I didn’t know we were supposed to be calibrating our outrage meters to Imus. Why doesn’t anyone tell me these things!
That is not how I read what Huerta said.
He said that “people (not least white liberals) really don’t expect much of the black community” - not because they hate black people, that is incoherent - but because the black community refuses to condemn even those who deserve it, like the LW and Al Sharpton - out of a misguided sense of racial solidarity.
It is that misguided sense of racial solidarity to which I am objecting. Nifong is white, but there has been no lack of condemnation of his actions, now that it has become apparent that his actions deserve condemnation. It is equally clear that Sharpton and the LW are equally worthy of condemnation for their actions - but from the “black community” (insofar as such a thing exists), not so much.
You said it yourself -
It’s that “soft bigotry of low expectations” again. In this case, it’s the tendency to shrug your shoulders and say, “Well, you can’t expect black people to condemn obvious race-baiters or liars or evil-doers who are black. After all, there is a lot of racism left in our society.” It’s what got OJ acquitted, and what keeps Sharpton in the money. It seems to be what Nifong was counting on to get re-elected. And it is, as you and I would agree, at least in part what keeps “the black community” from condemning the LW, now that it is clear that she is what the OP called her.
Again, that’s a strawman. Nobody is suggesting that the “black community” disregards black wrong-doing because black people are criminals. It is out of the misguided racial solidarity that I mentioned earlier.
Certainly true. But I thought what you were suggesting is that no one could condemn a black person because genuine prejudice exists.
Yes, it is, but nobody has suggested it.
Some people don’t want to publicly condemn the LW and Al Sharpton, not because they don’t like black people, but because their expectations are lower for black people, as I mentioned above, or because their standards for those of their own race is different from those for others. OJ really does commit two horrible crimes against white people, and he gets a walk because Fuhrman lied about saying “nigger”. The Duke lacrosse players are falsely accused of a horrible crime against a black woman, and are instantly condemned based almost entirely on fabricated evidence. Sharpton is convicted of slandering a white guy, and has a radio program (and has never paid the judgement against him). Imus calls some basketball team “nappy headed hos”, and loses his radio gig over it. Why do we apply the “no hate speech” rule against Imus (legitimately, IMO), but not against Sharpton, in the court of public opinion or public condemnation?
This is going on too long, and I have to do some genuine work.
Regards,
Shodan
My last post was just in response to your substituting “don’t like blacks” for “don’t expect much of blacks,” and on the latter point, I do submit that many people who like and root for or ally themselves with “the black community” don’t, indeed, expect fully adult, rational, accountable behavior from them, just as people can like their children a great deal indeed but not expect them to talk sensibly, or not throw a tantrum, etc. And when a black individual or subset of individuals does act unreasonably or badly, I do submit that a double standard of accountability comes into play. For instance, there was probably more MSM ink spilled here, in the initial days, in hand-wringing over the alleged toxic white jock culture (which was hardly all that toxic as it turns out) than there has been or will be over the inflammatory, justice-distorting role of the race hustlers. “Nevveerrrr mind.” That’s paternalism, and that’s why I liken it to a minstrel show; oh well, those rascals got carried away again.
Let me give you another example. Let’s say someone white were arrrested in connection with the murder of Emmett Till. And let’s say he were acquitted by a largely white Mississippi jury on clear grounds of racial sympathy. And let’s say that national television caught a shot of Ole Miss students huddled around a television watching the verdict and then bursting into whooping, hollering, cheers and jubilation. Do you think we would not hear endless diatribes against these troglodytes, endless protestations that decent white people don’t share these views, endless apologia and exhortations to rednecks never to act like that again? Of course we would. But when it was black students cheering (cheering!) the race-induced acquittal of a double murderer – move along, nothing to see, in summary, this case has inflamed passions all around and raises interesting sociological questions about the intersection of ethnicity and gender, blah, blah, blah. I don’t recall (and I could be wrong) any widespread white or black commentary saying: “WTF is up with a sizable portion of the black community either believing an really unbelievable story, or not believing it but still wanting a murderer to go free?”
I mere idea of chewing someone a new one seems :eek:
Her in particular, no? Ugh.
The Attorney General’s Report (Summary of Conclusions.) (pdf)
Fascinating stuff. Well worth reading. That this case ever saw the light of day is almost incomprehensible.
[RIGHT] {DarkRed}=CMC[/RIGHT]Is that crickets I hear?
CMC fnord!
In a blast from the past, the stripper has just admitted that she was lying.
Was the really 18 years ago? Wow do I feel old now.
Seems like yesterday, don’t it?