Meta-Blog

SEARCH QandO

Email:
Jon Henke
Bruce "McQ" McQuain
Dale Franks
Bryan Pick
Billy Hollis
Lance Paddock
MichaelW

BLOGROLL QandO

 
 
Recent Posts
The Ayers Resurrection Tour
Special Friends Get Special Breaks
One Hour
The Hope and Change Express - stalled in the slow lane
Michael Steele New RNC Chairman
Things that make you go "hmmmm"...
Oh yeah, that "rule of law" thing ...
Putting Dollar Signs in Front Of The AGW Hoax
Moving toward a 60 vote majority?
Do As I Say ....
 
 
QandO Newsroom

Newsroom Home Page

US News

US National News
Politics
Business
Science
Technology
Health
Entertainment
Sports
Opinion/Editorial

International News

Top World New
Iraq News
Mideast Conflict

Blogging

Blogpulse Daily Highlights
Daypop Top 40 Links

Regional

Regional News

Publications

News Publications

 
Post Traumatic Slave Syndrome?
Posted by: McQ on Tuesday, March 25, 2008

While researching for Project Hero, I came across a rather odd article written by an unidentified columnist in Annapolis MD, for "The Capital".

What drew me to the column was the discussion of the death of a young soldier in Iraq. As it turns out, he was killed by an IED and the columnist laments his loss. That's obviously both appropriate and understandable.

Of course there was more to the columnist's concern than just this young man's death. She turned the column into a history lesson which, at least in my estimation, hints at a problem within black culture today which, for some of its members, is debilitating. I'm referring to the use of the past as a crutch for failures today.

What I found odd was the lesson taken from the past and how it was presented:
Specialist Matlock made the ultimate sacrifice for a country that at one time had men that looked like him, enslaved, drawn and quartered, whipped and lynched. He made a choice.

In his honor we must raise up our African-American boys with positive male images, if not in the home then in the community. We, the mothers of this village, must raise them to understand that education and service to others and their communities will be the phenomena to reverse the Willie Lynch Syndrome and end post traumatic slavery disorder in America.
"Willie Lynch Syndrome", if you read the article, refers to a slave owner who, apparently, shared techniques with other slave owners to create a "slave mentality" among blacks held in captivity. She says:
During the radio program we talked about the slave mother and her son and the tactics shared by Lynch to Virginia and Maryland slave owners in an effort to create slave life in America for 300 years if not 1000. I read from his letters, in particular the breaking of the slave mother.

Lynch talked about having the slave mother witness her son being torn apart by two horses, or whipping her son within an inch of his life. He said: "By her being left alone, unprotected, with the "male image destroyed" the ordeal caused her to move from her psychologically dependent state to a frozen, independent state. In this frozen, psychological state of independence, she will raise her male and female offspring in reversed roles. For fear of the young male's life, she will psychologically train him to be mentally weak and dependent, but physically strong. Because she has become psychologically independent, she will train her female offspring to be psychologically independent…

Continually, through the breaking of uncivilized savage slaves, by throwing the female savage into a frozen psychological state of independence, by killing the protective male image, and by creating a submissive dependent mind of the male slave, we have created an orbiting cycle that turns on its own axis forever, unless a phenomenon occurs and re-shifts the position of the male and female slaves."
Now, I'm not a psychologist and, I'd guess the author of the column isn't either, so I have no idea whether the psychology of these assertions is true or not. However, I would point out that Willy Lynch was one slave owner, and it isn't clear if other slave owners practiced or took heed of his advice. It is rather hard to claim that sort of psychological harm was inflicted upon all slaves. To be clear here, there is enough psychological harm endemic to being a slave for there to be quite a bit of psychological harm, I'm not disputing that. What I'm wondering about is specific claims she's making in the article.

She's claiming that the particular horror Lynch inflicted for a certain effect caused slave mothers to 'reverse the roles' of their children, raising the sons to be "weak minded and dependent while physically strong".

Really? A "submissive dependent male mind?" And there's no mistaking she's claiming that to be more than just the result of Lynch's treatment, but a broad outcome of slavery and one, apparently, that brings us this new disorder that survives even today:

Post Traumatic Slave Syndrome - an inter-generational disorder which apparently includes non-trauma "trauma". Obviously she's trying to tie in a continuing mental trauma that somehow survives the experience of slavery of past generations within the psyche of black mothers.

Notice too, the reference to the "mothers of the village" being responsible for raising sons a certain way. What's the father's role for heaven sake? And, seriously, why does it take a "village" when a good, solid family should do?

To her credit the aim of all of this is to change, for the better, the life of blacks in America.
The proof: Fewer homicides, the reduction of our males entering the America's new plantation - jails and penitentiaries, and an increase in their presence in institutions of higher learning.
I agree. I most profoundly agree. But her rhetoric is loaded. Is this the way to effect such change? Why the "village"? Why the reference to "America's new plantation"? Why the made-up disorder? How is blaming the problems of today on something that isn't and hasn't been a part of anyone's life for well over 100 years helpful?

These are the questions which continue to mystify "typical white persons" like myself. I don't say that flippantly - I'm genuinely curious about the answers. If we're to have a dialogue about race, this is as good a place to start as any.
 
TrackBacks
Return to Main Blog Page
 
 

Previous Comments to this Post 

Comments
These are the questions which continue to mystify "typical white persons" like myself.
I think its hard for people on any side of a cultural divide to truly understand the perspective of those who think differently. Whites look at society and say "geez, there are equal rights, affirmative action, scholarships...sure, there may be some lingering racism, but if anyone works hard, then they can succeed." I think the response might be something like "it’s hard for those who have had privilege to recognize the long term impact of past practices, both on the social situation of blacks and even the psychology — are the higher crime rates, higher poverty rates, and higher prison rates something just to blame on individual blacks for not trying enough, or blame completely on black culture? I think not."

One would hope the discussion would move on from there. Today’s white individuals can’t be blamed for the past, and today’s black individuals can’t gain success if they see themselves as victims — seeing oneself as a victim creates a self-fulfilling prophecy. But the two groups aren’t really separate, they’re linked, and the problems are to be solved as they learn to understand each other to, if you will, create a more prefect union. Because ultimately blame — either blaming blacks or black culture, or blaming whites or past slavery — solves nothing. Sharing and accepting responsibility is the answer, and it can really only work if both sides do it.
 
Written By: Scott Erb
URL: http://faculty.umf.maine.edu/~erb/blog.htm
"a continuing mental trauma that somehow survives the experience of slavery of past generations within the psyche of black mothers"

Lysenkoism— "the heritability of acquired characteristics". Wrong then, wrong now. Since the history of mankind is the history of traumatic events, we should all be disfunctional emotional and mental cripples.

It also sounds like an awfully expensive way to train slaves. Slavery worked pretty well for thousands of years without resorting to such techniques. Why would someone destroy a perfectly good slave now in order to possibly affect possible future slaves?
 
Written By: timactual
URL: http://
Scott, how can someone talk so much and say so little?
 
Written By: coater
URL: http://
I’m waiting for some smartalec typical white guy to come up with Post-Traumatic Emancipation Syndrome....

Here’s the bottom line: If you’re unhappy, if your life sux, if you underachieve/are jailed/are stupid/are lazy/are angry, etc.....it is not because of a "syndrome" or a disorder, or whatever.

It’s because you’re a loser who made bad choices.


Tough love America............tough love
 
Written By: shark
URL: http://
I think its hard for people on any side of a cultural divide to truly understand the perspective of those who think differently.
The problem with this claim, coming from you, is that it is self-annulling. I just checked your web page and confirmed that you are white. So, if what you say is true, I therefore can not trust any claims about the "black experience" that you make. QED.

I don’t have to understand "black cultural issues". I can constructively (in the mathematical sense) point to a wide variety of successful black people, from the big time down to a number of people in my personal experience. The claim that the "experience" is an immutable problem fails in the face of real, physical people who have demonstrably succeeded. You’re "explaining" a non-existent phenomenon, and it really doesn’t matter how many times such an explanation is offered or by how many people; if it doesn’t fit the facts, reject it.

And I can’t help but notice that one nearly-universal attribute of such successful people is the rejection of the very excuses you are offering. I do not think this is coincidence.

This victim talk is just the new slavery; well meaning, mental instead of physical, and used for political power instead of physical labor, but a form of slavery nonetheless. Fortunately, it is a set of chains that can be thrown off via a simple mental re-adjustment, on a personal level, instead of a protracted large-scale uprising.
 
Written By: Jeremy Bowers
URL: http://www.jerf.org/iri
Without speaking the relative merits of the columnist’s purposes, reading the language supposedly quoted from Willie Lynch made me immediately suspicious. For example:
By her being left alone, unprotected, with the "male image destroyed" the ordeal caused her to move from her psychologically dependent state to a frozen, independent state. In this frozen, psychological state of independence, she will raise her male and female offspring in reversed roles. For fear of the young male’s life, she will psychologically train him to be mentally weak and dependent, but physically strong. Because she has become psychologically independent, she will train her female offspring to be psychologically independent.
Even leaving aside how the alleged letter does not even come close to approximately 18th Century language, where did all this talk of "psychology" come from? Until the late 19th Century, "psychology" was considered to be more of a philosophy than any rigorous scientific discipline. Certainly the behavioral psychology explained in the letter wasn’t part of the discourse until B.F. Skinner. So if the quoted letter was actually written in the 1700’s, this Willie Lynch was well ahead of his time theoretically speaking.

After just a bit of googling, I came across this:
It’s really sad that so many African-Americans not only beleive this "urban legend" (to put it in decent language), but that so many seem not to care that it is not really true. Anyone who does not care about the truth is in big trouble. For the record, the "Willie Lynch" letter was actually a recent creation, as evidenced by the language used. It was actually created in 1993 as a chain letter which spread like a bad disease throughout Black America. Research indicates that it was "loosely adapted" (to put it nicely) from a section of Anatoli Vinogradov’s fictional 1935 novel "The Black Consul" that dealt with Napoleon’s supposed plans to divide and conquer the Haitians during the Haitian revolution.We Black scholars and professional historians should take this as a wake up call to get out of the ivory tower and teach the masses REAL Black history to keep them from being misled by the clever crackpots who collect cash by confusing the credulous. The REAL story of the damage done to Blacks from slavery may be found in actual slave narratives like "The Life and Times of Frederick Douglass," and detailed studies by legit scholars such as Carter G. Woodson’s "Miseducation of the Negro" and Kenneth Stampp’s "The Peculiar Institution."

Here are some enlightening comments from different historians:

There is a speech attributed to William Lynch which has been circulated on the internet and elsewhere, and which even Louis Farrakhan referred to at the Million Man March of October 16, 1995. By quoting extensively from the "Willie Lynch" speech, Mr. Farrakhan inspired the birth of a new term, Willie Lynch Syndrome, based on Lynch’s supposed speech.

this speech is a ridiculous fake, written in the 1990s (there’s no record of it being circulated before 1993).

First, the writer of this speech has made hardly any attempt to use the writing/speech style of the early 18th century.

Second, the author was not at all successful at steering clear of very specific anachronisms. We’ll name only the most glaring word-choice errors: fool-proof, used in the speech, actually dates from only 1902. The noun program is not used in the sense found in this speech until the 1830s. Self-refuelling is an utter anachronism, as the term refuelling did not arise until the early 20th century. Use of installed when referring to something other than a person did not first occur until the mid-19th century. Moreover, attitude did not refer to anything other than a physical position until the mid-19th century.

Third, a speaker would hardly need to so carefully identify the date and place of his speech, nor would he be likely to refer to King James as "our illustrious King, whose version of the Bible we cherish", unless he were a person of the 1990s making a clumsy attempt at writing a fake speech from the early 18th century. We cannot imagine why the writer introduces the theme of "James... our illustrious king" unless it is merely to emphasize that this took place in colonial times. Only someone creating a fake would need to try to establish a date for the speech within the fake itself. And, by the way, James was long-dead by 1712, the monarch of that era being Queen Anne. Finally, there is no evidence that a William Lynch from a "modest plantation" in the West Indies ever existed. There is, however, plenty of evidence for the existence of Captain William Lynch of Pittsylvania, Virginia, whom we have identified as the probable source of the verb lynch, and who was born fifty years after the date given in the speech above.
There’s more out there for those willing to look.
 
Written By: MichaelW
URL: http://asecondhandconjecture.com
I descend from Native Americans in the northeast (my maternal grandmother was 1/2 Native American). Smallpox and alcoholism virtually wiped out my ancestors, leaving pockets of survivors who have banded together to form a small shadow of their original culture. This all happened due to incursions by Europeans long before slavery.

So, do I automatically suffer from "Post Traumatic Indians Being Driven Out of Their Homeland Syndrome"? Can I blame all my problems on that? The fact that I look as white as you can get doesn’t matter...I still have 1/8 Native American in me so don’t I qualify, especially since I can trace my ancestors to a particular individual in a specific tribe?

Really - if people of any color want to end racism, then Morgan Freeman is right - we have to stop talking about it. No more white, black, red, etc... We are all Americans, period, no hyphens unless it’s an historical conversation and its kept in context.

I’m all about personal responsibility - the XX man isn’t responsible for the bad luck of the XX man. We each are responsible for ourselves and the choices we make, period.
 
Written By: Kris, in New England
URL: http://www.reflectionsbykris.squarespace.com
Certainly it didn’t take Lynch to remove the possibility of stable families, attachments and fathers... having family members sold would do that.

But after slaves were free labor unions did more and did more systematically to remove fathers as primary influence and, frankly, it’s upsetting and shocking and... well... it explains a lot.

One documentary I watched claimed that it was so impossible for any black male to find work that about the only thing they could do was be a Pullman Porter... a job that involved travel! And most families were supported by women who could find domestic work. I don’t know how it could possibly have been quite so absolute as the documentary claimed because there must have been non-union work someplace. But it seemed obvious that it would be impossible for men with pride to stick around when they couldn’t provide as a man in their homes.

What Scott gets wrong (don’t worry, you’re not alone in that!) is the idea that white people, or even *typical* white people, can’t understand what this means or what this would be like to live through or how people would by necessity react to that situation. Oh, individuals might be as empathic as a stump and not do so well, but race is irrelevant.

This "you can’t understand" is the racial doctrine that I grew up with, the post color-blind ideal. It’s garbage. Pure stinking waste.

 
Written By: Synova
URL: http://synova.blogspot.com
Here’s more:
I am a long-time believer in the importance of studying Black and African history. I took courses in junior high, high school, college and have continued to study extensively o­n my own. I love learning about history in general and really enjoy learning about Blacks and Africans who have struggled to improve the lives of our people. Let’s learn a little history in order to better honor our ancestors.

[...]

2. The Willie Lynch Letter

The Willie Lynch letter supposedly was a letter describing to slave masters the "formula" for controlling African slaves in the new world. What is interesting is that although this letter was supposedly taken from a speech given in 1712, those of us who have been studying Black history for 25 years or more have never heard of this letter until a few years ago!

Dr. Jelani Cobb, a Black professor of History at Spellman University, has written an excellent article debunking the Willie Lynch Letter as a fraud. He points out that the prose and language is more 20th century than 18th century. (see www.jelanicobb.com/portfolio/willie_lynch_is_dead.html)

I have problems with the Willie Lynch letter and the supposed "Willie Lynch Syndrome" because it o­nce again attempts to make it look as though Blacks are powerless and that Whites are all powerful. Just think of it, Whites are so smart that they can give o­ne speech that continues to control us over 200 years later! I would suggest that our time would be better spent studying hard and getting "A’s" in History, English and Math so that we can better learn how to separate fiction from reality.
And here.
 
Written By: MichaelW
URL: http://asecondhandconjecture.com
Certainly the behavioral psychology explained in the letter wasn’t part of the discourse until B.F. Skinner. So if the quoted letter was actually written in the 1700’s, this Willie Lynch was well ahead of his time theoretically speaking.
I should have made that point clearer, however she waves it away in the article, so it was acknowledged.
It has been said by a number of historians that this slave owner who came from the West Indies during the 1700s did not exist. However, black historians dispute this and believe strongly that his letters and tactics were used in creating slave life in America.
The bigger point I was interested in is the seeming necessity to blame today’s failures on the past and to do it in such a way that those failing are held blameless. What better than a couple of convenient "syndromes", neither of which pass the smell test.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.QandO.net
The problem with this claim, coming from you, is that it is self-annulling. I just checked your web page and confirmed that you are white. So, if what you say is true, I therefore can not trust any claims about the "black experience" that you make. QED.
Exactly so.
Unless that is, one proclaims themselves a trained expert in the area by means of self appointment. Interestingly, this seems to be focused on people who are (Questionably) trained in other disciplnes. For example, an anthorpologist claiming expertise in areas of social development. Or, a language expert, claiming expertise on everything.

Or, Erb, who is an expert in.... what was it again?

For the rest of us, who don’t make the claim to have an intimate understanding of everthing, all we can do is make judgements based on what we see, based on our own experiences and (perhaps more importantly) our readings of history...without an innate claim to a personal superiority in the matter.

Then again, I’m not the one trying to shift responsibility from those actually responsible to the successful in society, simply because free money seems an easy out, so I suppsoe my understanding is limited thereby.





 
Written By: Bithead
URL: http://bitsblog.florack.us

And I can’t help but notice that one nearly-universal attribute of such successful people is the rejection of the very excuses you are offering.
I’m a social scientist, I’m not offering excuses, I’m looking for causal relationships. Moreover, I agree that the solution is to have people in a position where they make good choices and take responsibility for their lives. In fact, I think a lot of social programs designed to help poor and minorities have instead created a kind of dependency which reinforced some of the problems they were meant to solve. (Or and Jeremy, the word "hard" does not mean the same as "impossible." Thus your ad hominem fails)


What Scott gets wrong (don’t worry, you’re not alone in that!) is the idea that white people, or even *typical* white people, can’t understand what this means or what this would be like to live through or how people would by necessity react to that situation. Oh, individuals might be as empathic as a stump and not do so well, but race is irrelevant.
Actually, my premise is tat we CAN understand this if we try, otherwise I wouldn’t be trying, or arguing for this as a solution. My point is that too many people really don’t try because they are either turned off by the other side claiming to be victims, or they dismiss without serious reflection the impact of a history of oppression on a culture (where there is still lingering racism).

Oh, I agree completely on families — that really is key, good solid families, with a good upbringing. That’s where the primary focus needs to be, and that’s one area where black churches like that of Rev. Wright makes a real positive contribution.
 
Written By: Scott Erb
URL: http://faculty.umf.maine.edu/~erb/blog.htm
The bigger point I was interested in is the seeming necessity to blame today’s failures on the past and to do it in such a way that those failing are held blameless. What better than a couple of convenient "syndromes", neither of which pass the smell test.
I think it’s interesting that there is a clear divide amongst blacks about such a necessity, and that an approximate fault line can be drawn between those who buy the Willie Lynch hoax, and those who emphatically reject it. Just looking around the web a bit reveals that there is no shortage of black voices vigorously eschewing mythical means of addressing the problems facing African Americans. At least some of those voices are more interested in an ex ante solution to those problems, and "syndromes" don’t play much of a role in those solutions, if any.
 
Written By: MichaelW
URL: http://asecondhandconjecture.com
"Sharing and accepting responsibility is the answer, and it can really only work if both sides do it."
There is only a need to share and accept responsibility if one actually is responsible. Otherwise this is just talk-show feel-good nonsense.

 
Written By: Grimshaw
URL: http://
Tough love America............tough love
I have no idea whether the affects suggested in the article are related to specific tactics used to manipulate slaves, these particular tactics seem to be compeltely fabricated, but it has been well documented that long term institutional repression has a profound impact on the repressed group, and these affects to do go away quickly on their own and are passed from generation to generation even after the repression ends.

Some people like to point to groups that suffered repression and overcame it, but generally, these groups were not subjected to long term oppression. Some people like to point to repression victims that emigrated and seem to exhibit none of the characteristics of the affects of repression, but again, these individuals, like slaves that escaped and went on to lead successful lives, were the exception, not the rule.

The fact is that the institutional repression of blacks in America lasted for over 300 years and only recently ended with the enforcement of federal civil rights legislation. People can deal with discrimination and prejudices, we are all subjected to discrimination of one form or another, but that’s not what we are talking about.

On one hand, it’s important for the descendants of the repressed to take control of their lives and escape the affects of repression, and that is the message that Shark wants to deliver. But on the other hand, when people behave as people would be expected to behave after long term repression, blaming them while ignoring the reality of the effects of this repression is pure self deception.

The trick is to acknowledge the affects of long term repression on the affected group, and taking action to reverse it, while be careful not to cause dependence as a result of the steps taken to mitigate the affects of repression.

Shark is wrong in his suggestion that a simple policy of telling people to buck-up will reverse these affects, and others are wrong suggesting that giving the formerly repressed group charity will reverse these affects.

Both are wrong, but because there is an element of truth to them, they continue to be accepted positions by people who are inclined by ideology to hold those positions.

The answer is as old as the ancient proverb, that if you give a man fish, you will feed him for a day, if you teach a man to fish, you will feed him forever.

We need to take special pains to assist those in the formerly repressed community who show initiative, in escaping the cycle, and eventually, the cycle will be broken.

The fact is that blacks in America are not like Asian immigrants who escaped repression, they are more like the Asians that did not emigrate, and you can blame them all day if you makes you feel better about yourself, but there is a causal factor, and our nation, or society, though not us individually, are responsible for those affects.

Our responsibility, should we choose to accept it, is to decide whether the cost to our current society will be greater if we address the problem, or if we ignore it. It’s not a simple equation, because ignoring it is not free, we just pay in different ways.

To look at them is disdain and complain about laziness, victimhood, racism, etc, is just wrong, and of course it is a well accepted position in the conservative community.



 
Written By: Captin Sarcastic
URL: http://
There is only a need to share and accept responsibility if one actually is responsible. Otherwise this is just talk-show feel-good nonsense.
You don’t have to, nor should you, take responsibility for what was done in the past, but you have no choice in accepting responsibility in choosing how to deal with the effects of what was done in the past.

If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice.

There are costs either way.
 
Written By: Captin Sarcastic
URL: http://
If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice.
OK, now I’m going to listen to Permanent Waves.
 
Written By: Scott Erb
URL: http://faculty.umf.maine.edu/~erb/blog.htm

Here’s the bottom line: If you’re unhappy, if your life sux, if you underachieve/are jailed/are stupid/are lazy/are angry, etc.....it is not because of a "syndrome" or a disorder, or whatever.

It’s because you’re a loser who made bad choices.
The winners take that credit, the losers seldom take that blame.
 
Written By: Scott Erb
URL: http://faculty.umf.maine.edu/~erb/blog.htm
OK, now I’m going to listen to Permanent Waves.
Erb, I’m shocked. A sense of humor?
 
Written By: SShiell
URL: http://
Because ultimately blame — either blaming blacks or black culture, or blaming whites or past slavery — solves nothing. Sharing and accepting responsibility is the answer, and it can really only work if both sides do it.
Well, whites did accept responsibility. For example, my great-grandfather carried a Rebel bullet until his death, and I have a bowie knife he took off of a Rebel he killed. It was a little thing called the Civil War, you may have read about it.

And then there was the Civil Rights Act, and a varity of other actions by whites to make things right for black Americans (some of these, like welfare, did more harm than good).

At this point, it is time for blacks to stand up (and many are); we are at a point where there is little left for white people to do.

The remaining problems lie mostly within black culture. So in a sense Erb is correct, it is just that white people have been taking care of their end of the problem over the last 140 years.
 
Written By: Don
URL: http://


At this point, it is time for blacks to stand up (and many are); we are at a point where there is little left for white people to do.
Very convenient belief system. I can see why you’d be motivated to think that way. After all, if everything is somebody else’s problem, then you don’t have any responsibility to improve the society in which you live. Ignorance is bliss, I guess.
 
Written By: Scott Erb
URL: http://faculty.umf.maine.edu/~erb/blog.htm
Deciding to take responsibility for one’s response to the situation *now* doesn’t mean that everyone will come to the same conclusion. Obviously. But what seems to happen is, if you don’t voice the correct ideas about what should be done, then you are a racist who obviously hasn’t thought about it or decided and who doesn’t care.

So this is the racial situation *now*....

I’m in Subway. My daughter who is ten says, "Look at that freaky cardboard thing," and points right at a black man eating his lunch. Then she says, "Oooo, scary."

He was sitting right in front of the big cardboard standee of the skinny guy holding his triple sized fat-pants.

So, what is worse? Realizing that the man might have heard "freaky" and "scary" and *might* think my daughter was talking about him but hoping not, but realizing that maybe this is going to go down as yet one more example of outright racial bigotry in America.

Or walking over to him and saying, "She was talking about the cardboard standee behind you, not you." And more or less giving the message that "I know you’re going to view everything in a racist context and assume that this white girl was afraid of a black man, which is stupid, but there you go."
 
Written By: Synova
URL: http://synova.blogspot.com
Erb, that was a dumb response.
 
Written By: Grimshaw
URL: http://
Obvious this technique of generating the "Willie Lynch Syndrome" works better than "waterboarding." I mean, it goes right into the genes of these slaves and causes their offspring to become "mentally weak and dependent, but physically strong" as well. Or at least that is what some would have us to believe and not believe on alternate days of the week.
 
Written By: Neo
URL: http://
I see the light.

Rev. Wright wasn’t "lynched" .. he was "Willie Lynch"-ed

The man is a victim and needs help. Obama should abandon his quest for the White House and help "Willie Lynch"-ed mentor. It’s a moral imperative.
Anything less would be a sin against God and "The Man."
 
Written By: Neo
URL: http://
Very convenient belief system. I can see why you’d be motivated to think that way. After all, if everything is somebody else’s problem, then you don’t have any responsibility to improve the society in which you live. Ignorance is bliss, I guess.
The simple fact is that there is essentially nothing I can do.

Right now it is time for blacks to fully integrate into mainstream American culture. I can’t do that for them, I can’t help them if they don’t want to, etc.

The best things I can do at this point is to vote against leftist traps like welfare and affirmitive action, which basically means voting Republican (not that the Rs are perfect in this, but they are better than the Donkey Party).
 
Written By: Don
URL: http://
Very convenient belief system. I can see why you’d be motivated to think that way. After all, if everything is somebody else’s problem, then you don’t have any responsibility to improve the society in which you live. Ignorance is bliss, I guess.
In America, everyone has an opportunity to succeed or fail.
It’s their choice.

It’s the same mentality that brought about the need for the "missionary position" that has some still trying to teach some folks something that they knew well enough already.
 
Written By: Neo
URL: http://
"then you don’t have any responsibility to improve the society in which you live."
No, I don’t have any responsibility to improve society. Society has not been entrusted to me by anyone for any reason. Any improving I do of society will be because of my own self-interests.
 
Written By: Grimshaw
URL: http://
the formerly repressed community
Oh dear lord.

THAT’S THE THINKING THAT GETS PEOPLE INTO TROUBLE.

 
Written By: shark
URL: http://
Over the weekend, in order to counteract the rotten stench of reading the writings of the racist James Cone, I read Clarence Thomas’s memoir, "My Grandfather’s Son."

Talk about laying it out straight.

His grandfather took him and his brother in when Clarence was about nine.

The grandfather, well, he knew the world, and he knew the deep South. He knew the fates that awaited blacks. He knew Jim Crow. He knew the dangers of even going near whites. But the one thing "Daddy," as Thomas called him, was not, was a bullsh*t individual. He took his life totally onto his own shoulders, and that’s what he taught the boys to do as well. He kept them working, he kept after them, and he definitely kept them away from trouble.

Amazing stuff.

And Clarence Thomas is a man who knows what work is. Academically, he never stopped studying. The nuns who taught him in grade school pushed him. Daddy pushed him. He pushed himself. He did not graduate from Yale Law School by accident, and I think more than anything else in his life he regrets being treated as an "affirmative action" admission there. Thinks that it dogged him right into the Supreme Court.

The memoir is a tribute to Daddy and his wife Aunt Tina and everything that they did for Thomas and his brother.

The evolution of Thomas’s thought about being black in America, from becoming an angry young black man at Holy Cross to gaining control of what he calls the angry beast that black men harbor to finding his own way, and his own thoughts along that way, is fascinating. One poignant moment comes when he discovers Thomas Sowell and realizes that he isn’t alone.

I recommend it. It’s a blunt book about race, blunt about the black experience, blunt as well about the racial grievance industry that demands that everyone think one way about race. And in the end it’s really a simple story about one old man who shaped his grandsons with iron will to be their own men.
 
Written By: Martin McPhillips
URL: http://mcphillips.blogspot.com/
No, I don’t have any responsibility to improve society. Society has not been entrusted to me by anyone for any reason. Any improving I do of society will be because of my own self-interests.


EXACTLY!!!


Our responsibility, should we choose to accept it, is to decide whether the cost to our current society will be greater if we address the problem, or if we ignore it. It’s not a simple equation, because ignoring it is not free, we just pay in different ways.

This is completely self serving, if I deem that it will cost more to reverse the effects of institutional repression on a group within the society than to build more prisons, gated communities, pay for more police officers, security in schools, etc, then action is warranted.

I agree that we should not take actions that will create dependencies, but I do not agree that we should do nothing.

Affirmative Action is a way of rewarding initiative, not a hand out, but a way of getting more people from this community out of the cycle.

I am also quite comfortable with eliminating AA using race as a qualifier and make it purely economic. It would have the same result with less resentment.

It is wrong to think that because we have eliminated institutional repression that the effects disappear immediately, and it is also wrong think that addressing those affects is not self serving for the rest of society.

I’m not talking about altruism.


 
Written By: Captin Sarcastic
URL: http://
No, I don’t have any responsibility to improve society.Society has not been entrusted to me by anyone for any reason. Any improving I do of society will be because of my own self-interests.
It’s in your self-interest to recognize that we are part of a society wherein your opportunities, capacities, and limits are in large part socially constructed. Even who you are is a product of being in a western culture and learning the values and ideas around you. That’s true for all of us, we are part of a culture, linked whether we like it or not, or accept it or not. Moreover, if you buy into a dichotomy where it’s "society = big government, self-interest = radical individualism" then you will lose. Those wanting an expanding government will win that battle. And the reason we have a problem with government growing too powerful is that far too many people don’t recognize that the dichotomy above is a false dichotomy, one can take responsibility for being part of something bigger than just a bunch of discrete individuals interacting like billiard balls with will power. One can believe in that responsibility without thinking big government should be the way to improve things.

Again, the radical individual approach cannot win in our political environment. You paint the dichotomy as ’individualism vs. collectivism’ and you’ve created a false dichotomy, and you’re on the side destined to lose. Don’t go that route.

Don and Neo — what we can do is to stop thinking that we need to find a big S "SOLUTION." That desire is what pushes people to want government to decide. Rather, let’s just practically try to understand the different perspectives and maybe small actions over time will lead to less disparities between blacks and whites in terms of power and wealth. Because, frankly, it CAN’T be all individualist since there is such a difference in stats between the status of blacks and whites. There must be an impact of past oppression as it persists in the culture and the community. We’re all in this together.

Synova, I agree, one shouldn’t be paranoid about appearing or having kids appear to be politically incorrect. The first thing in moving towards real understanding and conversation is to ditch the whole PC thing.
 
Written By: Scott Erb
URL: http://faculty.umf.maine.edu/~erb/blog.htm
Boris discovers the analytically secure propostion:
It’s in your self-interest to recognize that we are part of a society wherein your opportunities, capacities, and limits are in large part socially constructed.
Oh, that’s fascinating, Boris. You say society is largely social in nature?

Put the old (c) next to that, Boris. There’s got to be some money in it.
 
Written By: Martin McPhillips
URL: http://mcphillips.blogspot.com/
Boris tells the blog about the problem he doesn’t have:
the radical individual approach cannot win in our political environment.
But don’t feel left out among the individualists, Boris, you’ve certainly found your own way to lose.

So, as I’m sure you’ll soon enough come to think of it, you are a winner of a loser. In other words, even as you lose, you win. Much as occurs, in your mind, in your "honest discussion and debate."
 
Written By: Martin McPhillips
URL: http://mcphillips.blogspot.com/
The fact is that blacks in America are not like Asian immigrants who escaped repression, they are more like the Asians that did not emigrate, and you can blame them all day if you makes you feel better about yourself, but there is a causal factor, and our nation, or society, though not us individually, are responsible for those affects.
Then why do we keep running into people like Rev. Wright? Upper middle-class Philadelphia upbringing, mom’s a vice principal (in the 60s, no less), went to mostly Jewish (uh oh) Central High and succeeded. Tell me what he’s so pissed off about? I mean, other than to create a captive audience that embraces repression politics.
It’s a blunt book about race, blunt about the black experience, blunt as well about the racial grievance industry that demands that everyone think one way about race.
... and it’s a book by the wrong black man who will not be included in the public debate about race because his past is all wrong. Clarence Thomas is not an "authentic" black man because he and his relatives rejected racial politics... and succeeded. And it keeps happening over and over. Larry Elder, Walter Williams, John McWhorter, they all keep saying the same thing. But since they aren’t "authentic", no one listens.
 
Written By: rob
URL: http://
Rob:
Clarence Thomas is not an "authentic" black man because he and his relatives rejected racial politics... and succeeded.
I don’t think that Thomas, or his family, out and out rejected the importance for blacks of race in politics. "Daddy" was a paid-up member of the NAACP who put his own precious home up to secure bail for student protesters.

Clarence Thomas is nobody’s fool, however. He saw right through white liberals, just as he saw the shrugs of conservatives when it came to blacks. The lesson that his grandfather taught him was to do what needed to be done for himself and to pass that on to the next generation. There was nothing to be gained by hating or blaming "Whitey," even if there was plenty of blame to give and plenty of reason to hate.

But it’s pretty clear that the way things evolved from the late ’60s onward made racial grievance into an industry that Thomas got on the wrong side of, and he knew it, and persevered in his way nonetheless.
 
Written By: Martin McPhillips
URL: http://mcphillips.blogspot.com/
Then why do we keep running into people like Rev. Wright? Upper middle-class Philadelphia upbringing, mom’s a vice principal (in the 60s, no less), went to mostly Jewish (uh oh) Central High and succeeded. Tell me what he’s so pissed off about? I mean, other than to create a captive audience that embraces repression politics.
Anger on behalf of others is the very definition of righteous anger.

Martin Sheen is angry too, about the same things, and he’s not even black.

And of course there’s a lot of righteous anger by Evangelicals about things like homosexuality, that have no effect on them.

If you saw Americans being harmed and believed they were being subjected to injustices, though you yourself had escaped their plight, would it be wrong to be angry on their behalf?
even if there was plenty of blame to give and plenty of reason to hate.
At times, righteous anger leads to social change, though at other times it is unproductive.

The sad thing is that we are talking about words.

Time was, a black man had to start a riot to get his willie lynched like this.



 
Written By: Captin Sarcastic
URL: http://
Don and Neo — what we can do is to stop thinking that we need to find a big S "SOLUTION."
I’m already down with that.
Because, frankly, it CAN’T be all individualist since there is such a difference in stats between the status of blacks and whites.
Really, everything is individualist. Culture and society are simply abstractions. That said, culture is a useful abstraction, because it describes the fact that groups of individuals have shared knowledge and beliefs.

The reason for the different stats between whites in blacks is due to the difference in the cultures, the shared knowledge and beliefs. Race baiters like Wright earn a living pushing blacks away from mainstream culture and towards a margionalized culture.
There must be an impact of past oppression as it persists in the culture and the community.
Yes. In a sense, but black culture has been continuing itself in the margins for quite a while, with blacks punishing other blacks for "acting white", "thinking white", oreos, etc.

At this point, white oppression receeds farther into the past, and the key problem faced by blacks is the black subculture.
We’re all in this together.
Not really. At the end of the day we are really all here for our selves and our own family.

To put it another way, I don’t want my neighbor’s children to starve, but if it comes down to my children vs theirs, guess what my answer would be?

What we currently have is a society that does an excellent job of providing incentives for playing nice and providing value to others, and we have a common interest in defense, etc. But to state that we are all in this toghether is simplistic and naive.
 
Written By: Don
URL: http://
How about righteous anger at the way the hostile rhetoric harms the process of eliminating racism in America, Captain?

How about righteous anger that Wright makes it worse and keeps it worse longer for more people?

Can we be righteously angry about that? On behalf of other people?
 
Written By: Synova
URL: http://synova.blogspot.com
Our responsibility, should we choose to accept it, is to decide whether the cost to our current society will be greater if we address the problem, or if we ignore it. It’s not a simple equation, because ignoring it is not free, we just pay in different ways.
We would be better off if the left and the Democratic Party ignored it. For the simple reason that they can’t even seriously discuss the problem, let alone solutions.

And, as Erb pointed out, big "S" solutions are not likely.

 
Written By: Don
URL: http://
"your opportunities, capacities, and limits are in large part socially constructed."
This isn’t true.

 
Written By: Grimshaw
URL: http://
Don, given the social structure of society, I don’t think you can separate black and white subcultures as being completely separate. They are interrelated, especially given the history of oppression and the material and cultural artifacts of its aftermath.

Grimshaw, to prove you are indeed a social product as well as an individual, try this thought experiment: You are born in Cairo to a poor, but devout Muslim family, and you attend a radical Madrassa. Your brother is shot by the Egyptian police. Would you be the same person — hold the same beliefs, values, and think the same way you do now? Change the circumstances of our births — class, nation, religion, etc., — and we would be different people. That doesn’t mean there isn’t an individual identity there too, certainly there is a biological entity. But what we become is very much shaped by the world around us. Think about the thought experiment, I think you’ll have to agree that there is no way you’d be the same person if you were born in that situation and had very different life experiences. That proves that much of what we are is socially constructed.
 
Written By: Scott Erb
URL: http://faculty.umf.maine.edu/~erb/blog.htm
Synova, I think you’re on solider ground here. There is a huge difference between rage or criticism of Wright, and the attempt by some to take soundbites and try to use them to attack Obama via Wright. In an ideal situation your rage would first be counter by his, and then as the two of you would dialogue, you’d start to realize that the other is not a caricature (a typical white, or a black radical) but a real person who is almost certainly driven by strong convictions held for a reason. And if both are willing to be self-critical as well as other-critical, you’d both probably come away from such a discussion with different perspectives. That would be, in microcosm, what I think our society needs.
 
Written By: Scott Erb
URL: http://faculty.umf.maine.edu/~erb/blog.htm
Boris visits the bald men have no hair department:
given the social structure of society,
That’s followed by evidence of a 6th grade education.
 
Written By: Martin McPhillips
URL: http://mcphillips.blogspot.com/
Boris:
try this thought experiment: You are born in Cairo to a poor, but devout Muslim family, and you attend a radical Madrassa. Your brother is shot by the Egyptian police.
Try this thought experiment, Boris: You are an academic numbnuts, with the imagination of a toad and the intellect of a congenital convenience store clerk.
 
Written By: Martin McPhillips
URL: http://mcphillips.blogspot.com/
How about righteous anger that Wright makes it worse and keeps it worse longer for more people?
In general, I absolutely agree with you. In this specific instance, I find it hard to agree with you. The reason I say this is the parishioners, and the community served by this church in Chicago. If this church were as pervasively angry as your rhetoric would indicate, that community would be a hotbed of racial unrest, and it’s simply not. Chicago at one time had the worst race problems in the country, now, although race is still a huge element of local politics, the people of Chicago are getting along.

This church has been a strong force for good in that community. So although I recognize that these soundbites are vitriolic and downright nasty, there is no way that could be representative of the church, or Wright, as a whole, otherwise it would be evident in the community. This is not just a church in Chicago, this is the largest congregation and it sits in the heart of the poorest areas of Chicago. Simply put, thought these remarks do not inspire racial harmony, the church as a whole, clearly does.

Let’s look at the "Black Value System" without trying to find a way to make it racist, but at what it actually says to members of that community...

1.Commitment to God - this could be (in fact is) in the Boy Scouts handbook

2.Commitment to the Black Community - Is helping your community a bad thing?

3.Commitment to the Black Family - Yes, avoid broken homes and single parent families, something white folks have been telling black people to do for decades.
4.Dedication to the Pursuit of Education - Improve yourself

5.Dedication to the Pursuit of Excellence - Try as hard as you can

6.Adherence to the Black Work Ethic - Work hard

7.Commitment to Self-Discipline and Self-Respect - Not if it feels good, do it, but do what is right.

8.Disavowal of the Pursuit of “Middleclassness” - When you gain success as a result of the first 6 values, don’t forget where you came from.

9.Pledge to make the fruits of all developing and acquired skills available to the Black Community - When you gain success as a result of the first 6 values, don’t forget where you came from.

10.Pledge to Allocate Regularly, a Portion of Personal Resources for Strengthening and Supporting Black Institutions - When you gain success as a result of the first 6 values, don’t forget where you came from.

11.Pledge allegiance to all Black leadership who espouse and embrace the Black Value System - Praise leasders who follow the ten values above.


12.Personal commitment to embracement of the Black Value System - Follow the 11 values above


As far as I am concerned, this church, in that community, under Reverent Wright, made a pact with the community that it would help people improve their lot, and it asked in return (not demanded, just asked), that they in turn help others improve their lot.

Now black churches that do great works may also be a place to occasionally vent frustrations peacefully, and in that, some of the more fiery rhetoric may be cathartic, and as long as the overriding message is love and harmony, that can be a good thing.

My honest personal opinion on this is that there are very few people who are running with this narrative that actually believe a word they say, but feel that it it has given them license to call Obama a racist, even though Obama has never uttered a word even slightly reminiscent of Wright’s more fiery moments.

Not only is this Machiavellian effort sad in it’s attempt to destroy one of the few clearly gifted leaders we have seen in recent history, (though maybe he isn’t ready to be President) but as collateral damage, willing to destroy this church, which is a force for good, in a place that could have been very bad.

This is what black churches are in America, forces for good, that also occasionally vent about real or perceived injustices. If we cannot accept this then the question of whether America is ready for a black President has been answered, and the answer is no.

I hope we are better than this. Not so much that I hope Obama wins, but that this race baiting is not the reason he loses.







 
Written By: Captin Sarcastic
URL: http://
" but it has been well documented that long term institutional repression has a profound impact on the repressed group, and these affects to do go away quickly on their own and are passed from generation to generation even after the repression ends"

I am sure you can provide a source for this documentation.



"they are more like the Asians that did not emigrate,"

Who also have very little social pathology. You know, strong families, work ethic, etc. Perhaps only white men are capable of the kind of oppression that causes all those ill effects.
 
Written By: timactual
URL: http://
I am sure you can provide a source for this documentation.
I suggest you read the book, "White-Washing Race: The Myth of a Color-Blind Society" by Michael K. Brown, Martin Carnoy, Elliott Currie, Troy Duster, David B. Oppenheimer, Marjorie M. Shultz, and David Wellman

I guarantee that if you read it with a slightly open mind, you will never again comment in the cavalier way you so often do.
Who also have very little social pathology. You know, strong families, work ethic, etc. Perhaps only white men are capable of the kind of oppression that causes all those ill effects.
I was speaking about immigrants who were members of repressed groups within societies in Asia, not whole populations who were or are repressed. When an entire population is repressed and the repression ends, the population begins on a relatively equal footing, so their is no competititve chasm between the former oppressed and the oppressor group.

You have actually strengthened my argument, noting that when Asians leave their caste system and come to America, or anywhere else, the effects of their institutional repression disappear. When African Americans leave America for parts of Europe, the results are the same, the effects of the institutional repression disappear. These are, as I said, the exceptions.

 
Written By: Captin Sarcastic
URL: http://
"Try this thought experiment, Boris: You are an academic numbnuts, with the imagination of a toad and the intellect of a congenital convenience store clerk pizza thief."
There, Martin. That’s fixed now.
 
Written By: Billy Beck
URL: http://www.two—four.net/weblog.php
Sarcastic — I gotta admit that if you ignore or excuse all the racist, anti-American, wacko, vicious aspects of Trinity United, it’s a doggone good little megachurch.
 
Written By: huxley
URL: http://
Meanwhile, whatever allowances Prof. Erb and Sarcastic believe Americans should make for Rev. Wright and however appreciative they believe Americans should be for Obama’s historic speech, Obama’s favorable/unfavorable ratings have moved from 48%/47% the day after the speech to 46%/52% almost a week later. See Rasmussen.

Obama is disliked almost as much as Hillary and that’s saying something.

In elections, the unfavorable rating has more effect on voters. If his unfavorable rating > 50% holds, Obama has been seriously wounded. Prior to Pastorgate, Obama’s unfavorables were in the low to mid forties.
 
Written By: huxley
URL: http://
A "values system" per the Grand Imperial Wizard:

=====
These White Ethics must be taught and exemplified in homes, churches, nurseries and schools, wherever Whites are gathered. They consist of the following concepts:

1. Commitment to God. “The God of our weary years” will give us the strength to give up prayerful passivism and become White Christian Activists, soldiers for White freedom and the dignity of all humankind.


2. Commitment to the White Community. The highest level of achievement for any White person must be a contribution of strength and continuity of the White Community.

3. Commitment to the White Family. The White family circle must generate strength, stability and love, despite the uncertainty of externals, because these characteristics are required if the developing person is to withstand warping by our racist competitive society.

Those Whites who are blessed with membership in a strong family unit must reach out and expand that blessing to the less fortunate.

4. Dedication to the Pursuit of Education. We must forswear anti-intellectualism. Continued survival demands that each White person be developed to the utmost of his/her mental potential despite the inadequacies of the formal education process. “Real education” fosters understanding of ourselves as well as every aspect of our environment. Also, it develops within us the ability to fashion concepts and tools for better utilization of our resources, and more effective solutions to our problems. Since the majority of Whites have been denied such learning, White Education must include elements that produce high school graduates with marketable skills, a trade or qualifications for apprenticeships, or proper preparation for college.

Basic education for all Whites should include Mathematics, Science, Logic, General Semantics, Participative Politics, Economics and Finance, and the Care and Nurture of White minds.

5. Dedication to the Pursuit of Excellence. To the extent that we individually reach for, even strain for excellence, we increase, geometrically, the value and resourcefulness of the White Community. We must recognize the relativity of one’s best; this year’s best can be bettered next year. Such is the language of growth and development. We must seek to excel in every endeavor.

6. Adherence to the White Work Ethic. “It is becoming harder to find qualified people to work in Chicago.” Whether this is true or not, it represents one of the many reasons given by businesses and industries for deserting the Chicago area. We must realize that a location with good facilities, adequate transportation and a reputation for producing skilled workers will attract industry. We are in competition with other cities, states and nations for jobs. High productivity must be a goal of the White workforce.

7. Commitment to Self-Discipline and Self-Respect. To accomplish anything worthwhile requires self-discipline. We must be a community of self-disciplined persons if we are to actualize and utilize our own human resources, instead of perpetually submitting to exploitation by others. Self-discipline, coupled with a respect for self, will enable each of us to be an instrument of White Progress and a model for White Youth.

8. Disavowal of the Pursuit of “Middleclassness.” Classic methodology on control of captives teaches that captors must be able to identify the “talented tenth” of those subjugated, especially those who show promise of providing the kind of leadership that might threaten the captor’s control.

Those so identified are separated from the rest of the people by:

i. Killing them off directly, and/or fostering a social system that encourages them to kill off one another.

ii. Placing them in concentration camps, and/or structuring an economic environment that induces captive youth to fill the jails and prisons.

iii. Seducing them into a socioeconomic class system which, while training them to earn more dollars, hypnotizes them into believing they are better than others and teaches them to think in terms of “we” and “they” instead of “us.”
iv. So, while it is permissible to chase “middleclassness” with all our might, we must avoid the third separation method – the psychological entrapment of White “middleclassness.” If we avoid this snare, we will also diminish our “voluntary” contributions to methods A and B. And more importantly, White people no longer will be deprived of their birthright: the leadership, resourcefulness and example of their own talented persons.

9. Pledge to Make the Fruits of All Developing and Acquired Skills Available to the White Community.

10. Pledge to Allocate Regularly, a Portion of Personal Resources for Strengthening and Supporting White Institutions.

11. Pledge Allegiance to All White Leadership Who Espouse and Embrace the White Value System.

12. Personal Commitment to Embracement of the White Value System. To measure the worth and validity of all activity in terms of positive contributions to the general welfare of the White Community and the Advancement of White People towards freedom.
=====

That is Wright’s "black values system" in reverse. There is no basis for anything but racism in a "black" or "white" "values system."

Wright’s "black values system" is a reflection, as Wright himself admits, of James Cone’s "black theology," which is racist to its core.
 
Written By: Martin McPhillips
URL: http://mcphillips.blogspot.com/
A "values system" per the Grand Imperial Wizard:
McPhillips, I know you are not this dumb, so you must simply be this slimy.

Black in America is an ethnicity, like Irish or Italian or Polish, as such, is perfectly PC in having a community around that ethnicity. When you replace black with white, you are not making an equivelant comparison. White in this context is not an ethnicity and the only defining characteristic of white exclusiveness is black exclusion.

Blacks are not welcome to white supremacist churches, but whites are welcomed at TUCC.

We see Irish for McCain and think nothing of it, the same would apply for blacks.

But go ahead and make this meme the center of your blog life, I think your attachement to this defines both you, and this issue, very well.
Sarcastic — I gotta admit that if you ignore or excuse all the racist, anti-American, wacko, vicious aspects of Trinity United, it’s a doggone good little megachurch.
The church, nor Wright, is racist, they use "The White Man" as symbolism of those in power, but hold no individual animosity for people who are white.

The church is not anti-American, it is opposed to specific government policies that it think should be changed.

Yes, some of the stuff is truly wacky, like the AIDS conspiracy theory, BUT, if you learned in your formative years that the government was taking people of your specific ethnicity and doing siphilis experiments like the Tuskegee Experiment up until 1971, that only stopped because it was exposed, very little becomes unbelievable.

And again, this is non-violent venting, with no call to any action except legal activism within the system.

So yes, this is a doggone good little megachurch that you’re trying to destroy.

 
Written By: Captin Sarcastic
URL: http://
Someone not paying attention wrote this nonsense:
Black in America is an ethnicity, like Irish or Italian or Polish, as such, is perfectly PC in having a community around that ethnicity. When you replace black with white, you are not making an equivelant comparison. White in this context is not an ethnicity and the only defining characteristic of white exclusiveness is black exclusion.
The "black values system" is based on, according to Jeremiah Wright, the "black theology" of James Cone, three of whose books I’ve spent much of the past week with. Everything in the work of Cone is based on black vs. white (not, for instance, black vis a vis Irish or Italian). Cone’s work is the most thoroughly racist blathering since the blathering of the Klan and the various leftover white supremacists who pop up from time to time.

Your attempt — and not for the first time — to minimize this as being like Irish, or Polish, or some other European national ethnicity is to miss the point entirely.

When you hear Wright describe Jesus as a "black man" who was killed by "Romans, who were Italian, which means they were European, which means they were white," you are hearing a the racist ideology of Cone, which is akin to German National Socialist ideology, not to something like a bunch of Italians getting together after Mass at the local Knights of Columbus building for some pasta. Indeed, those Italians might harbor racial prejudices and enjoy the company of other Italians as do many blacks in the United States, but they do not espouse a racist theology or ideology.

So, the replacement of "Black" with "White" in the "black values system" makes the point dead-on perfect.
 
Written By: Martin McPhillips
URL: http://mcphillips.blogspot.com/
So yes, this is a doggone good little megachurch that you’re trying to destroy.
This is a racist church that bases its "Christianity" on racist "black theology." The principal "theologian" of this racist black supremacist "theology" is James Cone.

But it’s a free country. Even white people can still get together and teach white supremacy, but they will do so only at the very narrowest margins of American society and the vast majority of people will reject them.

So no one is trying to "destroy" the church. The church is the focus of attention because a 20-year and counting member of it is running for President of the United States. He’s running as a racial reconciliationist, in the tradition of MLK, but he belongs to a racist church, an instant disqualifier for the presidency.
 
Written By: Martin McPhillips
URL: http://mcphillips.blogspot.com/
Erb,

Your ’proof’ of your earlier statement does not follow. That who I am is influenced by where I live and how I grew up is not what I disputed. I disputed this:
"your opportunities, capacities, and limits are in large part socially constructed."
I don’t think anyone’s opportunities, capacities, and limits have much to do with social construction. Whether I grew up a poor Muslim in Cairo or a rich atheist in Maryland has little to do with my absolute opportunities, capacities, and limits. Those are far more biological. It may be harder in one situation vs. the other, but limits are still limits.

 
Written By: Grimshaw
URL: http://
"I was speaking about immigrants who were members of repressed groups within societies in Asia,"

Like the Meo, etc? Which of these immigrant groups has the social pathology you claim they do?
 
Written By: timactual
URL: http://
Don, given the social structure of society, I don’t think you can separate black and white subcultures as being completely separate. They are interrelated, especially given the history of oppression and the material and cultural artifacts of its aftermath.
Of course they are interrelated. And not "especially given the history of oppression and the material and cultural artifacts of its aftermath", but much more fundamentally because the black subculture is largely based upon the Southern white culture.
 
Written By: Don
URL: http://
This is what black churches are in America, forces for good, that also occasionally vent about real or perceived injustices. If we cannot accept this then the question of whether America is ready for a black President has been answered, and the answer is no.
America is ready for a black president; that was already proven by Obama’s success in the primary despite his lack of qualifications.

That doesn’t mean we are ready for a black president with racist or wako beliefs, and with Obama’s history with this church, it is hard to buy the idea that his ideas are mainstream.
 
Written By: Don
URL: http://
That doesn’t mean we are ready for a black president with racist or wako beliefs, and with Obama’s history with this church, it is hard to buy the idea that his ideas are mainstream.
His church is mainstream within the black community, so excluding that, only a black person who was been never part of the black community would qualify.

Further, show me ONE example of Obama espousing any racist or "wako" beliefs?

You can’t.

This whole meme is about assigning Wright’s rhetoric to Obama, and when Wright’s rhetoric was not incendiary enough, people are reaching back 30 years to James Cone, and assigning Cone’s rhetoric to Obama, as if Wright and the TUCC were strict adherents to Cone’s theology and have not evolved in the slightest since that time.

Sad, pathetic, discriminatory.
 
Written By: Captin Sarcastic
URL: http://
His church is mainstream within the black community,
No it’s not.
This whole meme is about assigning Wright’s rhetoric to Obama, and when Wright’s rhetoric was not incendiary enough, people are reaching back 30 years to James Cone, and assigning Cone’s rhetoric to Obama, as if Wright and the TUCC were strict adherents to Cone’s theology and have not evolved in the slightest since that time.
The issue is Obama, a candidate for President of the United States, being a 20-year and counting member of this racist church. And Jeremiah Wright himself has insisted that if you want to understand the church you must read James Cone. There’s no "reaching back 30 years to James Cone" about it. Wright cites Cone in the present; Cone is in fact cited on the church’s web page, or at lest was as late as three or four days ago.

Wright states directly that to understand the "black values system" you must read Cone.

Well, here, read some Cone:
====
[I]f [white people] are going to be in a relationship with God, they must enter by means of their black brothers, who are a manifestation of God’s presence on earth. The assumption that one can know God without knowing blackness is the basic heresy of the white churches. They want God without blackness, Christ without obedience, love without death. What they fail to realize is that in America, God’s revelation on earth has always been black, red, or some other shocking shade, but never white. Whiteness, as revealed in the history of America, is the expression of what is wrong with man. It is a symbol of man’s depravity. God cannot be white, even though white churches have portrayed him as white. When we look at what whiteness has done to the minds of men in this country, we can see clearly what the New Testament meant when it spoke of the principalities and powers. To speak of Satan and his powers becomes not just a way of speaking but a fact of reality. When we can see a people who are being controlled by an ideology of whiteness, then we know what reconciliation must mean. The coming of Christ means a denial of what we thought we were. It means destroying the white devil in us. Reconciliation to God means that white people are prepared to deny themselves (whiteness), take up the cross (blackness) and follow Christ (black ghetto).
====

That is from the closing pages (page 150) of Cone’s "Black Theology and Black Power." Most of the book is spun with and from gibberish like that. But when you hear the "controversial" sermons of Wright, that is the context. Wright’s racist comments don’t come out of left field, they are derived from Cone’s "black theology."

That also describes the theological pathway along which Wright led Barack Obama to Christ, because that is the interpretation of Christianity that Wright espouses and teaches. James Cone’s version of Christianity.

As I’ve said before, Obama needed to be out of that church at least fifteen years ago. That’s pretty generous, considering that a person with common sense would have been out the door before the end of the first sermon. It’s also pretty generous considering that a white candidate who ever belonged to an equivalent white Christian Identity church would be considered a fringe candidate and beneath contempt, no matter how clever his rhetoric or how polished his oratory.

And Thomas Sowell has a few choice words for defenders of Obama and Wright:
Among the many desperate gambits by defenders of Senator Obama and Jeremiah Wright is to say that Wright’s words have a “resonance” in the black community.

There was a time when the Ku Klux Klan’s words had a resonance among whites, not only in the South but in other states. Some people joined the KKK in order to advance their political careers. Did that make it OK? Is it all just a matter of whose ox is gored?

While many whites may be annoyed by Jeremiah Wright’s words, a year from now most of them will probably have forgotten about him. But many blacks who absorb his toxic message can still be paying for it, big-time, for decades to come.
 
Written By: Martin McPhillips
URL: http://mcphillips.blogspot.com/
Black in America is an ethnicity, like Irish or Italian or Polish
No. If you choose to define Black or African-American as an ethnic group, then white or caucasian is also an ethnicity. Irish, Italian, and Polish would then be nationalities, like South African, Ethiopian, and Jamaican. African American includes all descendants of the latter countries, including Jamaica for some reason, but only if one’s skin is dark. Otherwise, your ethnicity is caucasian just like those whose heritage is Italian, Irish, or Polish.
BUT, if you learned in your formative years that the government was taking people of your specific ethnicity and doing siphilis experiments like the Tuskegee Experiment up until 1971, that only stopped because it was exposed, very little becomes unbelievable.
Kind of like the radiation experiments on the terminally ill, disabled children, and the like. This included people of my specific ethnicity. I guess this gives me the freedom to believe every conspiracy theory ever espoused. Also, despite the fact that atrocities have been committed against all people, I can cherry pick those instances that included only my ethnicity to make the case that I am a victim due to my ethnicity only, instead of the fact that 1. some human beings are despicable and without morals and 2. human beings make up government. But, now I have trivialized the Tuskegee experiments, so pull the card out.
 
Written By: Is
URL: http://
"Further, show me ONE example of Obama espousing any racist or ’wako’ beliefs?"
Why should he when he’s got creeps like Wright to do it for him?
 
Written By: Billy Beck
URL: http://www.two—four.net/weblog.php
Why should he when he’s got creeps like Wright to do it for him?
Yeah, like Wright was do Obama a favor?

Aren’t you someone who prides himself on logical thought or something?

You may want to bone up.

Or does Obama have you so flustered that you given up on rationality?
 
Written By: Captin Sarcastic
URL: http://
Further, show me ONE example of Obama espousing any racist or "wako" beliefs?
For starters, trying to compare Wright’s public spewing of racist hatred from the pulpit of a church to some private off-handed comment made by his grandmother.

People focused mostly on the idiotic moral equivalence and inanity of the comparison, but it is reflective of Obama’s church indoctrination, which can be assumed as the backdrop for his defensiveness about Wright’s off-the-wall racism. Granny just happened to be a convenient and emotional symbol to throw down in Obama’s rear-guard action against the facts. Wacko.

An equally wacko statement was trying to say that everyone’s pastor or priest or rabbi had said things like Wright. That’s delusional. And wacko. Not just so out of proportion as to suggest ideology-addled reasoning.
 
Written By: Martin McPhillips
URL: http://mcphillips.blogspot.com/
Further, show me ONE example of Obama espousing any racist or "wako" beliefs?
Staying in that church for 20 years, for one thing.

And his lame response whan called on his pastor’s hate speech.

It’s like Ron Paul and the racist newsletters; he may not have wrote ’em but they were published by him for way too long.

Obama was tied to that church for way too long for this to be rationalized away.
 
Written By: Don
URL: http://
Add to the above, Obama’s wife has made some outragous anti-American statements.
 
Written By: Don
URL: http://
I find Obama/Wright’s "Audacity of Hope" not exactly wacko, but weird. The bleak, despairing way Obama, his wife, and Wright talk about America makes it sound like they are looking out on the grim landscape of the dustbowl depression, Jim Crow, America of the 1930s. Never mind that all three of them have had quite privileged lives in America, thank you very much.

When the people of the world think of hope, they think of America. How exactly is audacity required to have hope in America? Why are millions of people streaming to America, legally and illegally, if not for hope?

Obama’s rise to his presidential candidacy—maybe even the presidency itself next year—is a fairy tale that could happen in few other, if any, countries.

 
Written By: huxley
URL: http://
huxley:
The bleak, despairing way Obama, his wife, and Wright talk about America makes it sound like they are looking out on the grim landscape of the dustbowl depression, Jim Crow, America of the 1930s. Never mind that all three of them have had quite privileged lives in America, thank you very much.
Selling "blackness" as a religion, where God is black and his incarnation on earth are black people, and whiteness is Satan, well, what you have there is a cult. Obama merely cleaned up the methods and took them on the campaign trail, forming the cult of Obama. "Whitey" still lurks, rich in his corporate holdings, in the "grim landscape."

There are a lot of interesting questions connected to this. If Obama was merely a self-serving politician, why didn’t he dump the church a decade and a half ago? And since he is still with the church, and says that Wright led him to Christ, how can we know, without administering sodium pentathol, how far Obama has bought into "black theology?"

If Obama has bought into "black theology" he is a racist. If Obama has not bought into "black theology" why is he still at a church, including taking his daughters there, that is based in "black theology?"

Why would anyone give Obama the benefit of the doubt about this? Fine, if he’s a guy you meet at the corner diner, and he says he doesn’t buy the church teachings, you shrug and wonder what the hell that means. (See again the Klan analogy: "I just go to the rallies, I don’t buy the racial stuff.")

But as a candidate for President of the United States, you don’t give someone in that situation the benefit of the doubt. His choice of that church, and his choice more pointedly to stay with that church for 20 years, means he is out.

The videos of Wright spewing from the pulpit are just phase one. The next phase introduces voters to the "black theology," which is, to paraphrase the old slogan for Jolt Cola: All the vitriol and twice the hate (of, say, the Nation of Islam and Farrakhan).

This story doesn’t go away until Obama goes away. He’s hiding, and apparently always has during his national public life, behind the fear of race in this country and more particularly among Democrats. It amazes me that he expected to get away with it. (As I pointed out elsewhere, if Bill Clinton was the first black president, Obama is the first black Bill Clinton.)

But regardless what anyone has or will learn about "black theology" (there’s always some benefit in learning about anything, or so they say), the only reason we are here talking about any of this is because the Democratic Party is a rotten shambles that promotes people without bothering to ask who they are. They get the bloody press kit, and it’s off to the races. Look at the embrace that Kennedy imbecile gave Obama.

It’s enough to make me vomit.
 
Written By: Martin McPhillips
URL: http://mcphillips.blogspot.com/
But as a candidate for President of the United States, you don’t give someone in that situation the benefit of the doubt.
That’s the bottom line for me.

If Obama buys into Wright’s ravings, then Obama is some kind of anti-American racist and he’s out.

If he doesn’t buy Wright’s ravings, but remains a member of the congregation for twenty years and makes Wright a personal friend, spiritual mentor and virtual family member, then Obama has terrible judgment and perhaps some character flaws, and he’s out.

I don’t like Wright and his little black power church in the dale, but I don’t care much either. However, I do care about who is president. That’s an ultra-selective position and for good reason. People get weeded out of it easily and that’s just the way it is.

I too am dumbfounded that the Democratic leadership has been so mindless as to allow such an unqualified, unknown junior senator with such an obvious red flag on his life to get this far.
 
Written By: huxley
URL: http://
I too am dumbfounded that the Democratic leadership has been so mindless as to allow such an unqualified, unknown junior senator with such an obvious red flag on his life to get this far.
Well, consider: in 2004 they ran a guy because he served in ’nam for ~3.5 months 35 years previously. Oh, and he essentially spit on his comrades-in-arms when he returned.

 
Written By: Don
URL: http://
Kerry was a senator for twenty years before his 2004 run. I don’t recall Kerry’s military service in Vietnam being the deciding factor in his nomination.
 
Written By: huxley
URL: http://

I don’t think anyone’s opportunities, capacities, and limits have much to do with social construction. Whether I grew up a poor Muslim in Cairo or a rich atheist in Maryland has little to do with my absolute opportunities, capacities, and limits. Those are far more biological.
That is the most absurd statement I’ve read recently. So, someone is born in a poor ghetto in Cairo or a rich suburb in New Jersey...that means little, it’s their biology that determines their opportunities, capacities and limits? Geez, that’s just stupid.
 
Written By: Scott Erb
URL: http://faculty.umf.maine.edu/~erb/blog.htm
So no one is trying to "destroy" the church. The church is the focus of attention because a 20-year and counting member of it is running for President of the United States. He’s running as a racial reconciliationist, in the tradition of MLK, but he belongs to a racist church, an instant disqualifier for the presidency.
Hey McPhillips, when Jeremiah was completing his service in the USMC, Martin Luther King was establishing the rhetoric on which Wright’s fiery rhetoric sprang from.


Martin Luther King, in his "Beyond Vietnam" speech delivered at New York’s Riverside Church on April 4, 1967
"I knew that I could never again raise my voice against the violence of the oppressed in the ghettos without having first spoken clearly to the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today: my own government."
As I said, this is mainstream.

So you are going to call Wright anti-American, and Obama, and you ahve already reached back to James Cone.

IS MLK on your hit list too?

MLK was wasn’t a white conservative, and he had sone very direct things to say about the government, right up there with Wright’s comments, and he was hated in his time, by people like you who now want people to hate Wright, for expressing a point of view that you disagree with.
From Vietnam to South Africa to Latin America, King said, the U.S. was "on the wrong side of a world revolution." King questioned "our alliance with the landed gentry of Latin America," and asked why the U.S. was suppressing revolutions "of the shirtless and barefoot people" in the Third World, instead of supporting them.
In foreign policy, King also offered an economic critique, complaining about "capitalists of the West investing huge sums of money in Asia, Africa and South America, only to take the profits out with no concern for the social betterment of the countries."
King’s economic bill of rights called for massive government jobs programs to rebuild America’s cities. He saw a crying need to confront a Congress that had demonstrated its "hostility to the poor" — appropriating "military funds with alacrity and generosity," but providing "poverty funds with miserliness."
No amount of gold could provide an adequate compensation for the exploitation and humiliation of the Negro in America down through the centuries…
"our nation was born in genocide,"
So if you’re going to try and take Obama down through Wright, go for it, but don’t pretend you are not accusing the whole of black America when you do it.

This destroy Obama meme is right out of the Turner Diaries and for the sake of our nation, I hope it fails.
 
Written By: Captin Sarcastic
URL: http://
Sarcastic — I think it was a mistake to make MLK into an American saint next to Abraham Lincoln for many of the reasons you list.

Nonetheless, MLK was a decent man who was non-violent and honest. I can’t imagine that he would pass on conspiracy theories like the US government creating AIDS or importing drugs to kill blacks. Nor can I imagine that he would preach with sexual slur and crude name-calling.

MLK did not focus exclusively on the black community and he spoke of a positive future in which the races were united. He did not preach the gospel of a black Jesus oppressed by a white enemy. "Chickens coming home to roost" was Malcolm X’s nasty line after the national tragedy of the JFK assassination, not MLK.

These are differences that make a very big difference.

Furthermore criticizing Wright, Wright’s theology and Trinity Church, and arguing that Obama should not be president, are not the same as hating Wright, Trinity or Obama, or trying to destroy them.
 
Written By: huxley
URL: http://
"Yeah, like Wright was do Obama a favor? Aren’t you someone who prides himself on logical thought or something?"
Check your stupid premises. You think that broad political marketability was the principal value to be moved for in this, and you’re not accounting at all for the natural deviousness of politicians with the bone in their teeth: this was always plausibly deniable in front of people like you.
 
Written By: Billy Beck
URL: http://www.two—four.net/weblog.php
The moron:
MLK was wasn’t a white conservative, and he had sone very direct things to say about the government, right up there with Wright’s comments, and he was hated in his time, by people like you who now want people to hate Wright, for expressing a point of view that you disagree with.
Martin Luther King’s work on civil rights was perfectly in sync with the mission at hand, which is why he is recognized today for his great leadership in that area. I admired him then and now for being the key person in breaking the stranglehold of segregation. He wasn’t the first. He wasn’t the last. But he got to the other side of the mountain in that regard.

As I came to understand much later, his involvement in the Vietnam War issue was regretable. But a lot of people got caught up in that and spoke a lot of nonsense about it, King included.

King’s point mission on civil rights was profound and carried out with perfect zeal.

Jeremiah Wright, by contrast, is a black separatist and a black supremacist and he’ll tell you himself exactly where to go to find that out:
[I]f [white people] are going to be in a relationship with God, they must enter by means of their black brothers, who are a manifestation of God’s presence on earth. The assumption that one can know God without knowing blackness is the basic heresy of the white churches. They want God without blackness, Christ without obedience, love without death. What they fail to realize is that in America, God’s revelation on earth has always been black, red, or some other shocking shade, but never white. Whiteness, as revealed in the history of America, is the expression of what is wrong with man. It is a symbol of man’s depravity. God cannot be white, even though white churches have portrayed him as white. When we look at what whiteness has done to the minds of men in this country, we can see clearly what the New Testament meant when it spoke of the principalities and powers. To speak of Satan and his powers becomes not just a way of speaking but a fact of reality. When we can see a people who are being controlled by an ideology of whiteness, then we know what reconciliation must mean. The coming of Christ means a denial of what we thought we were. It means destroying the white devil in us. Reconciliation to God means that white people are prepared to deny themselves (whiteness), take up the cross (blackness) and follow Christ (black ghetto).
That’s James Cone, Wright’s "theological" guide and mentor, in "Black Theology and Black Power," p. 150.
 
Written By: Martin McPhillips
URL: http://mcphillips.blogspot.com/
Oh, and this:
This destroy Obama meme is right out of the Turner Diaries and for the sake of our nation, I hope it fails.
I note your final collapse.
 
Written By: Martin McPhillips
URL: http://mcphillips.blogspot.com/
And in case anyone is interested, my theory of racial reconciliation is that we all, blacks and whites, carry a little light in our hearts and minds and take quiet advantage of opportunities to do right by one another.

If that means even one person in a lifetime gets a hand up from you, then an individual has done his part.

Once, a long time ago, when I was trying to find my way in the Big City, I was crashing with friends and running from one job interview to the next with a non-existent bank account and a decidedly un-embellished resume. One morning I threw on my suit and downed the caffeine and rushed down to the subway — it was the World Trade Center station for the E-Train in fact — on my way to another interview.

As I made my slightly crazed way down the platform I approached a black woman, who was dressed for an office job and watching down the track for the next train. She turned her head slightly as I approached and watched me with just a slight arch of her eyebrow. She wanted my attention, so I gave it to her.

She lifted her hand in front of her and swept her index finger upward, and very kindly said to me: "Your fly is down."

That was a homely act of kindness, that if you know the street formalities of Manhattan was not necessarily something any person would feel compelled to do for another, but in that moment she treated me the way she would her own son or favorite nephew and saved me a morning of embarrassment, and perhaps even from walking into a job interview like that. I’ve never forgotten that.

There are millions of ways, some very small, some not so small, that everyone can do right by one another.
 
Written By: Martin McPhillips
URL: http://mcphillips.blogspot.com/
Further, show me ONE example of Obama espousing any racist or "wako" beliefs?

You can’t.
Well, got me there, but only because Obama is careful not to discuss his beliefs in specific terms, so I dont really know what they are. Then again, neither do you. However, since he’s the newest, prettiest embodiment of Socialist Progressive America, you want to paint the prettiest picture you can.
 
Written By: rob
URL: http://
Well, got me there, but only because Obama is careful not to discuss his beliefs in specific terms, so I dont really know what they are. Then again, neither do you. However, since he’s the newest, prettiest embodiment of Socialist Progressive America, you want to paint the prettiest picture you can.


I can only go on his OWN words from the books he has written, and he is explicit and specific in how he believes policy should be formulated and how he would do it.

Based on his own words, he isw certainly progressive, but also pragmatic, and decidely not socialist.

For a general statement of ideals, From "The Audacity of Hope" Page 11
"I believe in free market competition, and entrepreneurship, and I think no small number of government programs don’t work as advertised. I wish the country had fewer lawyers and more engineers. I think America has more often been a force for good than for ill in the world; I carry few illusions about our enemies, and rever the competence of our military. I reject politcis that is based solely on racial identity, gender identity, sexual orientation, or victimhood generally. I think much of what ails the inner city involves a breakdown in culture that will not be cured by money alone, and that our values and spiritual life matter at least as much as GDP."
A little more specificity - Page 157
"Not every government program worked the way it was advertised. Some functions could be better carried out by the private sector, just as in some case, market based incentives could achieve the same results as command and control style regulations, at a lower cost with greater flexibility. The high marginal tax rates that existed when Reagan took office may not have curbed incentives to work or invest, but they did distort investment decisions - and did lead to a wasteful industry of setting up tax shelters. And while welfare certainly provide relief for many impoverished Americans, it did create some perverse incentives when it came to the work ethic and family stability."
And a bit more specificity - Education - Page 160
"Our task, then, is to identify those reforms that have the highest impact on student achievement, fund them adequately, and eliminate the programs that don’t produce results. And in fact, we already have hard evidence of reforms that work; a more challenging and rigorous curriculum with emphasis on math, science, and literacy skills; longer hours and more days to give children the time and sustained attention they need to learn; early childhood education for every child, so they’re not already behind on their first day of school, meaningful, performance-based assessments that provide a fuller picture of how a student is progressing; and recreuitment and training of transformative principals and more effective teachers. "
He continues, addressing teacher quality, accountability, and unions...
"There’s just one catch. In exchange for more money, teachers need to become more accountable for their performance - and school districts need to have greater flexibility to get rid of ineffective teachers. "
He spends almost 50 pages on race, so if you want Obama’s words on Obama’s position on the subject, it’s right there in black and white. The only reason to assign someone else’s words to Obama is not, as you seem to suggest, because he has taken no positions, because he has written hundreds of thousands of words espousing his own positions, in fact, the only reason to assign Wrights’ (or Cone’s, or MLK’s, or Stephen King’s) positions to Obama, is because those positions get a negative reaction, and when you are actively trying to destroy something, a negative reaction is what you want.

I don’t know if Obama is ready to be President, I really don’t. I suspect not. However, I have seen him speak, and I have read his books, and this guy is something special.

McPhillips has THREE James Cone books he is poring through for rhetoric he can assign to Obama. You have to wonder why he isn’t poring through Obama’s words.

But I know the answer, he could not care less who Obama is, or what Obama stands for, he has a D in front of his name, so if he can be destroyed, he must be destroyed.

And if race relations are set back to the times of racial violence and riots, he could not care less, and the Turner Diaries fans see that end as justification in itself.

 
Written By: Captin Sarcastic
URL: http://
McPhillips has THREE James Cone books he is poring through for rhetoric he can assign to Obama.
I’ve listened to plenty of what Obama has to say for himself. What I’m telling you about is what he isn’t telling you about the teaching of the church and the man Obama says led him to Christ.

And what I’m showing you about that teaching is that it is prima facie racism, and that Obama is deliberatly deceiving voters about it. He knows that he can’t disavow the church because he’s already been there for 20 years. So he’s goint to try to dissemble his way through the issue.

And I’m telling you why that is not going to work.

Again, do you think that someone who belonged to a white racist Christian Identity church would survive as a major candidate of a major American political party for five seconds?

This is a mess that the Democratic Party has made for itself by promoting this man as a viable candidate on the basis of his press kit.

And what you’re trying to tell me is that you believe what he’s telling you in his bloody campaign biography.
 
Written By: Martin McPhillips
URL: http://mcphillips.blogspot.com/
And what you’re trying to tell me is that you believe what he’s telling you in his bloody campaign biography.
Yes, Obama’s words and actions are consistent with someone who is a generation removed from the major civil rights struggles, Wright’s words are consistent with someone who participated in that struggle.
I’ve listened to plenty of what Obama has to say for himself.
Only to the extent you can misrepresent what he says and pretend he is saying something else.
What I’m telling you about is what he isn’t telling you about the teaching of the church and the man Obama says led him to Christ
.

I don’t ever expect a candidate to proslytize their own specific brand of their religion and would turn away from any who did.
And what I’m showing you about that teaching is that it is prima facie racism,
Cone’s decades old writings may be racist (though probably appropriate at the time), but you haven’t the slightest clue how much Wright’s understanding has evolved from that time.
and that Obama is deliberatly deceiving voters about it.
It is idiotic to presume that Obama should come out apologizing for his church, he recognized that there was potential for problems because of Wright’s outspokeness, but you don’t lead with your negatives, but Obama did address them long before they became an issue. You don’t see John McCain volunteering to talk about the Keating Five scandal, he deals with it when he has to.
He knows that he can’t disavow the church because he’s already been there for 20 years. So he’s goint to try to dissemble his way through the issue.
No dissembling necessary, there is not the sligtest indication in Obama’s words or actions that indicate he is a racialist, a black nationalist, or a racist, if there were, you would be going after Obama’s OWN words.

His OWN words show that he is a very different person than Wright, which is why you REFUSE to address Obama’s OWN words (unless you can twist a soundbite), and instead choose to attempt to put Wright’s (and then COne’s) words in Obama’s mouth.

The good news for the country, it’s not working. He is rebounding in the polls, and this issue will never get as much press as it had in the past two weeks (no matter how much you want it to).

This Church is simply not as radical as you want to claim it is, and is firmly in the mainstream of black America. The sad part of this is your ignorance of history and the importance of developing a Christian church that answered the black theology of the Nation of Islam as well as dealing with being prohibited from attending white churches. The mainstream black churches ARE more socialistic and afro-centric than the usual Christian Church, but they have been a force for good, and without them, we might have an angry Muslim population of 40 million or so. And again, the most fiery rhetoric is the exception, and is a call for peaceful activism.

To quote Gabriel Salguero, Pastor and Executive Member, Latino Leadership Circle
Anyone who tries to use Dr. Wright’s sermons as an entry point to demonize or launch into some type of theological McCarthyism against Black Liberation theology because there are points with which they disagree or they refuse to become more fully informed should take a second look at theological discourse. I disagree and denounce Luther’s anti-Semitism but I know Lutheranism has much to offer the world. I disagree with and denounce Calvin’s often abuse of authority and violence in Geneva but I know Reformed theology has much to offer the world. I disagree and denounce some of John Wesley’s portrayals of Native Americans but I know Wesleyanism has much to offer the world. I disagree and denounce Augustine and Aquinas’ sexism but know that their understandings of trinity and proofs of God are worth studying. In short, theological discourse, like all discourse, is profoundly flawed but also profoundly liberating and rich.
Anthony Pinn of Rice University acknowledges that black liberation preaching often sounds angry. But he says the anger does not advocate violence but is instead channeled into constructive routes. Trinity UCC, he notes, has 70 ministries that help the poor, the unemployed, those with AIDS or those in prison. Pinn says the words can be jarring to the untrained ear, but they’re still valid.

"Folks, including myself, may be taken aback by the inflammatory nature of the rhetoric, but I don’t think very many of us would deny that there is a fundamental truth: Racism is a problem in the United States," Pinn says.

Black liberation preaching can be a loud, passionate, physical affair. Linda Thomas, who teaches at the Lutheran School of Theology in Chicago, says the whole point of it is to challenge the powerful and to raise questions for society to think about. Thomas says if white people are surprised by the rhetoric, it’s because most have never visited a black church.
At this point, raising this issue will do more good for Obama than anything, because everyone who was swayed by this, is already swayed, so going forward, potential voters will either see this a pure politics, pure racism on the part of those trying to stoke this fire, or both.

So McPhillips, all I can say now is yell louder.


 
Written By: Captin Sarcastic
URL: http://
It is the very attitude I am seeing displayed here that perpetuates anger over racism. The comments on here are, once again, saying "Get over it" in way too many words. As long as you all continue to believe that you are not benefitting from the 400 years of free labor and that Blacks are not still suffering from the effects of slavery, lynchings and Jim Crow, we will continue to be angry. We will continue to tell the truth no matter how much you squirm. The truth is the truth.

How quick we are to forget that the last lynching occurred in the 90s. Not so long ago, huh?

America today is structured so that white people can believe that they’ve built their wealth and success from scratch. So now you all sit around being arrogant wondering "what’s wrong with those Blacks" yet CONVENIENTLY forgetting about the enormous advantage you have. Time to remove those blinders, people. Change is coming.






 
Written By: Lise
URL: http://
As long as you all continue to believe that you are not benefitting from the 400 years of free labor and that Blacks are not still suffering from the effects of slavery, lynchings and Jim Crow, we will continue to be angry. We will continue to tell the truth no matter how much you squirm. The truth is the truth.
No one is squirming here, Lise.

Slavery ended over 100 years ago.

Jim Crow ended over 50 years ago.

None of the whites alive today had anything to do with slavery and only a few very old people had anything to do with Jim Crow. And many whites had ancestors who fought against them or immigrated afterward.

So you can continue living in the past or join us in the present. Your choice. But as long as you decide it is the past where you’ll dwell, expect anger in return, because, for the most part, "white guilt" is dead and that is what you’re seeing reflected in these comments.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.QandO.net
The whole bit about "post traumatic slavery disorder" says you get "independent" females and submissive, dependent males. And I’ve read stuff suggesting that the pattern they’re talking about is evident in black culture. (Though I’m not fully convinced, personally.)

While I suppose it could be that the actions of a handful of slave owners 100 years ago caused this, it just seems a whole lot more likely that it’s caused by the past 40 years of Democratic welfare policies and anti-male, anti-family propaganda.
 
Written By: ben
URL: http://
How can you truly believe that 400 years of genocide can be 100% reversed in merely 40 years! Do you believe that there are no white persons directly benefiting from wealth and status created as a result of slavery and passed on through the generations? If wealth and privilege can pass on then why not poverty and disadvantage?

Culture: is a shared, learned, symbolic system of values, beliefs and attitudes that shapes and influences perception and behavior — an abstract "mental blueprint" or "mental code."

Learned and repeated behavior. Are you denying the very definition of CULTURE? If human beings pass on beliefs and value systems then why is it so hard to accept that it is not realistic that in just over 40 years the entire legacy of over 400 years of slavery and segregation can be simply erased? It’s not a crutch; it is a real and true lineage of event that leads us to this day and this time. Black people did not just fall out of bed yesterday and decide to be in this situation. For every action there is a reaction. What you see today is undeniably a direct result of institutionalized genocide. A few examples of successful Black people is a mere token when compared to the plight of the population as a whole. There is a definite problem.


 
Written By: NJRAMAL
URL: http://
How can you truly believe that 400 years of genocide can be 100% reversed in merely 40 years!
Well, you begin by rejecting hyperbole like that in your statement.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.QandO.net

 
Add Your Comment
  NOTICE: While we don't wish to censor your thoughts, we do blacklist certain terms of profanity or obscenity. This is not to muzzle you, but to ensure that the blog remains work-safe for our readers. If you wish to use profanity, simply insert asterisks (*) where the vowels usually go. Your meaning will still be clear, but our readers will be able to view the blog without worrying that content monitoring will get them in trouble when reading it.
Comments for this entry are closed.
Name:
Email:
URL:
HTML Tools:
Bold Italic Blockquote Hyperlink
Comment:
   
 
Vicious Capitalism

Divider

Buy Dale's Book!
Slackernomics by Dale Franks

Divider

Divider