So back in February I wrote an entry that I feel established a new identity for me as Captain Irony. The column, in response to comments from the new attorney general regarding what he saw as a reluctance by whites to discuss matters of race, opined that any honest endeavors to do so were invariably met by shouts of racism and calls for economic sanctions and boycotts.
The blog entry was met by shouts of racism and calls for economic sanctions and boycotts.
Thus was Captain Irony born!
It gets better.
See, around the same time, a columnist named Bill Maxwell wrote an Op-Ed piece that ran in a Florida newspaper that said much the same thing that I did.
“Seeing themselves as victims of racism, most blacks reject raw race talk from whites. After all, whites are viewed as being the perpetrators of racism. The perpetrator, therefore, should confess, shut up and listen. Because of this dynamic, far too many whites have learned to avoid direct matters of race.”
In fact, he was even more extreme, saying—among other things—
“To mention the deleterious effects of hip-hop is to be attacked. The ugly truth is that this outlaw culture, with its anti-intellectualism, antiauthoritarianism and nihilism, will do more harm than virtually anything else to a generation of blacks. Fearing attack, too many blacks remain silent on this issue, and when whites bring it up, they are shouted down as racists. Holder should make a second speech on race, this time specifically taking blacks to task for keeping silent on the abandonment of their personal responsibilities.”
Maxwell, as was I, was taken to task by the subjects of his column. The same sorts of folks, no doubt, who accused me of being clueless about the topic because of white privilege. It would be interesting if they accused Maxwell of the same, what with his being black.
Oh…did I forget to mention that?
“Although black attacks against whites are harsh, our attacks against other blacks who tell the truth are downright vicious. I know from personal experience. You are tar-brushed with the stain of Uncle Tomism, and it sticks to you forever.”
I wonder if Maxwell’s name was stuck on the same list mine was. Yes, apparently there’s a list floating around of authors who have been targeted as racists and are supposed to be condemned, ignored, and boycotted, and I’m on it.
Funny: Fifty years ago, people were put on a similar such list, condemned, ignored and boycotted for ascribed attitudes whether true or not. Now what was that list called? Let me think…
Oh. Right.
A black list.
Captain Irony away!
PAD
• 
I’m glad to see you haven’t let the bullies get to you. Cowards and liars, each one (I’ll grant a few are just ignorant followers but I’m not sure that puts them on any higher ground than the ones who at least derive some enjoyment from their mendacity).
Now–let me put on my Amazing Kreskin Hat-O-Mystery and predict what their response will be (a tough one since they are so edgy). I’ll go with “Boy, we really must have struck a nerve with our accurate criticism!” (used when the alternative “Boy, we sure shut him up with our accurate criticism!” can’t be used).
Well, if you’re going to open a can of worms, at least you picked squirmy one.
right on man – I’m tired of feeling too intimidated to have a conversation about something a white man can only talk about if he’s a) a university professor being interviewed on “60 minutes” or b) Ralphie May.
or for that matter – riding the subway, having 4 teenagers taunt me for being a white man for about 5 or six stops – and sitting there feeling very certain that if I stood up and said anything that if i stood up for myself and got the crap kicked out of me it would never be called a hate crime.
Free speach means everybody about anything.
And nobody is above being a racist by virtue of their race.
Are you calling black people worms?
(See how easy it is to be offended?)
“opening a can of worms” is clearly a racially motivated metaphor. It’s source is the legend of Pandora, who opened a box and released all the evils upon the world.
.
And what was left in the box? Hope. Hmmmm, now I wonder what politician is most closely connected with that word? That’s right, Obama.
.
So, to summarize, Obama (hope) is locked in a box with a bunch or wormy evils…look, I don’t have all the whys and wherefores but the point is, racist!
The columnist’s name is Bill Maxwell? When does Ralph Hinkley drop in?
Mother of God, this is such a weird one. Apparently, I first learned of this “list” from Lady Sybilla herself, who contacted me on my Wikipedia user page, at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Nightscream#Peter_David.27s_Potato_Moon because she saw that I did a lot of editing on Peter’s article, and wanted my help in creating articles and edits to Peter’s article regarding the Russet Noon/Potato Moon matter. Clicking on the links she provided was an eye-opener. She (and/or her fans) refer to Peter as a “right-wring conservative President-Bush”-type, and the Potato Moon project as a type of “Inquisition.
When I investigated this further, I found that someone on another wiki called FanHistory.com created an article that mentioned Peter’s appearance on this list, at http://www.fanhistory.com/wiki/Race_wank#The_Cultural_Appropriation_Discussion_of_Doom, the oddest part came when I clicked on the link for Potato Moon (an article for which Lady Sybilla herself tried to create on Wikipedia), and found that FanHistory.com has an article for that too, and that it even mentions me, at least by my Wikipedia username, at http://www.fanhistory.com/wiki/Potato_Moon . Sybilla also created a Wiki article of herself (a big no-no on WP, since autobiographical edits and other conflicts of interest are frowned upon), and uploaded an image to WP whose copyright status was unclear.
To second Peter’s own reaction to this when I informed him of this by email, this woman is definitely missing a few French Fries from her Happy Meal.
I looked at the “Potato Moon” Wikipedia page, which is by “Lady Sybilla”, right?
.
If it is indeed by her, and is typical of her writing, i can say with little fear of contradiction that anything she ever writes that gets published will be self-published.
.
By a vanity press with low standards, even for that field.
Wow, I am shocked to see Cowboy Pete lassoed in with Cowboy George! That’ll be one heck of a rodeo!
So, black people don’t all think and feel exactly the same way? Who knew?
Maxwell seems to indicate–in this and other columns–that it’s not so much that anyone is expecting black people to think or feel the same way. In his case, the problem comes when he SAYS he doesn’t think or feel exactly the same way as certain others who feel he SHOULD act or feel a certain way.
PAD
That’s just the thing, though. It seems that people, both black and white, often do think that all black people think and act the same. I and several other people i know have been told that we don’t act ‘black enough’ by both white and black people as if we have some responsibility to fulfill the (mostly negative) stereotypes that have been hung around our necks. That one drives me crazy.
Wouldn’t the fact that people are telling him he SHOULD act or feel a certain way rather contradict your first sentence? Or are you using a definition of ‘anyone’ that I’m not familiar with?
Wouldn’t the fact that people are telling him he SHOULD act or feel a certain way rather contradict your first sentence? Or are you using a definition of ‘anyone’ that I’m not familiar with?
Noooo. No, I didn’t say that. I’m saying that people attack Maxwell as punishment FOR saying it. Part of the reason is made clear later in his column:
.
Your mistake is not that you told the truth but that you told the truth in public, thereby giving the enemy valuable ammunition. (Here, think of comedian Bill Cosby, who is castigated for saying that too many low-income blacks have not held up their end of the nation’s civil rights gains.) In short, you committed the unforgivable sin of “airing dirty laundry.”
.
PAD
While i am on your side in this – so far as i’m concerned, if anybody can say something, then anybody can say it, if you get my meaning – i’d like to point out that a gentile who publicly says anything that might be considered critical of Israel or Zionism is likely to be loudly accused of anti-semitism.
.
Or anyone who says anything supportive of Israel is likely to be similarly accused of supporting its Zionist genocidal policies.
.
Last time someone hit me with “You can’t say bad things about Jews or Israel ‘cos you’re goyim.” my response was “Kush mir en tukhes”, followed by ignoring that person with a highly-polished Ignore. If someone had said something similar about talking about Palestinians, i’d have done something similar, thoguh i’d have to Google a bit to find the appropriate Arabic words.
“a gentile who publicly says anything that might be considered critical of Israel or Zionism is likely to be loudly accused of anti-semitism.
Or anyone who says anything supportive of Israel is likely to be similarly accused of supporting its Zionist genocidal policies.”
So true, on both accounts. But is there a jewish equivalent to “Uncle Tomism” which can stain a persons reputation for life?
You mean like “Uncle Moshe”-ism? Probably not. With no offense intended… it’s not as easy to tell Jewish sympathizers among gentiles as it is white sympathizers among blacks.
Although I have heard the perjorative “Jew Lover!” tossed about once or twice.
I remain,
Sincerely,
Eric L. Sofer
x<]:o){
The Bad Clown…
“Self-hating Jew” I support Israel in most things but that term gets tossed far too often at any Jew who is deemed insufficiently supportive.
I have a suggestion.
From what PAD wrote take out every word that mentions race; “black” “white” or “hip-hop” with “Rock and Roll” or “Heavy Metal” or “Country Music” etc., etc., and replace or switch it around with a word that is culturally significant to you (the readers in general NOT you PAD).
Then measure how you feel. If you flinch – you might be a racist, if you emphatize(?) you might be a person more open to truth no matter from what where it originates.
I understand that a review of one of my brother David’s very early books spoke negatively about the inherent sexism that had historically forced women to write SF under male pseudonyms or gender-neutral names (Andre Norton, Lee Hoffman and C. L. Moore come to mind), and said that it was obvious that “David Weber” was a woman writing under a male name for sales purposes, because no (mere) male could have written a female protagonist so well…
.
Anybody can, potentially, write anything well – even things they have no direct personal experience of … conversely, anyone can write about things they know intimately and make a mess of dingo’s kidneys out of it.
.
By definition, a writer of stuff (err … fiction) is someone who imagines things that don’t exist and tries to make them seem real to her readers.
James Tiptree Jr = Alice Sheldon.
I didn’t realize you were that Mike Weber. I haven’t seen any new Honor Harrington books lately, I love those. Is David going to write any more of those or has she run her course?
Storm from the Shadows, the newest book set in the Honorverse, came out in March.
“Storm from the Shadows” is on the stands. You can pretty well skip the first seven chapters or so because they’re basically recap of things like Mike Henke’s time as a POW and being sent home and other things.
.
I’ve read about half of it and i’m not sure if i’m going to finish it – so far it’s mostly talk/exposition and introducing the True Masters Of Villainy. Doesn’t have the snap of “Shadow of Saganami”.
.
OTOH, the sequel to “Crown of Slaves” is coming up.
.
I’d recommend hitting Baen.com to check on publishing schedules.
I was there for your previous post and didn”t feel the need to boycott any of your works (though I did stop buying ‘She-Hulk’ shortly thereafter). Chalk this ‘black list’ up to idiots. The fact that they’re (apparently) black idiots shouldn’t make a difference.
Troy, I would not be at all surprised if a majority of the people compiling and/or passing on the black list are not black. Some of the people quickest to yell “Racist!” are whites looking to boost their “progressive” bona fides.
Those in the black community who criticize blacks who speak out against the anti-intellectualism, defeatism and racism in the black community, like Bill Cosby, Spike Lee, etc., need to get rid of this idea that it is wrong to do so. Cosby and people like him are examples of what people can achieve when they really want to achieve something. Ostracizing of blacks by other blacks because saying this constitutes “acting white” needs to be delegitimized in that community.
Ah, yes – Spike Lee – the man who said “I’m not racist; I can’t be racist – I’m black.”
.
One of the most racist remarks i’ve ever heard.
.
(I had little respect for him before that – he’s always seemed a bit of a jerk to me – but inow have none at all.)
Makes good movies, though.
PAD
Mike–this honestly depends on your definition of racism. The definition many people cling to defines racism as an INDIVIDUAL point of view that sets one race above another, regardless of the larger social dynamics. A less comfortable definition states that racism is the SOCIAL structure that places one race above another. In the latter context, Spike Lee’s remark is hardly contradictory.
.
I suspect that a lot of the anger that flares up in racial discussions comes from the fact that people are operating with these two different definitions of the term ‘racism’. If we can’t even be clear on terms, how can we be clear on anything?
Sheila, even peasants can be monarchists.
The worst meme shared by the current antiracist community is that since institutional racism in America is white, that means that only white expressions of racism are actually “racism”.
That’s like arguing that a Tudorian monarchist can’t be a monarchist because the house of Tudor isn’t in power, the house of Windsor is. But a Tudorian’s monarchism de facto supports the current Windsorian monachy by supporting monarchy as a *whole*.
That’s the exact same way that black racists end up unwillingly supporting white racism via supporting racism as a whole. Or the way (to bring up examples from my homeland) that minority Turkish or Albanian or Macedonian chauvinisms merely aid the majority Greek chauvinism in effect, they don’t actually combat it.
Sheila, when you say that the one definition is one that people “cling” to while the other is “less comfortable” (but, presumably, one that can be embraced by those less clingy), you’re kind of stacking the deck. 🙂
.
I think the definition that allows people to exclude themselves from the vice to be the one that is far more comfortable, at least to those who can now safely think of themselves as incapable of being racists.
.
To take it a step further, I would make the following generalization; anytime a person insists that there is no possible way that they can be guilty of a particular transgression, it’s a safe bet that they are, in fact, fully capable of said transgression. Anyone who tells you they are immune to a particular sin by virtue of anything not having to do with personal ethics–breeding, religion, race, history,etc–is probably trying to convince themselves of something that they may well know isn’t true. Or worse, they believe it, which is a great way to virtually ensure they will do exactly what they claim to be incapable of doing. A person who thinks that nothing they do can be racist is someone more likely to do something racist–they won’t recognize it as such and even if they do, it’s just not racism because they can’t be racist, right? Q.E.D.
.
Some of the meanest people I’ve known insisted that they did not have a mean bone in their body and, when confronted with the results of their meanness, simply passed the blame to the victim or just gave it a new name–“I’m not being mean, I’m being honest.”
.
(Regarding Spike Lee, who I think is somewhat overrated as a director (I would like to get back the time I spent watching She Hate me) but capable of good work now and again, I will give him credit for what he recently said at Concordia university in Montreal (soon to be my youngest daughter’s university): Lee criticized how some in the black community wrongfully associate “intelligence with acting white, and ignorance with acting black”, admonishing students and parents to maintain more positive attitudes in order to follow their dreams and achieving their goals.
From what i’ve heard Lee quoted as saying, Sheila, i’d be inclined to put my money on the individual case – your first option.
Sheila, the 2nd definition is counter-intuitive. It would mean that the KKK stopped being racist the minute it lost influence on the social structure. Under this definition, the KKK as an organization with little power cannot be racist.
I don’t see some benefit in this definition except to shift the responsibility for racism.
Secondly, you have to decide if racism only exists if someone believes his race is better than others. A person might argue that he doesn’t think his race is better than blacks, but might still exhibit prejudices toward blacks as a group.
Moreover, racism, if used to include any kind of prejudice toward a group is too crude. You need a scale, with say, Hitler on top (wanting to exterminate hated races who are viewed as inferior), and at the bottom the kind of hidden prejudices that many (maybe all) people have to a degree, but that are not motivated by any animosity.
A few comments:
1) I’m white, and have had a few conversations with African-Americans about race without being called a racist.
2) Troy Phillips, I read your earlier comment about being called “not black enough” and wonder if you have read “Not a Genuine Black Man” by Brian Copeland. I thought that it was a good read, smart and funny in some places, horrifying real in others. One thing he points out is that when he tried to get good grades, be a good father to his kids, be responsible etc. people would say he “wasn’t being black.” But when his psycho father got drunk, hit his wife or kids, abandoned them, etc. no one ever accused that guy of not being black. It’s as though the people who are self-defined “defenders of black identity” (both black and white) only accept negative definitions of black.
3) Peter David, you are a racist for not showing more sensitivity to the Borg and the Romulans. There, someone finally said it. Now the healing can begin.
regarding your first point –
Yeah, me too. But generally with black guys who have similar opinions towards race as I do. And by the way – I feel fine using black because they both refer to themselves as black on the rare occasions they refer to their race.
So no, it’s not impossible to talk to somone with a certain point of view – but some really loud guys have made it a scary topic to bring up.
And oh yeah – Borg smell funny!
Jonathan, I’ll have to check that out. Even as popular a voice as Will Smith has addressed the topic in his songs.
I’m white, and have had a few conversations with African-Americans about race without being called a racist.
.
As have I.
.
PAD
And you *still* stereotype Betazoids as empaths/telepaths.
Bigot.
As was briefly mentioned above, I’d like to bring up Bill Cosby again. I read a couple of his speeches taking blacks to task for their lifestyles, and their disinterest in making a better life for themselves, and his outrage at their own indignation because they weren’t getting “what was due them” as children of oppressed. (Please take no offense; I am paraphrasing what he said.)
I know that the Jews have been oppressed for an awfully long time too, and they aren’t the only ones. If you think open discussions about race are tough between a white and a black, try arranging a meaningful discussion between a Jew and an Arab – weapons-free, please!
Personally, I know that even as a lot of different minorities (including, at times, what we consider white “middle-of-the-road” Americans) have had their hard times, I believe that looking back at it in anything in a historical perspective is a step backwards – and quite honestly, we don’t need to revert any further. We need to look FORWARD, to making things better. We’ve made a lot of progress in the last fifty years… not nearly enough, but it’s a start. But it’s ONLY a start.
As for myself… I don’t like to hate people for their race, religion, and so on. I prefer to hate them one on one for their individual traits and beliefs. That’s the problem with bigots in this country… they’re LAZY. They only hate a group of people all together, when groups of people aren’t homogeneous. Hate ’em singly, that’s what I say!
I remain,
Sincerely,
Eric L. Sofer
x<]:o){
The Bad Clown…
“try arranging a meaningful discussion between a Jew and an Arab – weapons-free, please!”
Have you tried?
I cannot say that I have. Still… I don’t know that anyone these days is publicly stating that they’re out to destroy the black race. But you can find plenty who are very vehemently crying for the destruction of Israel and the Jews.
I can’t speak from experience, so maybe you’re trying to make a point that you HAVE tried to arrange such a discussion? If so, please let me know of the results – I would be very interested.
All I know is what I read in the papers. And arguably, a quote that sums it all up: “If the Arabs lay down their weapons, there would be no war. If the Israelis lay down their weapons, there would be no Israel.”
I remain,
Sincerely,
Eric L. Sofer
x<]:o){
The Bad Clown…
“I can’t speak from experience, so maybe you’re trying to make a point that you HAVE tried to arrange such a discussion?”
No, I haven’t. Only a few times, and I wasn’t the organizer. But since neither of us has real experience, I feel your initial statement was out of place.
From the little that I saw, and from wider experience in this region, it seems to me that interactions between arabs and jews can be quite amicable if both sides makes an effort to be polite, but they tend to flounder on certain underlying issues, and then you see how deep the differences are.
““If the Arabs lay down their weapons, there would be no war. If the Israelis lay down their weapons, there would be no Israel.””
There is some truths in this statement, but like everything else about this issue, it is a gross oversimplification. I don’t suggest you use this statement.
” don’t know that anyone these days is publicly stating that they’re out to destroy the black race. But you can find plenty who are very vehemently crying for the destruction of Israel and the Jews.”
One similarity between what Jews went through and what american blacks went through, is the level of dehumanization. Blacks were treated as property, Jews like vermin. I see similarities between the slave ships and the nazi trains to the camps. One difference between the Jewish and black experience is that while blacks were seen as inferior and unworthy, Jews are perceived as evil, sinister, dangerous, which justifies exterminating them. The only thing similar to that that I’ve ever seen was the rabid anti-catholic view of the Catholic Church as an evil cabal. It seemed very similar to the protocols of the elders of zion.
I was raised with Reform Judaism and I’ve had a few meaningful discussions with Arabs about Israel. (One of the things I love, the Palestinians I’ve talked to (who were actually from the West Bank and Gaza strip) were more supportive of Israel’s right to exist than various self-described “Palestinian activists” that I’ve met.
(One particular Palestinian-raised man *really* wanted to see the U.S. taking more of a role in the peace talks. He saw the two groups as in sort of a Mexican standoff, with each being afraid to put down their weapons/walk away first and thought that only the U.S. could separate the two.)
Pete,
Race will always be a sticky subject. At some point everyone just needs to let go of it, though, period. The problem is it is an issue that gives power to people on either side, so as long as you can use it to control people, it isn’t ever going to go away.
Thanks for taking a visible stand, though!
Even racists can have honest opinions, so I don’t know how your being called a racist while expressing your honest opinion is “ironic”. That you understood you would be called a racist by some was merely recognizing reality, not ironic.
And though in my opinion the antiracist community is often too eager to call “racism” all expressions of white privilege (not because they’re wrong, but because I find it counterproductive to group together the milder forms of racism with the more severe forms thereof), boy, you sure as hëll expressed it back then.
Your post back then didn’t seem as a complain about black racism, or about black overreaction to honest opinion. It seemed as a complaint that white racism would be honestly and ACCURATELY perceived to be racism, and declared such.
What the hëll else did you expect, when part of your list of your complaints was that white people aren’t allowed to form exclusive white groups, or that white people aren’t allowed to call black people “nigg-rs”?
Seriously, how clueless can you get?
But one thing’s certain: Someone who’s more worried about being called a racist, (rather than whether they are one), has no place discussing racism.
What the hëll else did you expect, when part of your list of your complaints was that white people aren’t allowed to form exclusive white groups, or that white people aren’t allowed to call black people “nigg-rs”?Seriously, how clueless can you get?
Thank you, thank you, thank you for bring that up. Because you just nailed, right there, the distortions to which my original posting was subject to. This was the most popular, and the most offensive, and the most wrong.
.
I want you to find for me anyplace in the original posting–anywhere in the history of my writings–where I specifically stated I wanted to use racial epithets to describe blacks.
.
I’ll save you time.
.
I didn’t say that. I’ve never said that. I’ve never said anything remotely like that. I considered the term offensive back in the 1960s, never wanted to use it then, never wanted to anymore than I wanted to use any racial epithets. I simply pointed out the truth: That you’ve got some members of the black community condemning it so thoroughly that news organizations refer to it as “the n-word” while others use it freely in their discourse and their music. That that’s indisputably true.
.
But the ONLY way I can be attacked on that observation, since the truth of that cannot be challenged, is to fabricate a lie and say that I’m just dying to utilize racial epithets myself. That is typical of much of the reaction, which was not to what I actually said, but to what others CLAIM I said.
.
Oh, and I didn’t say whites weren’t “allowed” to form whites-only groups. I said that a group specifically formed and explicitly labeled as “whites only” would be condemned as racist. Which it would.
.
What’s sad is that it’s all too typical of people who endeavor to attack my opinions. So when you ask what did I expect, the answer is: Exactly that. Because unfortunately there will always be people who live down to your expectations.
.
PAD
I obviously seem to FAIL at getting your point, after multiple attempts on my part — which you may not believe to have been sincere, but they were.
Anyway, regardless of how you perceive your own words, from this outside perspective over here it still seems to me as if you feel the major expression of racism in America nowadays is white people getting called racists unjustly. I can’t say I feel your pain.
“Regardless of how you perceive your own words.”
.
There. Right there. Perfect. The oft-unexpressed sentiment which fuels so many attacks, encapsulated in eight words. It doesn’t matter what I said. It doesn’t matter what I even think I said. All that matters is what YOU think I said.
.
I mean, I can turn that right around, can’t I? “After multiple attempts on my part–which you may not believe to have been sincere…” Couldn’t I easily make the argument that they were NOT sincere? Would someone who was sincere in trying to get my point–a point which I would hardly have thought was obscure to begin with–feel the need to reword it and then attack the rewording? You may SAY you are sincere, you may even BELIEVE you are sincere, but I could claim that I think that you are insincere. And really…isn’t what I think about what you have to say of far more importance than how you perceive your own words?
.
Do you see now, Aris? Do you see how easy it is to attack and dismiss rather than simply accept what someone is saying?
.
As for the major expression of racism in this country? I don’t know. Again, I don’t know how to quantify it. Muslims being made to feel that all Muslims are potential terrorists is pretty major. Hispanics might have a thing or two to say on prejudice. Mexicans, Asians, Arabs might want to weigh in. And tell me, Aris, how many states are busily passing laws stating that blacks and whites can’t marry as opposed to, say, two men?
.
There are many indisputable acts of racism towards blacks. On the other hand, Bill Maxwell writes of how he’s been physically assaulted by blacks because he said something they didn’t like and is viewed by many as a traitor. And the Protestants hate the Catholics, and the Catholics hate the Protestants, and the Hindus hate the Muslims, and everybody hates the Jews.
.
I mean, is that what this is really all about, Aris? Who gets to be the target of the major expression of racism? Who gets to have the bragging rights to being the most oppressed? Is that what you really want? Do you really want that flag to wave? Because honest to God, if that’s what you want–if that’s what you REALLY want, to have bragging rights for being the most downtrodden–then, man, it’s all yours. You can have it. I don’t know why the hëll you’d WANT it, but by all means, wave it with pride.
.
PAD
PAD, that was really well said.
.
Normally I would have let this go, but I get the feeling that Aris is honest about this. I don’t get the Janine Garafalo “anyone who is against the president is racist because nobody ever complained about a president before they elected a Black man” vibe from him.
.
Could be wrong. There are lots of folks who use “Racist!” as an all purpose argument closer and/or cheap and easy way to elevate themselves, not through the hard work of actual self improvement but rather by trying to lower others.
.
It’s all so counter productive. Anyone not kindly disposed toward improved race relations will only be hardened at the sight of seeing even people sympathetic to the cause being targeted. “See?” they’ll say, “It’s got nothing to do with equality, it’s all a power thing.”
.
And those that are in favor of improving things between groups of people are hardly going to feel terribly inclined toward that endeavor if they feel like there’s a good chance they will end up being attacked and blacklisted for their efforts. There are lots of good causes out there and only a little time to spend on them–why waste the effort for so little reward?
.
Me, I think the best way to do this is on the personal level, one on one, person to person. Doing anything that gets your name out there in the media, especially for a person in a business that is vulnerable to blacklisting and boycotts is taking one hëll of a chance. I admire your tenacity and refusal to be bullied but you’re getting into fights with people who can hurt you and will never ever back down, no matter how weak their arguments or how strong yours. They have too much invested in a certain mindset to change.
I want you to find for me anyplace in the original posting–anywhere in the history of my writings–where I specifically stated I wanted to use racial epithets to describe blacks.
You said, and I quote exactly “I mean, what should we discuss? Racial epithets that whites can only refer to as “the N word” whereas blacks use the term routinely in rap songs? The word “ņìggárdlÿ,” the utterance of which in a private staff meeting resulted in a mayoral aide in Washington, D.C. being forced to resign? What about off-hand jokes by radio personalities that wind up getting them fired from their gig no matter how much they endeavor to apologize for it?” And so on…
In short it was a large list of complaints about racial relations in America; and some of them were actually meaningful and actual complaints. But first in that list was that white people can’t use the word “ņìggër” but that some blacks can.
I never said that *you* said you wanted to use it. You merely complained that other white people can’t.
Oh, and I didn’t say whites weren’t “allowed” to form whites-only groups. I said that a group specifically formed and explicitly labeled as “whites only” would be condemned as racist. Which it would.
Yeah, you seemed to complain about that too. Why? It would be racist. It would be rightfully condemned as racist.
Ah ah ah. You quote what I wrote but don’t read what I wrote. “That whites can only refer to as ‘the N word” is what I said. I was alluding to news coverage, reportage, or other secondary use. If I’d wanted to say, “Racial epithets that blacks can use but whites can’t,” then that’s what I would have said.
.
I never said that *you* said you wanted to use it.
.
Not here and not now. Nor did I say you did. But plenty of others on other website said exactly that. Now if you’re unaware of that, then fine. But if you’re not, then you’re being disingenuous.
.
Yeah, you seemed to complain about that too. Why? It would be racist. It would be rightfully condemned as racist.
.
Wasn’t a complaint. A complaint would be, “How come whites don’t get to do it?” I simply made a flat statement. And it’s true. Is anyone contending that a group were formed called “The Association of White Journalists,” it would NOT be condemned as racist?
.
And by the way…
.
But one thing’s certain: Someone who’s more worried about being called a racist, (rather than whether they are one), has no place discussing racism.
.
On that, we agree. Fortunately, I’m not worried about being called a racist. The proof? I’m willing to discuss racism. Those who are worried about being tagged as a racist avoid the subject entirely…which is precisely what the AG was saying we should NOT do.
.
The sad truth is that the term “racism” is tossed around so liberally that it’s beginning to lose all meaning. What’s my proof of that? On that same black list on which my name appears also is the name, “Harlan Ellison.” Ellison, who marched with Doctor King in Selma before the people making the black list were born. To paraphrase Bill Adama: If he’s a racist, we’re really screwed.
.
PAD
Whoa! Harlan Ellison is on the list? THE Harlan Ellison? Are you sure they aren’t confused with Harley Ericson or Ellie Harland or something?
.
This stuff went straight past joke and right into farce.
If Harlan is on the list, then they should put President Obama on the list. And Martin Luthor King.
Idiots.
I never said that *you* said you wanted to use it. You merely complained that other white people can’t.
No. He. Didn’t. Read it again. And ask yourself, honestly, can you think of any possible way that maybe, just maybe, the complaint was not that Whites can’t use racial epithets but that some Blacks do? Ask yourself, what do you think, based just on his words, not what you want to believe, does this sound like a guy who wants everyone to be able to talk like trashy ignoramuses or does it sound like a guy who would like everyone to avoid the use of gutter words, especially those who might be quick to take umbrage at them.
.
I can’t tell what’s in your heart so for all I know you honestly believe you are justified in assuming the worst in someone, based on little evidence. You should not be surprised though when that proves to be a minority opinion.
.
Oh, and I didn’t say whites weren’t “allowed” to form whites-only groups. I said that a group specifically formed and explicitly labeled as “whites only” would be condemned as racist. Which it would.
.
Yeah, you seemed to complain about that too. Why? It would be racist. It would be rightfully condemned as racist.
.
Again–is the complaint that he can’t form or join these racist groups or that people who would otherwise see these groups for the exclusionary organization that they are see no contradiction in forming or joining equally exclusionary groups? At the very least, can you acknowledge that as a possible alternative explanation? (Not to mention one far more consistent with everything else in PAD’s philosophy and actions).
.
You can well state that neither of us can ever truly know PAD’s intent. A person’s heart and mind are closed to all but themselves. But at least be open to the possibility that your interpretation is not the only one (and, in this case, I would argue it’s not even close to the most reasonable one.)
The thing is… perceived intent only matters so far, and at some point we must see the actual complaint for what it is:
If Peter brought up merely the usage of the word “ņìggër” by black singers, that’d be opposition to black people deprecating other people of their race. Someone (not me) might argue than as an outsider Peter doesn’t get a say — that it’s an internal “black matter”. Others (including me) would argue that antiracists of all races ought be united and make a common front against such language by all. It’s a legitimate point of discussion.
But when he instead complains about the CONTRADICTION, “white people can’t, black people can”, he’s in effect arguing that white people
getting to call black people the n-word would ALSO be as valid as solution as nobody getting to use it at all. Equality uber alles: We all ought be able to insult black people as much as black rappers do! Because the Chinese government itself tortures Chinese people, let’s all go out and torture a Chinaman!
Same with the issue of black-only groups. We can argue whether black-only groups are racist or instead a necessary defensive reaction to white institutional racism (I personally tend to fall inbetween: I consider them non-racist, legimate but often counterproductive defensive reactions).
But when you bring them up in comparison to how white-only groups would be seen as racist (in a long list of other things that would be seen as racist but you argue shouldn’t be), then Peter’s argument seems to be that either BOTH should be seen as racist or that NEITHER should be. And that he’s either okay with both options, or atleast that which solution ought be picked doesn’t concern his current argument.
Take that long paragraph of Peter’s and post it in some white racist forum. I doubt there’s anything in there they’d disagree with. All the contradictions he brings up, are the contradictions white avowed racists themselves bring up. Though THEIR solutions are different (they’d want everyone to use “ņìggër”, Peter wants nobody to), the complaints are identical.
Take that long paragraph of Peter’s and post it in some white racist forum. I doubt there’s anything in there they’d disagree with.
.
Funny thing: I didn’t notice it being posted in any white racist forums. At least my google searches at the time didn’t turn up any. But in forums overseen and frequented by blacks? All over the place. And all condemning. And all rewording it and condemning it.
.
And you blithely ignore context, Aris. Why did I have the comparisons? Because the AG talked about A NATION OF COWARDS. And I endeavored to put forward the reasons why the white part of that nation might indeed have reluctance to discuss the matter that aren’t a matter so much of cowardice as just being weary of being condemned as racist if the wrong word is spoken.
.
Your alternatives as to how I “should” have put forward the discussion are dubious at best, ridiculous at worst. I should have skipped over the white perspective and discussed only the black perspective? Seriously? I mean…SERIOUSLY? You truly think that the AG’s desire for a white/black dialogue over race relations is for whites to discuss the black point of view for them? How can you remotely put that notion forward? We’re talking white and black. Compare and contrast. I compared, I contrasted, and I’m condemned for THAT?
.
Captain Irony’s work is never done.
.
PAD
“I should have skipped over the white perspective and discussed only the black perspective? […] We’re talking white and black. Compare and contrast. I compared, I contrasted, and I’m condemned for THAT?”
So basically your “white perspective”, and the main complain of whites, is that whites are called “racists” more often than black people are.
If I were to discuss Greek-majority-vs-Albanian-minority relations, “Greeks are more often perceived as exploitators of Albanians than vice-versa” would be way down my list. Towards the top of my list would be that Greeks more often ARE exploitators of Albanians than vice versa.
You contrasted black with white, and you didn’t see political or financial or societal imbalance or imbalance in media representation, you mainly saw — that white people are called “racists” more often?
Okay. Yeah, in that case, I think you were rightfully condemned for that.
Or perhaps I’m misinterpreting you again.
So basically your “white perspective”, and the main complain of whites, is that whites are called “racists” more often than black people are.
.
Well, no. I wouldn’t know how to make that complaint because I would have no idea how to quantify it. “More often than?” I think whites get called racists, I think blacks get called racists. I wasn’t keeping a running tally. So basically that would be a pretty stupid complaint to make and easily challenged and dismissed…which is why, I suppose, you made it on my behalf, challenged it, and dismissed it.
.
PAD
I obviously seem to FAIL at getting your point, after multiple attempts on my part — which you may not believe to have been sincere, but they were.
Anyway, regardless of how you perceive your own words, from this outside perspective over here it still seems to me as if you feel the major expression of racism in America nowadays is white people getting called racists unjustly. I can’t say I feel your pain.
The complaint is more that a white person (actually, when I think about it i really prefer pink and brown) a pink should be allowed to call a brown person ņìggër as but that a pink person can’t even use it in a sentence without being called a racist.
And I’ve seen groups that call themselves blacks only. Is that racist?
But if you use “pink” aren’t you afraid of being called a Commie? 🙂 (Sorry, just trying to lighten the mood somewhat)
Bill, I’ve not seen that particular list myself, but I wonder if Ellison’s on it because of sexism, not racism. There was some fuss some years ago in anti-sexism circles about him groping Connie Willis at the Hugos 2006 presentation.
So reasons matter on a black list. Tailgunner Joe had his reasons as well. That’s certainly the moral pool that anyone wants to be swimming in.
.
PAD
Oh, I read them, Craig. I just don’t feel that I (or black people, or anyone else) are under any obligation to give them the best possible spin imaginable.
You and Peter may both start off with the assumption that Peter is a swell guy. I don’t.
The benefit of the doubt is all he gets from me. And not everyone’s obliged to give him that much either.
‘What the hëll else did you expect, when part of your list of your complaints was that white people aren’t allowed to form exclusive white groups, or that white people aren’t allowed to call black people “n****rs”?’
Just wanted to recap your argument for anyone who comes in late:
You complained about the above and Mr David explained that he did not do any of that.
You then changed you argument and kept fighting.
I’m gonna give you a bit of advice. When you are wrong and if you’ve been unfair to anyone, which you have been, you should apologise.
To keep mewling the way you are is embarrassing at best and pathetic at worst
And this is advice from someone who frequently gets it wrong and often apologies.
I didn’t change my argument one iota, Elton. My argument remains the same: That in his list of complains, he mentions that white people aren’t allowed to use the word “ņìggër”, and that they aren’t allowed to form exclusive white groups.
What Mr David claims, is that he didn’t mean it like I perceived him to mean it. That I was ignoring his “context”. That he was merely providing the “white perspective”. That he was “comparing and contrasting”. One of those thingies.
But I got his words accurate. He simply supposedly didn’t mean them like this white European over here, and seemingly most black Americans over there, perceived him to mean them.
“To keep mewling the way you are is embarrassing at best and pathetic at worst”
Oh, I certainly find something pathetic in this whole discussion. But whether I’ve been mewling or not, I’ve not changed my argument: If Mr. David doesn’t want people to accuse him of racism, then let him not insert in a list of complaints a sentence about exclusive white groups being called “racist”, or about white people not being able to use the word “ņìggër”.
Not even as a “compare and contrast” methodology. If anything that’s even more offensive: That’s like a king comparing his quality of life to that of a peasant and the only thing he finds to say is that the peasants have it easier since they don’t have to wear such a dámņ heavy crown.
But I got his words accurate.
But you continue to fail to actually read them.
Oh, I read them, Craig. I just don’t feel that I (or black people, or anyone else) are under any obligation to give them the best possible spin imaginable.
You and Peter may both start off with the assumption that Peter is a swell guy. I don’t.
The benefit of the doubt is all he gets from me. And not everyone’s obliged to give him that much either.
If Mr. David doesn’t want people to accuse him of racism, then let him not insert in a list of complaints a sentence about exclusive white groups being called “racist”, or about white people not being able to use the word “ņìggër”.
.
And that’s all it would have taken, huh? Allow me to respond:
.
Bûllšhìŧ.
.
There are plenty of people out there ready to contend that simply the fact that I’m white makes me a racist. That I can’t help it; it’s so thoroughly inculcated into my upbringing that I’m a racist and don’t even know it.
.
The fact that I made ANY commentary on race AT ALL was enough to put me on the radar of exactly the kind of people I was referring to in the first place. The ones who will shout “Racist!” first and ask questions never. The AG claimed that there is a reluctance to discuss race in this country and the reactions to my initial blog–to say nothing of the reactions Maxwell gets to his columns–underscores precisely why that is. It’s not cowardice. It’s that people figure, why endure the unending attacks, hostilities, condemnation, lampooning and shitstorms? What’s in it for them?
.
Guess what, Aris? I’m not a coward. That should earn me the praise of the AG while at the same time it earns me hostilities, boycotts and black lists from the very people responsible for the mindset that the AG condemns.
.
But please, don’t give me this business that the deliberate distortion of my comments on racial epithets or white-only groups (which, by the way, WOULD be condemned as racist, which we both know, so why are you arguing that?) was the only reason that the howling started. You know perfectly well that there’s plenty of people out there whose reaction was, “Where does Peter David get off addressing matters of race? He’s white! Obviously he’s a racist!”
.
For instance, I contended that Obama’s election was a major step forward in race relations. That got transformed into, “Peter David says that with Obama’s election, racism is over! What a clueless fool!” Except of course I never said that. In fact, I pointed out in previous discussions the unfairness of the fact that had it been revealed early on that Obama had a teen daughter, pregnant and unmarried, that’s it. Game over. He doesn’t get to say, “This is a private family matter and the press should stay out of it.” Instead it becomes this massive referendum on whether black men are lousy fathers because their teen daughters are getting knocked up. Obama’s done. Never gets elected. For a white woman, it became an issue, but not a campaign-ending one, and certainly not a referendum on white motherhood.
.
If critics can take my being pleased that a black man was elected president as a sign that I’m a clueless racist, then I really think you’ve got nothing upon which to stake your contention that it was merely those two examples that stoked their fury.
.
I mean, seriously. I don’t mind that you think I’m stupid, but don’t treat me as if I am.
.
PAD
Oh, I read them, Craig. I just don’t feel that I (or black people, or anyone else) are under any obligation to give them the best possible spin imaginable.
.
No one is claiming that you should. I’m saying that you’re giving them the WORST possible spin imaginable. Thus proving my point all the more.
.
Allow me to give you an example of how it would go if I treated you the way you’re treating me. I would take your comment above–in which you said I should not include upon my “list of complaints” that white-only groups would be considered racist, and say, “So basically Aris is contending that white only groups are NOT racist. The KKK is a whites-only group. Aris believes that the KKK isn’t racist? Wonderful. Nice job, Aris. You support the KKK, you bigot.”
.
See how easy it is?
.
PAD
Oh, I read them, Craig. I just don’t feel that I (or black people, or anyone else) are under any obligation to give them the best possible spin imaginable.
.
You are also not obligated to give them the worst spin imaginable either, yet that is exactly what you are doing. And it’s completely disingenuous.
To me it seemed that your argument changed from condemning Mr. David for wanting to set up a ‘whites only group’ and use the n-word to ‘ ..it still seems to me as if you feel the major expression of racism in America nowadays is white people getting called racists unjustly.’
Which I don’t believe he did. But then again maybe I’m taking you out of context. Speaking of context:
What Mr David claims, is that he didn’t mean it like I perceived him to mean it. That I was ignoring his “context”.
Here’s a lesson in ‘Context’:
Everything I say is a lie. You only every try to see the good in people and are ever quick to go on a witch-hunt.
Read the second sentence and feel good about yourself for a while. Then tell your friends ‘Elton said ‘You only every try to see the good in people and are ever quick to go on a witch-hunt.”
Would you get my words accurate- but your friends would laugh at you all the same. Sometimes context is everything.
The benefit of the doubt is all he gets from me.
Maybe you could have read the post in a similar manner to the way I did:
‘This is Peter David’s blog. The man writes Star Trek. Star Trek is story about how earth has risen above the petty arguments of race and religion and humanity has gone to explore the stars in unity. Not exactly the reading material of the Klan. I’ll look at his arguments subjectively and with the presumption that he is trying to be balanced and above all not racist.’
dang. I meant ‘never quick’ not ever quick in the above.
There seems to be a disconnect here between discussing a topic and thinking that the writer’s personal beliefs are what he is discussing.
.
Well, this is the internet, Alan, where Reading Comprehension 101 is not required. Indeed, it’s not even encouraged.
“try arranging a meaningful discussion between a Jew and an Arab – weapons-free, please!”
Have you tried?
You know, if racists took a page from the marketing community a lot of headaches would be saved.
Hasbro was going to have to pay a hefty tariff on GI Joe toys, as any dolls being imported from China were taxed. No problem – GI Joe was no longer a doll, it was an “Action Figure”.
Just use a new term, and the arguments start from zero again. You can’t do commercials that “target black people”. That’s racist. But you can “appeal to an urban demographic” all day long.
As we all know, the words you use are far more important to people than the ideas you express. So my advice to racists – rather than continue to argue over getting to use or not use the old hackneyed expressions, come up with new ones.
By avoiding the confronational words, almost all the controversy is diffused. If a black leader accuses you of racism, he’s got to resort to hand-waving and accusations of “We all know what he meant”, which you can easily combat with “Apparently NO ideas are acceptable to this man – if he can’t find racism, he infers it”, effectively puttig the burden of proof on him.
With only a few deft strokes of the pen, you can be back on track in no time.
Aaron McGruder has said much the same things as Maxwell did, in his strips/cartoons and in public, and gotten about the same reaction.
“Ya know people, I can’t say I’m black, but there’s a whole lotta times I wish I could say I’m not white.”
Frank Zappa
Bill Maxwell of the St. Pete Times — a worthy columnist.
More irony found today on Newarama from a comment in response to the story about Fallen Angel’s return.
.
Quote:
“However, given Peter David’s recent broadsides against torrenting of comics, and his active hostility to people who got into his work via downloading, I feel like I should respect his wishes and drop Fallen Angel.”
.
*shakes head*
He was trying to pick a fight and be a dìçk. That NEVER happens on the Internet…
.
PAD