After Action Report
September 9th, 2006 | by Craig |So, what have we learned after all this?
- Many people won’t bother with facts that refute their pre-conceived notions
- It’s easier to cast aspersions than actually engage a person
- The mere suggestion that other races can be racist will, in turn, brand you a racist
- We, as a nation, are not mature enough to have a meaningful conversation about race.
11 Responses to “After Action Report”
By Gman on Sep 9, 2006 | Reply
It was a great post, Craig, and a even better dialogue ensued. We need to talk about these things…
By Chad on Sep 9, 2006 | Reply
Book that trip yet, Craig?
With the exception of the straw man you constructed by reconstituting the one quote as if it had come from a rapper, it was a good post, and Gman’s right, a better dialogue did ensue. And we do need to talk about these things.
As far as the straw man quote goes, should you search for ‘racist rap stars’ on the internet, you mostly get links to stories about Eminem, interspersed with links to Kanye West’s protest on SNL regarding perceived federal action post-Katrina, and the occasional link about Ice Cube in his Nation of Islam days.
Admittedly, this does not refute the conception that some degree of rappers are racist, but if it does exist to any degree, it’s disappeared down the Google memory hole. Your results may vary, I didn’t want to get into a big research project.
FWIW, it doesn’t matter much to me which direction that quote ran, it affected me the same way. I suspect that many others would feel the same, but I may be wrong.
By Craig on Sep 10, 2006 | Reply
I wonder if the lack of results on those search terms imply something further, namely, that when blacks say “Kill Whitey,” it isn’t considered racist. But, that’s just my trollish side saying that.
Like I say, my internal “racism filter” pegs on BS when you can do a simple %s/black/white or vice versa, and the meaning is changed. Consider:
White Congressional Caucus
United White College Fund
“The White Community”
I’m certainly not trying to imply that the converse of these organizations are racist, just that if someone were to start any of these, “racist” would be the first words out of everyone’s mouth.
I find it interesting.
By R;. Alex on Sep 10, 2006 | Reply
Craig,
I agree that we’re not generally ready to talk honestly about race. In large part because whites are looking eagle-eyed at absolution while blacks want apology and remediation. Any dialogue that starts where each side has a concrete idea what the correct resolution to the conversation is will likely not be fruitful.
Regarding ethnic clubs, I think that context matters. Right or wrong, blacks percieve themselves as having to worry about white racism on a daily basis. We see white racists as an exception, and they certainly are not typical, but even if only 1 in 10 whites has a conscious or subconscious preference for white people, that pool likely includes more hiring managers, shift managers, security guards, and others that can rather directly influence their lives, prosperity, and self-fulfillment (to name a few) than the entire pool of blacks in those same positions.
In that vein, I consider it entirely logical that groups of whites banding together would cause considerably more concern than groups of blacks doing the same. The level (and nature) of impact is just not the same between the two.
As a conservative, I’m not a fan of the Black Congressional Caucus and the NAACP. But that’s not nearly as troubling as a majority of people (or, even if not a majority of people then a majority of influence) banding together.
By Shane Mason on Sep 10, 2006 | Reply
Of course people of all races are racists craig. It is not productive when they are and often becomes downright disgusting. GMan is right, the ensuing dialog was productive. I still maintain that the OP was not the place for that topic. You made a valid point and then nullified it by changing subjects.
By Craig on Sep 11, 2006 | Reply
That probably should have been two different posts, but the knee jerk reaction and ensuing mud-slinging was rather telling, I thought.
By Matt Singer on Sep 11, 2006 | Reply
What knee jerk reaction, Craig? I think your reaction was knee jerk. People were discussing very blatant white supremacist racism and your response was to change the subject to anti-white racism through construction of a strawman, rather than engaging in the topic at hand.
To now refer to the strawman as a “fact” is rather bizarre. I think most of the liberals in the discussion acknowledged the existence of black racists — hell, I cited Louis Farrakhan as one example. Yeah, you got called a racist, by a single individual.
You’re now using the comments of Larry Kralj to decide that you’ve been “branded” as a racist, when I don’t think any such thing has happened. One person has accused you of racism. He is not just wrong, he is out of line, but you’re not branded.
By Rocky Smith on Sep 11, 2006 | Reply
Larry Kralj called someone a name? There’s a first time for anything.
By Craig on Sep 11, 2006 | Reply
What knee-jerk reaction? Well, yours for one, Matt. I admit (repeatedly) that the post, as it stood was bad. There were two different topics, and I should have addressed them separately. But you made an assumption, and ran with it.
I’m not referring to the strawman as fact. How did you get that? I used very general terms, on purpose, to note my observations. Again, knee-jerk.
Perhaps my terminology and yours aren’t compatible. One person did, indeed, brand me a racist, which is what I expected, and what I got. Is labelled a better word?
By Matt Singer on Sep 12, 2006 | Reply
With the rap group, you said “consider this quote”, a quote to me indicates something that someone else said. No one, as far as I can tell, had ever said any such thing.
As for the use of the term branding, I don’t think a single person can brand you as something, unless it’s a rancher and you are a bull. Individual people call me a lot of things a lot of times. I think you’re making yourself out to be a victim very quickly.
When I started writing over at Left in the West, you started out, I believe, by calling me a communist (in slightly friendlier terms). I wasn’t a communist then and I’m still not. I’ll admit, I may have overreacted in my response back then. Thankfully, now, I’ve got a somewhat thicker skin.
Regardless, my core point in responding your post was that when it comes to a high-profile white supremacist family moving to our state, you believe the elephant in the room is racism against white people by non-existant rap groups. I think that’s a pretty confused understanding of the world, especially for someone who lives in a state that is over 90% white. Anti-white racism is unlikely to ever have any real impact on your life. Meanwhile, white supremacists really are mobilizing in our state. Which bothers me more?
And how is this knee jerk?
By Craig on Sep 12, 2006 | Reply
Meh, we’re talking at each other.
I admit it was poorly executed, and I deserve some lumps for that, so I’ve certainly taken them.
To say my understanding of the world is skewed is a little off. I’ve been in several places where I was a minority, and the thing is: most people don’t really give a shit one way or another on an individual basis, but some do and it’s not a function of melanin content.
Again, point #1: I don’t know that it’s healthy to feed the trolls.
Point #2: Racism is a double-edged sword, and until we admit that it’s not just a “white” thing, we’re not really having an honest discussion as a nation about race.