The passage of California's anti-gay marriage Prop. 8 with the strong support of that state's African-American churches led to heated complaints by some supporters of marriage equality (including author/activist Robin Tyler, as we noted here), which were quickly met with cries of "racial scape-goating" from the politically correct crowd. The issue then died down - Mormons and white evangelicals being far easier to protest against. But the role of black churches has come to the fore again, this time in Washington, D.C., where the City Council just voted to recognize same-sex marriages from other states, and openly gay City Councilmember David Catania is preparing to introduce a bill to recognize same-sex marriages performed in the district.
Former D.C. mayor and current City Councilmember Marion Barry, an otherwise very left-liberal Democrat, is a vocal opponent of marriage equality and declared, "We may have a civil war. The black community is just adamant against this." (IGF contributing author David Boaz has more about Marion Barry, Defender of Marriage.)
According to the Washington Blade story "Barry warns of racial divide over marriage":
Barry's comments came after more than a dozen black ministers and members of their churches in D.C. and Maryland rushed out of the Council chamber following the vote [recognizing same-sex marriages performed elsewhere] and shouted their disapproval of the Council's action.
The paper goes on to note:
Statements by local ministers that they planned to work for the election defeat of Council members who supported the D.C. marriage bill prompted a church-state watchdog group to warn that it would monitor the ministers' actions. Rev. Barry Lynn, executive director of Americans United for the Separation of Church and State, said churches could lose their tax-exempt status under federal tax law if they become involved in partisan politics.
Given the long-standing role of black churches on behalf of liberal causes and candidates, it's good to see them getting some of the same scrutiny that's been, quite rightly, focused on conservative churches involved in political action. It may be that marriage-equality advocates are finally realizing what they should have learned in California - just because religious leaders are black and Democrats doesn't require us to give them a pass when they mobilize to fight against our rights.
More. From the Wasington Examiner, Battle over gay marriage in D.C. raises questions of racial divide, quoting Bishop Harry Jackson, the leader of a black mega-church who is emerging as a national leader in the fight against gay marriage:
Black people have been silent for too long on matters of "righteousness," Jackson said. Gay marriage offers the perfect opportunity to refocus their political power.
62 Comments for “Color Blinded”
posted by Bobby on
This is just great, a former crack user defending traditional marriage.
To all those gays who support affirmative action, how do you feel right now?
I’m not really surprised, there are plenty of blacks that are greedy when it comes to civil rights. It’s all me, me, me.
And then they have the audacity to complain about racism in the gay community.
One thing is certain, gays should be afraid of a civil war, most gays are unarmed and outnumbered yet Washington DC is filled with armed gangs. So if I was living in DC, I would start packing today.
We can only hope that the gangs are more interested in selling drugs than in defending traditional marriage, which would be ironic since most gang members come from broken homes anyway.
posted by Pat on
Sorry, these persons don’t get a pass from me. And there is so much about Marion Barry that he doesn’t deserve to get a pass from me if I was so inclined.
posted by Jorge on
It’s about time someone took a good look at the black churches’ political activities. Their integrity suffers without it.
Obviously I’m not with Barry here, but why is it in a city that’s majority African American, where presumably most African Americans are against gay marriage, that you get only one opponent of this bill? That speaks to a certain political ignorance and powerlessness. I’m sure that’s one of the reasons Washington DC has such a low quality of life, education, etc. Where were all these ministers and where was all this black community outrage before? Because their absence is exactly why us minority gays are getting served before the majority blacks.
posted by David Link on
Jorge, I think I’m more inclined to trust the political leadership of DC about what their folks want. It looks to me like a little under half of the city council is African-American, and they’re a lot closer to their constituents than I am. It looke to me like Barry is trying to stir up a controversy out of a prejudice his fellow African-Americans are willing to let die. They may even believe it would be a better politics for them and for their city if they could get past this issue. Whatever their reasons, though, I assume they are savvy politicians and public servants, and have thought about this vote from an awful lot of perspectives — and, in the end, believe that there is enough support for it in their districts.
posted by BobN on
Marion Barry’s continuing political career mystifies me, yet I’m sort of glad he voted no. It’s started a mini-brouhaha and has gotten a lot of people talking. And the more people talk, the more people shift to our side.
posted by Audrey the Libertarian on
Bobby, put down The Turner Diaries.
posted by Bobby on
“Bobby, put down The Turner Diaries.”
—I don’t read homophobic and anti-semitic crap, although I’ve always wanted to read that book, I hear it’s really interesting, then again, they portray a republican as a pedophile and they nuke Israel, so it’s not exactly something fun to read.
I do believe in survival. A good friend of mine is 59, liberal, gay and harmless. He was working out in his condo gym, a woman complained that he was starring at her, he told her he wasn’t and that he’s gay. Her 24 year old boyfriend assaulted him, twice! Once in the gym, a second time in the elevator. Luckily the perp got arrested, he’s now out on bail, and might be facing criminal charges, but my friend is covered with bruises.
You see the kind of world we live in? You see why I’m such a fierce advocate of guns and self-defense?
Washington DC is full of gangs, what if they decide to pay Dupont Circle a visit? You saw what they did to the Koreans during the Rodney King riots, you saw the looting, pillage, beatings, and general destruction. In places like Oakland California they hold parades for cop killers! So if Marion Barry is warning us about a civil war, maybe he knows something we don’t.
posted by David Link on
“So if Marion Barry is warning us about a civil war, maybe he knows something we don’t.”
Or maybe he’s spouting nonsense. I know it’s hard to believe that of him. . .
posted by Jorge on
Jorge, I think I’m more inclined to trust the political leadership of DC about what their folks want. It looks to me like a little under half of the city council is African-American, and they’re a lot closer to their constituents than I am.
I would be interested to know in what experience, research, or gut instinct you base your trust on.
I base my skepticism on observing the local politics of NYC–which is admittedly doing a lot better than DC. Probably a few other observations that I cannot name. Our City Council is ideologically similar to the public, but it also regularly does things that go against what most people want, and it does sometimes go on ideological tangents. But most people do not pay attention to what it does and reflexively vote for their councilperson regardless of how much negative publicity they receive–which usually isn’t much. It’s very hard to unseat a sitting councilperson, since they’ll have the support of the (sometimes suspect) political establishment during the primary, and they’re all smart enough to make a few community appearances and pass a couple of pork-barrel items.
So no, I don’t think the DC City Council merits a presumption of representing the will of the electorate.
posted by french62 on
Marion B.,
You truly live in the ghetto of your own mind and making. Your incitement of human passions via such ignorant and reprehensible statements such as …civil war…. I mean really, how pathetic. You do all the black community a disservice with such drivel. I can assure you Mr. Barry that there are many, many homo’s of every walk of life out here who are weaponed-up and fully prepared to protect themselves and their families from the likes of you and the haters you incite.
As the Sage once stated: Be careful what you wish for…
Have a Thoughtful Day
posted by mademark on
Among the unfortunate things in this whole situation is that African-Americans who are supportive of marriage equality (and there are many, from Governor Paterson of New York to Rev. Al Sharpton to Cornel West to Ta-Nehisi Coates) aren’t given the microphone or the air time. It’s been that way forever with right-wing Christians being given TV time when the thousands of liberal Christians have been kept voiceless. What bleeds, leads, as they say in the media biz, and screaming evangelicals make better circus. One might conclude from the coverage that all black people are homophobes and all black preachers bigots, which is not the case. Sometimes I have to remind myself of that.
posted by Bobby on
“It’s been that way forever with right-wing Christians being given TV time when the thousands of liberal Christians have been kept voiceless. ”
—I don’t know what evangelical christian station you’re watching, but most TV stations aren’t interested in the evangelical christian point of view.
Only Fox News presents ALL points of view -rightwing, moderate, leftwing, liberarian, conservative, radical, etc.
posted by Richard J. Rosendall on
Marion Barry’s statement about a civil war is way over the top (even he has admitted as much), and his claim that black people in D.C. are adamant against marriage equality is simply not consistent with the available evidence. I have polling data from Celinda Lake (which I helped commission in 2006 as vice chair of the Foundation for All D.C. Families) that show a significant minority of likely black voters in D.C. support legal protections for same-sex couples and oppose a hypothetical anti-gay ballot initiative. Barry talks as if all black people agree with him, and that’s not true. Overall, D.C. voters SUPPORT marriage equality.
Bishop Harry Jackson, who has led the anti-gay effort, promised 1,000 protesters at Freedom Plaza on April 28, and only about 150 showed up. He claims to have 100 ministers on his side, but refuses to publish a list and we have seen little more than a dozen. My contacts among D.C. black ministers indicate that most of them, even if they do not support SSM, are steering clear of Jackson because they are embarrassed by him and feel exploited by him. There is also a group forming of gay-affirming D.C. clergy, most of them black, who are going to issue a statement in support of marriage equality. I should note also that D.C. marriage equality activists across the racial spectrum are working closely together.
Six out of the seven black members of the D.C. Council (which has a total of 13 members) voted for final passage on May 5 of the bill to recognize SSMs from other jurisdictions. Most are telling us they are holding firm in support of equality, contrary to a story last week in the Washington Times that suggested several are wavering.
Here are links to relevant material from the Gay and Lesbian Activists Alliance of Washington, D.C., of which I am political vice president. I have made the talking points document into a flyer which we are distributing. A Spanish-language version is in preparation.
Talking Points on Marriage Equality in D.C.
Previous idle threats from Rev. Anthony Evans
My report on D.C. Council vote
Where They Stand: D.C. Officials on Defending Gay Families
A Timeline on Marriage Recognition in D.C.
Besides GLAA, others working on the issue in D.C. include D.C. for Marriage, which focuses on grassroots organizing; the Gertrude Stein Democratic Club, which helped get the D.C. Democratic State Committee to endorse marriage equality last week; and the Campaign for All D.C. Families, an IRS 501(c)(4) organization that I helped instigate for the purpose of lobbying and campaigning in defense of marriage equality. We are also getting help from national organizations including HRC, the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, the National Black Justice Coalition, and Freedom to Marry. Several attorneys have offered their help, and the local chapter of ACLU is a close ally.
posted by Greg on
I would like to point out that after prop 8 passed an exit poll that indicated the 70% of blacks voted for prop 8. This led to many cases of racism from white gays and labeling of blacks as a whole as homophobic by some. The poll was later proven very wrong and criticism of black churched died down.
While homophobic churches that mostly black in parishioners should not be ignored, I just wanted to point out that criticism of them died down because of a very bad reaction from a few white gays based on bad information after prop 8.
posted by Richard J. Rosendall on
Here’s an update from The Washington Blade:
10 Council members back same-sex marriage bill; Stances contradict Washington Times report
In support of Greg’s point, here’s a blog entry from Nate Silver of FiveThirtyEight from November 11, 2008:
Prop 8 Myths
posted by Bobby on
Fine, not all blacks are homophobic, just 70% of them 🙂
Either way, minority politics won’t work anymore. There’s no use in blaming the Mormons and the Catholics if we don’t blame black churches as well.
posted by Richard J. Rosendall on
Bobby, both criticism and credit should be given where due. In the case of black churches, I’ve pointed out things regarding black ministers in D.C. that go against the “blacks are against us” theme. And there were many African American organizations on our side in opposing Prop 8 last year, including the statewide consortium of NAACP chapters, the National Black Justice Coalition, the National Black Police Association, the National Congress of Black Women, and many black pastors. It is uninformed and distinctly unhelpful to hold forth on blacks and Prop 8 without taking these facts into account. We need to build on the support we have, and make better use of our allies.
Here in D.C., one straight black minister regularly calls me to discuss the situation on the marriage fight and how to defeat Bishop Harry Jackson et al.
posted by BobN on
It is uninformed and distinctly unhelpful to hold forth on blacks and Prop 8 without taking these facts into account.
Well, it’s certainly uninformed but it’s quite helpful to those whose goals have little to do with gay rights.
posted by Bobby on
Richard, you’re a “glass-half full” guy when it comes to blacks and “glass-half empty” when it comes to whites.
Minority groups for the most part are politically incorrect. Most of the triumphs of the gay community are the result of liberal whites in academia, entertainment and law.
When was the last time you saw a gay character on BET? Or one that wasn’t a stereotype on Univision or Telemundo? And forget about asian television in the states, gays are a big taboo in those cultures.
If you want to fight homophobia, you have to call it what it is where you see it even if they call you a racist for it.
posted by Richard J. Rosendall on
Bobby wrote, “Richard, you’re a ‘glass-half full’ guy when it comes to blacks and ‘glass-half empty’ when it comes to whites.”
Bobby, I cited facts. I also acknowledged that we have more work to do. That contradicts your characterization. As to the second half of your remark, where in the world are you getting the idea that I am a “glass half empty” guy when it comes to whites? Don’t make stuff up about me just because you think it sounds clever.
I seldom watch those channels, so I can’t speak about them. OTOH, I know a good deal about gay rights activism at the local level in Washington, D.C. There is substantial black leadership within that effort, and we have substantial support from the straight black population. I did not just say we have no work to do to improve our support in the black community; of course we have more work to do. But we’re building on what we have, not starting from scratch. Bishop Jackson and Councilmember Barry would like for people to believe that all black people agree with them, and that is very far from being the case.
posted by Trey on
Richard,
Thanks for dispelling some of the more damaging myths that surround African-Americans. It’s refreshing to see that not everyone is given to knee-jerk reactions to political opportunists.
posted by Bobby on
Yes Richard, you cited facts, I don’t deny there are gay-friendly African-Americans out there, my argument is that there are the minority. You focus on the good, I focus on the bad.
Facts are a funny thing, you can always find those that support your point of view:
Obama acknowledges homophobia in the black community.
http://www.americablog.com/2009/01/debate-continues-over-homophobia-in.html
“where in the world are you getting the idea that I am a “glass half empty” guy when it comes to whites?”
—From reading your columns and past statements I get a feeling you’re more likely to defend minorities and blame majorities. But fine, maybe I was wrong to draw that assumption, maybe you’ll have no problem supporting the rights of white University of Alabama students as they celebrate “old south week,” an event where they dress up in civil war costumes, carry battle flags and party.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,520116,00.html
Blacks at that university are protesting of course. Diversity is fine and dandy as long as nobody else gets to celebrate his.
So if blacks in Alabama can’t tolerate good ol’ boys celebrating their history, what makes you think they’ll tolerate same-sex marriage?
I’ve seen groups of African-Americans protesting outside of a gay bar in Dallas, TX. Ask anyone who lives in Cedar Springs and they’ll tell you of the tensions of having a gay ghetto next to a black ghetto.
What’s wrong with agreeing that blacks are more homophobic than whites? Admitting that would allow our community to shift political strategies away from preaching to the converted, attacking the never-changing (Catholics, Mormons), and ignoring a group that may or may not be willing to change.
posted by Trey on
Isn’t the reasoning behind needing strategies for equality the fact that gay rights supporters are in the minority in general. What’s wrong with agreeing that blacks are more homophobic than whites? It’s a prejudiced and bigoted statement.
The University of Alabama students are perfectly within their rights to celebrate the “Old South,” just as other students are within their rights to condemn it.
posted by Richard J. Rosendall on
Bobby, black voters in D.C. (and I have expensively obtained, first-rate polling data backing this up) are more opposed to civil marriage equality than white voters. I thought that was already understood. I am in the midst of a fight on the subject here in D.C., and all of us who are working on it, black and white, agree that the bulk of our efforts need to occur in the eastern half of the city, which is predominantly black. That is not in dispute. My point is that we have substantial support there on which to build, including black clergy who met the other day at the Howard University School of Divinity to organize their own effort on behalf of equality and to counter the anti-gay ministers. For goodness’ sake, celebrate that or celebrate our inequality. If we don’t give credit where due, however small, we undercut our own efforts.
The problem, it seems to me, Bobby, is that you appear eager to hold onto some convenient static nostrum rather than recognize that we are working in a changing landscape. If your main purpose is to be scornful toward blacks, you can use polling numbers to support your position; but I am an activist working for change, thus I look at things in a more constructive way.
In addition, I have been laboring in these vineyards for nearly 30 years. If all I had learned to do in all that time of interacting with black Washingtonians was to sit back and sneer, I wouldn’t have learned or accomplished much. As it happens, six out of seven black D.C. Council members voted FOR civil marriage equality on May 5. In the face of that, to insist on focusing solely or primarily on the one who voted “no” suggests prejudice. (BTW, thank you, Trey, for your comment.)
As to students in the old South celebrating the “lost cause,” there is no text on planet earth that matters more to me than the First Amendment. In one of the FAQs on GLAA’s website I defend the right of Fred Phelps to spew his over-the-top hateful homophobia. You would have to have made a highly selective reading of my work to have missed this about me. One example is First Amendment, Last in Our Hearts. People are free to say foolish things, and as Trey notes, others are free to refute them.
It has occurred to me that often, in online discussion forums like these on IGF, those who argue in stark black-and-white terms, and who seem more interested in scoring points than in having a productive discussion, treat as a weakness anyone else’s more nuanced approach. That attitude could not be more wrong, but people can suit themselves.
posted by jim on
divide and conquer
posted by Bobby on
“What’s wrong with agreeing that blacks are more homophobic than whites? It’s a prejudiced and bigoted statement.”
—So if I write “Christians are more homophobic than secular people” would you also call that a bigoted statement? Or is it only bigoted when it’s truthful?
“The University of Alabama students are perfectly within their rights to celebrate the “Old South,” just as other students are within their rights to condemn it.”
—I doubt Harvard, Stanford, Berkeley and the typical leftwing universities would tolerate “Old South.” More likely, the minorityfascists would probably fight to have it banned.
posted by Bobby on
Richard, first of all, kudos for doing something about the problem.
“If your main purpose is to be scornful toward blacks, you can use polling numbers to support your position;”
—My main purpose is telling the truth no matter whom it hurts. Homophobia from liberals, secularists, and racial minorities is more dangerous because it’s often not acknowledged or excused.
Eminem was the perfect example, years ago there was an outcry about his anti-gay and anti-women lyrics yet other rappers who happen to be black have been doing the same or worst for years.
“In the face of that, to insist on focusing solely or primarily on the one who voted “no” suggests prejudice. (BTW, thank you, Trey, for your comment.)”
—One of the things I’ve never liked about the NRA is that they preach mostly to the converted, gun ownerss, instead of reaching out to the uncoverted. I feel the gay community spends way too much energy attacking the usual suspects and preaching to the usual friends instead of focusing on the problem areas. I’m glad you’re doing something about it, but HRC, NGLTF and GLAAD hardly care.
I was wrong about your support of the first amendment, I stand corrected.
posted by Richard J. Rosendall on
Bobby wrote, “My main purpose is telling the truth no matter whom it hurts.”
A selective approach to the truth, in which you talk only about the negative side of the ledger, is just as bad as the anti-gay ministers quoting selectively from biblical passages. Letting the chips fall where they may is fine, but you seem to be more interested in poking people in the eye than in enlightening. The whole truth includes the positive developments that I have cited.
posted by Trey on
“So if I write “Christians are more homophobic than secular people” would you also call that a bigoted statement? Or is it only bigoted when it’s truthful?” Yes, it is a bigoted statement when you don’t qualify it. Sweeping generalizations usually miss the mark. As Richard put it, it’s a selective approach to the truth, and it disregards the whole picture. There are many LGBT and pro-gay people that fall under the umbrella of Christianity.
“I doubt Harvard, Stanford, Berkeley and the typical leftwing universities would tolerate “Old South.” More likely, the minorityfascists would probably fight to have it banned.”
Private institutions have the right to choose what they allow onto their respective campuses, and they have to deal with the consequences of those choices.
posted by Bobby on
“Yes, it is a bigoted statement when you don’t qualify it. Sweeping generalizations usually miss the mark”
—I don’t always have statistics to back up my statements. This is mostly an opinion-based website, comments are often based on perception.
“Private institutions have the right to choose what they allow onto their respective campuses, and they have to deal with the consequences of those choices.”
—If a private institution was banning a gay group, gay event, or even a gay movie you’d be up in arms. Besides, most universities receive public funds, only christian colleges like Liberty University and others can do what they like because they are 100% private and have strict rules of behavior.
The University of Alabama is however funded by the public. In the 1980s they used the state sodomy law as an excuse to ban the Gay Student Alliance, the GSA (or whatever it was called) sued and won on the state supreme court.
Today there are leftwing forces trying to deny others of their freedoms. The hypocrisy is astounding, these people embrace Israel Apartheid Week which is full of little Hitlers preaching hate and yet they find the Old South costume party and parade offensive?
posted by Richard J. Rosendall on
Bobby, is everyone who disagrees with you automatically part of the leftwing forces opposed to free speech? Is everyone who finds the Old South parade offensive necessarily on that account opposed to people’s right to hold it? Are those who take offense automatically endorsers of Israel Apartheid Week and the little Hitlers you describe? Is it really productive to blast away all distinctions and make such false generalizations? The far left does indeed tend to be highly illiberal in its eagerness to silence people it finds offensive. IGF is in part a response to that very mindset on the gay left. But most people, and most gay people, are not doctrinaire.
But having criticized the gay left, and assuring you that nothing I am about to say is intended to erase that criticism one bit, there is nonetheless a big difference between the anti-gay right and the gay left. The right wing has sought to write gay couples out of the U.S. Constitution, and no comparable effort has been made against the religious right for all of their claims of victimhood. No one is trying to make the government tell relligious groups whom they must marry or welcome into their congregations. The fact is that gay people are far more sinned against than sinning.
On a similar note, while reiterating that the Old South folks have a right to speak and march to their hearts’ content (as do those who disagree with them), it shouldn’t need pointing out that the enormous difference between white people who mourn the old Confederacy and “black pride” marchers is that the former were not descended from generations of slaves. The level of brutality and horror that was long sustained against the children of Africa in this country is of a different order entirely from any depredations suffered by the sons of the Confederacy. To cite but one example, it was but 40 years ago when four black churches in Meridian, Mississippi were firebombed simply because they sponsored a Head Start program. It was but 53 years ago when Dr. King’s and Rev. Abernathy’s houses in Montgomery, Alabama were bombed simply because they were struggling to end discrimination on municipal buses. The legacy of those old hatreds lives on in people who rushed to buy as many firearms as they could after the November election based on a groundless fear that Obama was going to take their guns away. We have come a long way as a country, as Obama’s election helped demonstrate. But that doesn’t require nor justify a whitewashing of our history. The point is not for white people to flagellate themselves forever. The point is to be mindful of where we have been, and not to forget the price of freedom that has been paid by others on our behalf.
posted by Bobby on
“Is it really productive to blast away all distinctions and make such false generalizations?”
—Fine, I guess it’s not productive.
“The right wing has sought to write gay couples out of the U.S. Constitution, and no comparable effort has been made against the religious right for all of their claims of victimhood.”
—That doesn’t mean the religious and secular right hasn’t been victimized in many other ways.
“it shouldn’t need pointing out that the enormous difference between white people who mourn the old Confederacy and “black pride” marchers is that the former were not descended from generations of slaves.”
—Both groups have the right to celebrate their heritage. I’m sure you’re familiar with the atrocities during reconstruction, and even before that, General Sherman’s infamous march through Georgia. In the south people fly the confederate flag because they’re taking a stand for their culture, a culture that’s always being challenged by the politically correct leftwing.
And it’s not like African-American history lacks it’s darker sides. What about the racism and anti-semitism from Malcom X? What about all the riots in the 60s? What about black on white violence?
Besides, Old South isn’t a Klan rally, they’re not burning crosses, they’re not lynching people, so what’s the big deal?
“The legacy of those old hatreds lives on in people who rushed to buy as many firearms as they could after the November election based on a groundless fear that Obama was going to take their guns away.”
—Obama has an F rating from the National Riffle Association, he has NEVER voted to support the second Amendment, Handgun Control Inc gives him an A. Groundless fears? I think not. Maybe democrats got smart and know that gun control isn’t popular in this country, but I don’t know how long will the democrats remain smart or what tragedy will they use to push for gun control. Nobody bought guns because Obama was black, they bought guns because Obama is a liberal who grew up with radicals. Besides, it was Obama who ridiculed midwesteners as bitter people who cling on to their guns and religion.
“The point is to be mindful of where we have been, and not to forget the price of freedom that has been paid by others on our behalf.”
—-Blacks have more than equal rights in this country with affirmative-action and special taxes for minority-owned businesses. Segregation is illegal, slavery ended long ago, convictions have been won against Klansmen, schools are integrated, now it’s the left that complains that there are too many minorities in the military.
Tell me, when do we stop with the white-guilt? I’m sick of the race bating, sick of leftwing academics who blame every ill in the world on white people and western civilization, sick of people like Tancredo not being able to give a speech without activists shouting him down, at some point people have to stand up and say “enough!”
posted by Trey on
Bobby wrote: “Besides, Old South isn’t a Klan rally, they’re not burning crosses, they’re not lynching people, so what’s the big deal?”
My family and I were raised in the South. We’ve seen, firsthand, how the “Old South” and those who celebrate the Confederacy treat blacks. I can’t really muster up much sympathy for that cause. I imagine many feel the same about those groups that celebrate Hitler’s Germany or Mussolini’s Italy.
posted by Bobby on
Trey, are you black or white? If you’re black I can understand you not liking Old South, but if you’re a white southerner, I can’t understand it.
Why are there so many self-hating white southerners? Why do so many try to lose their accents? It angers me that CNN will hire annoying journalists with British accents but you never see one with a southern accent.
I live in Miami, where there’s no trace of southern culture whatsoever. My city’s multicultural mess leaves much to be desired, yet when I go to Orlando and hear those pretty southern accents, enjoy southern architecture, southern cuisine and southern hospitality I absolutely love it.
Why can’t you be proud of the south? Why must everything be yankee? Thanks to television lots of southeners are losing their accents and their values. Is that what you want? A boring MTV world where everyone sounds and thinks the same?
posted by Trey on
Bobby, I’m black, but i do have white southern friends who don’t see the Old South as something to necessarily celebrate. They recognize their ancestors as products of their time, and they don’t hold the Confederacy as some ideal of southern pride.
posted by Bobby on
Trey, I hope you know that not everyone who wears a confederate flag or dresses in a confederate uniform is a racist.
To me it’s no different than wearing a USA flag or New Yorkers claiming to be the center of the universe. Maybe these people choose to focus on the positive aspects of southern culture and ignore the negatives, to an extent, all groups do that with their culture, I doubt African History Month will have lectures of how black Kings betrayed their own people by selling their own into slavery, or how Mugabe’s appropriations of white farms have resulted in starvation for Zimbabweans.
Is Old South really more offensive than one of the hundreds civil war reenactments held accross the south?
Is it more offensive than the black proms and white proms that still take place after integration? And what about all black fraternities or all black colleges? Is that not proof that sometimes people prefer to be with thier own kind?
While I’m more likely to fit in with very special individuals rather than groups, if you go anywhere you’ll notice how people self-segregate. Go to any college and you’ll see groups of chinese students talking to others in their language, or latinos speaking in Spanish, or muslims hanging out with other muslism?
The real racism isn’t a bunch of girls dressed like Scarlett O’Hara and boys dressed like Rhett Butler for one day. The real racism is displayed in more subtle ways by all kinds of people all year long.
posted by Richard J. Rosendall on
Bobby wrote, “Both groups have the right to celebrate their heritage.”
Who said they didn’t? Trey and I both explicitly embraced free speech rights for all.
“And it’s not like African-American history lacks it’s darker sides.”
Again, who said they didn’t? My criticism was that its darker side appears to be all you are willing to notice.
“Blacks have more than equal rights in this country….”
I was going to skip responding to this point, because you are virtually guaranteed to respond to what I am about to say by treating it as the summation of my entire world view to the exclusion of all else I have said. Nonetheless: Despite the great progress that has been made on racial equality in this country–to the point where we have elected our first African American president–“more than equal” is not the point of view you would have if you experienced what many black friends have recounted to me: being stopped by police on the highway for “driving while black”; being followed around stores by security staff as if you were a criminal; being served in a restaurant long after a party of white people that arrived after you; walking into an elevator, dressed not in gangsta style but in an expensive business suit, yet seeing a white woman in the elevator shrink back and clutch her purse in fear. Imagine such indignities being inflicted on you at random in the course of your day. Yes, again, we have made enormous progress in this country. But we are not finished. And will you please not respond to this by putting words into my mouth?
posted by Bobby on
Richard, I’m not denying that blacks don’t experience racism from time to time just like gays can experience homophobia even in those states where it’s illegal to fire people for sexual orientation.
“More than equal” refers to affirmative action in the workplace and education and the diversity committees that seek to hire more minorities.
Diversity should never be the goal of a free society. Imagine a line of people waiting to eat at a restaurant, logically, the ones in front should be seated first, but according to diversity, we must pick the ones in the back just because they happen to be black, gay, latino, asian or whatever.
No other country in the world accommodates minorities like America. Here voting guides are printed in English and Spanish! Here we have affirmative action which no other country has (including all South and Central American nations).
The problem America has is that a liberal elite dominates the culture, they’re the ones that brainwashed most Americans, telling them that if Obama didn’t get elected we’re a racist nation. This shit has to stop. When people vote for Obama because McCain is too old or because it would be nice to have a black man in the white house they not only do a disservice to the nation but insult Obama as well.
People should vote based on ideology, and if young people are too lazy to find out why they like a candidate, they should abstain from voting.
posted by Richard J. Rosendall on
I was proud to witness the Ward 8 Democrats today (Saturday) vote by a 2-to-1 margin in favor of a resolution endorsing civil marriage equality. Longtime Ward 8 activist Philip Pannell, who drafted the resolution, and Rev. Dennis Wiley of Ward 8’s gay-affirming Covenant Baptist Church were in fine form speaking in favor. It’s a great day for Washington.
posted by Trey on
“Diversity should never be the goal of a free society. Imagine a line of people waiting to eat at a restaurant, logically, the ones in front should be seated first, but according to diversity, we must pick the ones in the back just because they happen to be black, gay, latino, asian or whatever.”
I think your metaphor is very telling. You naturally assumed that the minorities were at the back of the queue. It’s as if you don’t feel a candidate, who happens to be a minority, could be the best person for the job. Affirmative Action does what it can to combat the effects of prejudice, bigotry, and racism in hiring practices. As this dicussion has proven, there are still those who believe that due to the color of my skin I am more likely to be homophobic, in a gang, violent, and generally less than.
posted by Trey on
Nice work, Richard!
posted by Bobby on
“I think your metaphor is very telling. You naturally assumed that the minorities were at the back of the queue. It’s as if you don’t feel a candidate, who happens to be a minority, could be the best person for the job.”
—-If minorities aren’t in the back of the queue, they don’t need affirmative action anyway.
My metaphor implies fairness, you wait your turn just like everyone else. Just like you don’t hire a wedding photographer based on race, you shouldn’t get a job based on race. That should be irrelevant.
“Affirmative Action does what it can to combat the effects of prejudice, bigotry, and racism in hiring practices.”
—Affirmative action creates prejudice, bigotry and racism. In the University of California there’s a big controversy because the school wants to lower the number of Asians and increase the numbers of other minorities, this is of course upsetting to Asians that have worked really hard to get into UC.
In the workplace affirmative action makes employees distrust one another and wonder who deserves to be there vs. who benefited from affirmative action.
Would you really want to work for a white person that sees you as a color and hires you to fill a quota?
“As this discussion has proven, there are still those who believe that due to the color of my skin I am more likely to be homophobic, in a gang, violent, and generally less than.”
—Actually, I judge people on an individual basis, so I have no idea what you’re capable of but I do know that just like I don’t get any benefits out of my race neither should you.
Ultimately, affirmative action is patronizing to your race because it implies that your race can’t get ahead without Big Brother’s help. That is why there are many black intellectuals that oppose affirmative action and embrace republican values as opposed to democratic socialism.
posted by Trey on
“—Actually, I judge people on an individual basis, so I have no idea what you’re capable of but I do know that just like I don’t get any benefits out of my race neither should you.”
I think that gets to the basis of our disagreement. You don’t believe that you receive any benefits by being white in America, and I believe that you do.
posted by Bobby on
“I think that gets to the basis of our disagreement. You don’t believe that you receive any benefits by being white in America, and I believe that you do.”
—Alright, what benefits do I get for being white? I would love to know since I don’t think being white has ever benefited me at all.
What does benefit a person in America? Maybe going to the right school, joining the right fraternity, being a natural-born leader or perhaps being invited to join the Skull & Bones?
Success and failure depend on so many more factors than race. Just being white doesn’t automatically give you an edge. I don’t have an edge.
posted by Trey on
That’s the thing about privilege. Most don’t know that they have it until they are confronted with it.
The black-white average salary gap narrowed slightly in 2007, but the pay disparity widened for black Americans with college degrees. Blacks who had a four-year bachelorâ??s degree earned $46,502, or about 78 percent of the salary for comparably educated whites. Hispanics saw similar trends.
Those with high-school diplomas earned about 83 cents for whitesâ?? every dollar. But Hispanics with bachelorâ??s degrees had an average salary of $44,696, amounting to roughly 75 cents for every dollar made by whites.
Race and ethnicity play an important role in contemporary sentencing decisions. Black and Hispanic offendersâ??and particularly those who are young, male, or unemployedâ??are more likely than their white counterparts to be sentenced to prison; in some jurisdictions, they also receive longer sentencesâ?¦than do similarly situated white offenders.
These are just a few “advantages” that being white in America affords. One doesn’t have to actively participate in discrimination in order to reap its benefits. That’s how institutional racism works.
As I stated before, people tend to think the worst when it comes to African-Americans, and I look forward to the day when the whole race will not be judged by a sub-group. That’s a privilege worth pursuing.
posted by North Dallas Thirty on
The black-white average salary gap narrowed slightly in 2007, but the pay disparity widened for black Americans with college degrees. Blacks who had a four-year bachelorâ??s degree earned $46,502, or about 78 percent of the salary for comparably educated whites.
The key words missing there are “of comparable age”. A worker with twenty years of experience versus a worker with two may have the same degree, but there will likely be a vast difference in pay. It’s no secret that there are more older white workers and more younger Hispanic and black workers; hence, without years of experience factored in, the statistic is meaningless.
posted by Trey on
Fine…so you don’t believe in the racial income disparity. That wasn’t really the point in my discussing white privilege. Will you at least concede that whites, for the most part, are not looked at as a monolithic community? The actions of Fred Phelps, Rick Warren, Pat Robertson, Tony Perkins, James Dobson, and Carrie Prejean(ha!) aren’t seen as indicative of a wider problem with white homophobia.
Ta-nehisi Coates puts it better than I can:
http://ta-nehisicoates.theatlantic.com/archives/2009/05/gay_marriage_and_dc.php
posted by North Dallas Thirty on
Will you at least concede that whites, for the most part, are not looked at as a monolithic community?
Of course. But that has to do with the fact that there is not an ideological pathway that one has to follow to be white — in contrast to the black community, where not holding the correct political opinions renders one “not black”, and where those supported by Barack Obama and the leadership of the Congressional Black Caucus can argue that black women should be “ashamed” to ride in a car with a man named “White” and to investigate a black man for crimes.
The black community created the problem by linking skin color with political identity, in exactly the same fashion that the gay community links sexual orientation with antireligious bigotry and leftist politics.
posted by Trey on
I think you just proved my point. We’ll just have to agree to disagree, North Dallas Thirty.
posted by North Dallas Thirty on
If you’d like an example, Trey, it’s easily found.
posted by Trey on
How is that different from Bill O’ Reilly calling lefties sell-outs:
http://mediamatters.org/clips/200605170006
or Pat Buchanan:
http://oldatlanticlighthouse.wordpress.com/category/splc-keep-america-white/
again, black race is not some monolithic community.
posted by North Dallas Thirty on
How is that different from Bill O’ Reilly calling lefties sell-outs:
Could you outline precisely in that quote where exactly he called people “sell-outs”?
or Pat Buchanan:
Could you line out precisely in that link you provided where Pat Buchanan is speaking?
posted by Trey on
whoops…sorry about the pat buchanan link…in my rush to respond during my break, i accidentally copy and pasted the wrong link. I’ll flesh out my point:
http://thinkprogress.org/2006/08/31/buchanan-white-country/
both he and O’Reilly subscribe to a nativism that comes from a place of “tradition”:
Now in 1986, President Reagan thought he could solve the [immigration] problem by granting about 3 million illegal aliens amnesty. The New York Times was in heaven, editorializing back then, quote, “The new law won’t work miracles but it will induce most employers to pay attention, to turn off the magnets, to slow the tide.” Of course, just the opposite happened. But the Times hasn’t learned a thing. That’s because the newspaper and many far-left thinkers believe the white power structure that controls America is bad, so a drastic change is needed.
According to the lefty zealots, the white Christians who hold power must be swept out by a new multicultural tide, a rainbow coalition, if you will. This can only happen if demographics change in America.
An open-border policy and the legalization of millions of Hispanic illegal aliens would deeply affect the political landscape in America. That’s what The New York Times and many others on the left want. They might get it. And that’s the “Memo.
They decry the New York Times and lefties as not having America’s (read white christians) best interests at heart. It’s no longer appropriate for these gentlemen to explicitly race-bait (though Pat may not have gotten that memo), so any “ideological pathway[s] that one has to follow to be white” are implied…plausible denial.
Now, I realize that O’Reilly and Buchanan couldn’t possibly represent all whites. I don’t understand why the same consideration can’t be afforded to blacks.
posted by Trey on
Bill’s quote begins at “Now in 1986” and ends with “And that’s the Memo”.
posted by Bobby on
“That’s the thing about privilege. Most don’t know that they have it until they are confronted with it.”
—Trey, I went to college, then I went to advertising school. My last salary was $45,000 a year. Where’s the privilege there? With 5 years of experience I should be making $65,000 or $80,000. Yet the most I ever made was $50,000.
A black blue collar truck driver, a black plumber, a black electrician, they are making more money than me. Even in advertising, a mostly white industry, I’ve seen minorities do extremely well when they are willing to play the asshole games successful people in marketing play.
Being white means nothing anymore, there’s no group loyalty, no group protection, no religious conspiracy. Our individualistic culture has made each of us survivors, even in the criminal world being a member of a gang or the mafia no longer offers the degree of protection and loyalty it once did. The scary thing is, Trey, you’re all alone just like me. You’ll see that once you get betrayed by your own kind, it happened to me.
posted by Trey on
“A black blue collar truck driver, a black plumber, a black electrician, they are making more money than me.”
I’m not sure what you’re trying to prove with that statement, or rather, I’m not sure that I like what you’re implying.
“Even in advertising, a mostly white industry, I’ve seen minorities do extremely well when they are willing to play the asshole games successful people in marketing play.”
I worked in marketing, and I’m well aware of its lack of diversity. Many, including me, would argue that there’s a reason behind that fact.
“You’ll see that once you get betrayed by your own kind, it happened to me.”
On that note, I think I’m going to throw in the towel. I think we’ve hit an impasse.
posted by North Dallas Thirty on
They decry the New York Times and lefties as not having America’s (read white christians) best interests at heart. It’s no longer appropriate for these gentlemen to explicitly race-bait (though Pat may not have gotten that memo), so any “ideological pathway[s] that one has to follow to be white” are implied…plausible denial.
Ah, so they didn’t actually say it, you’re just implying it, based on what you “know” they “really meant”.
posted by Bobby on
“A black blue collar truck driver, a black plumber, a black electrician, they are making more money than me.”
I’m not sure what you’re trying to prove with that statement, or rather, I’m not sure that I like what you’re implying.
—My point is that if that so-called “white privilege” doesn’t stop black people from being successful, which means it either doesn’t exist or is not what it used to be. Face it, when I need someone to fix my car, do my taxes or give me a prescription, I don’t inquire about race.
“I worked in marketing, and I’m well aware of its lack of diversity. Many, including me, would argue that there’s a reason behind that fact.”
—I worked for a multicultural agency (90% black), 3 Hispanic agencies and a general market agency (mostly white). The people that were successful at those agencies they all had the same personality. In the African-American agency I was shocked when a blue eyed blond was hire full time after a successful internship while an African-American woman who had been an intern there for almost a year was fired just because she fell asleep at a client presentation and someone from a competing agency noticed her. What this proves is that there is no racial loyalty, this is a very unforgiving business, if you screw up and you can’t get someone else to take the fall, you’re gone.
“On that note, I think I’m going to throw in the towel. I think we’ve hit an impasse.”
—Are you saying you can’t get betrayed by your own kind? Surely you jest, I’ve read of the trials and tribulations straight-A black students face in their own communities, I’ve read of the accusations of “acting white” they’ve faced. Just because I’m politically incorrect doesn’t mean I’m ignorant. Blaming white people for everything will never help you succeed.
posted by Trey on
North Dallas,
Here’s Pat Buchanan saying that he wants to keep America majority white:
” COLMES: Would you prefer only white immigrants?
BUCHANAN: No. What I would like is ? I?d like the country I grew up in. It was a good country. I lived in Washington, D.C., 400,000 black folks, 400,000 white folks, in a country 89 or 90 percent white. I like that country.
We didn?t vote to change it. In 1965, in the Immigration Act, Teddy Kennedy said we?re going to maintain immigration at about present levels and numbers, and we will not consciously alter the character?
(CROSSTALK)
COLMES: All right, but are you saying we should work to keep an 89 percent white country? Is that what you believe we should do?
BUCHANAN: No, no. What I believe is that people should not deliberately alter the character and composition of the country without consulting the American people. If you adopt two children, Alan, you?re going to go in and you?re going to decide who comes. Who should decide who comes and who doesn?t? First, illegals should not come. Secondarily, the American people should be consulted how many immigrants come, what are the criteria. And we haven?t been consulted.
COLMES: But it sounds like what you?re saying, though, that we should keep the status as it was back then, with the certain percentages of different ethnic groups, meaning 89 percent white, not changing that to any great extent. Is that pretty much what you?re saying?
BUCHANAN: That is what ? 1964, John F. Kennedy?s book was reprinted. You know what he said? He said we should change ? no higher immigration, and what we should do is ? the quotas given to Germans, and Irish, and English, and others that are not used should be given to folks from Eastern Europe and Southern Europe. That?s what Kennedy said. I would go along with that. I supported that in a book. ”
How is that not not an “ideological pathway[s] that one has to follow to be white”?
O’Reilly told his listeners: “[T]he bottom line is Charles Barron said last night is there is a movement in this country to wipe out ‘white privilege’ and to have the browning of America.” O’Reilly suggested that this “hidden agenda” included plans to let “people who live in the Caribbean, people who live in Africa and Asia … walk in and become citizens immediately.” He then congratulated himself for exposing the “underside” of this issue: “[Y]ou know, we got it out; we got it out. Now it’s out there in play.” Further, he commended Barron for being “man enough to admit it.”
I’m not supposed to read that as race-baiting?
Look, it looks like i won’t be able to convince you that black people aren’t interchangeable, or that we have the same variety in our community that whites do.
Bobby, with every new point that you make, I realize just how far your values are from mine. You have a pretty narrow view of blacks, and there is nothing I can do change your mind. Like I said before, we’ve hit an impasse.
posted by Bobby on
“Bobby, with every new point that you make, I realize just how far your values are from mine. You have a pretty narrow view of blacks, and there is nothing I can do change your mind. Like I said before, we’ve hit an impasse.”
—Too bad, Trey. I don’t know what you will do when you meet people like me in the real world. But you’re wrong about me and blacks, I don’t have a narrow view about blacks, I’ve had black roommates and black friends. They got along with me fine as do all blacks who love the second amendment, the first amendment and ideological diversity. Blacks and anyone else who demands ideological conformity (progressive values, diversity, multiculturalism) rarely get along with me because they can’t stand debate. It’s the reason Perez Hilton called Ms. California a bitch and a cunt, a progressive can never be friends with anyone who disagrees.
As for Pat Buchanan, he left the republican party many years ago and he’s now a talking head on MSNBC. The left likes him because he was against the war in Iraq from the get go and hates Israel. In fact, the black community seems to agry wtih him on immigration. Here’s an article from the New York Times, so you can’t accuse me of rightwing bias.
Growing Unease for Some Blacks on Immigration
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/04/us/04immig.html
posted by Craig2 on
Is it true that some of these smaller African-American fundamentalist sects either took a quietist role, or else *actively opposed* civil rights in the fifties and sixties?
And if so, should anyone be surprised at this development? It may pay to do some detective work about these churches, spokespeople and pasts…
Craig2
Wellington, NZ
posted by Bobby on
Hey Craig2, I don’t know about the fundamentalist sects. But “civil rights” and affirmative action, diversity, multiculturalism and all the special treatment based on race, culture, gender, sexual orientation, etc that goes on today was not what Martin Luther King, jr. dreamt about.