Off Topic · OT: Taking down Obama with the race card (page 17)

Posted by codeunknown:

Its unfortunate but not surprising that the article underestimates the intelligence of Wright's detractors, whether they be black, white, asian, hispanic etc. And lets be clear that his detractors are not just white. Those folks are mad at Wright, or should be mad at Wright, not because he spoke out against American foreign policy, which has been flawed far before 9/11.

They should be mad at Wright because he claimed, without further clarifying, that the government "purposely infected African American men with syphilis" and that "the government lied about inventing HIV as a means of genocide against people of color."; he distorted the truth for inflammatory rhetorical effect in a manner that, rather than educating his audience of real obstacles, antagonizes them without purpose. By never discussing the aftermath of Tuskeegee, a rather dramatic regulation of scientific research, he constructs a singularly evil image of white government, with which compromise seems far-fetched, and entertains the implication that Tuskeegee type healthcare violations may still be widespread. In other words, he opens old wounds and leaves them open to be "infected" by ideas of stereotyping, irreconcilable difference and revenge.

I have adressed this point, he misspoke about the Tuskegee experiment, as did I, but what the gov't did is no less nefarious. Even after a cure was developed, black men were used as guinea pigs, to see how the disease spread and the effects it had on the body while living and after death; while they were denied treatment, and not even notified that they had the disease so they could at least protect their wives and children!! These are the exact types of things the Nazis did. This is not something easily glossed over, and the fact that the majority of Americans dont know it is a problem. It is a part of the reason Americans are so delusional and get so offended when they hear something negative about the country, they have been shielded from the truth. The black community has rarely had the luxury of not knowing many of these things, because so often we were the victims of these things. I wrote papers on this in school. The fact the Rev' Wright mispoke about exactly what happened in NO WAY overstates what actually did happen. The truth itself is damning. Did you know about this prior to his speech?

I think it was irresponsible to talk about the HIV theory when there is not proof to support the claim, I've said that before. But i don't think he said this to make his congregation hate white people. Its crazy how everything that anyone says publicly that is bad about our experience in this country, is always treated as somebody trying to make black people hate white people. I think he said it because he believes it to be true.

They should be mad that Wright states unabashedly that he knows "what’s going on in white America, the US of 'KKK' A" because, this time, he deliberately exaggerates the present pervasiveness of racism and white supremacy, this time grouping not just "rich, white people" but seemingly a majority of white Americans with a cult that calls for the elimination of African Americans.

Honestly, and with respect and humility, I have to tell you as my knick brother, that in general, white people are in no position to say the Rev. is exaggerating the present pervasiveness of racism and white supremacy. What you are saying implies that you know and understand what black people go through in this country, and that is simply not true. The average white person truly has very little idea about what the current state of racism is in this country; and this is our most critical source of misunderstanding.

What you are saying is the equivalent of me saying Gay people are overstating the pervasiveness of anti-gay sentiment in society. How would I know that? What do I know about what its like to be a gay man in this society? This is the key aspect of the problem. How would a white person really know what kind of time black people are having? This is the question I have been asking over and over again and its never been answered. How does a white man, come to know much of anything about how prevalent racism is in a predominantly white society? I really need an answer to this question because this question gets at the heart of the misunderstanding between whites and blacks.

[these are questions not of you specifically but in general to all of the white guys reading this to think about and hopefully respond to, and I ask seriously with respect, I'm not mad or anything like that, I am just sharing my perspective and I'd like to hear some responses.]

How would a white man know what it was like to be a black male during the Giuliani era? Or what its like to be a black man and deal with the police and have your rights violated so blatantly and so often? Or be black at a job when something ends up missing? Or what its like trying to get a job or an apartment when all of the people who determine your fate are white and are often prejudiced against you before you say a word? How would you know what its like to have friends who did long stretches in prison for a crimes they didn't commit, because they were poor and black and cops knew they could get a conviction? How would you get a sense for how often that happens? How would you know what it is like to be non-white in a majority white society? Do you not see the arrogance in the assumption that you know these things when it is so obvious to those of us who do know, that you do not? This is where the anger comes in. Because I have said all of these things many times before, and essentially what happens is this is treated is if it is untrue or does not matter. It is ignored. It isnt a part of the white experience so I think you guys just ignore it.

And this has been the trend in this society. America has gone from denying that racism exists, to stating its over, all without ever acknowledging it in the present. And more importantly, what the average white person views as racism, is bigotry and prejudice. WHat the average black person understands racism to be, is a system of discrimination where they have unequal access to housing, education, jobs, healthcare, etc, because of their race. It isn't someone calling you nigger, its society treating you like one, institutions treating you like one.

Bear in mind that this fabrication has striking similarities to the generalization that black people are, as a whole, violent and misogenistic because of a few high profile rappers; this flavor of argument has almost unanimously and, rightfully so, been rejected by posters here. Needless to say, racism exists and, in many forms, but, by failing on every occasion to mention that not all white share this malice, his efforts strain a discoure with what appears to be the irrational, unyielding and violent "KKK" opposition.

First, the critical difference between Rev' Wright and the stereotypes you mention, is that Wright said this in a church with a few thousand people and the racist remarks against blacks can be found all up and down talk radio and all over many TV and print media. Glen Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'reilly, Sean Hannity, and many many others promote the most rabid, virulent racist stereotypes imaginable, and they get paid millions of dollars to do it. Everytime white posters try to equate anti-white sentiment with anti-black sentiment it falls on its face. The nation of Islam is not the Klan or the Nazis. Rev. is not FOX news, he is not the media empire of a racist like Rupert Murdoch, he is not a media superstar, he is one black preacher who no one would have ever heard from if an excerpt of his speech could not be used to smear a presidential candidate. There simply is no comparison. Mainstream people promote stereotypes. Imus has been doing that for years, the media just seized on it this time, and I dont know why, there are people making more sophisticated, but no less racist remarks like that on the airwaves every single day and tens of millions of white people are enjoying it with no moral outrage.

Secondly, when Rev. Wright says AmeriKKKa, we understand this in different ways. If I ask you is this a racist country, I dont know what you'll say. But if you ask me I will laugh. I will laugh because what you are asking is, to me, so obvious, so apparent, so glaring and obtrusive, it would be hard for me to take the question seriously. THis is a racist country, and by that I do not mean everyone in the country is racist. The average white person thinks of racism as prejudice or bigotry. The average black person, whether they can articulate this or not, understands racism to be prevalent on an institutional level. Take this excerpt as a better explanation, written by Tim Wise, one of the preeminent anti-racist intellectuals, who is white btw:

While most persons of color conceptualize racism as an issue of structural injustice, whites often seem to view it as nothing more than a personality flaw, present in only a small handful of especially damaged individuals, and hardly worth worrying about in the larger social sense...More recently, with high-profile cases of individual bigotry surfacing, as in the examples of actor/comedian, Michael Richards and radio personality, Don Imus, the nation's awareness of individual level racism has been raised yet again. But at the same time that these men's personal biases were made visible to anyone with a television, the media was almost entirely ignoring the persistent evidence of racism as an institutional phenomenon. So there was no coverage, nationally, of the report from the Department of Housing and Urban Development, to the effect that 2006 had witnessed the highest level of housing discrimination complaints in recorded history. Nor had there been any national coverage of, or outrage over, the 2004 study in a respected medical journal, which noted that between 1991 and 2000, there had been nearly one million African Americans who had died, who wouldn't have died, had they merely had health care equal to that of their white counterparts. Though persons of color are painfully aware of these structural injustices, whites are largely oblivious, convinced that individual bad people are the problem to be solved..."

None of this is surprising to me, because the media, like the country, is owned and controlled by rich white men. That people saw a similar remark from Wright as controversial truly boggles my mind. Is it not true?

So when you continue on with the notion that

real oppression does not need to be "pointed out"...

this again implies that you, and the nation, for that matter, are as aware of our strugles as we are. You are saying in essense, as a nation, we 'get it'. Which, of course, is simply not the case, at all. Furthermore, you go on in your paragraph to interpret Wrights remarks as some kind of a call for a race war in society, and I'll go on record and say wholeheartedly thats not what he said, nor is it what he meant. (lets get the actual remarks if you care to delve into this further) Black people, in general, see this society as racist, and as something that needs to be fought to be improved. This figthing is political. It is the same kind of fighting Dr. King did, Malcolm X did, Medgar Evers did, Paul Robeson did. Those were people who fought, and when he is admonishing black men to stop fighting each other and fight their true enemy, he means the people in the seats of power who are allowing injustices to carry on. He also means regular people who are indifferent, who passively support whats going on. This fighting is political, and if you want to interpret it as violence, thats on you, but I think thats a gross mis characterization. Perhaps it sounds different to your ears, and maybe you need some kind of disclaimer in his speech that says, oh I dont mean all white people, but thats what he means; its very clear to me that hes not calling for a race war. The handful of organizations of black people who are organized and are anti-white, are fringe groups, very small, pretty crazy and are more of a threat to their own well-being than they are to white people; and they don't have a large following in the black community.

Most black people do in fact, see racism as an intrinsic part of this country. White people do not. But what is so ironic to me is, white people have NEVER seen it as we saw it. This country went from denying it exists, to saying its over with; without ever seeing or acknowledging institutionalized, systemic racism in the present tense. In general, dont you find it amazing that throughout history so many, otherwise inteligent, dynamic, sensitive and caring white people, are anything but, when the topic of racism in America is broached.

Wright shows a refusal to accommodate even minimal compromise and, hence, sermon after sermon, reinforces his monopoly of thought on African Americans, from impressionable children to senior citizens rooted in his line of thinking, who may otherwise have had a more realistic and optimistic racial outlook.

Wright has a monopoly of thought on African Americans? LOL Surely you jest. And you, as a white man are in a position to determine that black people are being robbed of a more realistic racial outlook? Again I have to ask, (and this is all in the spirit of debate and understanding truly so please dont take this any other way) how would you have any real idea what a realistic racial outlook is? As a member of the dominant group, what gives you a vantage point from which to make such a strong statement? As I have pointed out, this country has NEVER had a realistic outlook on race, NEVER.

The excuse of church hyperbole is not in the least mitigating just as Imus's comedy excuse falls flat. It should be clear that Wright is more influential to his listeners than Imus is to his casual early morning listeners looking for gossip and a good laugh. Just as Imus’s “nappy headed hos” comment required only slight inference to surmise underlying racist bias, Wright’s religious and historical comments are quite straight forward; moreover, while Imus apologized, Wright intractably stands by his racism. The bottom line remains I slammed Imus before and Wright deserves an even greater indictment. I expect a similar, consistent standard from others.

I'll end saying this, he never says anywhere or implies that he hates white people and I dont see anywhere in any of his remarks anything that could be classified as racist. You drew your conclusions about him being racist by reaching and implying and interpreting in order to see racism. I see anger, but I dont see hatred. I saw him being critical of society in a way that is totally consistent with my life experiences. I dont expect you to see it as I do, because you have not experienced it as I have. But I do expect you to not presuppose you know whats best for my community, when it is obvious, in spite of how well-written your post is, that you do not have a firm grasp on racism in this society.

Let me end saying please, please, PLEASE do not take offense to anything I have written. I am trying to be direct about what I am saying while also being respectful, but I know in a charged topic such as this, it is easy to misinterpret intent. Trust me when I say, I do this because I think we all have something to learn from each other, and that part of the reason whites and blacks see things so differently is because there hasn't been enough dialog. And I'm sorry for rambling.


[Edited by - killa4luv on 03-27-2008 12:17 AM]

Killa, I very much appreciate the respect that you show. Hopefully, I can be as respectful and direct (and I will have to be direct because I have all of 20 minutes to address the entirety of your post). It is incredibly disappointing to me that you begin your argument with an assumption about my race and my lack of perspective. This is such an egregious blunder on your part that the bulk of your argument crumbles almost instantaneously. We have also had this conversation before. Let me state explicitly that your assumption about my color is, in every way, false. And, there starts a series of misguided assumptions on your part. Before I go on, I'm not sure how to interpret your statement about me "presupposing to know whats best for your community" because 1) I'm not sure what specifically the differences are between our communities and 2) because I haven't made any specific recommendations for your community. My argument, in totality, is that Wright's comments have been divisive and racist and that he deserves reprimand.

In short, I think you make a series of stock, "straw man" arguments. Here are the highlights. First of all, to answer your question, I knew about the details if the Tuskegee tragedy before Wright even began preaching. More to the point, your analysis of simply whether or not he overstated the crimes is incomplete. I was never concerned that he discussed Tuskegee and was angry about it. I'm concerned about the implications of conveying a provocative, yet incomplete truth. And I'm concerned that he does this deliberately.

Moving on, I know clearly that institutional racism in America exists: yet, you go on, at length, about this as if its a revelation. Your statement that blacks typically have not had access to this information is valid; the unfortunate irony here is that this is precisely why my "monopoly of thought" argument is so strong. Not a monopoly on all African Americans, as you mischaracterized. But, certainly, a strong influence to many that are deprived of other, more accurate sources of history. To reitterate, they are now deluded to an extreme, without a clear concept of how they should combat the real racism that occurs every day.

And, on that topic, you've misinterpreted what I think Wright wants his audience to do: its not violence, although a quick glance at his rhetoric might lead one to entertain that. Instead, its a refusal to appreciate an evolving racial climate, a refusal to enter a discourse until a redemption of Biblical proportions, and a refusal to incorporate dissenting black Americans. Of course, I agree that Wright wants a political "fight" against the perpetrators of injustice but I think you're naive if you think the implications of Wright knowing "whats going on in white America, the US of KKKA," end there. To address this, you can't continue talking about racism in a vacuum, ignoring the ubiquity and severity of racism that has been suggested. Even if this is a "racist country," it remains impossible to argue that the white segment of United States, at large, is working singulary to the end of African American elimination. The way one tackles each of those situations, separated by many orders of magnitude, is entirely different. Very likely, this delusion is what frames Wright's forever broken discourse.

In summary, I think that you have a firm grasp of the nature of racism in this country, but a catastrophically weak interpretation of Wright's comments. Maybe reading my previous post again, without your opening bias, will help bridge our differences in opinion.

We are in the 6th rd of the UK Payperview down goes codeunknown, down goes codeunknown. I guess his handlers didn't put enough water in his bottle....no stamina

Posted by playa2:

We are in the 6th rd of the UK Payperview down goes codeunknown, down goes codeunknown. I guess his handlers didn't put enough water in his bottle....no stamina

you missed the last round. There was a swing and a miss.

Whites refuse to remember (or perhaps have never learned) that which black folks cannot afford to forget. I've seen white people stunned to the point of paralysis when they learn the truth about lynchings in this country--when they discover that such events were not just a couple of good old boys with a truck and a rope hauling some black guy out to the
tree, hanging him, and letting him swing there. They were never told the truth: that lynchings were often community events, advertised in papers as "Negro Barbecues," involving hundreds or even thousands of whites, who would join in the fun, eat chicken salad and drink sweet tea, all while the black victims of their depravity were being hung, then shot, then burned, and then having their body parts cut off, to be handed out to onlookers. They are stunned to learn that postcards of the events were traded as souvenirs, and that very few whites, including members of their own families did or said anything to stop it.

Martin - other than being a moderator, what qualifies you as a referee on racial matters?

Then on the other hand... and back to Obama and Social Networks

"In the days after Mr. Obama’s speech on race last week, for example, links to the transcript and the video were the most popular items posted on Facebook. On The New York Times’s Web site, the transcript of the speech ranked consistently higher on the most e-mailed list than the articles written about the speech.

______

Thankfully, the conversation is being held in places other than the patently biased closed-set studios of Fox and Friends.

_______

Although some college seniors may say they learned about Mr. Obama’s speech about race on CNN, more are likely to have seen it on YouTube, where it has been viewed almost 3.4 million times, or on Facebook, where it remains among the most shared links.

Candidates are capitalizing on this social development, and so are their supporters. A youth-minded music video called “Yes We Can” has been perhaps the biggest beneficiary. A musical version of Mr. Obama’s campaign speech made by the singer will.i.am of the Black Eyed Peas and a bevy of celebrities, it was released on YouTube three days before the series of coast-to-coast nominating contests on Feb. 5. Counting hits on YouTube and other sites, the video has been viewed more than 17 million times."

- NYTimes

For his carefully edited 15-30 seconds bytes to be more impactful than 400 years of institutionally-supported acts of segregation and violence against Black people in all areas of American culture ... (ALL areas of American culture, including professional sports)

... Rev Jeremiah Wright must be the most powerful man in the United States

he must be stopped

It's Only Basketball

Haskins, who along with Dwight Smith in 1963 were the first African-Americans to play basketball for the university, recalled not being able to eat in segregated restaurants and watching movies from the balconies of theaters because seats in the lower sections were reserved for whites. Jim McDaniels, another black player, went to Western Kentucky in 1967 and recalled the former Kentucky Coach Adolph Rupp’s halfhearted recruitment of him, which included spending just 15 awkward minutes with Rupp in the six days he spent in Lexington. The Southeastern Conference did not integrate until 1966, and Kentucky did not integrate until 1969.

No code, people don't know.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/27/sports/ncaabasketball/27western.html?ref=sports

The Western Kentucky coach at that time, John Oldham, had a police officer check his car at times in 1970 because of threats directed at him after he began starting five black players.

“So much of what we deal with right now is stuff that’s absolutely trivial,” said the current Western Kentucky coach, Darrin Horn, who played at Western in the early 1990s. “Coach Oldham and the players from that era, they were dealing with serious issues. That’s one of the reasons that I have so much respect for them.”

Oldham, 84, still lives in Bowling Green and works as a salesman at a John Deere dealership. Some of the scars from his time at Western Kentucky as coach and later as athletic director can be found in the tattered letters he keeps in a two-inch-thick manila folder labeled “Criticism” in his desk at the dealership.

The letters offer a window into the racial attitudes at the time.

“Why don’t you join the Black Panthers?” read one.

A note that arrived with a $25 donation said, “Given in thankfulness that Coach Oldham retires.”

Another read, “I prayed for the worst for you, your children and your grandchildren.” And yet another: “I whole heartedly disagree with your philosophy of using five Negro starters.”

“I think you are sacrificing Western and Bowling Green’s image for your own personal glory,” another letter said in reference to his decision to start five black players.

And another: “I can also tell you that Western will never advance to any high finish in the upcoming N.C.A.A. tournament simply because you can’t win the big games with five Negro players. They don’t possess the intelligence nor stability to meet such a challenge.”

Oldham said before that season a member of the university’s board of regents approached him and coarsely asked if he was going to start five black players.

When Oldham confirmed he was, the board member said he would stop going to games.

Posted by misterearl:

Whites refuse to remember (or perhaps have never learned) that which black folks cannot afford to forget. I've seen white people stunned to the point of paralysis when they learn the truth about lynchings in this country--when they discover that such events were not just a couple of good old boys with a truck and a rope hauling some black guy out to the
tree, hanging him, and letting him swing there. They were never told the truth: that lynchings were often community events, advertised in papers as "Negro Barbecues," involving hundreds or even thousands of whites, who would join in the fun, eat chicken salad and drink sweet tea, all while the black victims of their depravity were being hung, then shot, then burned, and then having their body parts cut off, to be handed out to onlookers. They are stunned to learn that postcards of the events were traded as souvenirs, and that very few whites, including members of their own families did or said anything to stop it.

Martin - other than being a moderator, what qualifies you as a referee on racial matters?

remind me where I stated that I was a referee on racial matters.

Thanks for the blanket statement about whites above. That was informative. I gotta read up about the get-togethers that were thousands strong.

Posted by misterearl:

For his carefully edited 15-30 seconds bytes to be more impactful than 400 years of institutionally-supported acts of segregation and violence against Black people in all areas of American culture ... (ALL areas of American culture, including professional sports)

... Rev Jeremiah Wright must be the most powerful man in the United States

he must be stopped

Who claimed Wright's comments were more powerful than 400 years of history? This is the wrong time and thread to be posting snippets of distortion, Earl. I'd almost prefer that you pretend I went down in the 6th round of a phantom fight, a "fight" in which the truth is that I've used kid gloves and that I've yet to be nicked.

Posted by BlueSeats:

WOW!

Code, that is a brilliantly executed piece or writing. Send it over to the NY Times Letters to the Editor.

Let me ask you, how did you feel about Obama's handling of the situation?

Sorry Blue, I missed this. I'll try to post about this later.

Maybe the NYT would accept it, if the uproar here is any indication.

Hillary Clinton’s pastor, Dean J. Snyder of Foundry United Methodist Church, gave the following quote on March 19th:

“The Reverend Jeremiah Wright is an outstanding church leader whom I have heard speak a number of times. He has served for decades as a profound voice for justice and inclusion in our society. He has been a vocal critic of the racism, sexism and homophobia which still tarnish the American dream. To evaluate his dynamic ministry on the basis of two or three sound bites does a grave injustice to Dr. Wright, the members of his congregation, and the African-American church which has been the spiritual refuge of a people that has suffered from discrimination, disadvantage, and violence. Dr. Wright, a member of an integrated denomination, has been an agent of racial reconciliation while proclaiming perceptions and truths uncomfortable for some white people to hear. Those of us who are white Americans would do well to listen carefully to Dr. Wright rather than to use a few of his quotes to polarize. This is a critical time in America’s history as we seek to repent of our racism. No matter which candidates prevail, let us use this time to listen again to one another and not to distort one another’s truth.”

To the posters above and on other threads who keep perpetuating this story, please stop this smear tactic. Hopefully you will take the time to reflect on this message.

To find offense in his words is a smear tatic now...right. He said what he said and others testimony of him doesn't change those words. They weren't said to effect any kind of reconciliation but rather an attack on another racial group. Ironically, this pastor whom you guys view as a saint who champions the oppressed is moving into a 1.6 million dollar house, courtesy of his flock. It pays pretty well to fan the flames of racial tension, while disavowing 'middleclassness' it seems.

To Thelonius:
BVS
1. Commitment to God
2. Commitment to the Black Community
3. Commitment to the Black Family
4. Dedication to the Pursuit of Education
5. Dedication to the Pursuit of Excellence
6. Adherence to the Black Work Ethic
7. Commitment to Self-Discipline and Self-Respect
8. Disavowal of the Pursuit of “Middleclassness”
9. Pledge to make the fruits of all developing and acquired skills available to the Black Community
10. Pledge to Allocate Regularly, a Portion of Personal Resources for Strengthening and Supporting Black Institutions
11. Pledge allegiance to all Black leadership who espouse and embrace the Black Value System
12. Personal commitment to embracement of the Black Value System.

Note that none of these are for oppressed people but just to the black community or leaders. I believe that ethnocentrism is decidedly un-Christian, as God so loved the world, that he sent his only begotten son...that God reached out to even Roman centurions, despite eventually being executed by the empire.

Noteable also is apart from 1. all the rest are secular.
Most churches have an commitment to outreach, evangelism, etc.

If even Obama denounced his pastor's words it either means he feels they are way out of line or he's just being politically expedient. I'd like to believe the former.

Posted by misterearl:

Hillary Clinton’s pastor, Dean J. Snyder of Foundry United Methodist Church, gave the following quote on March 19th:

“The Reverend Jeremiah Wright is an outstanding church leader whom I have heard speak a number of times. He has served for decades as a profound voice for justice and inclusion in our society. He has been a vocal critic of the racism, sexism and homophobia which still tarnish the American dream. To evaluate his dynamic ministry on the basis of two or three sound bites does a grave injustice to Dr. Wright, the members of his congregation, and the African-American church which has been the spiritual refuge of a people that has suffered from discrimination, disadvantage, and violence. Dr. Wright, a member of an integrated denomination, has been an agent of racial reconciliation while proclaiming perceptions and truths uncomfortable for some white people to hear. Those of us who are white Americans would do well to listen carefully to Dr. Wright rather than to use a few of his quotes to polarize. This is a critical time in America’s history as we seek to repent of our racism. No matter which candidates prevail, let us use this time to listen again to one another and not to distort one another’s truth.”

To the posters above and on other threads who keep perpetuating this story, please stop this smear tactic. Hopefully you will take the time to reflect on this message.

[Edited by - nykshaknbake on 03-27-2008 11:31 PM]

As far as I'm concerned America is just as evil, and unjust, or more, as it is good, and I premise that upon it's history, it's present actions, and my experience living within it as a black American.

Anyone who can witness the response to Katrina's black and the poor populations, during and after, the storm; with the mass displacement of black people; the seizing of black property; and offering it to wealthy developers; or placing black and poor people into toxic trailers; where people are being actually poisoned; without adequate health care resources; the hiring of foreign mercenary forces; to patrol New Orleans black neighborhoods, with M-16's; and believe Wright's sermon is so offensive, is either in denial, complicit...or both.

FOX Lies!! Irresponsible Media! Barack Obama Pastor Wright IN CONTEXT

I can't wait until November so I can cast my vote against Rev Wright wait.... He's not running for office so I guess I'll just have to throw in the group with the rest of the religious quacks that have association with political figures.

Codeunknown what reprimand would you be speaking of, because last time I checked freedom of speech or even better seperation of church and state regardless of how much a person may disagree with it is not against any laws.

Well judging by your info sources in the past...I'm very skeptical of that happening to the extent you say it does.

Posted by playa2:

As far as I'm concerned America is just as evil, and unjust, or more, as it is good, and I premise that upon it's history, it's present actions, and my experience living within it as a black American.

Anyone who can witness the response to Katrina's black and the poor populations, during and after, the storm; with the mass displacement of black people; the seizing of black property; and offering it to wealthy developers; or placing black and poor people into toxic trailers; where people are being actually poisoned; without adequate health care resources; the hiring of foreign mercenary forces; to patrol New Orleans black neighborhoods, with M-16's; and believe Wright's sermon is so offensive, is either in denial, complicit...or both.

Posted by bitty41:

I can't wait until November so I can cast my vote against Rev Wright wait.... He's not running for office so I guess I'll just have to throw in the group with the rest of the religious quacks that have association with political figures.

Codeunknown what reprimand would you be speaking of, because last time I checked freedom of speech or even better seperation of church and state regardless of how much a person may disagree with it is not against any laws.

correct me if I am wrong, but I think Code was speaking about race relations and not about how Rev Wright played out in the political arena.

Yeah, apparently I mad a false assumption, but it really doesn't change the bulk of my argument, but I will concede a huge error on my part. As I read over some of my remarks, I didn’t take the time to be as accurate as I would have liked to.

For the record, I’m going to be a lot more patient and deliberate in my further responses. I barely proof read my original, and I must admit, I responded to you as if I was responding to the entire group of posters here who agree with your position. Yes I do remember having a conversation about this kind of thing with you before now that you mention it.

Let me begin with this, you being white, or black or asian, or martian, is irrelevant. I shouldn’t have even argued from that point, but those were points I wanted to make and I used our discussion as an opportunity to make them. Hopefully other posters will feel compelled to discuss them.

We disagree on your premise. I don’t think Wright’s comments were racist, in any way.
I also think that there isn’t necessarily anything wrong with saying something divisive. Many feel it was divisive to imply that American foreign policy lead to the attack on the towers. I feel it was simply a statement of fact. Although I concede his remarks were divisive, they were only divisive in the sense that the typical American is ignorant of and oblivious to what the US gov’t is responsible for internationally. So it shocks their ears to hear someone speak a truth that shatters an illusion they have held closely for so long. The US is not an international force for good. The rest of the world is painfully aware of that, but Americans, are largely delusional when it comes to this. No different than when talking to a white man and a black man about the reality of the way the police operate.

Even if this is a "racist country," it remains impossible to argue that the white segment of United States, at large, is working singulary to the end of African American elimination.

Even if? You obviously do not understand institutional racism in the way that you claim to or you wouldn’t be making this argument. Institutional racism has little to do with the white segment working to the end of African American elimination. Again, your focus is on bigotry, prejudice, white people with bad intentions, and while I do think there is still plenty of that to go around, that’s only part of what I’m talking about when I say this is a racist country.
Institutionalized Racism in economics:

…is so insidious is because it yields racist outcomes even if people are not particularly prejudiced. It is insidious because it makes it possible for the failure of an agricultural program or a race riot decades ago to have an impact on people's economic situations today.
Wealth is passed from one generation to the next. This means that if, in previous generations, black people or native people had no wealth or had it stolen from them, they will have less now than whites. This has all the potential in the world to perpetuate itself.
Jobs and other business opportunities are often not advertised and go instead according to personal and family connections. Even without severe discrimination, in a racist society people have mostly friends and family of their own race. If the people with jobs and opportunities to give out are white, the people who get the jobs and opportunities will be white. This, too, has a self-perpetuating logic.

And still this quote is only dealing with one aspect of society, economics. So far from claiming there is a concerted effort to destroy black people, there is a cycle that repeats itself and will continue until there is acknowledgement that it is happening and then a concerted effort to undo it. And this isn’t about just black people here, eventually we will get to the point when we are talking about all races with common interests, fighting against being controlled by the rich, but unfortunately we have to walk through the door that deals with racism first, and it has proven incredibly difficult to do. Even as Americans become less bigoted and prejudiced over time, these inequalities reproduce themselves, poor people have poor children who go to prison and remain poor, and rich people have rich children who goto college or to daddy’s business. And because this society has been openly legally racist for about 90% of the time black and white people were here, I’d say we are still very much lving in a divided society, largely shaped by racism, where the rich are overwhelmingly white, and the poor are overwhelmingly non-white. And that’s not a coincidence or happenstance or ‘just the way the ball bounced’.

So no, I do not think Wright’s comments are going to make black people hate white folks, nor are they going to make black people violent against white people. The most damage they will do is hurt some white people’s feelings and possibly hurt Obama’s run. And again, amidst all of this talk about Wright’s alleged racism, we wont be making any headway at all in terms of understanding or dealing with real racism that has an impact on people’s lives. And mind you, I said the same thing with regards to Imus. Making stupid comments on TV isn’t what we need to be dealing with when we talk abut racism, this has all been a distraction from real meaningful discussion about racism.

I agree that in general the things he says are provocative and I think he means it to be and I don’t think there is anything wrong with that. He leads an activist church, he needs to be provocative. Hes not saying these things for fun, hes saying these thing to make people move. I think he wants to light a fire inside people to fight for change, and I think focusing on ‘how much progress has been made’ is counterproductive (aside from the fact that neither he nor I, are particularly impressed with the ‘progress’ that you and others believe has been made.). The black community is complacent, yet still badly in need of change. In general, communities of any color do not fight for change when they are complacent. I think he is correct in pointing out the things out that he points out. I say some of these things often and I’m not angry or hateful or any of that, as I think many posters here who’ve met me can attest to. I say them because they are true and they shape my view of this country. I don’t get choked up when I hear the pledge of allegiance. The words god damn America don’t sound offensive to me. I am from a people who have been through a lot of bad things here, I see the effects of it everytime I walk out my door, so I don’t have the same feelings about this country that the average white person does.

In my previous post I spoke mainly about black vs. white perspectives because that is the dominant dynamic at work. That is really what this is about in the media and the political arena. Obama’s opponents correctly saw this as a way to damage his support among whites, who view Rev. Wright’s rhetoric as hateful, racist, incendiary, etc.

Again, he and I both misspoke about the Tuskegee experiment, and I don’t think the mistake in any way made the situation any worse than the reality. No the gov’t didn’t inject black men with syphilis, what it did is fail to treat them or notify them that they were infected which let them pass it on in their families and community, while the gov’t monitored them and watched them die. If you think that truth is somehow more benign than how Rev. Wright and myself misspoke, than I really don’t know what to say. I fail to see how that mistake makes his statement any more incendiary than the documented reality of what did happen.

And we definitely disagree in terms of how you interpret his remarks as being a concerted effort to make his congregants hate white people. You are concerned that he conveys ‘a provocative yet incomplete truth and that he does it deliberately, and I suppose you have your right to be concerned about that, but because you believe it to be true does not make it so. I am not so concerned because I don’t believe it to be true. If all the hell my people caught in this country hasn't made them hate white people in large numbers, certainly no sermon on sunday is going to accomplish that.

I want to get down to some things that he actually did say so we can analyze his exact words and not yours or my interpretation of them. Here is clip which Fox has been using.


This sermon is against the power structure, who in this country, are rich, white, people. They are his enemies, your enemies, and mine as well. Only one line in the political part of this sermon, is anappropriate, where he says Europeans fit the bill, and he doesn’t really clarify that, because obviously all Europeans don’t fit the bill, even based on the logic of his sermon. I dont think that was intentional either. Now, I’m a communist, so I wouldn’t say what he said in the same way, I’d be more accurate about the way I phrased it. I’d say your enemy is the ruling class, and it wouldn’t matter the race, religion or ethnicity of the people I’m talking to or about. The ruling class are our enemies. We want better wages they want to lower wages. We want restrictions on air pollution, they want to pollute to their heart’s content. They want wars over oil, we want alternative fuels and no war in Iraq. They are our enemies, and this is how I would phrase it.

Let me also say that, I don’t phrase it in that way to avoid pointing out that these people are white, I phrase it in that way because its more accurate to call them the ruling class then to say rich white people. I mean, Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie are rich white people, but I don’t see them as my enemy. George Bush, Dick Cheney, the board of directors of ExxonMobil are (mostly if not entirely) rich white people who I’d say are my enemies, but I call them the ruling class. I say it in that way because the ruling class puts more of an emphasis on their richness than their whiteness, and it is their richness which I take issue with. Rev. Wright probably isn’t sophisticated enough to understand this in this way, so he describes it in the way he and most black people in this country knows and understand it.

Power in this country is white. That’s how the black community understands the power dynamic in this country. And its true, its accurate and there is nothing wrong with saying it. Is there a better, more accurate, more sophisticated way to say it? Yes. But to say it in the way that Rev. Wright said it touches not just on the power of class but also on the power if racism; and I think that’s what he was trying to communicate. I think in general people who have a limited understand of the racial and power dynamic in this country, will be offended when it is spoken to. They get offended. But because they are offended doesn’t make their point legitimate.