Wall of Shame: Racists

[ismnotwasm]

In the wake of the George Zimmerman verdict, racists have shown their true colors. We’ve seen…

the white supremacy apologists,

the “I’m not racist, but” folks,

the “experts” on “black-on-black” violence,

the Trayvon haters,

the Zimmerman defenders,

the white woman sympathizers (a variation of “I’m not racist, but”),

the neo-slaveholders,

the neutralists,

the “you weren’t there, how can you know” apologists,

the a-historicists (“nothing to do with lynching”),

the thug-definers and finger-pointers,

the “justice is blind” symphony,

the race baiters,

the race traitors,

the white kids “Trayvoning,”

the “every conversation needs to be about me” people,

the “where is your evidence?” deniers,

the brigade of “your data are wrong,”

the plain ole white supremacists,

and the list goes on and on…



We offer as a balm the words of poet Langston Hughes:

“Besides,

They’ll see how beautiful I am

And be ashamed—

I, too, am America.”

http://thefeministwire.com/2013/07/wall-of-shame-racists/

[flvegan]

1. Whoa! Let me get this straight...

So if one suggested one cannot possibly be sure beyond a doubt because they weren't there, one is an apologist? If one asked where the conclusive evidence is/was, one is a denier? If either or both of those are an answer of yes, then one is a racist? Or is this not a conclusion but an observation of things that bigots have otherwise stated?

I just have to ask if that's what this article/post/whatever means.

[loli phabay]

2. the one that jumps oit at me is race traitors, does this mean the inverse as well

If your white and on the trayvon side then your a race traitor or is it only if you are a minority and take zimmermans side. This race traitor crap annoys the shit out of me whether its from one side or the other.

[ismnotwasm]

4. I believe they are referring to the subtext of conversation and argument.

Not the superficial back and forth arguments. The topic is racism, which this case clearly brought up and out, partly because of the circus it became but mostly because racism is so pervasive and/or insidious.

I understand its very difficult to parse out what actually is racism in this case, these are observations of arguments used by racists.

That doesn't invalidate a couple of them for well-reasoned discussion, which is the point of the question, correct?

[Bettie]

6. Generally, the "you cannot possibly be sure beyond a doubt" people

Are 100% on Zimmerman's side, saying that he was clearly attacked.

Their evidence: He said he was.

Yeah, because he'd have no reason to lie or anything. It wasn't like he'd just killed someone.

I'm sick to death of people who think that trying and convicting a dead victim is A-OK.

[freshwest]

3. Thank you. Didn't leave anything out but the 'Meanwhile, in Chicago' meme.

Great list and webpage.

[markiv]

5. Quotes from Booker T Washington

My Larger Education, Being Chapters from My Experience (1911)

There is another class of coloured people who make a business of keeping the troubles, the wrongs, and the hardships of the Negro race before the public. Having learned that they are able to make a living out of their troubles, they have grown into the settled habit of advertising their wrongs — partly because they want sympathy and partly because it pays. Some of these people do not want the Negro to lose his grievances, because they do not want to lose their jobs.

Ch. V: The Intellectuals and the Boston Mob (pg. 118)

I am afraid that there is a certain class of race-problem solvers who don't want the patient to get well, because as long as the disease holds out they have not only an easy means of making a living, but also an easy medium through which to make themselves prominent before the public.


http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Booker_T._Washington

[markiv]

7. was a 1911 west point cadet influenced by those quotes?

of a leader concerned about the corrupt influences within his own cause. that people might face conflicts of interest in the fight for their cause?

note the similarities, he's talking about the exact same thing

The total influence -- economic, political, even spiritual -- is felt in every city, every State house, every office of the Federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society.

In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the militaryindustrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.

We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.

[7962]

9. Your statement is just as good as the quote, IMO

Very well said. But too often ignored.

[radicalliberal]

10. I have no comments about the Zimmerman case because I don't know all the facts.

But I am amazed at Booker T. Washington being quoted as if he were a fount of wisdom. He urged a total surrender to Jim Crow. 1911 was a horrible time for black Americans. They had next to no rights. Apparently, all the lynchings and everything else did not bother Washington. As long as it didn't happen to him. In his mind, it was all the fault of blacks. He was nothing more than a traitor to his race. I'm amazed that he would not get a negative reaction in this forum. I'm a 63-year-old white guy who grew up under Jim Crow. I have more than just an impression of how terrible and unjust it was. This accommodation of Jim Crow (by a leading black figure, nonetheless) is almost enough to make me puke. Of course, today we've got Justice Clarence "Uncle Tom," who just recently ruled to rip the guts out of the Voting Rights Act. I'm sure Booker would be proud! Again, I'm amazed there has been no reaction to this post. And, again, I'm not commenting on the Zimmerman case. That has nothing do with with my very low opinion of Booker T. Washington.

By the way, markiv, that great progressive Michael Savage shares your enthusiasm for B.T. Washington. (I wonder why. ) You're in great company!

[markiv]

11. I'll just have to take your word on that

since I dont listen to Michael Savage, as you do

[radicalliberal]

12. I used to listen to him at one time as a perverted form of entertainment, . . .

. . . just as certain other DU members have also admitted. Got to be downright masochistic at times. I finally had enough when he personally attacked Betty Ford for the way she grieved at her husband's funeral! That was absolutely contemptible and shows what a lowlife jerk he is! Haven't listened to him since. Today I don't listen to any radio talk show host and recently have even stopped reading syndicated columns and editorials in newspapers. I've given up.

Getting back to Booker T., I'd have a more favorable opinion of him if he had simply maiintained that the political situation regarding civil rights was not going to change anytime soon and that blacks needed to do all they could to help their own communities. If he had adopted a separatist approach and had not spoken out against Jim Crow, that would at least have been perfectly understandable. But that is not what Washington did. He gave public speeches to white audiences in which he endorsed Jim Crow, lending his moral stature to the brutal oppression of his own people. If any Russian Jew living under the Czarist regime had expressed support for the Czar and endorsed his policies regarding the Jews, he would not have been any less morally offensive than Washington was in his endorsement of Jim Crow. To say there was an Al Sharpton situation in 1911 is absolutely ridiculous! Even Clarence Thomas, who is another notorious "Uncle Tom," has admitted that Jim Crow was like a form of totalitarianism for the black Americans who lived under it.

As I've already said, I'm a 63-year-old white guy who grew up under Jim Crow. I still remember all the racial hatred quite clearly. I was appalled by its utter cruelty. In fact, the first reason I became a liberal when I finally became interested in U.S. politics at the age of 19 in 1969 was because of white racism, along with anti-Semitism and other forms of bigotry. So, I have absolutely no respect for Booker T. Washington; and I'm amazed that anyone purporting to be a "progressive" would think highly of him. He was the Clarence Thomas of his day.

[Starry Messenger]

8. k&r