April 15, 2006: Welcome to my blog! You’ve landed on this page through a Google search on “Alicia Hardin.” I’ve provided a brief update of the case in this post.
Update II: Alicia Hardin is going to have a hard time in life if she doesn’t learn to accept responsibility for her actions. She now claims she didn’t send the letters, and the cops “forced” her to say she did.
———————————————————————————————————————————-
By now most of you’ve heard about the black student at Trinity International University whose fake-hating caused the evacuation of minority students to a local hotel. We finally have a name to go with this treachery. Alicia Hardin has been charged with a hate crime for mailing “racist” threats to fellow students at the school. Why? Because she wanted to go home. She figure this stunt would convince her mother that the Christian college was “dangerous.”
The letters, filled with threats and racial slurs, were sent to two black students and a Hispanic student over the past three weeks. The third letter contained a threat to use a weapon against a black female student.The Rev. Jesse Jackson, who met with students and parents after the letters were made public, said last week, “It was painful to talk with the students. They feel there are targets on their back because they are black, because they are involved in interracial dating relationships.”
However, the president of the university, Gregory Waybright, said Friday that there was no mention of interracial dating in the letters. (Source)
Whatever, Jesse.
I suppose some compassion is in order. At least the person who wrote this story feels that way. What Hardin did was “sad” and everyone is “brokenhearted.” Had the perpetrator been white, particularly a white male, this story would have been filled to the brim with harsh words and overtones of retribution, peppered with references to “slavery,” “oppression,” and the “KKK.” But what Hardin did is no less serious because she’s black. It’s worse. She deserves to be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
This Chicago Tribune story leaves the impression that we ought to feel sorry for Hardin:
Martin granted the prosecutor’s request, and set a 24-hour curfew for Hardin, restricting her to home except to go to work or meet with her attorneys. After Hardin told the court she did not believe her family could afford a lawyer, the judge also assigned a public defender to the case.Hardin appeared confused in court. Questions put to her often had to be repeated as she stood before the judge, her arms wrapped around herself, softly answering “yes, ma’am” or “no, ma’am.”
The defendant told the judge she was taking anti-anxiety medication and had a prior arrest record from 1998 or 1999, when she was charged with battery and criminal damage to property.
Awwwww, poor thing. I do feel sorry for her, though. I’m sorry that she’s a troubled and immature young woman who hasn’t learned to handle problems like an adult. Apparently, her previous arrest at 12 or 13 (!) didn’t do much for her, so perhaps this one will. But I suspect the authorities will go easy on her.
I’m starting to believe a lot of “hate crimes” are hoaxes. In the case of threatening letters, the perpetrators want us to believe that the letters were written by a white “racist.” Most major news outlets provide blanket coverage of these stories, playing up the “intolerance” theme for all it’s worth.
Suspected hoaxes:
- Actor Taye Diggs and his wife received threatening letters.
- Black athletes with white wives and girlfriends received “hate” mail.
- “Angry Caucasian Woman” is probably an “Angry Black Woman.”
Proven Hoaxes:
- Campuses are ripe for kookery.
- Kerri
DunceDunn vandalizes her own car. - Harsh words for homosexual fake-hate.
- Those crazy kids!
- Update: I forgot about Tawana Brawley! (I don’t like citing Wikipedia, but…)
Also see this site, HateLawsExposed.org. Related posts: It’s a Hate Crime After All, Whites Not Protected, George Orwell and Georgia Strikes Down Thought Crime Law.
I don’t want to turn my blog into a repository of the latest “hate crime” news, but someone has to expose this race-based idiocy. I reluctantly volunteer.
Update — Mary Mitchell, Chicago Sun Times:
As strange as all this may sound to white people, the average black person understands that Hardin was neither mentally ill, desperate or stupid when she allegedly mailed letters containing racial slurs to black students. She was brilliant in the way that only manipulative children can be.Hardin wanted to shake up her parents to the point that she would have her way. So she played the one card that she knew would trump any other card in the deck. She seems to have created a situation in which they would be worried that her life could be in danger.
If race wasn’t involved, maybe Hardin could have gotten away with her scheme. But Trinity officials weren’t taking any chances and evacuated all the non-white students…Besides harming her family with her lies, Hardin probably doesn’t have a clue about the backlash she may have caused…A lot of white people already believe allegations of racism are overblown or are outright lies.
Thanks La Shawn for pointing out the other examples of lunacy. I only heard about this story yesterday and from one of my co-workers. Like you said, if it had been a white male, I couldn’t turn on the tv or surf the internet without being bombarded with how bad “the man” is. Ms. Hardin just goes to show how we are failing to equip our own children to deal with “hard times” (let’s keep in mind some people today think a broken fake fingernail is hard times
). Definitely does not give me warm fuzzies about our up and coming youth.
Comment by Renee — 04.28.05 @ 7:23 am
LaShawn,
Are you claiming here that interracial couples who face intimidation and threats of violence (if not outright violence) are imagining things? I know you don’t want to make this a “repository on hate crime incidents”, but exactly what basis in fact do you make these claims?
–Cobra
This is what happens when people come to this blog just to be contrary rather than to read what I write. My focus is not on the “hate” interracial couples may receive; it’s on the letters themselves, which were probably sent by a black woman, and not a white woman or man, which is what we’re supposed to think. - Admin
Comment by Cobra — 04.28.05 @ 7:55 am
La Shawn:
Apparently it is a hate crime for a Black person to intimidate other Black people.
But it is not a hate crime for a Black person to murder another Black person.
Is this Planet Earth?
Comment by Frank Zavisca — 04.28.05 @ 8:29 am
First off, the girl was just stupid. And although the effect of her action was the same as if a white male did it, the intent is totally different.
I think we need to put things into perspective here…and I will do so by analogy…
There has been much talk on this and other sites about ‘terrorism’ and how we need to be tough on ‘terrorism’…
Stay with me…
Yet when it comes to hate crimes, the general sentiment among you conservatives, is “all crime is a hate crime and shouldn’t be prosecuted any different” IE no discrimination in hate crime. So in effect, the lowest common denominator is that you don’t want to prosecute differently based upon INTENT, but you want to prosecute based exclusively on the ACT. So if the effect of a ‘hate’ crime is that someone beats someone up because they are black, and the effect of a normal assault is that someone is beat up because they are talking crap, then you believe both crimes should be prosecuted equally.
HOWEVER
Back to the terrorist issue, by definition, defining someone as a ‘terrorist’ we are evaluating their act of criminality by INTENT. And we wholeheartedly sanction this. So when an American hostage is beheaded and the video tape shown, we aren’t applying the same standard in terms of saying, THIS IS SIMPLY MURDER, we instead evaluate the murder in its applied context which is to instill fear and coercion.
So I want to toss this out there, don’t you feel a bit hypocritical, when you fight against ‘hate’ crime, because you don’t want intent coming into the equation, while simultaneosly assigning intent to a ‘terrorist’ act?
Just a honest question.
Comment by Dell Gines — 04.28.05 @ 9:04 am
Just how many of these fake events have happened these last few years how many have faked these hate mail events? You can trust these certain persons looking for jesse jackson’s bantering.
Comment by firebird — 04.28.05 @ 9:45 am
LaShawn, you are SOOOOO going to get reamed for daring to suggest that some alleged hate crimes might be phony.
In my opinion, the idea of “hate crime” is ridiculous. Are there not already laws on the books against assault, murder, and threats of same? If a person is murdered, does it really matter whether or not the murderer “hated” them or why? Further, setting up special laws that de facto provide more protection for some people than others based on race, sex, or sexual orientation only serves to divide the society into “us” and them.” Finally, hate crimes fly in the face of the 14th Amendment and the very concept of Anglo-Saxon jurisprudence, which is equal protection under the law (before anybody screeches, I realize quite well that we haven’t always lived up to the standard).
I believe that hate crime laws were passed for three reasons, none of them especially wise:
1. Societal guilt over the fact that justice has been denied on a massive scale to various groups in the country during our history. While altruistic, it seems to me that trying to pay for the sins of the father doesn’t make for very good law;
2. Our justice system does not do an adequate job of punishing violent criminals, so we add more statutes and laws to give prosecutors that many more charges to bring in the hopes that the crook will actually be found guilty of one of them and will spend enough time in prison to either be rehabilitated or else be so elderly when he’s released that he won’t be a danger to anybody else;
3. Politicians pander to constituency groups, in effect trading special protection under the law for more votes on election day.
As we’ve seen with different incidents in the past few years, hate crimes make a mockery of themselves, either because they are not applied in an even-handed manner or because a few sick people cry “wolf.” It is my hope that the American people realize just how pernicious these statutes are and have our lawmakers remove them from the books.
We want equal justice, not special treatment.
Comment by docjim505 — 04.28.05 @ 10:04 am
Thank you, for reluctantly volunteering, giving your opinions, on these hate crimes against whites.
I am a white woman, who grew up in the civil right times, of the sixties.
Needless to say, we were taught, as white people, we cannot discriminate against people of color.
Yet, in a so-called equal society, whites are being discriminated against, because of the color of their skin.
Everyone is discriminated against.
The Mentally ill, are the most discriminated against.
Skinny people are discriminated against. I do not know how many times I have heard, “Oh, I hate you, you are so skinny, I just could kill you, you skinny person you.” Skinny, skinny, skinny, you get my point.
And, I am off the point, again, sorry.
But, really, thank you for giving your opinions.
Suzie, in Ohio
Comment by Suzie Brown — 04.28.05 @ 10:04 am
I am against the idea of “hate crimes” altogether. Prosecuting someone based on how much they hate the victim leads to this kind of lunacy. I am against bigoted attacks made on someone by anyone, regardless of color, but some are taking advantage of the climate of political correctness and “racism.”
Comment by La Shawn — 04.28.05 @ 10:08 am
Dell, first let’s get the premises straight.
The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence against people or property to coerce or intimidate governments or societies, often to achieve political, religious, or ideological objectives. (JCS Pub 1-02)
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/army/fm/100-20/10020gl.htm
This is different than a crime committed for personal reasons. Hence the Unabomger is a terrorist because he did his evil by targeting certain people, saying why he did it and promising to keep on doing it until we conform to his world view. Ditto for ELF, Rudolph, Zarqawi, etc. This would also apply to serial killers like the Zebra Killers (Nation of Islam Death Angels).
That said, all crimes are motivated by hate, ergo your hypothesis does not compute.
Comment by Andy — 04.28.05 @ 10:12 am
Dell G.
The common denominator in arguments such as yours is Volume. You had to ask us to stick with you. Just how much deliberation does society (taxpayers) have to give to criminals?
Government was established to do the “business” of the people. A private firm would never consider such distractions from the question of guilt or innocence. Why should the public?
After the election the leftys called America “Jesusland.” I think arguments like yours call for something else; “Lawyerland!”
A land where lawyers get paid by the public to debate all things. A land where there is no reality, but endless perceptions. If diferent races become involved in a conflict, KACHING! Lawyers 100 Taxpayers 0
Or we could assume a fiduciary responsibility to the bill-payers such as our Founding Fathers envisioned. Acts may be criminal. Thoughts and Feelings CANNOT!
Comment by pajamazon — 04.28.05 @ 10:25 am
La Shawn, this is the law of unintended consequences at work here. Feeble minded people look around and see how hate crime victims are elevated — hero of sorts, why they might even get to meet Jesse & his posse of victicrats. So they manufacture a fraud to :
1) achieve their immediate goal
2) avoid responsibility for their original objective
3) garner sympathy from this cold, cruel world of ours
4) if played right, there could be $$$ and fame.
Here in Detroit, over the past couple of weeks, women were terrified of some Good Samaritian rapist running loose in our streets that the police couldn’t find, even tho the “victim” gave a good description of the “perp” and his blue Ford PU. (He helped her fix a flat tire on the side of the freeway, then raped her)
Now we find that she made it up because she had other issues and figgered playing the victim would get her out of it.
These people need to get slammed for fraud, false testimony and “Hate Crime”. That plus pound the story to death to make sure people get the message that creating a fake incident will cost you. Since Dell brought it up, let’s toss in a charge of domestic terrorism for the liar for the simple reason their lie created an atmosphere of fear in the community.
Comment by Andy — 04.28.05 @ 10:26 am
Pajamzon: “KACHING! Lawyers 100 Taxpayers 0”
Actully this is a zero-sum game, hence KACHING! Lawyers 100 Taxpayers -100
Lawyers do not create wealth or what have you. Every thing that a lawyer wins is something taken away from someone else.
Comment by Andy — 04.28.05 @ 10:30 am
Andy - First I was not hypothesizing, was simply making a contrast and compare.
And yes, it does compute and this is why -
Although DEFINED differently, the effect of a HATE crime law, and the defining of TERRORIST have a similar premise and that premise is defining the action based upon INTENT…
For example, each one does not look exclusively at the crime…but the INTENT of the crime…
In the case of the unibomber as you mentioned, he was defined as a terrorist because of the INTENT of the murders…whereas a Ted Bundy wasn’t a terrorist because he didn’t have the same INTENT…the could have an equal body count, yet different intent and be defined as they were differently.
A hate crime participant is considered performing the hate crime because of the INTENT behind the crime, as we have discussed previously in these conversations. Whereas the mugger of a random victim is not charged with a hate crime because of INTENT…
Comment by Dell Gines — 04.28.05 @ 10:40 am
Dell Gines, you raise a good point about intent and terrorism laws. I would respond in two ways:
Intent is accounted for in the process of preparing the charges and applying the punishment in the event of a guilty verdict. For example, if a person accidentally hit and killed another person with his car (assuming he’s not DUI), he’d probably be charged only with vehicular manslaughter and serve little if any jail time.
If, on the other hand, a man coldly and deliberate shot another person to death, he’d almost certainly be charged with murder and (hopefully) receive a lengthy prison term or the death penalty.
In both cases, a person has been killed, but the law takes into account that there was no intent to kill in the first instance, and so judges the crime differently.
With regard to terrorism laws, my own feeling is that politicians wrote them to show that they were trying to do something in the wake of 9-11 (and so cover up for the fact that they were asleep at the switch for years before that dark day). Let’s assume that we catch bin Laden. There are plenty of laws on the books to try him for conspiracy to commit murder, so I don’t see any need to try him for “terrorism.”
Ditto any other terrorists we catch. They can - and should - be charged as appropriate for conspiracy, money laundering, illegal immigration, possession of a weapon of mass destruction, etc, etc. It is appropriate that the prosecutor stress their horrid intent in the trial, and it is also appropriate for the jury to consider it when passing sentence.
If there are “holes” in our legal system that would make it hard to prosecute a terrorist (like that idiot “wall” put up by Jamie Gorelick during the Clinton administration), then they should be fixed. What we don’t need are laws piled on top of laws on top of laws, all making the same act illegal (this is clearly seen with our gun control laws). What worries me about terrorism-specific laws is NOT that we haven’t already got appropriate laws on the books, but that the idiots we’ve been putting on the bench for the past few decades will find some heretofore unknown right in the Constitution that forbids us to execute terrorists or at least throw them in prison for a long, long, long time.
What also worries me is that prosecutors have an unfortunate habit of using laws in ways that the Congress didn’t intend, as when they use RICO (intended for use against organized crime) to prosecute anti-abortion groups.
Comment by docjim505 — 04.28.05 @ 11:17 am
The problem with fraudulent claims of hate crimes is exactly what Ms. Mitchell states in her article: Prejudice is still very prevalent in this country and in order to combat it, there is a need for honest dialogue regarding this topic.
Unfortunately, I’m sure many white readers will again think many blacks are “whiners and complainers, race baiters and frauds” and ignore the real need for real talk about race in the United States.
Comment by Tiffany In Mpls — 04.28.05 @ 11:20 am
They bring it on themselves, Tiffany. Blacks are just as accountable for their actions as anyone else. “Hate crime” is such an amorphous and inane concept that it’s ripe for fraud. Bigotry is NOT a crime. What Hardin did IS a crime, and I hope they make an example out of her.
Comment by La Shawn — 04.28.05 @ 11:25 am
Docjim - I agree with you - “They can - and should - be charged as appropriate for conspiracy, money laundering, illegal immigration, possession of a weapon of mass destruction, etc, etc. It is appropriate that the prosecutor stress their horrid intent in the trial, and it is also appropriate for the jury to consider it when passing sentence.”
Comment by Dell Gines — 04.28.05 @ 11:28 am
Tawana Brawley should make the hoax list!
As regards racism towards interracial couples, I’m of the opinion that those that complain the most of it are the sort who are determined to be offended. As a white man married to a black woman, I’ve noticed the following reactions from various people who’ve seen us together:
White Men: Don’t appear to notice or care (granted, this could be because men are generally less socially observant)
Black Men: likewise, don’t appear to notice or care
White Women: At worst, fail to realize we are in fact a couple. For example, at a store, instead of “May I help you” directed at us both, it’s “May I help you Ma’am” followed by “May I help you sir” in turn, or a confused look from the cashier as I start pay for items my wife is carrying. If I were bound and determined to be offended, at this point I suppose I could. Instead I usually just watch their face, and frankly sort of enjoy watching them squirm as the situation dawns on them.
Black Women: Everything from long, angry stares to tut-tutting. Once got the “Help you sir/Help you ma’am” followed by “Oh wait, you two are TOGETHER?!” followed by teeth-sucking and long looks up and down.
Of course, we have the benefit of living in Texas, where interracial relationships are common.
Comment by Jim — 04.28.05 @ 11:30 am
LaShawn - why would you think they need to make an “example” out of her. Why wouldn’t you want them to simply prosecute her under the law as it is on the books?
Comment by Dell Gines — 04.28.05 @ 11:30 am
What I mean by that is they should not show her leniency. The prosecutors will have a choice, and they need to choose the harshest one. This girl already has a record, although a juvenile one, so either this will be the beginning of a life of petty crime, or she will turn her life around. The full consequences of her actions must be felt, in my opinion, if they’re to have any impact at all.
Comment by La Shawn — 04.28.05 @ 11:33 am
Around the Blogosphere
Tony Snow returns to work Powerline Anti-Christian bias Powerline Minneapolis Star-Tribune flipflop Powerline, Michelle Malkin NAALCP scandal Captain’s Quarters Yahoo!…
Trackback by JackLewis.net — 04.28.05 @ 11:39 am
LaShawn - I don’t disagree with you and I wasn’t saying that to be infammatory, it’s just that I think a lot of people make sweeping judgements about many topics based upon what they read or see and not what they experience, and in this case, I would think some whites would chalk this up in their mental ledgers as another reason that black people “act like X(insert behavior here)”.
Jim in Texas -
Where do you live because I am from Houston, Texas (born and raised until I moved in 2003) and I never saw that many interracial relationships at home. I now live in Minneapolis, Minnesota where interracial relationships (particularly black men/white women and white men/Asian women) are quite common.
Comment by Tiffany In Mpls — 04.28.05 @ 11:51 am
To add to DocJim’s excellent post, I would say yes, intent is a factor. As in, was it intentional or accidental? Hate Crime tries to determine levels of intent, which only leads to thought control and shades of Minority Report-prosecution of the thought before the physical crime has been committed.
We then come to the ridiculous scenario of lawyers defending clients by admitting, yes Joe Bob did intend to kill John Doe, but it was because of race.
Comment by Andy — 04.28.05 @ 11:54 am
Tiffany In Mpls,
I regret to say that you’re right: a lot of white people (including me) have a knee-jerk response that complaints about racism are at best overblown and at worst outright fraudulent. I think that a lot of this is due to the fact that about the only “voices” we hear from the black community are always the same: Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Julian Bond, Maxine Waters, etc, etc. And they all tend to preach the same message: that ANYTHING they oppose, ANYTHING bad that happens to black people, is due to white racism.
Take, for example, the recent case of the little girl being handcuffed by the police. I believe that it was an outrage and I really don’t care if the little girl was white, black, brown, polkadot or plaid: it shouldn’t have happened. But, just as sure as Monday follows Sunday, the usual suspects and their lesser-known allies in academia show up to tell us that it was the result of racism.
That card has been played so often that it not only lacks the punch that it ought to have, but it can have the opposite effect: instead of drawing people together in mutual outrage over an absurd abuse of police power, it divides people between those who think, “Well, there they go again” and those who think, “Well, there they go again.” Of course, both sides have a different “they” in mind.
I think that prejudice is a normal human response. Forming stereotypes allows us to more easily navigate a complex world and can be a useful defense mechanism. The problem arises when, through action or ommission, people allow their sterotypes to lead them to perform hateful acts.
I think that most Americans happily belong to the “live and let live” camp: they may not LIKE certain groups based on race, creed, color, sexual orientation, age, etc, but they also aren’t interested in harming them or seeing them denied the rights and justice that they expect for themselves.
Comment by docjim505 — 04.28.05 @ 12:03 pm
Andy - I loved that movie!
Comment by Tiffany In Mpls — 04.28.05 @ 12:03 pm
Minority Report? Me, too. We need something like Pre-Cog now. How’d you like that?
Comment by La Shawn — 04.28.05 @ 12:05 pm
DocJim, BINGO!!
Tiffany/La Shawn, That’s the whole thrust of Philip K. Dick’s writings. We all know about George Orwell’s prophecies. Well, in Phillip’s novels, he contemplates a world where hi-tech meets human nature and the conflict from resulting abuses. Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?/Blade Runner is another classic, vis a vis cloning/androids
Comment by Andy — 04.28.05 @ 12:19 pm
La Shawn:
One of the advantages of Internet sites such as yours is that we get to see the bias and sloppiness of the Chicago Tribune (quoted in your post) and the rest of the MSM. I think the phrase “hate crime” is less an attempt to describe a particular event and more an effort to evoke a certain emotional response, at least when used by the MSM.
I feel sorry for Alicia Hardin. Why should she have refrained from doing what she did, given the tremendous social and political pressures around her to use race as a trump card? The central philosophy of the Chicago Tribune and others in the MSM is that the ends justify the means, is it not? To be sure, Alicia should be held accountable and prosecuted, but I feel that the media lords have a much heavier burden of guilt in this case, even if they cannot be hauled into court and punished.
Please keep up the good work. I suspect that the Chicago Tribune and others will never learn, but thanks to you and others they do less damage these days.
Comment by Mwalimu Daudi — 04.28.05 @ 12:30 pm
Tiffany: Actually I currently live in Houston. Interracial relationships are common here–if you count white/hispanic relationships, which some people don’t, for whatever reason. I grew up mostly near Fort Hood, and in the military I know interracial marriages are quite a bit higher than the civilian population.
The 2000 census shows Texas as a whole as slightly higher (2.5 vs 2.4) than the national average in people reporting themselves as biracial (I couldn’t find interracial marriage statistics by state, but presumably people who report themselves as biracial is a correlating indicator). Interestingly, Minnesota falls well below the national average for people reporting themselves biracial (1.7 vs 2.4).
I’ve been meaning to look at current census data and dig for actual by-state and by-city interracial marriage statistics and make up a map, would be an interesting project.
Comment by Jim — 04.28.05 @ 12:38 pm
When an adult is “brilliant in the way only manipulative children can be” that IS having a serious mental problem.
Or we can go back to the old days where we just called that “acting like an immature child” and was unacceptable.
Though I did notice she has a public defender. Hopefully her parents got sick of the drama and told her she’s on her own.
Comment by Pluto's Dad — 04.28.05 @ 12:48 pm
Dell you are still wrong, you say :
“Although DEFINED differently, the effect of a HATE crime law, and the defining of TERRORIST have a similar premise and that premise is defining the action based upon INTENT…”
Go back and read the definition that Andy posted. NOWHERE does it say “intent.” instead it says that there must be a statement saying why you attacked a certain class of people, and that you will continue to attack that class of people until your demands are met.
In short, prosecutors do not have to show intent when prosecuting terrorism charges. They merely have to demonstrate the accused said they’d keep doing it.
Comment by Pluto's Dad — 04.28.05 @ 12:52 pm
Docjim - “I think that most Americans happily belong to the “live and let live†camp: they may not LIKE certain groups based on race, creed, color, sexual orientation, age, etc, but they also aren’t interested in harming them or seeing them denied the rights and justice that they expect for themselves. ”
The only problem Jim, as that when a certain group has a disproportionate percentage of the power, it is incumbent on the minority to pray for the benevolence of the majority. In America, the ridiculous disparity between blacks and whites in every majory category demonstrates that whites are not (as a group) benevolent. Yet the issue of race as spun by conservatives is always polarized into an issue of individual responsiblity which in effect is saying that any group which is disproportionately beneath was is normative in America is inherently flawed, which is why they don’t have the individual accountability to participate on an equal footing in an America which (according to conservatives) is now relatively racism free.
So, now what you have is a liberal counter group of black leaders whose concentration (an rightfully so I believe) is on issues of racism, and how racism effects ‘their people’, white liberals who need the black constituents, or who feel guilty, but still in many ways resist a true analysis of the history and current impact of racism, and a conservative base who marginalizes and polarizes the issue all together.
So when the sound bite media deals with these respective groups, you never get a true articulation of anyones position, only pieces and snapshots that so many people like you say above are burnt our on hearing, and arbitrarily dismiss as un-credible rhetoric.
Comment by Dell Gines — 04.28.05 @ 1:02 pm
Dell,
Your use of the term “benevolent” is thought-provoking. I would tend to agree with you that white people are not benevolent (Merriam-Webster: marked by or disposed to doing good), mostly because I think that MOST people are not benevolent. We live in a fallen world, after all.
Since humans are not by nature benevolent, the best we can hope for from each other is tolerance, justice, and mercy. You’re right when you say that minorities typically have to rely on the goodwill of the majority.*
However, I don’t agree with your argument that conservatives basically believe in social Darwinism, which is to say that we believe that a race is inherently flawed just because some fraction of its members don’t meet some sort of hazily-defined norms. What I think we DO believe is that people can be crippled or placed at a disadvantage by societal pressures, and that it is the business of the individual to overcome those disadvantages. Government can do some good in helping to erase barriers to success, but fundamentally the decision to succeed must be made by the individual.
This is why, for example, conservatives favor school vouchers. We believe that the public education system is flawed, and that the lack of a good basic education is holding back Americans of all races and colors. This is an obstacle we want to remove by giving people the right to choose where to send their children to school.
We also oppose race-based quotas and other discriminatory methods for hiring and college admissions, though we support government intervention in cases where there is a clear violation of civil rights. What good does it do to send a student to law school if he is not prepared, or to just sort of pass him along until he gets his diploma, hoping that he picks up enough in his classes to let him succeed in the job market? What good does it do to deny a qualified applicant in favor of the unqualified applicant?
I would contrast the conservative view with typical liberal policy. This starts with the premise that, because somebody is a member of a given group, he is ab initio an underpriviledged victim of racism, must have the active assistance of a “benevolent” government, can’t be blamed if he doesn’t make it even with government assistance, and must be made a ward of the state when he doesn’t. I believe that President Bush (among others) refers to this as “soft racism.” Actually, the concept is quite similar to that used by plantation owners a couple of hundred years ago when it was “the white man’s burden” to take care of their slaves.
I’m not naive: there is still racism in America, just as there is anti-Semitism, homophobia, male chauvenism, and the entire gamut of human ugliness and cruelty. However, I believe that we’ve come a long way in the two centuries of our country’s history. Think of it: fifty years ago, would anybody outside of a sci-fi writer have dreamed that a black woman would be the Secretary of State and a favorite prospect to be a candidate for president?
One thing that I think has helped our country on the rocky and often dark road toward the level of racial equality that we have today has been the idea that we are all Americans. It’s an idea that’s been actively resisted by people who believe that, to be American, you must be a white, Anglo-Saxon Protestant, but they’ve been matched by others who stood up and asserted, “I am an American, regardless of my color or the place my parents came from. I AM AN AMERICAN.”
If I may offer a personal anecdote, when I was in basic training, one of the first things our drill sergeant (a black man) told us was that, in the Army, everybody is one color: green. He and the Army didn’t play favorites with people based on anything. We were all treated the same (just like s**t!). It seems to me that this would be a good way to deal with racial issues in America. Let us STOP talking about people as groups who have particular grievances or “hyphenated” Americans who proclaim that they identify THEMSELVES as different from everybody else, and start talking about people as Americans. Period.
* I say ‘typically’ because a heavily-armed / ruthless minority can keep a majority in thrall, as in Saddam’s Iraq or Orwell’s 1984.
Comment by docjim505 — 04.28.05 @ 2:20 pm
Dell, did you read Thomas Sowell’s recent article on Black Rednecks? If you haven’t you really should. If you have, what’s wrong with his premise in light of all that you wrote?
Comment by Andy — 04.28.05 @ 2:51 pm
Mary Mitchell’s assessment is right on the money. Hardin’s actions are best described as a childish attempt at manipulation with little or no concern for the concequences beyond her own selfish desires.
Comment by PajamaHadin — 04.28.05 @ 4:34 pm
Anti-anxiety medication?
In other words: she can’t be held responsible for her own actions; and therefore, prosecuting her is a waste of time.
—-These are the same people who pitch a sexual harassment claim……as a career strategy.
I wonder if corporations and schools will get the message and start limiting these kinds of claims?
Or, at least do better at investigating these nutty claims/complaints, before disrupting the entire campus.
Comment by Glamchild — 04.28.05 @ 4:36 pm
Andy - I am going to pick it up and read it, I read the synopsis and I am suspending judgement. But suffice to say, similar to how you would champion LaShawn as an example of championing your major ideological positions as a black women amongst a sea of whiteness, I would dare say, you support much of what Sowell might say because of those same similarities.
Also, I would encourage you since we are on the topic of books to read Dr. Claude Andersons Powereconomics book.
Comment by Dell Gines — 04.28.05 @ 4:45 pm
Dell, I wasn’t talking about the book, rather the column.
But since you mention it, I haven’t read Powereconomics, but having watched him on several shows and gone thru his website, I’ll take a pass. He starts with some good premises, even some that most black leaders wouldn’t touch, but then goes on to conclusions that are at odds with human nature, namely black-good, white-bad, woe-is-the-down-beaten-black-man, why-we gots-to-fight-back.
Got a tip for you, racism is all in the head.
I support Sowell because what he says is objective.
Comment by Andy — 04.28.05 @ 6:31 pm
This is a manipulative child who knew the one thing she could to that would not be ignored. She wanted to throw an 80 yard touchdown pass instead of marching down the field. It is common in all of human nature to appeal to fears to get what we want, but it gets significant more play because of our history. For that reason, it has merited the considerable debate that has gone on here and on other sites.
This type of racial bomb throwing is a lot more prevalent than gets played. I see it daily in a classroom setting as a teacher and as a coach. I’ve seen several superiors and even myself dismissed as basketball coaches because of our skin color and because the race card was used, and one that punk school administrators refuse to investigate or because they didn’t want to take the heat. Instead they just bow to the pressure. To the administrators it must be racism, it can’t be anything else. That leaves teachers/coaches with no wiggle room. In my field at least, nothing will get the cavalry called faster than by using racism as an option.
This further pushes the possibility for reasonable dialogue “down the river” for everyone. For those of us that have experienced this treatment first hand, it makes me and others in similar situations very apprehensive about engaging in constructive discussion. In my field, it even makes “white” teachers less likely to apply and accept jobs in schools with high percentages of minority students. “Why deal with the trouble?” is something I often hear. It hasn’t discouraged me from teaching in tough environments, but even I admit that I do have a breaking point.
As long as name-calling and the race card is allowed to be played, it makes less significant the actual instances of racism taking place and marginalizes any hope for progress.
This girl deserves to be punished to the full extent of the law.
Comment by Chris Roberts — 04.28.05 @ 8:13 pm
I see a lot of comments about what Alicia’s lies have done to white people’s views about black people, but I don’t see any about how her actions caused black people at her school, and others who read about this story, to view white people. As a white person, I’m fairly sick of being suspected of harboring racist attitudes. Every suspicious thought, look, word, every strained or aborted friendship, that came about as a result of her lies sets race relations back. I’m with you, La Shawn, this lady needs to step up to the plate and accept the wrongness of what she did and take responsibility. It’s clear she gave no thought to all the consequences of her actions and how they affected people she will never even know.
Comment by Laura — 04.28.05 @ 8:15 pm
Cross-posted with Chris - I think we made the same point.
Comment by Laura — 04.28.05 @ 8:17 pm
One thing I haaven’t seen discussed is that we’re talking about a Christian school. What’s up with that? Or is this just a christian school in name only and the people there don’t consider themselves brothers and sisters in Christ.
If Alicia’s of the same brand of theology as Revs Jacson & Sharpton, well, never mind.
Comment by Andy — 04.28.05 @ 8:52 pm
LaShawn writes:
>>>This is what happens when people come to this blog just to be contrary rather than to read what I write. My focus is not on the “hate†interracial couples may receive; it’s on the letters themselves, which were probably sent by a black woman, and not a white woman or man, which is what we’re supposed to think. - Admin”
LaShawn, I don’t have a problem with your lambasting Alicia Hardin if she’s guilty of what she’s been charged with. I’ll join the party if that’s the case, because Hate Crimes are inexcusable. HOWEVER…..you didn’t just stop at Alicia Hardin.
>>>I’m starting to believe a lot of “hate crimes†are hoaxes. In the case of threatening letters, the perpetrators want us to believe that the letters were written by a white “racist.†Most major news outlets provide blanket coverage of these stories, playing up the “intolerance†theme for all it’s worth.
Suspected hoaxes:
Actor Taye Diggs and his wife received threatening letters.
Black athletes with white wives and girlfriends received “hate†mail.
“Angry Caucasian Woman†is probably an “Angry Black Woman.”
Now, there were physical letters sent of a threatening nature based on the RACE of the recipient. That’s not the definition of a “hoax.” That’s the definition of a CRIME. Now, according to the LAW, IT DOESN’T MATTER WHAT RACE the person SENDING THE LETTER IS. You, especially as a conservative black woman should KNOW that there are some African Americans who viscerally HATE black conservatives–some enough to harrass, intimidate or commit violent acts. That is ALSO a “hate crime.”
According to the FBI, a table breaking down the bias motivation of known offenders of hate crimes in 2002 is rather interesting.
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0RFV/is_2002_Annual/ai_n7639725/pg_3
Table 5 illustrates that of 888 reported single-bias anti-white incidents, 130 of the known offenders were WHITE, and of the 2,967 reported single-bias anti-black incidents, 84 of the known offenders were BLACK.”
Dell Gines is completely on the mark with his assessments, and I believe the terrorist vs. hate criminal comparison is outstanding.
–Cobra
Comment by Cobra — 04.28.05 @ 11:28 pm
Cobra would be more honest if he also noted that FBI studies show that blacks were far more likely to commit inter-racial crimes against whites than the reverse. The numbers are approx. 80/20 despite the reverse demographics. So blacks are far more likely to commit inter-racial crimes, especially against whites. He also ignores the fact that blacks are more likely to consider any crime against them, even non criminal incidents, committed by whites as hate crimes than are white victims whose pleas are generally ignored when they do raise them.
This is the first time reading about a fake hate crime that the black perpetrator did not make a smooth transition from facing federal charges for hate to facing a slap on the wrist as a ‘prankster’ when the culprit was discovered to be non white.
Comment by mikem — 04.29.05 @ 5:33 am
What about the school’s hysterical reaction in evacuating students based on 3 letters? Was there any actual violence, no. Why would students other than those who received the letters be evacuated? Under what other circumstances would students be evacuated?
Comment by Jack Tanner — 04.29.05 @ 9:47 am
But, don’t you think prosecuting her to the full extent of the law just allows her to claim more racism?
Plus, at best they only have a disruption/disturbing the peace charge, which isn’t going to get her much in the way of punishment.
All a full prosecution will do is give her the opportunity to scream and howl about racism in the justice system—gives her even more attention, talk shows, and a book deal.
She becomes the new Anita Hill.
Comment by Glamchil — 04.29.05 @ 10:51 am
Andy - “Got a tip for you, racism is all in the head.”
Explain…particularly if claim you are an objectivest…
Comment by Dell Gines — 04.29.05 @ 11:18 am
Dell, what I mean is that, ’so what if people are racists’? They can only hold you down if you let them. Especially since we have no legal barriers.
Jim Crow is dead, why do people insist on holding seances to bring him back, or to resurrect him?
I’ll be blunt, I don’t care about the crybaby secular worldview. Instead, from a Judeo-Christian worldview, history is replete with people who have overcome ephemeral restraints to become a tool for God. As Christian, why then would any of us allow a sinful world to desalinate us spiritually, emotionally and physically?
To wit,
–Joseph was sold into slavery. Had he dwelled on how unfair it all was, he would have died a miserable slave and in his sins.
–Joseph was tossed into jail as a result of sexual harassment and the false accusation of attempted rape. Had he dwelled on how he was framed, he would have died in jail and in sin.
–You know the story of Daniel, suffice to say, had he succumbed to the King’s lawful commands, Daniel and his pals would have died fat, dumb & unhappy and in sin.
Jump to the NT
–Stephen could have just shut up and quit antagonizing the theocrats & Saul. Instead he was filled with joy while being stoned as a result of theocratic prejudice.
–Onesimus was a legal slave that ran away from his master, now “free”, he could have refused to go back and would have lived unhappily ever after. However, he willingly obeyed Paul to go back, but with a letter for Philemon to treat him as a brother in Christ and all counted it for joy, love & grace.
–Of course we know of the countless abuses that the apostles suffered for their faith, race being the least of it. Given the laws in place, they could have whined about how unfair and tragic it all was.
It would have been so easy for them to just forget about it and avoid the harassment. Oh how easy it would be to rationalize it and say ‘I jist can’t spread the good news, when there’s so much racism/prejudice/hate all around me’.
Jump to American history
–Fredrick Douglass, Uncle Tom, George W Carver, etc, etc and so forth and so on. You get the point.
The Man couldn’t hold them down. Needless to say, I think they would slap us all silly for crying about ‘how bad we’s gots it’. Another point I would make is that most of the movers-n-shakers were people of faith. Faith in the God above.
–In this post-Jim Crow day and age, anyone crying about being held back/down is full of it!!
Romans 8 pretty much ties that all up.
Comment by Andy — 04.29.05 @ 3:53 pm
Andy - “Dell, what I mean is that, ’so what if people are racists’? They can only hold you down if you let them. Especially since we have no legal barriers.”
I think you are confused on terminology, racism is the application of power to subjugate or marginalize based upon the believe that one race is superior and the other inferior. Which is why the term ‘racism’ in has lost its relevence. What you are saying is that prejudice can only hold someone down.
Racism is not an isolated individualistic social phenomen. It is a corporate practice that enables one group to maintain and control the institutions, and economic systems of another. So let us say hypothetically, I agree…racism is dead…(which I don’t)….
Then you still have the effects of racism which helped empower one group while marginalizing another. Cause and Effect…
IF you really believe in the equality of races then necessity dictates that you look for alternative variables that impact groups who are unequal in practice.
We know that the governments practice of adjusting the interest rate to control inflation is a variable that determines certain spending patterns in America. The most recent and vivid example (I am a business banker by trade) is the run on housing refinances and new mortgages when the interest rate fell. Cause and Effect.
In America racism wasn’t simply a moral phenomenon, it was an economic phenomenon in which blacks were specifically reduces to chattel, limited from having a normative sociological development, locked out of wealth building opportunities, and other forms of development that ethnic minorities of other types were privey too.
So when you say slavery, sharecropping, jim crow, etc. is dead, what you simultaneously fail to mention is the benefits that accrued to one group at the expenses of another didn’t mysteriously stop. We know wealth and opportunity is passed from generation to successive generation. We know that higher rates of poverty (for any race) increase the likelihood of a child being in poverty amongst other things. Therefore to simply make the statement racism is dead therefore no-one can keep you down is tanamount to saying, your feet are broken but you can equally compete with someone with healthy feet. The exceptional athlete may indeed be able to compete, but the average broken foot athlete won’t be able to compete with the average well foot athlete.
Final example, I know this is long.
Baseball. Statistically the team with the highest payroll finishes in the top 4 of the league, while the teams with the lowest payroll the bottom 4. That does not mean that occasionally a small market team doesn’t have an exceptional season where things fall perfectly in place and they rank high, but ON AVERAGE…they don’t. YANKEES…
The conservatives have a tendency to flip from the social perspective to the individual perspective whenever it is conventient to make an argument for abdicating there portion of culpability.
Comment by Dell Gines — 04.29.05 @ 5:22 pm
Dell, I’ll say it again, racism is in the mind. It is subjective. There is no corporate conspiracy to hold blacks down. Even if there was, how is it holding you, a banker, personally down?
Wait!!! I take that back, silly me, how could I forget the vast MSM/DNC conspiracy and the cults of personalities like:
– The resident High Kleagle of Congress,
– Pee Wee (no pun intended) Frizzell, Jesse Jackson doing/out-doing the Slick Monika in their respective offices,
– I could go on from ACLU to Fulbright, Gore to Soros and so on all the way to Zebra, but you get my drift. Did I mention Klanned Parenthood?
Subjective cconservatism? Hardly.
I bet, scratch, I guarantee you that there are 10s of millions of black Africans that would gladly, and unreservedly, give an arm, or their firstborn, to swap places with you and experience some of that good old time racism that you’re so intent on crying about. Sheesh. Get a life.
Let’s talk terminology. Racism-Schmatism. We’re are all descended from Adam and again from Noah, therefore everyone is a blood relative. Heck, I have 1st degree relatives that are more spiteful than the obnoxious rednecked neighbor down the street.
I don’t believe in the fanciful equality of races, I believe in the equality of man before God and the constitutional equality of opportunity. I also believe that man is innately evil. If I make up my mind to achieve something, ain’t no power on earth is going to hold me back.
“Then you still have the effects of racism which helped empower one group while marginalizing another. Cause and Effect…”
And that excuse insults the black pioneers who paved the way generations ago.
It is the black red-neck culture run amok for decades, aided and abetted by the neo-klan & bleeding hearts that is the cause of the down-trodden black American. The effect is what we see around us.
All you have to do is examine the black community in pre-civil rights era to see that as a whole, they were economically better off within the community and a much higher sense of well-being/self-esteem. Not only that, they were upwardly mobile, then came the Civil Rights Act, take 3 - LBJ.
The blacks that are pulling themselves out of this vicious spiral of helplessness are those that reject the “aw, shucks, Eyes jist a po-boy and theys aholdin’ me down an Eyes caint heps its” redneck mentality. They saw the value of education & hard work and did whatever it took to move on up to the Eastside.
“IF you really believe in the equality of races then necessity dictates that you look for alternative variables that impact groups who are unequal in practice.”
Naw, the alternative variable that afflicts the black redneck culture is bling-bling, getting pimped, instant gratification, no ambition, no focus, no responsibility, no self-discipline, no self-esteem, no self-control and a good dose of wa-a-a-a-a-a-a-ah!!
Cry me a river!!!
“We know wealth and opportunity is passed from generation to successive generation. We know that higher rates of poverty (for any race) increase the likelihood of a child being in poverty amongst other things.”
Then explain the dirt poor black immigrants that come in and work their way up.
And that’s the tragedy inflicted upon us by the poverty/race pimps who violate Leviticus 19:17 everytime they open their mouth.
Your broken feet analogy sucks!!
Then run in the wheelchair class, or find another race that you can compete in, since you weren’t meant to run the foot race. Or you rewrite the rulebook that you’re going to play by. No matter what, you simply run with what God gave you and don’t make excuses.
The liberals have a tendency to flip from the personal perspective to the social perspective whenever it is convenient, and to run to Papa Fed, lately Aunty Justice, to make an argument for abidcating their portion of responsibility.
Figuratively speaking, over my dead body.
In closing, it’s telling that you have no objective rebuttal to my earlier points. Proverbs 14:12 & 16:25
Comment by Andy — 04.29.05 @ 6:57 pm
PS. Dell, it sounds like you’re looking for an earthly solution to our problems, it won’t ever happen. Change can only come from within the heart and the renewing of the mind from Jesus’ ultimate sacrifice. Romans 12:2
Peace
[extends hand]
Comment by Andy — 04.29.05 @ 7:06 pm
Dell,
You have written one of the most definitive posts on racism in America I have ever seen on a blog. It is cogent, well researched, factually and historically accurate.
Andy’s response is tantamount to a “flat earth society” dismissal of reality.
>>>I don’t believe in the fanciful equality of races, I believe in the equality of man before God and the constitutional equality of opportunity. I also believe that man is innately evil. If I make up my mind to achieve something, ain’t no power on earth is going to hold me back.”
If Andy believes that man is “innately evil”, how come it’s hard for him to accept the continuing existance of racism in America?
“The truth shall set you free”, and the truth is, there are intra-racial hate crimes. I’ve provided FBI statistics as proof. I wonder what the opinion of people on this board would have been if the threats Hardin allegedly made had been CARRIED OUT, ala Columbine or Red Hills, MN?
–Cobra
Comment by Cobra — 04.30.05 @ 12:25 pm
Cobra, good question: “If Andy believes that man is “innately evilâ€, how come it’s hard for him to accept the continuing existance of racism in America?
Granted, I should have for the sake of clarity inserted “notions” between “fanciful” & “equality”. Anyhoo.
The continued existence of racism in America is evident in the fact that the best Dell could do in the banking industry is to become head janitor and has to use the service entrance after hours to do his part for the corporate machine.
The truth is that FBI stats incorporate the legal definition of hate crimes. Without that definition, we’d still have the same # of crimes. OTOH, the average African suffers from a lack of transparency and rule of law. But sub-Sahara racism is next to non-existant. If racism is so bad here, why don’t you go where you set yourself free of this monster called racism?
I’d also like to see the stats on black immigrants held down as a result of race. I mean if whites are so prejudicial that any one black is indistinguishable from a sea of black faces, how on earth could they even tell an immigrant from a native?
Comment by Andy — 04.30.05 @ 1:44 pm
Andy writes:
>>>OTOH, the average African suffers from a lack of transparency and rule of law. But sub-Sahara racism is next to non-existant.”
It would benefit our discussion greatly if you would A) not make sweeping generalizations about entire continents full of people B) take even the most basic research about a topic before making outlandish claims such as the one above.
I mean, I know Fox News and right winged talk may have different “news priorities”, (Laci Peterson, Terri Schaivo, Runaway Brides, etc) but someone has to live in a CAVE not to have heard of the ONGOING RACIAL GENOCIDE in the Sudan, where black CHRISTIANS are being mass raped, tortured and slaughtered.
http://www.africaspeaks.com/articles/2004/1407.html
http://www.sudantribune.com/article.php3?id_article=9343
Should I mention racial issues in Zimbabwue, South Africa and…there’s a long list, Andy but this is a thread about DOMESTIC hate crimes, particularly Alicia Hardin.
Second, you seem to be asking me to post readily available information on racism that two clicks of your own mouse would easily provide.
Why is that?
–Cobra
Comment by Cobra — 04.30.05 @ 4:34 pm
In addition to the obvious problems surrounding this one young lady, this mess serves to point out that charges of racism are all too often cheap and unfounded, and are frequently the last refuge of scoundrels.
I was called a racist last year by a leftist white Irishman simply because I, a conservative of Irish heritage, had dared to suggest that IRA bombings might possibly be a substantial part of the troubles in Northern Ireland. Ridiculous as the charge of racism was, missing the dictionary definition by a mile, it’s the sort of non-specific accusation that is very difficult for oneself to refute.
To my mind, in most cases, the person shouting “racist” the loudest is the person with the smallest grasp of the issues and with the least to add to any solution of real problems.
Comment by RedBeard — 04.30.05 @ 10:38 pm
As I’ve stated before and the reality points to the fact that for most of the poor, their poverty is self-inflicted, regardless of race. The flat earth theory postulates, that it is not the fault of the poor black, rather it is racism. The problem with that theory is it doesn’t explain “white trash” poverty. It doesn’t explain that of all the sub-groups, upwardly mobile black women are the fastest growing.
Mountainbike Vollgefedert Kinderfahrrad Neu
A) sweeping generalizations. Hmmm, I believe I’m referring to facts. I wouldn’t doubt that I could inform FOX and other right-wing news outlets. But I certainly don’t see how the MSM/DNC would learn anything from it since the facts doesn’t fit their worldview.
B) research basic facts. Erm, long before you were googling it, I was living in Ghana, Nigeria & Ivory Coast for a total of 9 years; speaking Twi, my 1st spoken tongue (at first I thot my nanny was my mom, and mom was just someone who put me to bed ;)), Yoruba & French among a couple other; living under Nkrumah, Azikiwe, Gowan & Houphoüet-Boigny; experiencing the Biafran War; going to school with Rotimi & Olujukwo’s kids; meeting with tribal chieftans & Heads of States; meeting W.E.B DuBois, among other noteables & even Hanna Reitsch; dabbling in Pan Africanism.
Gosh, I hope the very short list didn’t “Forrest Gump” you. Does all that, on top of the ongoing family involvement in public education systems and ministry in over 30 African countries for 50 years, count for anything?
Like I said, spare me the sob stories about modern day American racism.
Oh, did I mention that my dad was born and raised in Faifield, AL, of a poor coalminer/local evangelical minister, who set off all on his own at 17 to Detroit to get any kind of education beyond his Alabamian 8th grade equivalent. Yeah, baby, he came a long ways against million-to-one odds, and don’cha know WWII was abrewing.
Like I said, there are millions who would readily sacrifice life and limb to be here in poor Ms Hardin’s place and count it a blessing.
As for your links, ho-hum. A liberal dose of evil-white-man-is-the-bane-of-our-existence. Where was our so-called 1st black Prez Clinton on Sudan while whipping thru Africa apologizing for the events of 150-400 years ago? Granted, Reagan and Papa Bush were pre-occupied with bigger issues, even tho I’d like to have seen more attention directed at Afica. But I seem to remember something about the peace dividend and downsizing the military, even while Somalia, Rwanda and Sierra Leone was happening. If it wasn’t for Blair, we wouldn’t have done squat on Kosovo–fat, dumb and happy we were.
Facts: Sudan is not located in Sub-Sahara Africa.
Military regimes favoring Islamic-oriented governments have dominated national politics since independence from the UK in 1956.
[SNIP]
Ethnic groups: black 52%, Arab 39%, Beja 6%, foreigners 2%, other 1%
http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/su.html
Hmmm, no mention of the evil racist whites, unless they comprise “other”. Blacks dominated by Arab slavers for hundreds of years. The current Arab elites aided & abetted by Osama bin Death Angel. Yet Arab non-profits, like CAIR, find common cause with ACLU & NAACP to rail against white American racism. What’s wrong with this picture?
Zimbabwe:The UK annexed Southern Rhodesia from the South Africa Company in 1923.
[SNIP]
Robert MUGABE, the nation’s first prime minister, has been the country’s only ruler (as president since 1987) and has dominated the country’s political system since independence. His chaotic land redistribution campaign begun in 2000 caused an exodus of white farmers, crippled the economy, and ushered in widespread shortages of basic commodities. Ignoring international condemnation, MUGABE rigged the 2002 presidential election to ensure his reelection. Opposition and labor groups launched general strikes in 2003 to pressure MUGABE to retire early; security forces continued their brutal repression of regime opponents.
[SNIP]
Ethnic groups: African 98% (Shona 82%, Ndebele 14%, other 2%), mixed and Asian 1%, white less than 1%
http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/zi.html
Ummm, didn’t he just steal the elections again just last month?
The current problem aren’t the whites, it’s tribalism; black on black and massive corruption. Ditto for South Africa. The whites aren’t in control, rather it’s the communist ANC and liberation theocracy that’s in control.
Wait a minute, I think I’m seeing a pattern that refuses to be recognized by bleeding hearts here.
Comment by Andy — 05.01.05 @ 2:14 am
There is survival value in being suspicious of people who are strange or different to you, just as there is survival value in being cautious around water. Avoiding water and strangers all together is not smart, either, and can get kind of smelly.
Comment by Walter E. Wallis — 05.01.05 @ 9:55 am
Andy writes:
>>>>>>OTOH, the average African suffers from a lack of transparency and rule of law. But sub-Sahara racism is next to non-existant.â€
First, by the facts…The continent of Africa has over 682,000,000 inhabitants. How exactly did you calculate the equation that the “average African suffered from a lack of transparency and rule of law?” Did you take surveys and polls?
Andy writes:
>>>B) research basic facts. Erm, long before you were googling it, I was living in Ghana, Nigeria & Ivory Coast for a total of 9 years; speaking Twi, my 1st spoken tongue (at first I thot my nanny was my mom, and mom was just someone who put me to bed ), Yoruba & French among a couple other; living under Nkrumah, Azikiwe, Gowan & Houphoüet-Boigny; experiencing the Biafran War; going to school with Rotimi & Olujukwo’s kids; meeting with tribal chieftans & Heads of States; meeting W.E.B DuBois, among other noteables & even Hanna Reitsch; dabbling in Pan Africanism.”
So this is to mean that you can speak for 682,000,000 Africans because you grew up in Ghana, Nigeria and the Ivory Coast? Can I pidgeon-hole and stereotype over 220 million white Americans because I was raised in New Jersey, and worked in New York City?
>>>Facts: Sudan is not located in Sub-Sahara Africa.
Military regimes favoring Islamic-oriented governments have dominated national politics since independence from the UK in 1956.
[SNIP]
Ethnic groups: black 52%, Arab 39%, Beja 6%, foreigners 2%, other 1%
http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/su.html”
You’re making my case, Andy. The FACT is that the Sudan is the largest nation in Africa, with 2,505,810 square miles. If you want a scale, the eastern portion of the US could fit inside it. It’s NORTHERN Arab portion is indeed in the Sahara, but it’s southern portion is NOT.
>>>Behind Sudan’s war is the story of two cultures trying to share one country. Sudan’s unique place between sub-Sahara Africa and Arab North Africa.
Sudan is both Africa’s largest country and the scene of the continent’s longest civil conflict. In nearly a half century of fighting between the mainly Muslim north and the Animist and Christian south an estimated two million people have been killed. At least four million civilians have been displaced in Sudan itself and another half million people sought shelter in neighboring states as refugees.
Sudan was colonized by the British during the 19 th century . It became the victim of forced and artificial borders with the Muslim Arabs in the north and black Africans in the south. The fundamental cause of the ethnic conflict in Sudan is racial discrimination. The Arab north was given political and military power. The black Africans in the south protested their political exclusion, military repression, and economic exploitation.
President Omar Bashir and his fundamentalist Islamic government have continuously fought against black African groups in the south; the Dinka, Nuba, and Neur peoples.”
http://www.prin.edu/panafrica/roundtable_topics_list.htm
Now unless you’re of the opinion that all Arab and Semitic peoples are “black”, your CIA quote is absolutely congruent with my posts, and your statement that it is tribalism, and not racism in this conflict is nonsense.
–Cobra
Comment by Cobra — 05.01.05 @ 11:10 am
1) Sudan is a Trans-Sahara country:
The Trans-Sahara region spans ten African and Maghreb countries and is an area of acute vulnerability due to vast expanses of desert and porous borders. With a long history of being a center through which arms and other illicit trade flow, it is becoming increasingly important as terrorists now seek to use these routes for logistical support, recruiting grounds, and safe haven.
[SNIP]
The overall approach is straightforward: build indigenous capacity and facilitate cooperation among governments in the region that are willing partners (Algeria, Chad, Mali, Mauritania, Morocco, Niger, Senegal, Nigeria and Tunisia, with Libya possibly to follow later if relations improve) in the struggle with Islamic extremism in the Sahel region.
http://wwwc.house.gov/international_relations/109/tal031005.htm
Cobra-”First, by the facts…The continent of Africa has over 682,000,000 inhabitants. How exactly did you calculate the equation that the “average African suffered from a lack of transparency and rule of law?†Did you take surveys and polls?”
2) The total estimated population of independent African countries is 885,972,849 (CIA FactBook)
3a) The total population of Africans living in a FREE independent country ranked higher/better than average is 79,789,762
when measuring;
–Political Freedom Classification is 2
–Civil Rights Classification is 2 - 3
–Risk of Coup is LOW to MEDIUM
–Risk of Conflict is VERY LOW to HIGH
These countries are Botswana, Cape Verde, Ghana, Mauritius, Senegal & South Africa.
3b) The total population of Africans living in a PARTLY FREE independent country ranked on average is 493,728,394
when measuring;
–Political Freedom Classification is 3 - 6
–Civil Rights Classification is 3 - 5
–Risk of Coup is VERY LOW to HIGH
–Risk of Conflict is LOW to HIGH, with some experiencing Guerilla conflict.
These countries are Algeria, Benin, Burkina Faso, Central African Republic, Comoros, Djibouti, Ethiopia, Gabon, Gambia, Guinea Bissau, Kenya, Lesotho, Madagascar, Malawi, Mali, Morocco, Mozambique, Namibia, Niger, Nigeria, Republic of Congo (Brazzaville), Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Tanzania, Uganda & Zambia
3c) The total population of Africans living in a NOT FREE independent country ranked lower/worse than average is 312,454,693;
when measuring
–Political Freedom Classification is 6 - 7
–Civil Rights Classification is 5 - 7
–Risk of Coup is LOW to HIGH
–Risk of Conflict is VERY LOW to HIGH, with some experiencing Civil War or Guerilla conflict.
These countries are Angola, Burundi, Cameroon, Chad, Democratic Republic Congo (Kinshasha), Guinea, Liberia, Mauritania, Rwanda, Swaziland, Tunisia, Congo, Cote d’Ivoire, Egypt, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Somalia, Sudan, Togo, Libya & Zimbabwe
4) By comparison America is higher/better than average (population 295,734,134)
–Political Freedom Classification is 1
–Civil Rights Classification is 2
–Risk of Coup is NONE
–Risk of Conflict is NONE
NOTES:
Type Of Classification: 1- is the most free, 7- is the least free.
Categories of risk: NONE, VERY LOW,LOW, MEDIUM, HIGH
WebSource: http://www.mherrera.org/freedom.htm
(Complied from Freedomhouse, US Human Rights Report, Amnesty International)
Cobra-”Now unless you’re of the opinion that all Arab and Semitic peoples are “blackâ€, your CIA quote is absolutely congruent with my posts, and your statement that it is tribalism, and not racism in this conflict is nonsense.”
Read it all again, I never made such an assertion. I only pointed out the irony of Arabs teaming with other American civil rights activists to beat up on white America. I only said black on black was tribalism, not racism. Typically in a less than free society, the majority is oppressed, hence my claim the average African would give anything to have it as good as the poor black American.
As for black on black American crimes, what’s your -ism for it?
Comment by Andy — 05.01.05 @ 2:45 pm