When I was a young’un, back in Britain, I lived in an area which was almost evenly divided between whites and minorities (virtually all of whom were South Asian).
Newspaper articles about, say, a mugging, would always specify “…by an Asian youth…” or “…by a black man…” if the perpetrator wasn’t white. If the perpetrator WAS a white person, no race was ever specified (except in the case of an apparently racially-motivated crime).
As a person of (East) Indian descent, I was naturally sensitive to such things, which is really the only reason I was able to make that point.
On a lighter note, how dumb is the Letterman audience, that they provide laughter because they think he is a doing a bit? Do they not realize the severity of what he said, and that no one would have the balls and insensitivity it would take to do a bit about it only (especially only a few days later)?
Doesn’t that suck? The audience is a poor indicator of what you’re supposed to laugh at. Until people walk out, do the talk show circuit and sue you, you don’t know if your bit was a hit or a stream-of-consciousness racist rage.
My friend is black, but he’s, you know, really articulate and stuff. I asked him what he thought about all this, and he just glared at me and said, “Seinfeld ain’t funny.”
But seriously, folks…
Having read this whole thread up to now, I wanted to address something Li’l Plucksaid a few pages back:
David Byrne, of Talking Heads, said something very similar to this in an interview on MTV in the early 90s. I can’t find a direct quote, but here’s a bit from the August 7, 2004 entry on Byrne’s blog, in which he mentions it:
I remember watching that interview with my then-roommate (this being around my sophomore year of college).
In the interview, Byrne said something like, I look inside myself, and look at my actions, and I see traces of racism. I don’t like it, and I’m working on it, but it’s there.
That’s a paraphrase, of course, but the spirit was pretty close to that. I was, and remain, impressed by his candor.
On seeing the interview, my roommate, who was an idiot, immediately said, “David Byrne’s a racist! I’m not buying any more Talking Heads tapes!” (Actually I don’t remember his specific wording, but I thought I’d throw in “tapes” for the comically retro touch.) I tried to explain what Byrne was getting at, but no dice. All he heard was David Byrne saying, “I’m a racist.”
The Byrne interview has stuck with me ever since as the only time I’ve seen someone who was NOT a publicly avowed racist admit to having racist instincts, or cultural values, etc. I think those instincts are a lot more common than just one slightly wacked-out rock star; I know I have them, though I don’t think anyone who knows me would consider me a racist.
Nonetheless, those cultural values are there; they are, as Byrne said, omnipresent in American culture. Casts of TV shows are carefully multiracial, but the light-skinned black actors play good guys and dark-skinned black actors play criminals. On sports shows, no mention is ever made of players’ race, and when someone does mention it (like Rush Limbaugh’s stupid-but-not-racist statements about Donovan McNabb a few years ago), the resulting hysteria gets him fired from his job.
Unspoken ideas about race permeate every facet of our culture. If they were openly expressed, this wouldn’t necessarily be a problem; acknowledging what legitimate differences do exist can be a healthy reminder of exactly what is and is not germane to the topic (skin cancer and sickle-cell = relevant; rape and buying weed = not relevant).
But the collective hysteria whenever race is mentioned even tangentially to an issue achieves a situation in which people are unwilling to bring it up when it might actually be a positive thing to discuss and clear the air. Hollering “racist” today is like hollering “witch” in 1692 Salem; all rational public discussion ceases and it becomes a contest among the onlookers to see who can denounce racism the loudest.
I suppose I ought to address the OP a bit, to justify this long-winded ramble:
Nothing I’ve said here is intended to meliorate Michael Richards’s lunatic rant; that shit was crazy-offensive.
The first time I watched it, I thought the same thing as some other folks here: He just snapped with rage and went for the strongest word he could come up with. “Nigger” is the most powerful word in the language, and he was instinctively trying to use language to destroy. (I’ve been that angry myself once or twice, but my vocabulary sucks and the best I could come up with was “you are a jackanapes.”)
After watching it again, though, I’ve changed my mind. More than once during that tirade he had the chance to calm down, realize what was going on, and make at least a token attempt to defuse what he’d done. But he didn’t.
I heard something strange in his voice during that whole video; in the roaring, in the let-loose feel of his voice, I heard relief. It sounded to me like that had been building up for a long time, and he kept going after the first minute because it felt good.
Maybe I’m wrong. Maybe he hasn’t been harboring all this shit for years, and maybe he really was just blind with rage, and maybe he really is sorry and ashamed. I thought he seemed genuinely penitent in the Letterman clip, for what that’s worth; he described his stand-up mindset as “free-flowing, stream of consciousness,” stuff like that, which does actually make his story a little more believable to me.
I hope I’m wrong. I always thought he was the funniest part of Seinfeld. (“Giddyup.”)
I was idly browsing YouTube last night when I saw the Letterman clip. Before that I hadn’t heard anything at all about Richards’s explosion, and I wasn’t sure at first if it was a gag or not; Letterman often goes to great lengths to introduce a serious-sounding bit that turns out to be a joke. It’s possible that the ones who were laughing genuinely didn’t know, especially if they’re tourists in New York and hadn’t been watching the news for the few days preceding the show.
I think that’s a good analogy. You don’t do things you don’t believe in doing and you don’t say things you don’t believe in saying. I absolutely will always believe you can judge a person by his or her words and actions. I try to only judge myself by mine.
I also agree that people probably refuse to call people racist because they think it’s got to be a permanent crossed wire instead of maybe an irrational line of thought that people could sometimes even slip into in a moment of weakness. Not everyone has strong convictions. What’s stupid is I think if everyone could act on the convictions they’d like to have, there’d be less racism, not more. I think most people behave lower than their ideals. But the long and the short of it is I think when you’re a white person yelling at a black person about how it was better when you could stick a pitchfork in their ass, that is about as racist as you can be. I felt pretty spiteful seeing Michael Richards say he wasn’t a racist. I think he’s lost the privilege of saying that about himself now!
You know that might be the best thing if we could just let loose and scream at each other a bit. Not in a really hateful way but in a cathartic way that makes other people go “whoa, you really had some shit built up there, huh?”
Good post, **jackelope **, I hope I address some of the points you raised.
Let me revisit something Li’l Pluck mentioned. There’s a reason why there isn’t a equivalent term for “nigger” directed towards Whites. “Nigger” represents a systemic progression of thought and action to denigrate and strip Black people of humanity that goes back 400 years. It’s facile to pretend that this history plays no role in the American, and I would extend, Western European version of racism.
The other thing is that yes, racism is contextual, and there are certainly times when Blacks can significantly affect the life opportunities of others in different racial groups. Reginald Denny was mentioned upthread. A better example would be Idi Amin’s expulsion of Asians. That was definitely racist.
White Americans are pretty much insulated from any lasting damage from racism from Black Americans. There was a period right after Reconstruction where Blacks made significant gains in electoral representation. That didn’t last long. The idea of vengeful Blacks beating, robbing, murdering, and raping Whites is mostly fantasy. The vast majority of these crimes are committed intraracially. Trust me, if the only damage from racism was that someone would say bad things about me, I wouldn’t worry about it a whole lot. But the reality is that when racism is directed at people like me, chances for job promotion and housing are on the line. This is why it’s a problem. I don’t spend my time worrying about “man-hating feminists,” for example, because there are so few of them and the reality is, even if I were to encounter one, I’m pretty sure the extent of the harm they could cause me or the people I care about is pretty limited. (Yes I am aware a good ass-kicking or bullet could be quite detrimental, but shit, how often does that happen?)
Now I think it’s offensive and ignorant if a woman decides to paint all men with a broad brush and act with malice toward me or other men based on the action of some men. But I can certainly understand that malice as an adaptation, albeit a poor one, to a societal milieu that undervalues the position of women.
David Byrne sounds like a cool muthaf***a to me. He might be a role model to MR. Speaking of MR, apparently he called Al Sharpton to apologize (!). Sharpton is arranging meetings with community members, whoever they are…
A bunch of people in my department watched the clip and noted that he says “THE white man” - interesting that he used the definite article. Although the difference between saying “a white man” and “the white man” is more academic than anything at this point.
Christ. :smack: Will you please read what I actually wrote in this thread? How many times do I have to emphasize that I’m not defending Richards’ ugly, assholish, offensive, insane, full of “racial animus” outburst? Tell me how many more times I have to say that before you’ll will read them, and I’ll do it. Okay? Just tell me! Or STFU.
I’ve already indicated what I mean by the word, if you’d only take the trouble to actually read what people wrote and the context in which they wrote it! From WordNet:
Racism refers to a conscious, intellectual (not “smart” or “educated”, but within the intellect) belief that one race (typically the racist’s) is superior to another. Since it is a conscious, intellectual belief system, it is under the person’s conscious control and thus subject to remediation. It is not only immoral and repulsive, it is a completely false belief, and worthy of the strongest condemnation.
Cite? Which “apologies” are you referring to? Certainly nothing I wrote!
I see your subtle, third-grade education has put you in fine stead for deep comprehension and nuanced analysis. Well done!