It's quite a world we live in, folks. Apparently, I can waltz over to North Minneapolis, find an African American, call them a "nigger," and then if they call me a racist, they are the ones that are at fault.
That's basically what happened to British PM Gordon Brown. In a campaign stop, he listened to a woman complain about Eastern Europeans coming in and taking over. Still mic'd, he called her a bigot. The world press is now saying he made a gaffe and he has been falling over himself to apologize. In fact, they have made this woman out to be a victim and now she has her own PR person.
Am I missing something here? The woman was a bigot and he called her on it. Who the fuck cares? And why is any of it his fault?
The same bullshit is happening here. Call someone a racist and you are immediately worse than them. Better still, they are now completely innocent! All is forgiven. The ass hat machine of the Cult will be up your ass with a tweezers and before you know it, the bigots are the victims. Trot out Al Sharpton and then the party really gets started with hate, anger and rage crowd.
Fucking beautiful.
9 comments:
awwww, cant play the race card anymore?
In my spare time this morning, I read eleven different UK papers regarding this episode, watched the video in question, and read the transcript of the conversation. I went off on a tangent to investigate the history of immigration in GB, both historically and more recently. Charts, graphs, facts & figures, and a healthy dollop of 'reader comments'.
I came up with two solid opinions regarding this brouhaha:
1) I regretted the US of A's puritan roots, as I read a whole story on Jennifer Aniston's perky nipples.
2) Her comment didn't seem to be the words of a bigot to me.
This paper seemed well written though, for those of you who want to be more informed on the topic for personal reasons.
http://www.population-growth-migration.info/essays/Dr2Pro-immigration.html
dw
Still distracted by those nipples I guess. Here is my direct retort Mark.
"Nigger!" = bigot
"You can't say anything about the immigrants ... but all these Eastern Europeans what are coming in, where are they flocking from?" =/= bigot.
In my opinion, the lady in question acknowledges the political correctness machine that prevents honest discussion, then asks a question regarding immigration.
Here in the US of A, I think the 'liberal' side of the debate is the first to yell RACIST!, and prevent any discussion. Your reference to Al Sharpton only solidifies my opinion. Why you would try to pin this on hard working musicians like The Cult, escapes my logic.
Using the the n-word is not what makes one a bigot. African Americans occasionally use it among themselves as a term of affection.
You are a racist or bigot if you espouse racist and bigoted attitudes, policies and laws. Euphemisms are often used by bigots and racists as they dance around the issue and dress up their bigotry.
As we've mentioned before, many code words have entered the vernacular to express racist and bigoted attitudes: welfare queen = inner city black, illegal immigrant = any Mexican, state's rights = the ability to treat other races differently from whites, and, I'm sure in some circles, racist = rural southern white male.
You are a racist or a bigot when you make judgments about an individual or class of individuals based on some characteristic over which the person has no control, and ascribe qualities (usually negative, though not always) to all members of of that group.
So, for example, saying, "White men can't jump" is a bigoted attitude, as are "Women are too emotional to be president," "Blacks are lazy" and "Blacks have good rhythm."
But saying "Conservatives who favor the Arizona illegal immigration law are racists" is not bigoted. It is, admittedly, making an assumption that may not be correct: that someone who favors a racist law is a racist. It's certainly possible that a non-racist could favor a racist law (usually those who say "Why, some of my best friends are Hispanic"), but tolerance of certain individuals is a moot point when you promulgate policies that are detrimental to an entire group.
Similarly, saying "Mexicans who smuggle drugs are destroying the fabric of society," is not bigoted. Saying "Black rappers who sing about killing cops and abusing women are nothing but thugs" is not bigoted. These statements might be wrong when they're applied to a particular individual, but they're not racist.
The right is always complaining about how terrible political correctness is when they get called for attaching derisive labels to the objects of their scorn. Yet they scream bloody murder when someone attaches the label "bigot" or "racist" to them when they're espousing policies that negatively affect minority populations.
If you expect to be able to call a spade a spade, you can't go crying to mommy when someone does the same thing to you.
@blk:
Although I'm still unclear on your position, I choose to dissect one piece of your post. IF "Mexicans who smuggle drugs are destroying the fabric of society is not bigoted."; THEN why is it bigoted for 70% of AZ voters to say that illegal immigrants are destroying the fabric of AZ society?
"Mexican drug smuggler" vs "illegal immigrant".... Isn't illegal immigrant just a code word for Mexican drug smuggler? If it is, then it isn't bigoted according to your statement. But you claim here (and have in the past) that those magic 'code words' are racist. I must admit I'm a bit confused.
And yet it is Democrats, not Republicans, who think awarding or denying government benefits based on skin color or ethnicity is not only acceptable, but should be mandatory. What's up with that?
I think the 'liberal' side of the debate is the first to yell RACIST!
You forgot to say that this is usually followed by a hair-shirt confession about that liberal's OWN racist tendencies, and thus if HE feels that way, well then EVERYONE must.
African Americans occasionally use it among themselves as a term of affection.
Hmm, Chris Rock seems to use it a LOT more than occasionally. Although I suppose he means it as a term of affection on occasion.
Euphemisms are often used by bigots and racists as they dance around the issue and dress up their bigotry.
Makes you kinda long for the days of "we must protect our white women". Not that much though, since "for the children" is all but the same.
For anyone that's keeping track, other than me; this post is currently the last of one whole webpage, spanning 6/7 of Mark-posts where the 'conservative' viewpoint has the last word. Can I at least get a "Ah.. The Rove" to let me know that 'you liberals' are paying attention. I assume you can't win on the merits of your argument, so you've conveniently vanished. How does that make you feel? Does it make you question your outlook regarding reality? Are any of the pillars that uphold your mindset quaking?
Please, someone disagree with me with facts, logic, and reasoning. Or else I am forced to assume that you are a racist, homophobe, gypsy-hater who is worse than Pol Pot.
dw
dw-
Aside from the bile spewing from the Professors of Tolerance, you might also note the absence of discussion (let alone persuasive argument) about the policies they want.
Still no discussion of what is actually in the health care reform act - just a little faint cheering when it passed.
And "they" (including M) have the audacity to call anyone else a cult?
As for me, I'm off on two weeks vacation with no internet. See y'all when I get back.
Post a Comment