A Nation of Cowards
".....in things racial, we have always been....a nation of cowards.... We...simply do not talk enough with each other about race."
Attorney General Eric Holder, Feb. 18, 2009
Does the AG mean that men like Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Louis Farrakhan and Jeremiah Wright are too cowardly to speak up about race in this country? I do not think so----they seem to talk about little else!
Perhaps he meant that white people, like this blogger (white as the driven snow, though Nazi-types would deny that) don't talk enough about race? It is true that the Glazerbeam has not dealt much with racial issues-----until now. I proudly accept the AG's challenge to discuss race in America candidly, but I am not sure he would like what I have to say, if he even reads this blog.
Unlike Mr Holder, I contend that talk of race has had too great an impact on public affairs in this country, and here are some examples of what I mean:
Clarence Thomas. When the first black Supreme Court Justice retired in 1991, President George H W Bush appointed US Circuit Judge Thomas to succeed him. Although he was the only black person ever nominated to the Supreme Court by a Republican president, Thomas apparently believed the President's claim that his race had nothing to do with his selection.
Yet, at his confirmation hearing, he never tired of reminding senators of his humble origins in a dysfunctional black family in Pin Point, Georgia. He lambasted criticism of his nomination as a "high tech lynching," deliberately using this racially-charged term to discredit his opponents. Instead of holding him in contempt of the Senate, the Senate confirmed him.
O J Simpson. Despite overwhelming DNA evidence of his guilt in the murders of his ex-wife Nicole and Ronald Goldman, Simpson was acquitted by a jury without even one white male member. (1) To this day, polls show that most black Americans believe Simpson was innocent. (2) He is only behind bars now because he subsequently committed other crimes in Las Vegas, where his race could not save him from justice. If he ever needed Johnny Cochran, he needed him at his Nevada trial.
Barack Obama must be one of the cowards that Holder was referring to, since he rarely mentioned race during his long presidential campaign, until the furor over Wright made him address the subject. But that is exactly where he differed from previous black presidential candidates like Jackson and Sharpton, which is why many whites voted for him!
Obama apparently believes that his partial-African heritage was an obstacle that he had to overcome in winning the Democratic presidential nomination, but the truth is that it was an enormous advantage. As the only African-American in a field of nine candidates, he garnered the lion's share of the black vote in every primary and caucus, while the other candidates scrambled for a share of the white vote. This was crucially important in winning southern primaries, where black voters today are often a majority of the Democratic base. In addition, white liberals could manifest their racial liberalism by voting for an African-American candidate more than by backing a white contender who was merely supportive of black aspirations. In this age of "identity politics", Obama was the "real deal."
As for Eric Holder, I cannot prove that his race was a major factor in his impressive legal career, which included important positions in the Clinton Justice Department, which then paved the way for his appointment as Attorney General. But it probably helped.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) The prosecution agreed to move the trial from the district where the crimes where committed to Central Los Angeles, where more blacks would be in the jury pool. Cochran succeeded in eliminating all white males from the final panel, then using the racism of Detective Furman to persuade the jurors that Simpson was framed.
(2) Simpson is an ironic beneficiary of black solidarity, since he preferred the company of whites. Not only did he marry a white woman (as his second wife), but he allowed an unemployed white guy to share his home, even though there were plenty of black losers in LA who would have gladly accepted his hospitality.
Attorney General Eric Holder, Feb. 18, 2009
Does the AG mean that men like Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Louis Farrakhan and Jeremiah Wright are too cowardly to speak up about race in this country? I do not think so----they seem to talk about little else!
Perhaps he meant that white people, like this blogger (white as the driven snow, though Nazi-types would deny that) don't talk enough about race? It is true that the Glazerbeam has not dealt much with racial issues-----until now. I proudly accept the AG's challenge to discuss race in America candidly, but I am not sure he would like what I have to say, if he even reads this blog.
Unlike Mr Holder, I contend that talk of race has had too great an impact on public affairs in this country, and here are some examples of what I mean:
Clarence Thomas. When the first black Supreme Court Justice retired in 1991, President George H W Bush appointed US Circuit Judge Thomas to succeed him. Although he was the only black person ever nominated to the Supreme Court by a Republican president, Thomas apparently believed the President's claim that his race had nothing to do with his selection.
Yet, at his confirmation hearing, he never tired of reminding senators of his humble origins in a dysfunctional black family in Pin Point, Georgia. He lambasted criticism of his nomination as a "high tech lynching," deliberately using this racially-charged term to discredit his opponents. Instead of holding him in contempt of the Senate, the Senate confirmed him.
O J Simpson. Despite overwhelming DNA evidence of his guilt in the murders of his ex-wife Nicole and Ronald Goldman, Simpson was acquitted by a jury without even one white male member. (1) To this day, polls show that most black Americans believe Simpson was innocent. (2) He is only behind bars now because he subsequently committed other crimes in Las Vegas, where his race could not save him from justice. If he ever needed Johnny Cochran, he needed him at his Nevada trial.
Barack Obama must be one of the cowards that Holder was referring to, since he rarely mentioned race during his long presidential campaign, until the furor over Wright made him address the subject. But that is exactly where he differed from previous black presidential candidates like Jackson and Sharpton, which is why many whites voted for him!
Obama apparently believes that his partial-African heritage was an obstacle that he had to overcome in winning the Democratic presidential nomination, but the truth is that it was an enormous advantage. As the only African-American in a field of nine candidates, he garnered the lion's share of the black vote in every primary and caucus, while the other candidates scrambled for a share of the white vote. This was crucially important in winning southern primaries, where black voters today are often a majority of the Democratic base. In addition, white liberals could manifest their racial liberalism by voting for an African-American candidate more than by backing a white contender who was merely supportive of black aspirations. In this age of "identity politics", Obama was the "real deal."
As for Eric Holder, I cannot prove that his race was a major factor in his impressive legal career, which included important positions in the Clinton Justice Department, which then paved the way for his appointment as Attorney General. But it probably helped.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) The prosecution agreed to move the trial from the district where the crimes where committed to Central Los Angeles, where more blacks would be in the jury pool. Cochran succeeded in eliminating all white males from the final panel, then using the racism of Detective Furman to persuade the jurors that Simpson was framed.
(2) Simpson is an ironic beneficiary of black solidarity, since he preferred the company of whites. Not only did he marry a white woman (as his second wife), but he allowed an unemployed white guy to share his home, even though there were plenty of black losers in LA who would have gladly accepted his hospitality.
posted by Gerald S Glazer at 9:10 AM
1 Comments:
Very good, excellent post.
I can only give my personal experiences and I have many. I am White and I was a cab driver in Philadelphia for 1 year full time and another year part time on the weekends. (I was not shomer shabbos then). I lived in North Philly at Allegheny and Broad Streets and I drove out of the Rockland garage. This was deep in the North Philly ghetto. I worked 10 hours per day 6 days per week from 2PM to midnight. I spent 100% of the time in the Black ghettos of North, South and West Philly. 99% of my fares were Black and the rest Hispanic. I never refused to pick up anyone and never refused to go anywhere. I picked up from 40-50 fares per day.
I was robbed at knife point by a the Diamond Street Black teenage gang and had numerous runins with my fares. I can provide scores of interesting and wild stories but I will stick to the topic.
In general as a group, Blacks were the most racist and bigotted people I have ever met; and they seemed to hate each other more than they hated Whites. In spite of the fact that I knew they hated me, I also had the sense that they were afraid to do something to a White person. This was in the early 1970's and things may be different now in this regard.
Their bigotry showed in their conversation. They all had a false and negative impression of who I was and what I was doing driving in THEIR neighborhood (I was the ONLY White cab driver I knew or ever saw in these Black neighborhoods). People also always seemed very freely tell cab drivers anything so they freely spouted their hatred and bigotry toward Whites to me.
Interestingly, when I picked up Hispanics in the very same neighborhoods they were always extremely nice and considerate to me. The difference was astounding. This proved to me that the Blacks did not hate Whites because of their economic status because the Hispanics were in the same economic status.
It should also be known that while most of the Black ghettos were in disarray physically and otherwise, there were isolated streets all over Philadelphia in the Black ghettos that were spotless with the nicest people in the world. That too was so very striking and proved to me that the problem was environmental and not racial. If they all had had a good background and good parents and good influences there would be no problems in the ghettos.
Therefore in my experience, the problems in the Black community are not racial or economic; but due primarily to the breakdown of the Black family. They simply do not have the support network to make sure they go in the right direction.
I put the main fault here on the Welfare System. The Black family in the 1950's was very strong. The illegitamacy and single mother rates were low. They may have been poor but their society was strong and free from crimes and drugs.
The Welfare system favored single mothers, they got the most money; so the family fell apart and when the family fell apart; their society fell apart.
It is clear that today the only barrier to success of Blacks is Blacks and Obama is surely one proof of that; but there are many as there are Blacks in every profession at all levels of all professions.
However of course there will always be prejudice, because prejudice is a human trait. We are all prejudiced and there is nothing wrong with that. That is, we all favor our family, our religion, our race, our nationality, our city, our state, out country, etc. This is normal and natural and it is OK. What is not OK is going out of our way to impede or harm someone because he/she is different.
I see very little racism against Blacks or any group these days in the USA.
Post a Comment
<< Home