# Michael Richards goes on beserk racist rant during nightclub act. **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [November 20, 2006, 4:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michael-richards-goes-on-beserk-racist-rant-during-nightclub-act/381170 "2006-11-20T16:44:18Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 19
**Author:** ![Cartooniverse](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cartooniverse/32/3084_2.png) [@Cartooniverse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cartooniverse)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2006, 9:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michael-richards-goes-on-beserk-racist-rant-during-nightclub-act/381170/361 "2006-11-24T21:02:58Z")
[QUOTE=Li’l Pluck] Then again, maybe they really wanted to make \*sure \* that he was dead. [/QUOTE] Darned tootin’. ---
**Author:** ![levdrakon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/49beb7/32.png) [@levdrakon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/levdrakon)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2006, 10:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michael-richards-goes-on-beserk-racist-rant-during-nightclub-act/381170/362 "2006-11-24T22:22:44Z")
[QUOTE=John Corrado] Are you not following the discussion? Do you have a comprehension problem to go along with your self-esteem issues? [/quote] Ooh, sah-lam! Snap! You go girl! Da-aaam! High five bro! I been served! > [@](#): > > Let’s repeat for the class: all humans are racists. Yah, you’ve been paying attention. > [@](#): > > The difference is, as **EddyTeddyFreddy** and **Hippy Hollow** and **Li’l Pluck** and **you with the face** and other have been talking about is how we react to those situations in our head, and how we deal with that. You’re talking to yourself here. I already know this. > [@](#): > > You seem to still be dealing with it as if the scale is 0 and 1; you’re either in 0 and not racist, or you’re at 1 and a bigot. And that’s not an honest or helpfull way to look at it. Do you have reading comprehension issues? The scale is: 0 = racist 1 = “R” racist. ---
**Author:** ![wring](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/838e76/32.png) [@wring](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wring)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2006, 10:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michael-richards-goes-on-beserk-racist-rant-during-nightclub-act/381170/363 "2006-11-24T22:39:42Z")
[QUOTE=levdrakon] Do you have reading comprehension issues? The scale is: 0 = racist 1 = “R” racist. [/QUOTE] no, the comprehension problem appears to be with you. Whatever you name it, 0 -1, R vs. r, whatthefuckever. as long as you have a binary scale like that you’ll not be able to effectively deal w/the human condition. It’s more of a gradient than an either/or option. as has been suggested. multiple times. and, I believe, also by the person you’re responding to. ---
**Author:** ![levdrakon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/49beb7/32.png) [@levdrakon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/levdrakon)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2006, 11:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michael-richards-goes-on-beserk-racist-rant-during-nightclub-act/381170/364 "2006-11-24T23:08:05Z")
[QUOTE=Li’l Pluck] (And high-five, or fist bump, or whatever the kids do these days to you, **John Corrado**. You totally took the words from my mouth! And, oh, I’m a “she” only on the occasional Saturday night–I prefer “lady” over “woman”;\* Sunday-Friday, I’m totally a dude.) 🙂 \*It’s a gay thing, so I’m not sure if you’d understand. 😃 [/quote] You’re right I don’t understand. Most gay guys I know don’t become women on the weekends, unless they’re drag queens. They may occasionally call each other “girl!” That’s a gay thing. You’re either a drag queen or transgendered but most transgendered don’t turn into women just on the weekends. > [@](#): > > What \*really \* got in my craw about your post was that you claimed that blacks have caused, via black racism, \*as much trouble for whites \* as white racism has caused for blacks, when that is, any way you slice and dice it, demonstrably not true. I asked for clarification by what you mean when you say the genesis of white on black racism is more important than the genesis of black on white racism. I wanted to know more about your POV. > [@](#): > > And, for me, taking what you said to its logical conclusion means that whites don’t really have to take responsibility for the ways in which they, either knowingly or unknowingly, via their actions (or, as is many times the case, _inaction_) perpetuate the notion of white racial hegemony and superiority. In other words, you were arguing tu quoque, and I didn’t think it was a valid way of making your point, which was, as near as I could reckon, that black racism is bad, too. Yeah, and the sky is blue, and water is wet, etc., etc. My point was racism is bad. I don’t think I put any particular emphasis on _black_ racism as you have on white racism. My point is emphasizing _white_ racism as the genesis of racism isn’t going to do much good other than raising a few generations of whites with a chronic case of _teh white guilt_. What are we supposed to do with our white guilt other than: > [@](#): > > So, what \*would \* I like for you to do? I think you already know what I’d like for you to do. How about confronting and challenging racism wherever and whenever you see it–whether it’s in yourself, in your friends, in your family, at your job, or wherever. Well I guess we’re good then. > [@](#): > > For instance, who are your friends? And by “friends,” I don’t mean only people from work with whom you might hang out after a day at the office. I mean “friends,” as in people outside of your job with whom you actually have emotional relationships. What do you want me to do? Import black friends? My five best friends: 2 Latinos, 1 Samoan male and 2 white females. Check my location. It’s very white where I live and there’s nothing I can do about that. I can’t import black friends. > [@](#): > > What are the racial demographics of your neighborhood? Or of the places where you hang out? I don’t hang out anymore. When I used to it was the local gay bar and my friends were a pretty darn good mix of Latinos, blacks, whites, mixes, tallies, shorties, fatties, skinnies, lesbians & transgendered. I used to get my assed kicked at pool by my transgendered pool partner every week. I don’t know how I can get much more PC than that. > [@](#): > > Ask yourself those questions, and if you find that, in one of the most ethnically diverse countries in the world, you’re living a segregated life, then do something about it, 'cause, trust me, it ain’t cool. I figure I’m about as unsegregated as I can be considering where I live and my social habits. I could list all the black friends (and a couple sex partners) I’ve had over the years but doesn’t it seem patronizing when people list their PC credentials? ---
**Author:** ![Monty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/monty/32/47_2.png) [@Monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monty)\ **Post date:** [November 25, 2006, 9:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michael-richards-goes-on-beserk-racist-rant-during-nightclub-act/381170/365 "2006-11-25T09:35:20Z")
This link (NSFW) just got posted on another board I frequent: http:||[captainoftheussinevitable.ytmnsfw.com/?f7a4be433fa6bfb7b1fe269ae1ee73e8](http://captainoftheussinevitable.ytmnsfw.com/?f7a4be433fa6bfb7b1fe269ae1ee73e8) Be sure to change the || to the correct characters. ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [November 25, 2006, 4:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michael-richards-goes-on-beserk-racist-rant-during-nightclub-act/381170/366 "2006-11-25T16:53:48Z")
You know, I agree that Richards is a scum-sucking lowlife, but [free speech should have limits?](http://youtube.com/watch?v=BSyx4lvBBlg) Listen through the entire interview. I’m sorry for the victims of his rant. I think what he said was inexcusable. BUT…I don’t see WHY they’re asking for money, nor do I think he did anything LEGALLY wrong. And I find the idea of putting “limits” on free speech to be the worst idea of all. ---
**Author:** ![you\_with\_the\_face](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/ecccb3/32.png) [@you\_with\_the\_face](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/you_with_the_face)\ **Post date:** [November 25, 2006, 6:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michael-richards-goes-on-beserk-racist-rant-during-nightclub-act/381170/367 "2006-11-25T18:23:09Z")
Not all speech is protected. So while I disagree with the guy’s claim that “free speech should have its limits”, I don’t know if Richards tirade is technically considered constitutionally protected speech. > [@](#): > > Other limitations on free speech often balance rights to free speech and other rights, such as property rights for authors and inventors (copyright), interests in fair political campaigns through (Campaign finance laws, protection from imminent or potential violence against particular persons ( **restrictions on Hate speech or fighting words** ), or the use of untruths to harm others (slander). > **[Freedom of speech in the United States](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_speech_in_the_United_States)** > > In the United States, freedom of speech and expression is strongly protected from government restrictions by the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, many state constitutions, and state and federal laws. Freedom of speech, also called free speech, means the free and public expression of opinions without censorship, interference and restraint by the government. The term "freedom of speech" embedded in the First Amendment encompasses the decision of what to say as well as what not The Firs... bolding mine Maybe someone more legal-minded can give some straightdope. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [November 25, 2006, 8:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michael-richards-goes-on-beserk-racist-rant-during-nightclub-act/381170/368 "2006-11-25T20:07:33Z")
[QUOTE=you with the face] Not all speech is protected. So while I disagree with the guy’s claim that “free speech should have its limits”, I don’t know if Richards tirade is technically considered constitutionally protected speech. > **[Freedom of speech in the United States](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_speech_in_the_United_States)** > > In the United States, freedom of speech and expression is strongly protected from government restrictions by the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, many state constitutions, and state and federal laws. Freedom of speech, also called free speech, means the free and public expression of opinions without censorship, interference and restraint by the government. The term "freedom of speech" embedded in the First Amendment encompasses the decision of what to say as well as what not The Firs... bolding mine Maybe someone more legal-minded can give some straightdope. [/QUOTE] [This site looks like a pretty good overview](http://www.csulb.edu/~jvancamp/freedom1.html#C). In the US, hate speech is not a crime, and I’m pretty sure that’s universal. (Note that speech that is criminal for other reasons may also be hate speech–if I call for killing all the Jews, that might count as an incitement to crime). The closest his speech could get to illegal would be, I think, as “fighting words,” but given that a fight didn’t break out, I don’t think that would pass muster, and according to the site, the “fighting words” exception to free speech has been declining in power in recent decades. **Monty** , thanks for that link. Up to this point, I’d been thinking about this incident based on what I read, not on hearing Richards’s rant directly. Hearing him makes all the difference for me: I can see why **you with the face** and others have no special interest in forgiving him. His voice drove home the undisguised racism that he was demonstrating; that’s not just someone trying to hurt someone else. My apologies for doubting y’all. Daniel ---
**Author:** ![Revtim](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/revtim/32/1042_2.png) [@Revtim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revtim)\ **Post date:** [November 25, 2006, 9:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michael-richards-goes-on-beserk-racist-rant-during-nightclub-act/381170/369 "2006-11-25T21:43:10Z")
There’s may be a lot different opinions on this issue, but I hope we can come together and agree that calling him “Ku Klux Kramer” is pretty funny. ---
**Author:** ![Larry\_Borgia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/larry_borgia/32/156_2.png) [@Larry\_Borgia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Larry_Borgia)\ **Post date:** [November 25, 2006, 11:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michael-richards-goes-on-beserk-racist-rant-during-nightclub-act/381170/370 "2006-11-25T23:15:07Z")
I just saw the epsiode “The Pilot.” I was struck by the fact that the character Tom Pepper (played by Larry Hankin) who plays Kramer on “Jerry” (the show within the show) is a mean short-tempered violent jerk, albeit not a racist. I can’t help but wonder now if that was a deliberate take on Michael Richards. Probably not, but I’ll never see that episode the same way again. “How’d you like it if I ripped your heart out and shoved it down your throat, Costanza.” ---
**Author:** ![Kelpy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/34f0e0/32.png) [@Kelpy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kelpy)\ **Post date:** [November 25, 2006, 11:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michael-richards-goes-on-beserk-racist-rant-during-nightclub-act/381170/371 "2006-11-25T23:51:28Z")
[QUOTE=Monty] This link (NSFW) just got posted on another board I frequent: http:||[YTMND - kkkramer](http://captainoftheussinevitable.ytmnsfw.com/?f7a4be433fa6bfb7b1fe269ae1ee73e8) Be sure to change the || to the correct characters. [/QUOTE] Catchy. ---
**Author:** ![Hippy\_Hollow](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hippy_hollow/32/4841_2.png) [@Hippy\_Hollow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hippy_Hollow)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2006, 12:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michael-richards-goes-on-beserk-racist-rant-during-nightclub-act/381170/372 "2006-11-26T00:00:29Z")
[QUOTE=Larry Borgia] I just saw the epsiode “The Pilot.” I was struck by the fact that the character Tom Pepper (played by Larry Hankin) who plays Kramer on “Jerry” (the show within the show) is a mean short-tempered violent jerk, albeit not a racist. I can’t help but wonder now if that was a deliberate take on Michael Richards. Probably not, but I’ll never see that episode the same way again. “How’d you like it if I ripped your heart out and shoved it down your throat, Costanza.” [/QUOTE] I saw that a few days as well. Even funnier, the other day the late Seinfeld was the one where Tim Whatley becomes Jewish and starts telling Jewish jokes. At some point, Kramer comes in and says to Jerry, “Do you hear yourself? You’re a raging anti-dentite! Next thing you’ll be saying they should have their own schools!” The irony! ---
**Author:** ![mobo85](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b19c9b/32.png) [@mobo85](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mobo85)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2006, 3:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michael-richards-goes-on-beserk-racist-rant-during-nightclub-act/381170/373 "2006-11-26T03:19:29Z")
[QUOTE=Monty] This link (NSFW) just got posted on another board I frequent: http:||[YTMND - kkkramer](http://captainoftheussinevitable.ytmnsfw.com/?f7a4be433fa6bfb7b1fe269ae1ee73e8) Be sure to change the || to the correct characters. [/QUOTE] This is catchy and very funny. I love the Richards/_Stop The Planet of the Apes_ “you can talk, he can talk” thing. ---
**Author:** ![ambushed](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3bc359/32.png) [@ambushed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ambushed)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2006, 4:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michael-richards-goes-on-beserk-racist-rant-during-nightclub-act/381170/374 "2006-11-26T04:00:35Z")
Thanks, **Lissa** , once again. Starting with your last paragraph first: [QUOTE=Lissa] However, I have to admit that if you accept one of the standard definitions of racism, as asserted by many Sociologists- Racism: The belief that one individual is inherently superior to another based upon physical traits that are transmitted genetically- then you are correct. [/QUOTE] This, to me, is an **extremely** important point: everyone in a discussion must agree on the definitions or the discussion is usually pointless in that people talk past each other. _That may qualify as the most important lesson I’ve ever learned._ I learned it, and learned it well, as a young philosophy student: it marks the difference between genuine discussion and mere verbal masturbation. I don’t want to become pedantic about it, but it is abundantly clear that this whole thread has been rife with huge misunderstandings between people based on little more than that we don’t all share the same definition of the words “racist” and “racism”. Earlier, I posted a dictionary definition of the word “racist”, and the entry states there is only **one** definition of the word: > [@](#): > > The noun _ **racist** _ has one meaning: > > a person with a prejudiced belief that one race is superior to others This standard definition isn’t identical with your sociological one in that it doesn’t specifically mention genetics, but they’re more or less equivalent. _ **Unfortunately** _ for the discussion here, too many people seem to think the word means something like “a person who dislikes people of another race”. But that is just **not** what the word means! That’s why I’ve been fairly careful about using the word “racist” with the dictionary definition and **Li’l Pluck** ’s felicitous phrase “racial animus” to refer to the “dislike” pseudo-definition apparently used by so many here. A lot of empty, merely verbal disputes have arisen all through human history because of the asymmetric definitions, and this is most clearly seen ihere n those posters who have (entirely unfairly, in my view) characterized those of us who can only claim agnosticism about Richards’ “racism” (dictionary def) as defending or apologizing for the cretinous bastard. These posters (and there have been a lot of them) obviously believe that we’re either defending racism (dict def) or denying Richards’ patently clear “racial animus” (dislike pseudo-def). But they’re flat-out **wrong**. And they’re wrong because they aren’t using the actual definitions of the words in question (or at least we’re not using the _same_ definitions). Now, let’s take a look at the rest of your post… [QUOTE=Lissa] Well, I don;t totally agree or disagree with you here. Depending upon your perspective, racism is not the same as the ideology of racial inferiority. [/quote] I would have said “depending upon your _definition_”, rather than “perspective”. [QUOTE=Lissa] For example, in the U.S. many blacks are racist. However, this is not as heavily rooted in an ideology of racial inferiority. [/quote] I’m afraid I don’t understand what you’re getting at, since I do not understand what _you_ mean by “racist” in that context, but it’s plain you don’t mean the dictionary definition. Would the term “racial animus” be the right one in this circumstance, or do you mean something else? [QUOTE=Lissa] Rather, it is more rooted in social identity. [/quote] I’m afraid I’m not clear on what exactly you mean. Could you elaborate? Is this “dislike” again, or do you mean something else? [QUOTE=Lissa] Many of the racist beliefs towards blacks in America stem from the ideology of racial inferiority that permeated U.S. culture and asserted blacks were sub-human. You don’t normally see this same belief amongst the majority of black racists, although there are some who started their own ideology of superiority. [/quote] I’m afraid I don’t understand what _else_ black racism could mean other than an ideology of superiority, the same as in white racism. What am I not grasping? ---
**Author:** ![ambushed](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3bc359/32.png) [@ambushed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ambushed)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2006, 4:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michael-richards-goes-on-beserk-racist-rant-during-nightclub-act/381170/375 "2006-11-26T04:04:55Z")
[QUOTE=you with the face] Yeah, you need to smack yourself on the head. Please do it a few more times. Never have I said that racism _must_ be anything, unconscious or conscious. I’m not even going waste my time asking you to find a post with me saying that foolishness. [/QUOTE] Let me get this straight: You’re being ignorant, unthinking, and evasive, but _ **I’m** _ the one who has to slap myself? ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2006, 4:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michael-richards-goes-on-beserk-racist-rant-during-nightclub-act/381170/376 "2006-11-26T04:29:29Z")
Well, it seems the victims of the racial epithets [are not above cashing in on the disgusting incident](http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/11/25/entertainment/main2208399.shtml): > [@](#): > > Two men who say they were insulted by actor-comedian Michael Richards during his racist rant at a comedy club want a personal apology and maybe some money, one of the men and their lawyer said Friday. > > … > > [Attorney Gloria] Allred, speaking by phone from Colorado, said Richards should meet McBride and Doss in front of a retired judge to “acknowledge his behavior and to apologize to them” and allow the judge to decide on monetary compensation. > > “It’s not enough to say ‘I’m sorry’ on ‘David Letterman,’” she said. > > She did not mention a specific figure, but pitched the idea as a way for the comic to avoid a lawsuit. I just hope the money can assuage the terrible injury they suffered. And buy Gloria Allred a another red dress. ---
**Author:** ![Man\_from\_Mars](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/c5a1d2/32.png) [@Man\_from\_Mars](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Man_from_Mars)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2006, 5:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michael-richards-goes-on-beserk-racist-rant-during-nightclub-act/381170/377 "2006-11-26T05:16:59Z")
[QUOTE=Fear Itself] Well, it seems the victims of the racial epithets [are not above cashing in on the disgusting incident](http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/11/25/entertainment/main2208399.shtml):I just hope the money can assuage the terrible injury they suffered. And buy Gloria Allred a another red dress. [/QUOTE] The judge should decree that he become their butler. ---
**Author:** ![Larry\_Borgia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/larry_borgia/32/156_2.png) [@Larry\_Borgia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Larry_Borgia)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2006, 5:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michael-richards-goes-on-beserk-racist-rant-during-nightclub-act/381170/378 "2006-11-26T05:19:45Z")
[QUOTE=Tony] The judge should decree that he become their butler. [/QUOTE] Awesome. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![ambushed](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3bc359/32.png) [@ambushed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ambushed)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2006, 8:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michael-richards-goes-on-beserk-racist-rant-during-nightclub-act/381170/379 "2006-11-26T08:07:06Z")
Hey, **you with the face** , you obviously have **severe** reading comprehension problems. You also lack intellectual honesty. You just keep making shit up and/or maliciously and/or misleadingly taking words out of context just so you can vent while at the same time **evade** the actual points people are making! You should have at least stopped pushing when you got your head halfway up your ass instead of going for the gold like that. For just **one** example, let’s look at the following exchange. You had asked: > [@ywtf](#): > > How many people do you know who aren’t homophobic, anti-semitic, or racist go on tirades like that in response to a relatively minor provocation? I know of none. To which I responded: > [@ambushed](#): > > I don’t think I do either, but the discussion has broadened considerably beyond Richards’ tirade and similarly extensive and vehemently demeaning rants, and the post you responded to with the above is clearly among the evolved discussion rather than Richards. How can you not know that? I suggest you re-read the entire thread from the beginning, only this time, do it more carefully, please. No one is defending Richards, and how you have kept from realizing that by now is beyond me. That’s a dead issue at this point, so you may want to stop kicking the carcass. Just a thought. And out of _all that_, you disingenuously selected and quoted only the following snippet that misleadingly suggests I don’t believe _anyone, anywhere_ is defending Richards: _“No one is defending Richards, and how you have kept from realizing that by now is beyond me.”_ In any event, you then responded as follows: [QUOTE=you with the face] Plenty of people are defending Richards. The most obvious cases are not present on this board, but there is a tone to some of these posts that reveals a puzzling and sometimes aggravating reluctance to just call a duck a duck. [/quote] **BULLSHIT!** What some people are saying here, including myself, is that we can’t **know** , in the epistemological sense, that Richards holds the belief that blacks as a race are inferior, _ **which is the only definition of the word “racist”!** _ We _can_ say that he very much appears to dislike or even hate African-Americans, which, if true (and I think it’s true), is a horrible blight on his character. But without additional evidence (the kind I listed previously) we have **no choice** but to remain **agnostic** about the contents of Richards’ mind. But since you implicitly claim genuine epistemological **knowledge** of such, please present your mind-reading certificate for our review, or rescind your character attacks against us and STFU. You stupidly continue: [QUOTE=you with the face] When this reluctance is expressed in the form of “Richards was just being mean and hateful, but not racist”, that comes across as something an apologist would say. It _is_ a defense. [/quote] Anyone who claims to know that Richards is **not** a racist is as stupid and indefensible as you, who claims to **know** that Richards holds the belief that some races are superior/inferior to others. I don’t believe anyone here has asserted that they **know** that Richards is not a racist, but there’s plenty of people here just like you who claim to **know** – supernaturally or paranormally or something – that he is! In any case, _ **I** _ certainly don’t claim to know either way. All I **know** is that he issued extremely ugly and offensive racial insults, for which there is no defense. I do **not** know if he has a habit of doing so, or that he’s expressed the **belief** that blacks are inferior to whites or anyone else, which _would_ make him a racist. You stupidly continue: [QUOTE=you with the face] It’s a defense against the idea that Cosmo Kramer could be anything except an angry guy who blew a gasket one day. [/quote] It’s a little thing, but _what_ the reaming fuck does Cosmo Kramer have to do with any of this? You stupidly continue: [QUOTE=you with the face] The thing is, I know plenty of angry people. And I can’t imagine them saying anything like that. [/quote] Implicit in that comment is the wholly unjustified assumption that if anyone _does_ release such remarks – even in the heat of rage – they **must** hold the belief that one race is inferior/superior to another. And that’s just crap. Now, I am **not** talking specifically about Richards! As I asked a previous poster, **HOW MANY FUCKING TIMES DO I HAVE TO SAY THAT?** These are general comments. It’s pointless and counter-productive to the discussion to focus exclusively on him, which has evolved beyond that one person. You stupidly continue: [QUOTE=you with the face] It’s disingenous shit like this that makes me consider you a Richards apologist, as you completely glossed over the most offensive parts of his speech and focused on the name-calling part. [/quote] You’re blithering out of your ass again. You had written the following, which in **no way** can be construed as being solely about Richards! > [@you with the face](#): > > It’s like a disease. Sure, just because you have a runny nose, doesn’t mean you have a cold. Just because you have diarrhea, it doesn’t mean you have inflammatory bowel disease. But some symptoms are **so uncommon** that when they present themselves, you can be fairly certain of the disease which causes it. To which I replied: > [@ambushed](#): > > Oh, yes. The use of the words “nigger” and “faggot” are so, _so_ “uncommon”. [Note that I included the word “faggot”, which **proves** that I wasn’t talking about Richards specifically or Richards’ remarks!] So when you do hear them, there’s no contemplation, no analysis of past behavior, no thought needed to believe whatever you want about the speaker. I mean, if you think one, single piece of evidence isn’t sufficient to convict someone of racism, then you must be a racist yourself! To hell with reason! What’s reason ever done for _you?_ Saying, or hell, even just _thinking_ the word “nigger” once proves you hold the actual belief that people of African ancestry are undeniably and implicitly inferior! Which is the nature of what the word “racist” actually means. (And do I really need to say, yet again, that this isn’t in regards to Richards?) You stupidly continue: [QUOTE=you with the face] Everything that I’m saying refers to Richards, sweet child o’ mine. So when you express disagreement with me like you have, and in the weak manner that you have done so, I have no reason to believe that you aren’t defending Richards. You’re bending over backgrounds to convince us why it’s wrong to call the man racist when that is exactly how he’s presented himself to be. [/QUOTE] And there shines your stupidity for all the world to see! Take my previous advice and re-read the thread from the beginning, but _this_ time, do it carefully. **Sheesh!** ---
**Author:** ![Lissa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/85f322/32.png) [@Lissa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lissa)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2006, 8:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michael-richards-goes-on-beserk-racist-rant-during-nightclub-act/381170/380 "2006-11-26T08:26:33Z")
[QUOTE=ambushed] Thanks, **Lissa** , once again. Starting with your last paragraph first: This, to me, is an **extremely** important point: everyone in a discussion must agree on the definitions or the discussion is usually pointless in that people talk past each other. _That may qualify as the most important lesson I’ve ever learned._ I learned it, and learned it well, as a young philosophy student: it marks the difference between genuine discussion and mere verbal masturbation. I don’t want to become pedantic about it, but it is abundantly clear that this whole thread has been rife with huge misunderstandings between people based on little more than that we don’t all share the same definition of the words “racist” and “racism”. Earlier, I posted a dictionary definition of the word “racist”, and the entry states there is only **one** definition of the word:This standard definition isn’t identical with your sociological one in that it doesn’t specifically mention genetics, but they’re more or less equivalent. _ **Unfortunately** _ for the discussion here, too many people seem to think the word means something like “a person who dislikes people of another race”. But that is just **not** what the word means! That’s why I’ve been fairly careful about using the word “racist” with the dictionary definition and **Li’l Pluck** ’s felicitous phrase “racial animus” to refer to the “dislike” pseudo-definition apparently used by so many here. A lot of empty, merely verbal disputes have arisen all through human history because of the asymmetric definitions, and this is most clearly seen ihere n those posters who have (entirely unfairly, in my view) characterized those of us who can only claim agnosticism about Richards’ “racism” (dictionary def) as defending or apologizing for the cretinous bastard. These posters (and there have been a lot of them) obviously believe that we’re either defending racism (dict def) or denying Richards’ patently clear “racial animus” (dislike pseudo-def). But they’re flat-out **wrong**. And they’re wrong because they aren’t using the actual definitions of the words in question (or at least we’re not using the _same_ definitions). Now, let’s take a look at the rest of your post…I would have said “depending upon your _definition_”, rather than “perspective”. I’m afraid I don’t understand what you’re getting at, since I do not understand what _you_ mean by “racist” in that context, but it’s plain you don’t mean the dictionary definition. Would the term “racial animus” be the right one in this circumstance, or do you mean something else? I’m afraid I’m not clear on what exactly you mean. Could you elaborate? Is this “dislike” again, or do you mean something else? I’m afraid I don’t understand what _else_ black racism could mean other than an ideology of superiority, the same as in white racism. What am I not grasping? [/QUOTE] I agree with you totally. Defining the topic of discussion is very important. Therefore, based upon that, I agree that a racist, independent of their own background (ethnicity/race) must accept an ideology of racial inferiority to embrace that notion. When I referred to social identity, I was referring more to racial discord. Many people mistake someone insulting, or not liking a person of another race, or even the group as a whole, as racism. _Just because it is not racism, for the record, does not mean it avoids having deleterious consequences. Thus, it does not have to be racist before we seek to bridge that growing racial divide, because it could quickly spawn into full-blown racism._ Many times, it is a result of social identity. Simply put, in the process of contructing our self, we as human actors living in a social construct, seek to assemble and validate various attitudes and beliefs. We consolidate those attitudes, behaviors, roles etc…, into our “generalized other” and then use that generalized other to reflect back upon our self and understand our position in the greater social structure. In other words, the self cannot exist without the collective and we base how the collective perceives us, typically, on the attitudes and beliefs of our primary agents of socialization. Inherent in this process is the desire to have self-esteem, or feel good about who we are and the position we hold in the social structure. Therefore, social identity theory stipulates that human beings have a tendency to highlight the strengths of their social groups, and denigrate other groups. In other words, lift yourself up by putting others down. You see it in early childhood when kids start forming various social groups that have differential status and then proceed to denigrate anyone who is not in that same group. This process is more poignant when the charcteristics that separate the groups are very distinct. For example, race. You really can’t hide race, if you are referring to skin pigmentation. Thus, whites, black, hispanics have a tendency, since their primary agents of socialization also tend to be of the same race, to highlight the strengths of their group and denigrate others. Now, this does not always approach the level of creating an “ideology of racial inferiority”. For example, a black man, when upset, as in this case, calls another a "cracker ass ". He is obviously referring to a racial difference. The question comes up, is he saying “Because you are a cracker (white), you are inherently inferior to me”, or is he saying, “You are a member of a group that is different than my own and in my fit of anger, I am trying to raise my self-esteem (after being called a nigger) by insulting your group”. The first would be an example of an ideology of racial inferiority, the other is an example of social identity. Now, in the United States, we have a LONG history of an established ideology of racial inferiority that asserts blacks are inferior to whites, genetically. There are a thousand examples, but some that may come to mind include: Jim Crowism, Black-face entertainers, the Mammie Stereotype, the Black Buck and/or the repetitive depictions of blacks as criminal, stupid or childlike. Thus, what I was saying earlier is that a lot of the racial discontent today, in regards to blacks against whites, likely stems from social identity issues. It is not on the same level of the ideology of racial inferiority that has been used to oppress blacks throughout U.S. history. Now, this does not mean that an ideology may exist amongst the black population in the U.S. and will continue to fester and grow. Rather, it simply points out the difference between the two types of hate, or discord. In regards to Mr. Richards. When he referred to violence against blacks (the picthfork), a reference to times past when this was accepted (Jim Crowism) and then followed it up with the word “nigger”; he was definitely referring to the ideology of racial inferiority. Why he did it is only a question he can answer. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michael-richards-goes-on-beserk-racist-rant-during-nightclub-act/381170.md?page=18) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/michael-richards-goes-on-beserk-racist-rant-during-nightclub-act/381170.md?page=20)