0 comment Friday, July 25, 2014 | admin
I suspect we're all tired of reading and hearing about this story, but we turn away from it at our peril. It's indicative of how bad things have become here in the former United States between blacks and Whites.
The woman who called the police to report a possible crime in progress is now distraught because she has been accused ''unfairly'' of being a racist.
I suppose I sympathize with her because she is the target of the loathsome PC vigilantes, most probably White, who take it upon themselves to sniff out any political incorrectness and to bring the 'offender' into line, by threats and harassment if need be. On the other hand, her reaction to the (no doubt unpleasant) treatment she's gotten illustrates that she, too, is a believer in political correctness and all its works and pomps.
Her reaction reminds me somewhat of the response by an arch-liberal friend who reported troublesome neighbors in her apartment building, and was accused by said neighbors of 'racism.' She was mortified and aggrieved because she has spent her entire adult life doing and saying everything 'right', playing by the rules of PC, being so careful not to utter a wrong word or offend anyone of a victim group. This friend never dreamt she would be called 'racist' one day; I can only think she imagined that somehow, minorities could divine that she was ''on their side'' and that she was one of the 'good' Whites, not to be confused with those evil racist Whites who lurk around every corner in America. I think she was quite indignant that she was not immediately recognizable as 'friend' and not 'foe.'
I don't know Mrs. Whelan, but her statement seems to show that she is very much a liberal.
When I was called racist and I was a target of scorn and ridicule because of the things I never said, the criticisms hurt me as a person, but it also hurt the community of Cambridge," Whalen said. "Now that the tapes are out, I hope people can see that I tried to be careful and honest with my words," she said.''
Bless her heart, I am sure she is an honest and decent woman, and she was doing a citizen's duty in calling police, but she does not seem to understand the rules of PC. Under those rules, the minority is always the victim, the White always the guilty party. Always. No exceptions.
Whites, in these interracial situations, are to be presumed guilty until proven otherwise, contrary to our general 'innocent until proven guilty' principle. Of course most of us who think at all about these things know that there is literally no way to disprove one's ''racism'', when one has been accused by an offended 'victim.' Guilty. Off with his head, is the instant verdict.
Will James Crowley stand his ground, or will he become another 'typical White person' who is used as an object lesson?
It is through incidents like this, ''teachable moments'' so-called, that the politically correct dogma is reinforced and further driven home to Whites. The fact that a woman can be driven to tears by name-calling and 'unfair' accusations of something called 'racism' is proof that the PC vigilantes are far too powerful.
And yet, how much power do they have, if we no longer react to their threats and their name-calling? They have only the power we accord them. Unfortunately, they have succeeded in getting more 'hate' legislation passed, which will potentially give authorities power to prosecute people for their thought crimes or 'hate speech', but for now, we still have the ability to stand up to these bullies and petty tyrants, and to stop their coercion.
As to the ''unfair'' accusation of racism, I have a big problem with Whites who go on the defensive in cases like this, protesting that they are not 'racists'. I would instead love to see Whites stand up and reject the whole category of thoughtcrimes called 'racism' or 'prejudice.' I would like to see more people simply shrug off the label, or better yet, to challenge it, to dismiss it as an invented 'crime'.
There was no word 'racism' or 'racist' in the English language before the World War II era, at least. We did just fine without an invented word to describe the various and sundry behaviors that are now lumped together as 'racism.' When the word did enter our vocabulary, it meant more strictly acts of violence or physical harm, based on the race of the victim. The word 'racism' is one of the most elastic words in the English language, expanding to include any number of behaviors, thoughts, acts, and words, or even looks. The word has been rendered absurd by its overuse and its increasingly arbitrary and subjective use.
Maybe this is why some well-intentioned liberal Whites get caught in their own trap: it has become increasingly likely, given the expanding definition of 'racism', that every White will be accused/convicted of it at some point. It's almost reached those absurd, almost comic, proportions now. But I think very few liberals realize that they will unwittingly transgress the constantly-changing PC codes, and be hauled before the PC police for it. Even then, they don't seem to get it.
So is there such a thing as a 'fair' accusation of racism? Mrs. Whelan apparently did not violate the unwritten rule 'thou shalt not mention the race of a suspect unless he be White.' She did not refer to Gates and his unnamed companion (what happened to the second man, anyway?) in her 911 call. But if she had, would she then be a 'racist'? No, she would just be doing what a citizen should do: giving a description of the people in question.
I think what bothers me the most about situations like this is that too many Whites have no instinct to stick together and defend their own; even worse, there are too many who will actually point at another White while proclaiming their own ideologically pure views on race.
Even on the right this happens. Just read any thread on a rightwing forum on the issue of slavery or reparations. Most will protest their innocence: ''my ancestors didn't own slaves! I'm not from the South! My ancestors were still over in Europe then! My ancestors fought for the Union to free the slaves! Not guilty!' The implicit message is ''not me! That other guy over there is the one who's guilty.''
Why do so many Whites feel the compulsion to essentially throw some of our own to the wolves as a kind of sacrifice, and expiation for our (subjective) guilt? Why not show some solidarity? Yes, that too would be called racism, but then it's unavoidable. You will be called that at some time or another, and in fact, you've already been tried and found guilty simply by heredity.
Once we realize that we're considered guilty anyway by virtue of who we are, and who our ancestors were, that should free us considerably from the ''need'' to prove our moral rectitude and PC bonafides.
The woman who called the police to report a possible crime in progress is now distraught because she has been accused ''unfairly'' of being a racist.
I suppose I sympathize with her because she is the target of the loathsome PC vigilantes, most probably White, who take it upon themselves to sniff out any political incorrectness and to bring the 'offender' into line, by threats and harassment if need be. On the other hand, her reaction to the (no doubt unpleasant) treatment she's gotten illustrates that she, too, is a believer in political correctness and all its works and pomps.
Her reaction reminds me somewhat of the response by an arch-liberal friend who reported troublesome neighbors in her apartment building, and was accused by said neighbors of 'racism.' She was mortified and aggrieved because she has spent her entire adult life doing and saying everything 'right', playing by the rules of PC, being so careful not to utter a wrong word or offend anyone of a victim group. This friend never dreamt she would be called 'racist' one day; I can only think she imagined that somehow, minorities could divine that she was ''on their side'' and that she was one of the 'good' Whites, not to be confused with those evil racist Whites who lurk around every corner in America. I think she was quite indignant that she was not immediately recognizable as 'friend' and not 'foe.'
I don't know Mrs. Whelan, but her statement seems to show that she is very much a liberal.
When I was called racist and I was a target of scorn and ridicule because of the things I never said, the criticisms hurt me as a person, but it also hurt the community of Cambridge," Whalen said. "Now that the tapes are out, I hope people can see that I tried to be careful and honest with my words," she said.''
Bless her heart, I am sure she is an honest and decent woman, and she was doing a citizen's duty in calling police, but she does not seem to understand the rules of PC. Under those rules, the minority is always the victim, the White always the guilty party. Always. No exceptions.
Whites, in these interracial situations, are to be presumed guilty until proven otherwise, contrary to our general 'innocent until proven guilty' principle. Of course most of us who think at all about these things know that there is literally no way to disprove one's ''racism'', when one has been accused by an offended 'victim.' Guilty. Off with his head, is the instant verdict.
Will James Crowley stand his ground, or will he become another 'typical White person' who is used as an object lesson?
It is through incidents like this, ''teachable moments'' so-called, that the politically correct dogma is reinforced and further driven home to Whites. The fact that a woman can be driven to tears by name-calling and 'unfair' accusations of something called 'racism' is proof that the PC vigilantes are far too powerful.
And yet, how much power do they have, if we no longer react to their threats and their name-calling? They have only the power we accord them. Unfortunately, they have succeeded in getting more 'hate' legislation passed, which will potentially give authorities power to prosecute people for their thought crimes or 'hate speech', but for now, we still have the ability to stand up to these bullies and petty tyrants, and to stop their coercion.
As to the ''unfair'' accusation of racism, I have a big problem with Whites who go on the defensive in cases like this, protesting that they are not 'racists'. I would instead love to see Whites stand up and reject the whole category of thoughtcrimes called 'racism' or 'prejudice.' I would like to see more people simply shrug off the label, or better yet, to challenge it, to dismiss it as an invented 'crime'.
There was no word 'racism' or 'racist' in the English language before the World War II era, at least. We did just fine without an invented word to describe the various and sundry behaviors that are now lumped together as 'racism.' When the word did enter our vocabulary, it meant more strictly acts of violence or physical harm, based on the race of the victim. The word 'racism' is one of the most elastic words in the English language, expanding to include any number of behaviors, thoughts, acts, and words, or even looks. The word has been rendered absurd by its overuse and its increasingly arbitrary and subjective use.
Maybe this is why some well-intentioned liberal Whites get caught in their own trap: it has become increasingly likely, given the expanding definition of 'racism', that every White will be accused/convicted of it at some point. It's almost reached those absurd, almost comic, proportions now. But I think very few liberals realize that they will unwittingly transgress the constantly-changing PC codes, and be hauled before the PC police for it. Even then, they don't seem to get it.
So is there such a thing as a 'fair' accusation of racism? Mrs. Whelan apparently did not violate the unwritten rule 'thou shalt not mention the race of a suspect unless he be White.' She did not refer to Gates and his unnamed companion (what happened to the second man, anyway?) in her 911 call. But if she had, would she then be a 'racist'? No, she would just be doing what a citizen should do: giving a description of the people in question.
I think what bothers me the most about situations like this is that too many Whites have no instinct to stick together and defend their own; even worse, there are too many who will actually point at another White while proclaiming their own ideologically pure views on race.
Even on the right this happens. Just read any thread on a rightwing forum on the issue of slavery or reparations. Most will protest their innocence: ''my ancestors didn't own slaves! I'm not from the South! My ancestors were still over in Europe then! My ancestors fought for the Union to free the slaves! Not guilty!' The implicit message is ''not me! That other guy over there is the one who's guilty.''
Why do so many Whites feel the compulsion to essentially throw some of our own to the wolves as a kind of sacrifice, and expiation for our (subjective) guilt? Why not show some solidarity? Yes, that too would be called racism, but then it's unavoidable. You will be called that at some time or another, and in fact, you've already been tried and found guilty simply by heredity.
Once we realize that we're considered guilty anyway by virtue of who we are, and who our ancestors were, that should free us considerably from the ''need'' to prove our moral rectitude and PC bonafides.
Labels: Ethnic Division, Free Speech, Liberal Intolerance, Media Bias, Political Correctness, Race Card, Race-Baiting