where there is no current objective offense.”

    – no one you know

    I’m not particularly offended by this, just perplexed: how do you not categorize Nixon as a “race hustler”, given the way he played white Southerners like a fiddle with the whole busing issue? I mean, he was from California – I find it kinda hard to believe he had any strong personal conviction on the matter. Was he or was he not exploiting racial tensions for political gain? And is that not the definition of a “race hustler”?

    Leviticus (30ac20)

  143. And to all of you on this blog who like to crow about the Democrats being “the party of slavery” – so long as we’re talking about Nixon, you might want to recall/read up on the Southern Strategy, and ponder its political implications. I’m not interested in saying which party is the Racist Party – the whole notion that one party or the other is inherently racist is stupid bullshit (regardless of who’s propagating it); I’m interested in pointing out that a lot white Southerners jumped ship on the Democrats in ’72, and that the lines are a whole lot blurrier than a handful of you seem willing to admit.

    Leviticus (30ac20)

  144. Strange you bring up bussing…
    The greatest controversies that I recall re busing were in Boston, and the San Fernando Valley, where White kids were bussed to distant schools and not allowed to attend their neighborhood schools.

    The controversy in the south was over seperate but equal, and the laws preventing Blacks from attending their local school.

    If the Ed and Civil-Rights communities had just allowed everyone to attend the school nearest to them, and had allocated resources equally among all schools, a great many of the problems we have seen over the last 40+ years would never have appeared.

    AD - RtR/OS! (011035)

  145. no one you know,

    My humble apologies for my error. I will not forget. I have often enjoyed your comments and while we clearly have some disagreement on this I am enjoying the discussion and regard your opinions with serious respect. Your compassion and concern are admirable yet your remarks are thoughtful and realistic. If there were more people of good will it would be so much easier for people of different viewpoints to work together to everyone’s advantage. My compliments.

    Machinist (9780ec)

  146. Leviticus,
    I am not up on Nixon. Could you fill me in, please?

    I think the point is that virtually all the offenses that we are to be guilty about, slavery, Jim Crow, KKK, Civil Rights violations, segregated schools, lynchings, back of the bus, and the rest, were all done by Democrats. For them to then claim they are needed to protect the black people from the evil racist Republicans is Animal Farm ironic. Many politicians on both sides have pandered but this goes beyond this.

    Machinist (9780ec)

  147. I’m not particularly offended by this, just perplexed: how do you not categorize Nixon as a “race hustler”, given the way he played white Southerners like a fiddle with the whole busing issue? I mean, he was from California – I find it kinda hard to believe he had any strong personal conviction on the matter. Was he or was he not exploiting racial tensions for political gain? And is that not the definition of a “race hustler”?

    Comment by Leviticus — 2/11/2010 @ 5:26 pm

    Oh, sorry, Leviticus, was thinking solely of the current crop: Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson et al. I was really young when Nixon was around so I don’t remember what happened w/ him but certainly race-hustling can be done by any political party. I just haven’t seen any done by high-profile Republicans in my adult life. Thanks for the correction.

    no one you know (1ebbb1)

  148. no one you know,

    I guess I am too influenced by what I saw in the fifties and sixties. Please recall that it wasn’t all black people that suffered discrimination like the ones in the South did. Black children were indeed taught that they had to try harder and do better. No one told them they couldn’t compete or did not have to try. This was common to many groups that were successfully assimilated. They did not have did not have racists telling them it was not their fault if they failed or affirmative action as we know it. They were just unleashed and did well through strong parenting and hard work. It was when liberal Democrats separated them out and offered them immunity from responsibility and rewarded sloth and irresponsible behavior that the community collapsed. I don’t know of any group of any race or any class in history that has long survived that destructive history.

    One of the fundamental principles of this Republic id “equal before the law”. We must strive for that, a color blind society, or at lest government. Your argument would seem more valid if progress was being made but in fact each knew generation destroyed makes the journey back that much harder and longer. I don’t see progress in teaching the same deadly sense of victim hood and entitlement to another uneducated generation.

    Machinist (9780ec)

  149. Comment by Machinist — 2/11/2010 @ 5:50 pm

    Thanks; appreciating the civil discussion as well.

    no one you know (1ebbb1)

  150. I see that I am sinking into illiteracy. My embarrassed apologies.

    Machinist (9780ec)

  151. We must strive for that, a color blind society, or at lest government.

    Agreed, except I’d cut off the end of the sentence.

    IMO most Americans want this. The ones who don’t are either true racists, or those who think some political (or other) gain can be had by emphasizing difference, as Leviticus put it so well above. The question that has always faced those of us (of all races) who want this is: what is the best way to get there?

    A good example: I do think there can be legitimate disagreement about affirmative action. Of course it’s going to have to stop sometime or we’ll never be color blind as a society. Some people make a (very persuasive IMO) case that the purpose of affirmative action has been achieved and should stop now. Others say no, a little while longer should do it. Am not willing to write off everyone who thinks the latter (not that I’m saying you are, but some are), even if I don’t agree w/ them, for the reasons I said above.

    Anyway, this discussion has been really interesting and (again) always appreciate a good civil discussion here at Patterico’s. Thanks for your input on the issue.

    no one you know (1ebbb1)

  152. Thank you, Ma’am. Good evening.

    ( I am dead set against affirmative action. It is one of the more evil aspects of keeping people down. It is racial discrimination to me and that is very wrong.)

    Machinist (9780ec)

  153. The original concept of AA as outreach was commendable; where it became despicable is when it crossed over into “equality of outcome”, or even worse, reverse descrimination.

    AD - RtR/OS! (011035)

  154. “I am not up on Nixon. Could you fill me in, please?”

    – Machinist

    The “Southern Strategy” is a term which refers to a series of moves made by Richard Nixon, who hoped to compromise the (currently) Democratic base in the South by exploiting anger over the recent support of Democrats for civil rights legislation. One of these moves was the opposition of busing – which in the South was highly racialized/tied to continued segregationist sentiment.

    So, AD/RtR-OS! is indeed correct when he says that the conflict in the South was over “separate but equal”, but “busing” was indeed something of a code word for the whole “separate but equal” issue.

    At least, arguably it was. Some people trace the shift in Southern support from Democrats to Republicans to economic concerns rather than racial tensions or that sort of thing. Sorry – I couldn’t find anything more comprehensive or succinct than Wikipedia on this one (not that I have any problem with Wikipedia; I just don’t like linking it on controversial matters).

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy

    Leviticus (30ac20)

  155. But blaming black Americans for supporting liberals/Democrats, there’s no doubt that Machinist was saying that.

    I don’t know about Machinist, but I sure as hell do blame the over 80 to 90 percent of people in the black community who like lemmings and nitwits coddle liberalism and leftist politicians, more times than not.

    That type of reaction or behavior might have been excusable decades ago. But in today’s era such mindless liberalism is not an indication of lashing out at racism, bigotry or the history of slavery and segregation in America. Such mindlessness is nothing more than liberalism for liberalism’s sake.

    Leftism might not paralyze a community when its social and cultural characteristics are very strong. But when a lot of dysfunction continues to sap the stability of a community, which describes a high percentage of black America, and that instability is greeted with a lack of common sense — which is a trademark of liberalism — the community in question ends up being its own worst enemy. Which, of course, is happily and lovingly exploited by the bigotry-of-low-expectations crowd throughout “progressive” America, black, white and anything else.

    Mark (411533)

  156. Thank you, Leviticus.

    Machinist (9780ec)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.2329 secs.