A common right-wing meme is that blacks have inferior intelligence; Kelly endorses that with this phrase. An insult doesn’t need a history of specific use to be racist. What I’d want to see, to decide whether Kelly was racist here, is a history of his previous insults: Does he also use such harsh words when speaking about whites?
*Assessing a person dishonestly can itself by a sign of prejudice and racism. * How’s your knee? Was Kelly lying?
As usual, people are reading way too much into it. Kelly was roped into a game of chicken, and didn’t cotton to it. He knew he had to right the ship, so he cracked the whip— masterfully.
The odd part is that she didn’t know what the insult meant at first, and so looked it up… and only then concluded that it was racist. Where in the world did she look it up that listed it as a racist term? If there is actually some dictionary out there that says that it is, then we ought to be lambasting that dictionary. And if there’s not, well, why include the part about looking it up?
I’m basically going to give Kelly the benefit of the doubt that he is not a racist - there’s nothing obvious in his history that would suggest that he is. But I can also understand how Wilson might have viewed the attack as having a racially-charged tone. As I said, Kelly and everyone who works in the White House knowingly, wittingly, voluntarily works with people who are challenging post-1960s norms when it comes to how the law treats race and how culture deals with race. And they work for someone who quite ostensibly ran a campaign based on sowing racial divisions. So there’s really no true protection from that charge.
But what you’re saying is that if someone is racist, literally anything they say is racist, as if their use of any word or phrase in any context now taints its meaning for everyone. That’s not how language works.
I have heard older people use the proverb “An empty barrel makes the most noise” for decades. It never had racial connotations- it just meant “The stupidest people tend to talk the most.”
No, that’s not at all what I said; that’s how you stubbornly interpret what I have said. I’ll try to explain it again. Not everyone who uses the term “empty barrel” is necessarily a racist, and Kelly’s use of the term doesn’t necessarily taint its use for others. Nor is Kelly necessarily himself a racist for using the term to describe a black person if he were not in any way associating himself with racists. However, Kelly’s use of the term to describe a black congresswoman can be viewed as racist given the total context of the fact that he serves in an administration that, in the views of many (including even some in his own party), is doing a lot to damage race relations in this country.
Does that mean that any insulting term he leveled at a black congresswoman while he’s serving in such an administration could be viewed as racist?
Nonsense. By your reasoning, he could have called her a “Floridian” and that could be “viewed as racist”. I guess Kelly better not ever say anything about a black person lest if be “viewed as racist”. I’m afraid you’ve taken us behind the looking glass here.
Imagine for a moment that Kelly isn’t serving president Donald Trump but instead President David Duke or President Richard Spencer. I’ll let you think about that and answer that question yourself.
Is Floridian an offensive epithet? No? Didn’t think so.
Again, as I’ve already said, I personally don’t necessarily believe that Kelly is a racist, but it’s not at all unreasonable for other people to come to a different conclusion. When a person hangs out with racists, when someone knowingly come out of retirement to serve a race-baiting president, we really shouldn’t be surprised if at least some people might not attribute epithets and insults of a black person to contain some racial animus. I understand - or at least I think I understand - the fact that Kelly is serving the president because he wants to make his country better and wants to stabilize the president and all that, as I’ve written before. I still think Kelly’s basically an honorably guy overall, but he really stepped in it here. That’s beside the point, though. The point is, it’s not unreasonable for a Congresswoman Wilson to interpret Kelly’s personal attack as one with potentially racial overtones.
I also go back to Kelly’s waxing nostalgic of his childhood in the 1950s and 60s. Again, from my view or yours, not really controversial, but if you’re black, those were not the good ole days. This brings up a common problem in discussing race. White people are not going to understand why certain things can be considered “racist” because they’ve never had to deal with the shit that comes with being on the receiving end of racism. We can imagine it or hypothesize all we want - but we won’t get it. Ever. So rather than just flailing around and protesting how language cannot possibly be racist, perhaps it’s better to try to understand the perspective of others who’ve lived through the consequences of racism.
He is serving an administration where racism is endemic. He is actively participating in the administration to protect it’s flanks, and if you look back this (Flank protecting) has been racist very often.
He is lying about a woman who he doesn’t know in any sense, who is black, from the podium, while representing the white house to Americans.
It seems like the only thing he really remembered from that speech that day was that she was black. And that seems to be enough for a lot of americans now. He was exploiting that in a despicable manner. This is evidenced by the lies.
She feels she was the victim of racism and would call it out. I don’t have a problem.
This is the loss of one important adult in the oval office though. Actually it’s just a warning that he was not the adult we thought he was. I don’t think he can serve much longer. I’m having my doubts about huckabeesanders too. It’s a shit show.
If someone is a racist, then the things that they say may in fact be racist, even if they do not use any racial slurs.
Saying something like “It was better in the 50’s” can certainly, in some contexts, be a racist remark, and in other contexts, not be.
That’s how language works, context.
But, you are correct that racists do taint the meaning of words or phrases with their use of hem. The blame for that should be on the racists using these words and phrases, not on their targets.
Is there any reason for insulting terms in the first place?
If he would be insulting towards a black congressman or woman, but would not be levelling insulting terms at a white congresscritter, then yes, it’s racist.
If you can bring up some examples of Kelly lying in order to disparage a white congressman, then you have an equivalent example, and can demonstrate that the remark was not motivated by racism. I haven’t seen any, but that doesn’t mean that they don’t exist.
Do some digging, and see if you can find instances of kelly fabricating lies in order to insult others, and see if there is a pattern. As it stands, I only see the one instance of him impugning his own integrity in order to degrade another in this instance, and in this instance, the person he was debasing himself in order to slander was a black woman, so the onus is on him to show that he is just usually willing to negate his credibility when it comes to all races.
He probably shouldn’t be lying about people in order to insult them at all. That would solve any accusations that he was lying for racist reasons.
Now, do I see the phrase “empty barrel” to be racist? Not really. There is no public history of it being used in a racist way before Kelly used it to insult the congresswoman. Definitely obscure, initially, I guessed it was a military term, with barrels referring to the barrels of guns, and that somehow an unloaded gun made more sound than a loaded one.
I think that wilson’s reaction to the term was a bit knee jerk, but I can understand why, as her reaction was to a man who was blatantly lying about her in a very degrading way. When someone is insulting you in a degrading way, “innocent insults” can feel like slurs. If I were in her position, my initial thought would be “Empty barrel, what does that even mean? It sounds racist.”
Given that he also said sexist things, and yearned for a different time, a time when racism was open and accepted, when people all knew their place, the entirety of the context was somewhat racist and degrading. Any term hat he chose to call her in that context becomes racially tinged at best.
So, prior to kelly’s comments, not a racist term. Now, due to his comments, it probably will be, we’ll have to see how popular it is with the racists.
Maybe the idea is that any criticism of a black person has at least some racism at its core. That got tried a lot with Obama - maybe it is too hard a habit to break.
Regards,
Shodan
Depends on the context. It certain can be offensive. Your reasoning is that any term uttered by Kelly that can be offensive can reasonably be interpreted as racist if directed at a black person. Once again: Nonsense.
If you want to claim racism, you need to prove racist intent, if the term is not inherently racist. So go ahead and make your case for racist intent. Facts only, please.
We’re talking about perceptions of racism, not whether or not someone can win a civil rights lawsuit. She doesn’t have to prove racist intent. If a black person perceives that a white person’s remarks are racist, then they can say so. She did. I already told you that I don’t necessarily agree with her that empty barrel was a racist epithet, but it really doesn’t matter what I think because the remarks weren’t about me and don’t involve me. Moreover, I can’t prove that Kelly isn’t racist and that racism wasn’t on his mind when he went on the attack (which was completely unnecessary by the way). I don’t believe there’s enough evidence to say that he is - I take him at his word (for now) that he’s not. But that’s not how everyone sees it, and not everyone has to see it the way I do. I’m trying to parse my words and thoughts as carefully as I can here.
Another point I want to make is that language does not function the way you believe it does. There are potentially many ideas embedded within language that go beyond its denotative aspects. This is not a logic problem, so you’re right: I can’t really prove anything with facts other than the fact that a black woman believed she was described as a dingbat because of her race. But that’s the thing about feelings: they’re subjective by nature. How we interpret meaning behind words and deeds can obviously be as well. I tried to explain why someone who is black might reach the conclusion that someone who is white used an otherwise non-racist term in a way that could nevertheless be interpreted as having racist intent.
You can call it nonsense if you want, but perhaps you should have the humility to admit that you really don’t know what it’s like to be a person of color in America. Maybe the way you view and define racism isn’t the way others would, and I’m guessing that others might have more experience at being on the receiving end of it. So if I’m judging whose opinions are more valid in this discussion are more valid, then I’m probably going to side with Rep Wilson, even if I think her sense of fashion is cartoonish.
I don’t think empty barrel was applied in a racist manner.
But we need to pause and reflect at how bad things have become. How does it look for an administration official to resort to name-calling because someone criticized how the President spoke to a constituent? Why did Kelly choose this immature reaction rather than simply defend his boss in a dignified manner, as would be expected of a normal CoS and a Marine general?
And then to blatantly mistate the facts of what was said at the FBI building…does this not make him the “empty barrel” now? It looks like Kelly has joined Trump in being a projectionist extraordinaire.
It sure looks like, at a minimum, he went off “half-cocked”. Since we’re using gun analogies.
Is “half-cocked” a way of disparaging his manhood? 
No one is denying Representative Wilson’s right to say that the remark was racist. The disagreement is whether the remark is accurate and there has been absolutely no evidence at all produced to support the claim. And while this discussion is going on it is distracting from the discussion of legitimate criticisms of the president and his underlings. So sure, she is free to feel how she feels but as someone who also opposes the extremist rightwing agenda I would hope that in the future she would refrain from saying dumb things that help Trump.
As for the comment, as has been pointed out it could have a racist subtext if Mr Kelly only deployed it to criticize people of color. I googled but could only find one other occurrence. Recently the chief of staff compared Representative Luis Gutierrez (D-IL) and unnamed others to empty barrels. Unfortunately the time search feature on Google doesn’t account for pages time-stamped when they were created but that contain text links to current stories. Maybe someone with better search skills could find more. If there were one more reference to people of color by Mr Kelly without any reference to white “empty barrels” and a pattern would start to emerge.