The Irrationality of Irrational Thinking

I found the video above when Oshay Duke Jackson referenced Black Patriarch. Oshay has some very good common sense ideas on improving the welfare of the Black community, so when he recommended Black Patriarch, I thought it might be worth checking out. Let me first start out by saying I don’t buy the author’s idea that emotionality is in the genes. It sounds too much like HBD to me, and there’s no proof that that it is gene-based. He doesn’t talk enough about culture and the pull of emotional, illogical victim-focused thinking. I also need to remind everyone that his critique is an internal critique, of Black people and by Black people. But lots of the stuff he says seems right to me, namely the main idea that emotionality is enough to keep an entire group of people down.

I especially enjoyed the interviews that he posted, especially the one with Dr. Claud Anderson where he talks about the “great disconnect” between intellect and emotional reactions and where it gets you in life. Anderson is 100% spot-on when he describes the pattern of people “intellectually knowing what they’re supposed to be doing” but being too emotional to actually do it. Black Patriarch is right to point out that societies only grow when people willingly step aside to follow the smarter members of their society and refuse to allow their own egos to drive their actions. All successful societies require people to sacrifice for the common good. This rarely happens when people prize emotionality over logic, ego over the welfare of others.

I bring this up because the world has gone emotional. In our own national election, we’ve got Trump and his followers, most of whom are valuing his emotion and anger, ignoring his irrationality and lack of logic (and inability to learn facts). Trump is not a conservative (nor a liberal), but his support started from the Far Right, who are tired of having to think deeply about how to fix our country’s race problems. On the Far Left, we’ve got Black Lives Matter, which, like Trump, perpetuates lie after lie after lie. “Hands up, don’t shoot,” was not a cry against White police violence (since it didn’t happen that way–Michael Brown’s hands were trying to take Officer Darren Wilson’s gun), but was rather a cry of emotion against the shackles of logical thought and “respectability politics.” While Black Patriarch may have made his video to criticize other African Americans, I see this irrationality and emotionality infecting all of us, especially Asian Americans. I loved the interview with the dude at around 19:30–his words describe us Asian Americans these days, especially those on the Far Left extreme. We’re all joining the Emotional Bandwagon. People on the Far Left see logic and rational thinking much in the same way that the Trumpkins see it. Both believe that rational thinking is a form of weakness and inaction.

What I think is most interesting about Black Patriarch’s video is his ideas about where emotionality leads. Even among the Far Left, there are far too many intelligent people who know that their arguments make no sense. They know “hands up, don’t shoot” didn’t happen, and yet they say it anyway because their emotions override their intellect. They would know that Peter Liang didn’t get off easy if they studied law and how the law works, but hey, it’s a free opportunity to attack Whitey and Chang. And although they think that this emotionality will lead to freedom and power, they don’t realize that their rejection of rational thinking is hurting them in the long run. Sure, it feels good to stick a knife into the side of Whitey and Chang, but can you really build anything in a world that resembles the Salem Witch Trials or the WWE? History says no.

Martin Luther King and Malcolm X, for all the adoration they receive from the Far Left today, were both highly rational men who made decisions based on calculation. For example, Martin calculated how many people he would need to fill the jails, and then he refused to allow people to march unless they could convince HIM that they could control their emotions and not strike back. He probably wouldn’t have hired Shrieking Girl from Yale. Malcolm met with the KKK because he calculated that they both at the time wanted the same thing, which was complete segregation. Malcolm acknowledge White intelligence, rejecting the popular idea that White people only got ahead because of racism. Both men refused to allow emotion to overrun their thought processes.

I really think that people need to take a step back and evaluate whether anger will help them achieve their goals. The problem with emotional and irrational anger is that emotions are fickle, and they tend to differ from person to person. Yes, rationality seems cold and calculating and not as much fun compared to being able to do whatever you want to whomever you want, but if it makes life better, why not embrace it? At least give it a try. The moral arguments against irrationality (“look at all the people you’re hurting”) seem to be falling on deaf ears, so why not look at how much more effective logical thinking is?

89 thoughts on “The Irrationality of Irrational Thinking

  1. That video is borderline racist. Asians, Mexicans, and whites are irrationally emotional too. The owner of the video should get out more and meet people.
    Black people are the way they are right now because of the inherent institutional racism. They don’t have the same opportunities as white people. They don’t receive good education, they don’t get good jobs, they have financial problems, they live in bad neighborhood, their kids are influenced by bad people because they live in bad neighborhood, their kids go to bad school because they live in a bad neighborhood, the vicious cycle continues.
    Government should have programs to help black people escape that cycle by making sure that black people have the same standards of living like white people.
    If you want to compare anything, all else must be equal to give accurate results.

  2. Black people can express prejudice toward other Black people, obviously. I have no opinion on the content presented in the video (I’m not going to watch it) but the race of the video’s owner has nothing to do with any possible racism expressed in the video.

  3. That’s true.

    I was referring to Kyrie’s statement that the owner had to “get out more and meet people.” The owner is black, so I was just making the point that he’s speaking as a black person about black issues.

  4. Byron,
    Allow me to elaborate:
    If 2 identical rice cookers are set to cook the same amount of rice with the same water level, but one is set 10 minutes before the other. Which one will finish cooking first ?
    All I’m saying is white people are born with better circumstances ( white privileges), so they have distinctive advantages over non whites. If both whites and non whites put the same effort into their lives, guess who’s gonna fare better ?
    The recent shootings of unarmed black men, the segregated schools like all black schools. Really? All black schools, that doesn’t sound good. Have you ever associated all black schools with good neighborhoods ? NO.
    And I agree that just because the dude is black doesn’t make him any better at knowing anything than any person of any skin color. A racist view is racist no matter who says it. And come on, blacks are born with high sense of rhythm ??? Asians are born with built in discipline and hard work ???? Are you serious ??? Asian hard work is underappreciated and that’s why you’ve been complaining about college admissions. There are plenty of good asian dancers, asian music composers,asian rappers, hard working black people, lazy asians,etc. That’s why he needs to go out and meet more people.

  5. Those are all good points, Kyrie, but that’s not the point that the owner of the video is talking about. The question is why activism has failed so badly. (He says it’s a black thing; I think it’s an activist thing.) It’s not failing because some Asians are good at dancing, although they are. It’s not even failing because of white racism, although that certainly exists. It’s failing primarily because activists are too emotional and not rational.

  6. Snoopy asked me a question on another thread, and I thought it made more sense to answer it here, since it’s more relevant to our emotions than Lionel Shriver. In my opinion, Snoopy is the most emotional thinker we have on this site, so I welcome the opportunity to talk with him about this.

    BigWOWO, you can solve that problem right now. Express what you think about the following statement: “Asians are good at math.”

    So in the original thread, I told Snoopy that I had no emotional reaction to that statement. Snoopy brought it up in order to elicit an emotional response. Most Far Leftists will go bat-shit crazy if they’re confronted with such a question in public (in private, they simply accept it as a reason to maintain affirmative action) and will not be able to think. They’re so used to being angry (and not being able to think) that they’ll lose it. I’m not one of those people.

    The above sentence, stated as is, is obviously an opinion rather than a fact, and it is stated as such. If you’re a rational person, you won’t lose your shit upon hearing a statement like, “Asians are good at math.” If someone asked me to think about it, I would think that yes, Asians on average have higher math SAT scores than the general population. It’s just a fact. If you’re threatened by this FACT, then you need to change your mental perception. Facts should not be threatening. Facts should not cause you to lose your sanity. Facts should not stop you from thinking logically. And most of all, facts should not cause you to violate your ethics by lying and trying to create new facts, like some people.

    Now whether a high SAT score average means a certain population is good at math is a fair topic for debate. But at the very least, it’s debatable without going batshit crazy with the victimology and hurt feelings that Leftists too often display.

    Let’s look at another irrational Leftist tantrum that happens too often. Let’s change the race. What if we said, “Black people are good at sports.” At this point, most Leftists reading this are probably going crazy about racism-this, racism-that, demanding a safe space because they just can’t handle an opinion that doesn’t mirror their own–even if it’s not my opinion and just a simple hypothetical (which…it is.) But true to the emotional way that these people think, it depends a lot on the speaker. In fact, Chris Rock said the exact same thing at the Oscars when he said Rocky was Sci Fi, but because emotional thinkers don’t use logic and instead rely on anger stemming from tribal affiliations, their reaction differs depending on who made the statement or presented the hypothetical question. This is illogical.

  7. Yeah, Oshay Duke Jackson is obviously effected by HBD thinking. What he shows onscreen is nonsocial.

    A video of Blacks flying off the handle in some social setting (as a proof) totally ignores the fact that you can find loads of examples of Russians, Italians, and Walmart customers doing the same thing.

    A Black 3-year-old bouncing to the beat is not proof that Blacks are genetically predisposed to have rhythm. There are PLENTY of home videos of Latino and White 3-year-olds doing the same exact thing.

    A film of Asians doing gymnastics in mass does not mean that Asians are organized. I can’t believe he can’t see his own obvious errors.

  8. Quick very important clarification…it’s not Oshay’s video, it’s Black Patriarch’s. I’ll bet Oshay doesn’t believe in that HBD stuff either. But Oshay recommended Black Patriarch, I think because they both believe that black men have to look towards strong black leadership in the past.

    And for the record, I agree with you, King. I would’ve posted one of Oshay’s videos, but I didn’t see any of him talking about emotionalism.

  9. Glad that King mentioned HBD. While there may not be anything inherently wrong with generalizations like ‘asians are good at math’ and ‘black people are good at sports’, I find that HBD types take it as an invitation to barf forth their ideology (which somehow ends up with Whites as the golden mean every time).

    I can understand the knee jerk reaction to those statements based on how HBD idiots have tainted them. You are right, though, that they are debatable generalizations. I think that as long as you stay away from trying to explain it in terms of biology, you’re probably OK. It might save you a lot of grief from outrage addicts if you make a disclaimer before you bring up the generalizations.

  10. No one needs to have an emotional reaction to recoil at stereotypes like “Asians are good at math.” But when Lionel Shriver implies that unnecessary and vitriolic controversy starts when someone raises that point, she suggests that such stereotypes have a place in reasonable public discourse. They do not. Stereotypes, by their very nature, express falsehoods.

    More to the point though, I take issue with the suggestion that I, or leftists like me, exhibit emotional thinking. What’s more accurate here is that people on the minority left recognize difficulty in commonly accepted public thinking that imposes injuries on fellow citizens. For example, the implicit bias teachers and police officers display toward young African American males contributes to the school-to-prison pipeline, as young African American males are tracked as troublemakers and disciplinary problems at early developmental stages, and then subjected to punitive sanctions from authority figures with a frequency and severity that children from other demographics do not endure, throughout their formative years.

    Some people within our society wish to grapple with the damage such phenomena cause, not through enforced conformity, where people no longer enjoy the freedom to say or think what they choose, but through education and public debate. That’s exactly what race activists — including those who disagree with people like Lionel Shriver — engage daily. None of this requires any emotional response whatsoever.

    But let us not use the descriptor ’emotional’ as a pejorative. Plenty of race activists throughout history responded to systemic injustice with emotional appeals. The suggestion that people like Martin King and Malcolm X did not respond to racism with emotion is patently absurd — no one writes material like “Letter from Birmingham Jail” or “The Ballot or the Bullet” without emotion. When a person adopts some false, pseudo-objective emotionlessness when confronted by racism and bigotry, they only illustrate their privilege to ignore and/or mitigate the negative effects of said racism and bigotry.

    Racism affects my life negatively; it should make me angry. It would not be intelligent to respond without anger. I don’t expect people for whom racism is not a meaningful factor in their lives to understand my anger. How can they? No one’s shooting at people like them, or denying them employment, or refusing their loan applications, or shuttling children in their community to failing schools while they argue against programs that could ensure those children opportunities for college. There is no border between emotion and an effective use of available facts. Much of the conversation about emotion and activism here recently is flawed.

  11. Thanks for the clarification, Byron.

    To be sure, different cultures emphasize different things. Blacks ended up majoring in sports and entertainment because eventually that is where White society allowed them to excel. For example, you could become a Black boxer like Joe Louis and become rich, famous and be seen as a her, even by White people. ON the other hand, if you became a Black accountant, Whites would assume that you were not as intelligent as a White accountant and refuse to give you their business. THe same was true over a variety of filelds, so the more Blacks who achieved in sports or in singing and dance, the more Blacks sought to go into those fields. Sooner or later it becomes a part of the culture.

    So sure, these generalizations sometimes hold true on a broad basis. But they cannot be based on genetics, of course.

  12. So Asians should thank White society for allowing us to excel in STEM and blame White for us not going into sports and entertainment?

    I think the number one obstacle for black people to achieve in this country is the victimhood mentality. As long as this kind of thinking is prevalent among black people, black race can’t achieve anything besides being angry and self-destructive.

    From what I’ve seen, I think genes do contribute to black people’s success in sports and entertainment industry. If we can accept genetic differences in individuals, why should we afraid to admit that there are genetic differences between races?

  13. chinesemom wrote:

    If we can accept genetic differences in individuals, why should we afraid to admit that there are genetic differences between races?

    How are these concepts even related? Individual variations occur at the microscopic levels of society, whereas “race” is at social aggregate that needs further clarification of what exactly is “race.”

    Furthermore, skin color is simply the most noticeable variations, but have you done detailed genetic analysis across populations to spew such pseudo-science of genetic differences across populations?

    Indeed, most real scientists would say there are less variations across populations than within populations, OVER THE ENTIRE GENOME.

  14. Indeed, most real scientists would say there are less variations across populations than within populations, OVER THE ENTIRE GENOME.

    If your “population” means race, then I would say it is true, and not just the MOST but EVERY real scientists would say that. Which also implies every real scientists thinks that there are variations across populations (races). Why it is so politically incorrect to admit that?

  15. This is what happens when people pretend that stereotypes carry truth, however broadly defined: an actual bigot shows up and spouts disgusting notions of genetic determinism ad nauseam.

    Don’t open the door to crazy, and crazy doesn’t show up.

  16. chinesemom wrote:

    If your “population” means race, then I would say it is true, and not just the MOST but EVERY real scientists would say that. Which also implies every real scientists thinks that there are variations across populations (races). Why it is so politically incorrect to admit that?

    What is “population” and “race?” Real scientists would gladly say there are CLINES that exist in the world, but there’s no such sharp delineations as the US racial constructs and hierarchy.

    There are variations according to cluster analysis being looked at, but NOT the entire genome, as I’ve said before. Indeed, more variation WITHIN population would mean your pseudo-science ideas are simply outdated from 19th century constructs.

  17. Chinesemom, bear in mind that the majority of the current Asian population arrived in the United States AFTER the Black-led Civil Rights movement secured certain legal rights for ALL minorities. However, by that time, African-Americans had already suffered centuries of culture-warping hate, belittlement and discrimination.

    NOBODY disputes this point. EVERY credible source admits that Blacks were mistreated over the course of centuries in the U.S., So why would this be surprising to you to say that this abuse had adverse effects on Black culture? When. abuse actually happens, then there is an actual victim!

    Now sure, one can take that victimhood to an extreme. BUt I don’t see that this is what I am doing here.

  18. King, I can understand your rebuttal to ChineseMom, but why open the door to the possibility that Black culture’s suffered adverse effects at all? Certainly it is true that African Americans historically and currently suffer adverse injuries from legal and customary racism, imposed through institutional policy and interpersonal bias, but given all that history and present day, why entertain the idea that Black culture itself suffered ill effects?

    Especially since Black culture proves so multifaceted and diverse?

  19. Because it’s impossible that it didn’t. Abuse breeds a certain level of dysfunction in both individuals and in cultures. It seems unavoidable that some things would be out of round.

  20. Snoopy,

    Thanks for the discussion.

    Before I begin, let me just say that I think ChineseMom baited you. You took it. She dropped a comment, and rather than respond calmly and logically like King did, you once again got all emotional and angry. Now let’s talk about some specifics that we need to hammer down.

    No one needs to have an emotional reaction to recoil at stereotypes like “Asians are good at math.” But when Lionel Shriver implies that unnecessary and vitriolic controversy starts when someone raises that point, she suggests that such stereotypes have a place in reasonable public discourse. They do not. Stereotypes, by their very nature, express falsehoods.

    You’re wrong on just about every count here. If you “recoil” at a stereotype, you are exhibiting an emotional reaction. Right? Even if it’s just a flinch, it’s still emotional. And yes, as someone above pointed out, stereotypes do have a place in reasonable public discourse. The world is not your safe space. If you want to fix problems, you’re going to have to deal with them, and you’re going to have to deal with them logically. That’s just how the real world works.

    Plenty of race activists throughout history responded to systemic injustice with emotional appeals. The suggestion that people like Martin King and Malcolm X did not respond to racism with emotion is patently absurd — no one writes material like “Letter from Birmingham Jail” or “The Ballot or the Bullet” without emotion.

    Right, but that wasn’t my suggestion. Again, reread what I wrote. I never said that Martin and Malcolm had no emotion. What I said was, “Martin Luther King and Malcolm X, for all the adoration they receive from the Far Left today, were both highly rational men who made decisions based on calculation.” I also said, “Both men refused to allow emotion to overrun their thought processes.” What that means is that even if they had emotions–and we ALL have emotions–they didn’t let their emotions force them into bad decisions, like some of the people in the video in the OP.

    Let’s put it this way, Snoopy. Malcolm secretly spoke with the Ku Klux Klan. Would you be able to do this? Probably not, because you’d get so emotional that it would quickly devolve into accusations of racism and anger. This happens even with ChineseMom, who is nothing close to the KKK. But you can’t talk to her because of your out-of-control emotions.

    Am I right?

    Racism affects my life negatively; it should make me angry. It would not be intelligent to respond without anger.

    Hmm. Okay. Well, I don’t know whether reacting with anger or not has anything to do with intelligence. What I will say is this: if you’re fed up with racism, I would think, for a purely problem-solving angle, that the intelligent response would be something that would stop racism, or at least mitigate the effects of racism.

    Do you agree?

  21. King,

    Agree 100%. I actually don’t think it’s a Black thing either, at least not with the culture he’s describing. I think that’s more Far Left culture. Black people just happen to be the focus of that culture.

    On the cultural angle for Asian Americans, I think one thing that Black Patriarch isn’t seeing is that the Far Left can be inviting for many reasons. I’ve seen lots of Asian Americans doing the same emotional thinking, making the same illogical statements, blaming everything on everyone but themselves. If that culture is strong enough to pull people in, I can imagine it’s even harder to get out of it.

    With the strength of that pull, it’s VERY hard for me to believe it’s genetics. I’ve seen quite a few smart people willingly jump into that culture, so I can’t imagine it’s easy if you’re already the focus of that culture.

  22. why entertain the idea that Black culture itself suffered ill effects? – Snoopy

    Snoopy, I’m really interested to know why you would even make such a statement. I think King’s answer to you is perfectly reasonable. If you believe what he said holds validity and if you are one to believe in continuous improvement, then why not entertain the idea that black culture suffered ill effects?

    Chinesemom has mentioned several times how many parts of asia have been colonized by whites and that the lingering effects of this are the colonized mindsets very much prevalent in the asian populations including those living in america. I think most members on this site acknowledges that to at least some degree and that we we are guilty (again, at least to some degree) of white-worship and self-hate.

  23. It’s sad that we have all worshiped whiteness at some point in our lives, simply because western civilization are more technologically advanced than that of eastern. We are all attracted to better living standards and white people are always associated with those standards.White people have so much luxury so we wanted to be like them.
    I don’t blame black people for what they’re doing to white people ( but not to asians). White people really bear a lot of responsibility( they brought black people to america mostly), and all those blacks were worse off than they were back in Africa. If they had stayed in Africa, their lives would have been better and Africa would be much more developed now.

  24. KIng,

    Now sure, one can take that victimhood to an extreme. BUt I don’t see that this is what I am doing here.

    I understand. As I said before, you are on the conservative side of the spectrum among black-Americans and you are a lot closer to mainstream Americans. Comparing to Snoopy and many others, you wouldn’t think you have victimhood mentality. But have you ever compared yourself to Whites, Asian immigrants or Black immigrants like your parents?

    Here is my criteria for people with victimhood mentality:
    1, Overly sensitive and defensive.
    2, Lack of trust in others, tend to think the worst of people of other races (resulting interpreting/treating others as racists).
    3, Tend to (or always) see race first.
    4, Lack the ability to empathize, only see themselves as victim, demanding others to understand them and empathize with them, but can’t put themselves in other people’s shoes.
    5, Always/Tend to use racist /racist history/slavery as excuses or to explain everything.
    6, Close-mindedness
    Now see for yourself how many criteria your above comments fit.

    Because this country is bath in victimhood culture and most minorities(including Asians who grew up here) were brainwashed and bought into this victimhood narrative, rational and honest dialogue about race/racism/culture can’t happen, because anything out of victimhood culture’s teaching will be interpret/labeled as racism/bigot, like what happen with me here.

    One direct consequence of victimhood brainwashing/culture is that it made racial minorities can’t take criticism, reflect upon themselves or learn from other cultures which they desperately need in order to improve themselves.

  25. Here is an example of Chinese mentality for your reference:

    I saw this reader’s comment a couple of months ago:
    http://www.unz.com/plee/what-if-it-wasnt-one-china-vs-two-chinas-what-if-there-was-no-china/#comment-1470969
    The guy is obviously lack of respect to Chinese people and could be a racist. I read his comment and thought he is right on a lot of things about Chinese culture, so I posted this link to several of my Wechat group. I praised his insight into Chinese culture which many of culture elites in China don’t have a grasp. What was other people’s reaction? No one cried “racist”, people talked about what is true, what is not and how we should improve.

    In Chinese culture, there are a lot of teaching/idioms about how to treat criticisms. Anything in black culture?

  26. @chinesemom

    Respectfully, may I ask what references or personal work experiences led you to your list?

  27. Yeah, I don’t see King as having ANY of those traits. At least no more than me, Sengge, Aardvark, ChineseMom, or most of the regulars.

    In Chinese culture, there are a lot of teaching/idioms about how to treat criticisms. Anything in black culture?

    WHICH black culture? There are many.

  28. Chinesemama will not be happy until king confesses that there is no racism– after all, Obama is president !

    Snoopy: what is your stance on colonialism and it’s after effects? Didn’t black people suffer similar effects? It wasn’t that long ago when black children were choosing white dolls over black ones. Couldn’t there have been other long term effects on the culture? Slavery had to be a 100xs worse than colonialism so I don’t see why it wouldn’t leave a footprint on any culture it touched.

  29. @ Chinesemom,

    What if you had a family, and one child was born with purple hair. So the parents decided that purple hair was a sign of inferiority. So they made this poor kid into the family servant and forced him to do all of the grunt work for the family. When it came time for the child to go to school, he was told that school was not for him and to just keep working. So, for years Purplehead watched his brothers and sisters going to school and began to believe that he was not fit for school. Even when the boy tried to teach himself to read he was violently punished. Purplehead cried a lot and often screamed when being beaten. Finally this brought so much attention to his situation people started to take notice. The negative attention caused a big family fight! Abusing Purplehead was now beginning to make the family look bad! Nobody actually thought that he was equal to them, but they just didn’t want to be known as abusers to the rest of the neighborhood. So on his 14th birthday, Purplehead was told he would no longer be the family servant.

    Purplehead was quickly given an education, using out-of-date school books and untrained teachers, Instead of sleeping on the kitchen floor they made him a little shack in the back yard and told him to stay out there unless he was working in the house. The family still had the poor kid doing most of the grunt work, but now they paid him a small amount for the work he did. Not as much as they would have paid anyone else, but just enough to get my on.

    Then one day Purplehead couldn’t take any more and he began to protest in the front yard and demand to be treated as an equal human being! The family was infuriated! Hadn’t they set him free?? Wasn’t he “free” since he was 14? How ungrateful! So they beat him, they soaked him with the garden hose as he stood protesting. They screamed at him! But he just kept on protesting his condition. Finally the entire neighborhood was watching what was going on. So grudgingly, on his 18th birthday the family declared that Purplehead was now equal to everyone else in the family.

    But after Purplehead had grown up and had been declared equal, he still had some problems. You see, he seemed to be overly sensitive and defensive. Can you imagine that? After all his family had done for him! And he also exhibited a
    lack of trust in others, and tended to think the worst from people. Where did he get that bad attitude from? He also tended to always see see hair color first as a reason for things happening to him. Can you believe that!?? He seemed to lack the ability to empathize, and often only saw themselves as a victim! He also tended to point back to his abusive history as an “excuse” or to explain away why he felt this way.

    Can you believe that Purplehead could be that Close-Minded? What could possibly cause this kid to PLAY the victim like that??? What he should do is take full responsibility for how he ended up in life! I mean, if he wasn’t like everyone else, IT WAS HIS OWN FAULT! After all, he had been emancipated since he was 14 years old! Stop bringing up THE PAST! We all know that the past has no effect on the present!

    I hope that you can now see how ridiculous your statements are?

  30. The reason I question the idea of a dysfunctional Black culture(s) as a legacy of chattel slavery and Jim Crow segregation is because institutional injuries to Black Americans persist today that constrain meaningful choice and economic opportunity among Black Americans, and there’s no consistent method by which one could decouple those injuries from any possible cultural trends that exacerbate educational and employment inequality between Black America and other groups.

    Put another way, we’ve yet to cease the legal and social methods by which Black people suffer; knowing this, why assume cultural reasons for stymied Black economic and political advancement?

    Case in point: if a man can’t breathe while uniformed police subdue him with a chokehold, it is not reasonable to assert that his inability to secure oxygen stems from his penchant for sugary, fatty foots. Reasonably, one would blame the officer with his arms on the man’s neck.

    The uniformed police, their violent actions, their indifference to the man’s frantic pleas, their very presence in the man’s neighborhood — all reflect the institutional policy that injures Black Americans, justified and authorized by the voting decisions of people from other communities who life in other places. The man’s obesity might represent a cultural penchant for unhealthy eating, but even this is a legacy his people endure from decades of slave owner refuse, anemic farming opportunities, and food deserts in metropolitan areas.

    Really, all aspects of the bleak situation reflect public policy choices. This is why I believe the Eric Garner case gained such resonance; why slogans like “I Can’t Breathe” served as rallying cries. The situation offers a chilling metaphor for the historical and current treatment of Black citizens by their country of origin, with the acceptance and approval of other political and social groups within the body politic. To my mind, it never makes sense to jump to interrogations of Black culture when systemic bias and institutional racism are not deconstructed or challenged in reference to it’s effects on Black people.

    Conservatives often remark on assertions of cultural pathology to discuss Black America’s woes; it’s fine to recognize that chattel slavery and Jim Crow segregation and today’s carceral state imposed serious material harm to Black Americans, but it’s to my mind a different statement entirely to allude to cultural pathology reasoning to explain Black social and economic concerns.

    For more on this topic, check out this rundown of the Ta-Nehisi Coates/ Jonathan Chait debate from a few years back.

  31. “Obama-era progressives view white supremacy as something awful that happened in the past and the historical vestiges of which still afflict black people today. They believe we need policies—though not race-specific policies—that address the affliction. I view white supremacy as one of the central organizing forces in American life, whose vestiges and practices afflicted black people in the past, continue to afflict black people today, and will likely afflict black people until this country passes into the dust.

    There is no evidence that black people are less responsible, less moral, or less upstanding in their dealings with America nor with themselves. But there is overwhelming evidence that America is irresponsible, immoral, and unconscionable in its dealings with black people and with itself. Urging African-Americans to become superhuman is great advice if you are concerned with creating extraordinary individuals. It is terrible advice if you are concerned with creating an equitable society.” — Ta-Nehisi Coates, March 21, 2014

  32. There is no reason why systemic and cultural effects can’t act in tandem. I think that both Black culture and the surrounding White culture have been negatively affected by slavery. There’s no way that that institution didn’t warp the perpetrators’ culture as well (which was already warped enough to institute slavery in the first place).

  33. King,

    You see, you are again assuming that I don’t know much about racism history and don’t empathize with black people, and you again used racist /racist history/slavery as excuses and to explain everything.

    1, Overly sensitive and defensive.
    2, Lack of trust in others, tend to think the worst of people of other races (resulting interpreting/treating others as racists).
    3, Tend to (or always) see race first.
    4, Lack the ability to empathize, only see themselves as victim, demanding others to understand them and empathize with them, but can’t put themselves in other people’s shoes.
    5, Always/Tend to use racist /racist history/slavery as excuses or to explain everything.
    6, Close-mindednes

  34. Nottyboy, the point isn’t whether state systems of control through subjugation and terrorism like chattel slavery had a damaging effect on Blacks and Whites, and the cultures that animate their lives. Even were one to admit that cultural damage occurred, there would be no real way to determine that damage with any specificity.

    Further, the historical record does not provide evidence in support of the claim that Black culture was negatively impacted by chattel slavery; freedmen during and after the Civil War struggled mightily to create and maintain family ties that the chattel slavery experience frayed and severed. During the Great Migration Black families traveled thousands of miles to gain a measure of peace and economic stability in service of their strong family ties; often Black families did not feel they could leave the counties where their former masters owned plantations, because of travel concerns about infirm and aged family members.

    If the theory about Black cultural dysfunction after chattel slavery holds, we should expect to find indifference to formal education and kinship ties from freedmen, given the abject horror of the slave experience. Instead, we find a massive boom in school and college development from freedmen, replete with strong cultural imperatives that promote English and mathematics literary as the chief concern of most children and adults. We find land ownership and trade apprenticeship on the rise.

    Plenty of Reconstruction-era histories assert these facts, so I find this argument about dysfunctional Black culture caused by chattel slavery incorrect.

  35. ChineseMom,

    Mentioning slavery, in my opinion, is common sense, not excuse-making. You talk about cultural deficiencies among Chinese. Is that excuse-making? I just don’t see how your approach to your culture is any different from King’s approach to black culture.

    Now if we’re talking about Snoopy…well, that’s another story.

    Snoopy:

    So which is it? Has Black culture been negatively affected by slavery? Or not? Have y’all made a complete recovery? Or not? You’re quoting Coates, who has talked about reparations. Coates makes his living off spreading despair and keeping African Americans stuck in a world of hopeless self-pity, but at least he doesn’t contradict himself. You, on the other hand, keep tripping over your own logical contradictions.

    Another symptom of emotional thinking is not thinking or considering the other side. What are cops supposed to do when a large man breaks the law and refuses to comply with a cop’s orders? Are they supposed to say, “Oh, he’s Black. Let’s just let him break the law.” They could do that, but in the end, it’s Black people who will suffer the most from this kind of neglect. Which is another problem that you haven’t considered–you always stand up for the criminals, but who is going to stand up for innocent people affected by criminals?

    I really think you need to put more time into thinking this through.

    In the meantime, here’s Oshay:

  36. @ Chinesemom

    The problem is that you judge YOURSELF to be knowledgeable and empathetic but your lack of ability to connect the dots proves otherwise.

    When something traumatic happens to an individual—an assault or a rape—we don’t try to figure out how much of their resulting dysfunction is because they are lazy or just “using the tape as an excuse.” Has a rape victim ever used their rape as an excuse for not doing something that they should have done? Maybe not gone back to work quite as soon as they could have? Blamed an angry outburst on the trauma instead of on a lack of patience with someone? Probably. But given the extent of what happened to them, none of us are willing to make that judgement.

    The fact that you think that “reasons” areautomatically “excuses” betrays the fact that despite your protests to the contrary, you are more interested in sweeping aside the very real effects of abuse and jumping directly into the blaming the victim for having a “victims mentality.”

    Like I said above, we can’t simply grant carte blanche to every victim. Sometimes, the effects of abuse upon attitude have to be pointed out to the effected victim. But this should be done with the understanding that the person is in fact reacting to things that were imposed upon them. IT doesn’t mean that something’s their reactions need to change. BUt in the aftermath of centuries of racism, the idea that racism can never be pointed to as an “excuse” for anything is blind and ludicrous.

  37. So which is it? Has Black culture been negatively affected by slavery? Or not? Have y’all made a complete recovery? Or not? — BigWOWO

    This isn’t complicated. Black people continue to be injured by American domestic policy, as has been true since chattel slavery and the founding of the Republic. The effects of these injuries on Black culture (even if those effects existed and were identifiable by modern social science) have no bearing on any policy discussion, because the best and most immediate way to improve Black America’s fortunes is to stop injuring Black people’s social and economic opportunities through commonplace White supremacy.

    It makes no sense to say, “Eric Garner, you wouldn’t have so much trouble drawing breath if you were not so obese”, when it’s clear from the video that public policy — in the form of Officer Daniel Pantaleo — literally choked the life out of him. If people want Eric Garner to breathe, remove the police officer’s arms from his neck.

    The problem is not any one Black culture. The problem is White supremacy.

    What are cops supposed to do when a large man breaks the law and refuses to comply with a cop’s orders? — BigWOWO

    Not murder him, obviously.

  38. King,

    The problem is that you judge YOURSELF to be knowledgeable and empathetic but your lack of ability to connect the dots proves otherwise.

    So anybody criticizes black culture or black people has to pass YOUR judgement to be knowledgeable of Black history and empathetic to black people, right? Do Whites or Black immigrants like your parents demand this? I know for sure that Asians don’t. Again, you fit yourself to my criteria 2 and 4:

    1, Overly sensitive and defensive.
    2, Lack of trust in others, tend to think the worst of people of other races (resulting interpreting/treating others as racists).
    3, Tend to (or always) see race first.
    4, Lack the ability to empathize, only see themselves as victim, demanding others to understand them and empathize with them, but can’t put themselves in other people’s shoes.
    5, Always/Tend to use racist /racist history/slavery as excuses or to explain everything.
    6, Close-mindedness

    You also once again proved my statement that “rational and honest dialogue about race/racism/culture can’t happen, because anything out of victimhood culture’s teaching will be interpret/labeled as racism/bigot, like what happened with me here.”

  39. Byron,

    Mentioning slavery, in my opinion, is common sense, not excuse-making.

    Mentioning slavery isn’t a problem, letting slavery blind your eye and seeing nothing else are.

    WHICH black culture? There are many.

    Any black culture that you think relevant. And should we ask people “WHICH black culture” whenever the word “black culture” mentioned? Could you tell how many black cultures out there and what are their names?

  40. But then I didn’t say “Anyone who criticized Black culture” did I? What you did was to take a critique that had been applied to you personally, and assume that it must be applicable to anyone whi critisizes Black culture. Are you familiar with the term “Straw Man?”

    The reason why the critisizm is applied to you is because you ignore the obvious effects of prejudice and abuse and instead embrace the “It doesn’t matter” theory in which nothing that White society has done in the past really matters. Anyone pointing to slavery or 100 years of Jim Crow, or systematic prejudice since the 1960s is simply “making excuses.” What matters is that minorities today aren’t trying hard enough. sure some bad stuff happened, but no need to point it out as a reason for anything that is going on today.

    After all, it hasn’t been White society all along that has been

    1. Overly sensitive about race and color and what it means.
    2. Who have lacked trust and thought the worst of other races
    3. Tended to always see race first
    4. Lacked empathy and the ability to see themselves in other races
    5. Tended to use race and history to explain everything
    6. Were closed minded

    Dont tell me…. you’ve never applied your little list to White people before, right?

  41. King,

    The reason why the critisizm is applied to you is because you ignore the obvious effects of prejudice and abuse and instead embrace the “It doesn’t matter” theory in which nothing that White society has done in the past really matters.

    Dont tell me…. you’ve never applied your little list to White people before, right?

    Again, you showed that you fits the criterion 2:
    1, Overly sensitive and defensive.
    2, Lack of trust in others, tend to think the worst of people of other races (resulting interpreting/treating others as racists).
    3, Tend to (or always) see race first.
    4, Lack the ability to empathize, only see themselves as victim, demanding others to understand them and empathize with them, but can’t put themselves in other people’s shoes.
    5, Always/Tend to use racist /racist history/slavery as excuses or to explain everything.
    6, Close-mindedness

    As long as you have this kind of mentality, it is a waste of time for others to talk about race problem with you.

  42. I hope you don’t take this too personal. Several years ago before we did that conversation about Blacks and Asians, I said that I think very highly of you, I still do. I’m just sad that even you can’t escape this trap.

  43. Nothing is personal Chinesemom.

    YOu just have a list that could be applied to anyone, creating a non-falsifiable dilemma. NO matter what a person says in argument to your assertions it will simply be defined as fulfilling the very assertions they are arguing against.

    in other words, rather is no way that they can disprove your point. THey must either agree with you or they are

    1. Being overly sensitive

    If they argue against racism then
    2. Lack trust of other races

    if they don’t agree with you, they are
    6. Closed minded… etc.

    You are just waving around a giant logical fallacy and you don’t even seem to know it!

  44. Seriously, what is even remotely offensive about my posts? Just more proof that BigWowo loves censorship and hates free speech.

  45. The unz commenter is clearly bigoted against Chinese regardless of any legit critique in his post.

    That said people in general won’t live up to their cultural ideals, whether it is the “unselfish invidiualism” he elevates or the unselfish mutualism of Confucius. People will continue to behave selfishly and will twist whatever ideology or philosophy for their own means, regardless. Dosen’t matter what culture religion or race you are

  46. The exchange between ChineseMom and King illustrates that no matter how evenhanded and sensible one can consider a Black person, there will always be people who choose to view that Black moderate as radical. Simply recognizing White supremacy as a factor in American life, however slight, proves sufficient for certain observers to label Black people as indelibly marked with ‘victim mentality’.

    It’s fine for people to disagree with anti-racism activists, but the assumptions of “irrational thinking” and “emotionalism” need to stop. The exchange between ChineseMom and King parallels most of the conversations I have on this site, where simple, easy to follow arguments that recognize White supremacy as a social and political force meet obstinate denial of this reality, coupled with smug allusions to Chinese cultures as if they form some standard other groups should follow. It is easy to recognize how this thinking may offend.

    Again, no one has to agree with or support liberals or progressives on race. But it simply can’t be argued persuasively that emotional thinking or irrationality animates the policy proscriptions anti-racism activists offer. Black Lives Matter doesn’t offer an emotional appeal to cease officer-involved shootings of people of color: they recognize law enforcement militarism as a response, however unjust, to the many, many tasks police officers are now required to perform. Police are asked to be social workers, mental health professionals, even highway tax collectors, given the Justice Department’s review of Ferguson’s police force. None of this is fair on the cops or those whom they serve.

    No one’s trying to be a victim. Black people are not victims, nor do they consider themselves such. Far from it: people who oppose the institutional racism that operates within our society feel empowered enough to apply their efforts toward an enormous, often intractable problem. Anti-racism advocacy is not victim mentality, it’s intelligence.

    To denigrate these activists of color without any interest in recognizing their logical, reasonable positions only serves the interests of racists like ChineseMom, people for whom nothing written by the most conservative Black man they know has worth should that Black man recognize that race affects his life.

  47. Snoopy:

    You have no logical positions. That’s the problem. You contradicted yourself on the same day.

    Early on Sept. 30:

    Further, the historical record does not provide evidence in support of the claim that Black culture was negatively impacted by chattel slavery;

    Later on Sept. 30

    Black people continue to be injured by American domestic policy, as has been true since chattel slavery and the founding of the Republic.

    This is a contradiction, unless you mean domestic policy in the days of slavery that happened to not include slavery itself. That would be a ridiculous statement (but probably not your most ridiculous statement.)

    These days, I think Black people continue to be injured by Far Leftist denial, but that’s just my opinion. We can’t even talk about Eric Garner, because you continue to perpetuate the false narrative that he was “murdered.” He wasn’t murdered. I can appreciate your tendencies for exaggeration and overstatement–you’re really doing a great job in expressing your anger–but at some point we have to get back to the facts. He wasn’t murdered. There was no premeditation there, and Pantaleo was cleared of wrongdoing…for good reason. If you know anything about martial arts, you’d see that that CLEARLY wasn’t a choke. It was an unfortunate accident that started because a very large man refused to obey the law. I don’t think he deserved to die, but it’s a risk that people take when they think they’re above the law.

    But that’s actually not even the point here. The point is that you’re living in denial, which makes it impossible to talk about real issues with you.

  48. ChineseMom:

    You’re talking about liberals who blame EVERYTHING on slavery or domestic policy. That’s not King. He’s taking a nuanced approach, which is EXACTLY the same kind of measured, intelligent approach that you take when you describe Chinese culture. If you want to see what a non-nuanced approach looks like, check out the statements above made by a certain Mr. Snoopy Jenkins.

    And yes, unless it’s clear from the context, I think you should in fact break down the different cultures. It’s too prone to abuse otherwise. In fact, that’s part of the Left’s problem too. They’ve got too many rich liberals in the Ivy Towers talking about what it’s like being a poor minority. It’s not just Black people either; Asians have this same problem:

    http://www.bigwowo.com/2014/06/affirmative-action-and-the-rift-between-the-asian-american-media-and-the-rest-of-us/

    We really need to be specific in our discussions. The world is a complex place, and it helps us to understand it better if we can talk about specifics.

  49. ChineseMom:

    I think there are two issues here that seem to conflict.

    King is saying that he has no power in what goes on in the inner cities. That’s true, much the same way I have no power over what what goes on in Weibo or WeChat among immigrants. It’s true the same way that I have no power over what goes on in China. This is simply true. King and I (and you) have all volunteered in poorer cities, but the amount of influence we have there is still limited. For the most part, we only have so much time to give and so much energy to invest, and so our influence may not be that great.

    But he’s not saying he has no responsibility in his own culture, the same way I never say I have no responsibility among Asian Americans. We have responsibility within our own subcultures where we have a voice, especially in areas where we spend most of our time.

    Now if you’re using yourself as an example, I’ll say that you are somewhat of an exception in that you’ve crossed over to address Asian Americans. You have two Asian American kids. You even went over to Reappropriate where you knew that you’d face racism. Props to you for that. In many ways, you’re a cultural cross-over.

    But that’s not most people. If you’re not part of a culture by birth, you may gravitate towards another culture, but it’s highly dependent on which culture you fall in love with. That was the point of my “cultural attraction” post:

    http://www.bigwowo.com/2016/08/cultural-attraction/

  50. BigWOWO, my statements do not contradict. You’re just having difficulty understanding the argument.

    I’ve clearly suggested that we lack evidence to interrogate the claim that chattel slavery negatively impacted Black culture with any specificity. What we do know from the historical record is that right when slavery ended Black people exhibited an intense desire to connect and maintain kinship ties, establish schools, learn trades, gain literacy, vote, and build economic stability for themselves and their families. These cultural trends to build and maintain strong, lasting families and properly educate young people persist to the present day.

    Systemic bias and institutional racism also persist to this day, and took various forms in the intervening years, from slavery to Jim Crow segregation, debt peonage, grandfather clauses, poll taxes, lynching, redlining, glass ceilings, police brutality, stop-and-frisk, mass incarceration, and more. Given this, the drives for familial connection, civic participation, educational attainment, and home ownership that Black families exhibit faced strong, and in some cases, impossible challenges.

    The point is that Black cultures are not faulty or damaged or broken. The challenges Black people face in this society do not result from inadequate or self-defeating Black cultures. The challenges Black people face stem from institutional racism and systemic bias imposed by White supremacy. If you’re interested in a specific discussion on these topics, quit telling yourself and others that Black cultures are the problem.

    There is no victim mentality among Black people, and no one exudes a victim mentality by recognizing the systemic bias that harm individuals in his community. When Daniel Pantaleo killed Eric Garner, he created a lasting metaphor for the state-sanctioned violence that claims Black lives, and elicits flinty-eyed excuses from non-Blacks who justify excessive police force through the feelings of security and protection they experience upon hearing that the police have violently subdued some large, dark-skinned Black male.

    It doesn’t matter if his crimes were minor or nonexistent. His skin makes it impossible for many people in this society to ever consider him innocent. That’s why people like you cling to cultural determinism to explain Black America’s woes, when institutional racism and systemic bias stares you right in the face.

    If you identify Black culture as the cause of Black problems, then everything that befalls Black America is Black people’s fault. If you recognize White supremacy’s impacts on our country and on Black people, then you must recognize the benefits you draw from today’s unequal status quo that Black people do not enjoy. If you know that racism affects real people today, then you must recognize your own complicity in this monstrous inequality. But blaming Black people for societal woes is easier than personally recognizing one’s own moral obligation to pursue justice.

  51. You’ll have to keep repeating yourself, Snoopy. That’s the only way you’re going to be able to keep believing the nonsense you’re saying. It makes no logical sense.

    You’re saying slavery is irrelevant (which itself is a ridiculous statement), and then you’re putting the blame on White people (again), for everything they’ve done–but not slavery because that had no impact! So slavery is irrelevant, but you’re still putting the blame on Whitey? With Eric Garner, you’re looking only at skin color. Never mind that he was breaking the law. Never mind that he refused to comply with lawful orders. Never mind that he happens to be a very large man. You excuse the criminals, but you never think about the negative impact criminals have on non-criminals. It’s always about just blaming Whitey and Chang. Why? Because you’re angry at Whitey and Chang. It’s anger, not logic.

    Above, you said that anger was the only intelligent response, and I said that I felt a more intelligent response would be to fix or mitigate the problem. Do you agree with this? It seems like you often respond in a way in which you get to say what you want, not in a way that benefits others.

  52. No one said that slavery was irrelevant.

    I said that chattel slavery did not damage Black culture such that meaningful community building activity like entrepreneurship, school formation, and maintenance of kinship ties were ignored by Black people after emancipation.

    Further, I claim that no one — certainly no one in this thread — can assert specific examples of faulty or inadequate Black culture. When they do, as ChineseMom attempts above, they run headlong into critics like King who point out their obvious bias and freewheeling overuse of anti-Black stereotype.

    Again, no one said that slavery was irrelevant. But slavery didn’t kill the Black family anymore than it perpetually degraded Black culture. The difficulties faced by the Black community reflect the continued influence of institutional racism and systemic bias on Black social, political, and economic opportunity. None of that blames Whitey — it recognizes that White supremacy remains a guiding organizing principle of American society. One can recognize reality without blaming Whites individually or collectively for this sad status quo.

    Tamir Rice broke no one’s law. It’s clear that people like Mike Brown and Eric Garner will not be viewed sympathetically by conservatives; dark, physically powerful Black men scare you too much for that. But in this nation children die because of the same fears that you use to justify the murder of men like Garner and Brown. But Tamir Rice was a child, sacrificed to soothe White fears of Black people, and his death remains an unpardonable sin on our country.

    When Philando Castile is shot dead next to his girlfriend, bleeding out because of White fear, conservatives seek exculpating information to exonerate the police involved. The human cost of such unnecessary death does not matter; protecting the ability of police officers to harass, demean, and kill Black people disproportionately does. In truth, it shouldn’t matter to anyone human whether one is an innocent like Tamir Rice or a grown man like Eric Garner: the police decision to kill must be regulated more tightly then these examples suggest proves common today to promote civic safety.

    BigWOWO, I challenge people here to recognize their inability to view Black people as worthy of the same human decency they would expect for themselves. Tamir Rice did not emerge from a broken Black culture. He was just a child, playing in a park like any other child on any other day. The problem that killed him was anti-Black racism, personified and granted civil authority by voters outside the boy’s community. It’s the same problem that killed Oscar Grant, Mike Brown, Eriuc Garner, Alton Sterling, Rekia Boyd, Philando Castile, Trayvon Martin, Akai Gurley, and many, many others.

    BigWOWO, you justify the horrors wrought on the people listed above when you allow the suggestion of a broken and/or dysfunctional Black culture to gain currency on this site. It takes a stunted, maldeveloped morality to blame a murder victim’s culture for his death, after you’ve watched the snuff film provided by on-site police cameras and random passerby.

    None of this is anger, BigWOWO. (Nor did I ever say that anger was the only intelligent response.) But you should be able to recognize the basic difference between cultural claims about a people, and the historical record about that people. The history of Reconstruction through to the present day displays Herculean attempts by Black America to improve itself through education and economic uplift, stymied in large measure by racist schemes authorized by law to steal Black wealth and terrorize Black populations.

    To focus on present day challenges and suggest that cultural deficiencies generate the Black community’s challenges and willfully ignore the historic and continued racism that plagues my people presents absurdity as disinterested objectivity. That’s just ignorant, and people here should know better.

  53. I think king is right when he says that chinesemom’s six points could easily apply to any group depending on context, including to whites

  54. Snoopy,

    You and King are not on the same side here. Sure, you may both be arguing with ChineseMom. But King is arguing from a standpoint of nuanced reason, while you’re just spewing whatever comes to mind. There’s a big difference. King is acknowledging some problems in certain Black cultures. You’re just denying.

    And again, you’re arguing the fallacy of “I found exceptions therefore the culture is blame-free!” What’s ironic, and we’ve pointed this out many times before, is that you’re quick to absolve Black people of responsibility for Black lives. But you put ALL the responsibility for Black lives on White people.

    Oshay describes Tamir Rice’s situation best. He said that it’s unfortunate and that Tamir didn’t deserve to die, but that it’s stupid to point a gun at a cop. His words were something along the line of, “It shouldn’t have happened, but we still have to say it’s stupid.” My kids play on the street, but they would never point a realistic looking gun at a cop. Why? Because they don’t own one. Nor do any of the kids they play with. This is what a balanced perspective looks like, Snoopy. Not “I get to do and say whatever and I want and then use racism as an excuse.” In other words, you should try to say things that actually help people. Don’t point a realistic-looking gun at a cop is helpful advice, regardless of race.

    It’s clear that people like Mike Brown and Eric Garner will not be viewed sympathetically by conservatives; dark, physically powerful Black men scare you too much for that.

    Mike Brown was bigger, younger, and stronger than you, Snoopy, and he was violent. Darren Wilson is also bigger and stronger than you. But if Mike Brown tried to grab your gun and shoot you, even without Darren Wilson’s added bulk, you’d be afraid. If we’re going to use our emotions, let’s use the right ones. don’t let your anger at Whitey and Chang get in the way of your empathy for all people, including Whitey and Chang.

    (Nor did I ever say that anger was the only intelligent response.)

    Well then, someone must’ve hacked your account because it happened in this very thread.

    It would not be intelligent to respond without anger.

    The history of Reconstruction through to the present day displays Herculean attempts by Black America to improve itself through education and economic uplift, stymied in large measure by racist schemes authorized by law to steal Black wealth and terrorize Black populations.

    WHAT??? Economic uplift? Dude, I helped to put poor people into homeownership, which is the #1 vehicle of wealth creation in the past 50 years or more, and you attacked me for that–without knowing anything about my business other than I was in it, i.e. the business of helping people become homeowners. Furthermore, I have NEVER heard you say anything about what Black people should do for economic uplift. If you can’t do more than just mention it, then it’s a talking point.

    Here’s someone who is actually giving advice rather than just deflection coaching:

  55. That’s exactly what I’m saying–you’re an EMOTIONAL thinker. There’s no reasoning behind your words. It’s just pure anger at the Whiteys and Changs of the world, and I just happen to be a Chang. 🙂

  56. Byron, you don’t argue in good faith. You act as if there’s no reasonable argument by which a person may suggest that Black culture(s) are not responsible for the challenges Black people face. You work backward from that conclusion and then denigrate anyone who criticizes that view.

    The only reason you find King reasonable at all is because you two agree about cultural explanations for individual behavior. It’s not that his reasoning is somehow more nuanced or more cogent: his arguments against ChineseMom’s racism are not substantively distinct from those I use against you.

    I’m just not interested in blaming a culture for challenges best explained by political phenomena. Jews were not responsible for the tenement depravity they endured for decades after journeying to America. Native Americans are not responsible for the economic malaise and social neglect that characterize many reservation communities. To blame a people’s culture for conditions caused by racist actions against their number is not valid.

    There’s simply no logic to the argument that Tamir Rice proves responsible for his fate because he played with a toy gun in public. He was a child. He’s not supposed to be completely responsible for his actions at that age. The adults in the situation are supposed to display the maturity required to investigate the object Rice held aloft without deploying lethal force on a twelve year old — especially if they are literally paid and authorized to display sensible judgment by the communities where they find employment.

    This is the problem between us Byron: you contort your capacity for reason to justify horrendous violence against Blacks that you would never tolerate against your own kind. No child deserves to be killed by police for playing with a toy. No man deserves to be killed by police for selling loose cigarettes. Black people do not deserve to die for being Black, and we don’t deserve to be told we deserve such excessive sanction because of cultural deficiencies.

    You support a different standard of justice for Blacks than you expect to apply to Whites and Asians, Byron. It’s unjustifiable and inhumane.

  57. Snoopy Jenkins on October 4, 2016 at 2:48 pm said:
    Byron, you sold subprime mortgages to poor people. You helped Black people find homes like the Klan helped Black people vote.

    Byron were you a mortgage broker ? I don’t know what you do for a living. Are you still a mortgage broker ? I never expected that you had worked in the industry. I haven’t seen many asians work in sales. I always thought you would be a little nerdy, but I guess you are much slicker than that.
    I agree with Snoopy, no child should ever die for playing with gun toys, no black man should ever get shot while sitting on the floor with his hands up. You have seen video of the black guy that got shot for running away from the cop. Any non racist reasonable person would use the taser on unarmed suspects. Those white cops were either very stupid ( otherwise they would be able to go to college), or very racist ( that’s why they couldn’t go to college), or both.

  58. Gotta love how Social Justice Warriors and American Leftists will hijack a movement for police accountability into a racial issue, in order to promote themselves and to get more special privileges for special victims. 🙂

    Just too bad… they are also hijacking the movement away from the real solutions. 🙁

  59. That’s exactly right, Sengge. Imagine if James took all this energy and instead of ranting and hollering, he formed cogent arguments and took action. Now imagine if all these Black Lives Matter activists did the same. Things might actually…change.

    James,

    King is logical. He’s reasonable. I can agree with him on facts even if my opinion is different.

    You’ve got a tendency to use different criteria for yourself vs. the rest of the world. As Sengge said, you’re turning this into a race issue when it’s not a race issue. Or at least it’s not THAT much of a race issue. I don’t want you going off on another tangent, so let’s just use one example.

    There’s simply no logic to the argument that Tamir Rice proves responsible for his fate because he played with a toy gun in public. He was a child. He’s not supposed to be completely responsible for his actions at that age. The adults in the situation are supposed to display the maturity required to investigate the object Rice held aloft without deploying lethal force on a twelve year old — especially if they are literally paid and authorized to display sensible judgment by the communities where they find employment.

    “Investigate the object.” Very interesting. I think maybe your interest in comic-con and the like have tricked you into believing that White cops are superheroes who can run like the Flash or see things with super-vision like Superman. Or that if they’re shot by a real gun, it’ll just bounce off of them. That’s not the case. They’ve got a split second to make a life-altering decision when they see something that looks like a gun. Here’s what the gun looked like:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3377431/Is-picture-convinced-grand-jury-not-charge-Tamir-Rice-s-killers-Photo-compares-12-year-old-s-toy-gun-real-weapon-John-Legend-leads-celebrity-outrage-decision.html

    Now I know that when you’re a parent, you’ll do what I say and do, not what you’re advocating right now.There’s no way in hell that you’ll take these illogical, emotional, ridiculous arguments that you’re making right now and apply them to your own child. You’re just way too smart to accept your own arguments (which aren’t really arguments as much as talking points). It’s the same way you would never take the money-grows-on-trees spending policies you advocate and employ them in your own financial life.

    For example, Snoopy, you would never tell your kid to wave a realistic-looking gun at a cop and expect the cop to be able to tell the difference. If you really believed that Black Lives Matter, you’d teach your kid to protect his Black life by thinking before acting–and you would do this even if you adopted a White kid. You would never tell your kid that he has no responsibility for his own actions and that he could do whatever he wants with the cops. You would never even allow your child to own a gun that looks real–my kids have nothing but bright colored Nerf Guns, and I’m sure you’d do the same. Snoopy, you’d be the first one teaching responsible behavior to your own kid. You would never tell your kid to run out in the street because, “Junior, you’ve got the right-of-way as a pedestrian, and if a car hits you, it’s the driver’s fault! He’s an adult and should know better!” This has nothing to do with race and everything to do with common sense. You’ve never EVER spoken about how Black people can enact their own “economic uplift,” but assuming your kid isn’t inheriting a shitload of money from you, you would never teach him to simply be dependent on The Man for handouts, even though that’s more or less what you advocate online.

    I have a feeling you’re emotional when you talk to us, but you’re a lot more logical in your actual life with the people around you. This makes me happy, both for you and your loved ones. But I just don’t see why you can’t just do the same thing in real life and online.

  60. The meaningful point here is that Tamir Rice should not have died. Video from the incident shows a police officer barely slow down his vehicle to fire the fatal round. Prizing the personal safety of an officer over that of every citizen, no matter how innocent, no matter how young, only makes sense for people who reasonably suspect their will never deal with life-or-death police scrutiny.

    None of this is emotional for me. I simply lack respect for the sort of reasoning that always justifies the taking of Black lives, in all circumstances. That is the reasoning you employ here, Byron. For you, police officers should not be held accountable for killing Black people.

    Akai Gurley simply walked in an apartment complex and was shot by a police officer — you believe a just system should exonerate the cop. Eric Garner stands on a corner selling loose cigarettes and ends up in a needless chokehold employed by police — you believe a just system should exonerate the cop. Twelve-year-old Tamir Rice plays by himself in a public park with a plastic toy gun only to be shot by police who didn’t even stop their car — you believe a just system should exonerate the cop. You display a clear preference for police officers over Black people’s lives, and that is quite unreasonable on your part.

    Byron, you’re allowed by our society to hold this indefensible position about the worth of Black lives because you do not expect to encounter the carceral state’s front line agents with such deadly stakes. Your son will never have to deal with a cop who assumes he is a violent, uncontrollable threat, in the way Darren Wilson and Daniel Pantaleo assumed danger from Mike Brown and Eric Garner. You couple privilege with inhumanity, Byron, because other people outside your community endure what you will not.

    Given this, I believe you lack the moral reasoning to conclude that Black cultures suffer from deficiencies, much less any factual basis for that odious claim. You, who will never deal with anti-Black prejudice from police officers that threatens your life as well as your livelihood, have zero understanding of what Black parents endure to raise children, and as such have no ability to predict what I would do as a parent.

    Any child I raise will have to navigate police officers you feel would be justified in killing them, no matter the circumstances. In the interim, your child attends chess tournaments. Safely. Don’t mistake this admonishment for emotion, Byron. I simply do not accept that you have standing to lecture Black people.

  61. Snoopy Jenkins said:

    Byron, you’re allowed by our society to hold this indefensible position about the worth of Black lives because you do not expect to encounter the carceral state’s front line agents with such deadly stakes. Your son will never have to deal with a cop who assumes he is a violent, uncontrollable threat, in the way Darren Wilson and Daniel Pantaleo assumed danger from Mike Brown and Eric Garner.

    Kuanchung Kao was shot dead by police because he was performing a “martial arts” maneuver and looked like a “ninja fighter” and “samurai warrior” according to the officers involved and the district attorney, but of course, racists like Snoopy Jenkins will continue to talk down to Asians and tell them to check their “privilege” if bigWOWO were to be murdered in front of his wife and kids for the same reason as Kuanchung Kao.

    To see Snoopy post another asinine comment where he downplays anti-Asian violence, just scroll down.

  62. I think that in the case of Tamir Rice, I’m with Snoopy. The kid was only 12 y.o. but these guys went in like Rambo, so they were already hyped up. One of them, if the news is correct, already had it in his mind that this was a high crime area. Nervous hyped up cops scare the shit out of me.

    I have nothing to prove it, but i think it’s a fair assumption that the cop wouldn’t have been so trigger happy if the kid had been white. I don’t mean that the guy had it in his mind to shoot someone black, but that he was probably already scared by his own conscious or unconscious profiling.

    I’ve seen the videos and I still don’t see the poor kid pointing the gun at the cops. yeah, he was being a real punk and pointing it at passerby, but I don’t think he would have been stupid enough to actually point it at a cop. he deserved a thorough spanking, but did not deserve to get shot.

  63. Black Americans protested unequal treatment in the military during the Vietnam War and demanded more opportunities such as promotions while they were busy killing Asians in large numbers, yet nobody accused Blacks of demanding White privilege. Instead, they’re called patriots who were serving their country. Chinese Americans protested unequal treatment in the police force when Peter Liang was convicted for killing a Black man by accident, yet Blacks and Asian SJWs were quick to throw Asians under the bus and shut them up by accusing them of demanding White privilege.

    When Blacks push their own causes, we laud them as fighting for everybody’s rights- even when they’re not. When Asians push their own causes, we label them anti-Black racists who are complicit in White supremacy.

    This double standard in race activism traces its origins to the 1960s and 1970s, when the nascent New Left in American politics derived a substantial portion of its support base from Black American activists but not other races, due to differences in numbers. The vast majority of racial minorities in the US at that time were Black, meaning Black concerns were heard by White liberals. Meanwhile, other races were ignored, thus modern American liberalism.

  64. Kuanchung Kao was shot dead by police because he was performing a “martial arts” maneuver and looked like a “ninja fighter” and “samurai warrior” according to the officers involved and the district attorney, but of course, racists like Snoopy Jenkins will continue to talk down to Asians and tell them to check their “privilege” if bigWOWO were to be murdered in front of his wife and kids for the same reason as Kuanchung Kao. — Kiwi

    Vitriol aside, this is a fair point. Asian Americans do face racialized violence from police officers, and I am incorrect to suggest otherwise because they face such violence at far lower frequency than do Blacks and Latinos. You critique is well noted, Kiwi. I apologize.

  65. @ Snoopy Jenkins

    To your credit, I do not entirely agree with bigWOWO on everything regarding his stance on police killings of Blacks. But I don’t see that as a reason to dismiss other things he says, especially his criticism of American politics and its (mis)representation of Asian Americans. Even though people may sometimes draw the wrong conclusions, the observations that lead them to come to those conclusions in the first place didn’t simply pop out of nowhere.

    I tried to address this phenomenon in my post after the first one you replied to. It’s a fact that Americans tend to see race relations as a Black/White binary and that other races often feel that this social narrative, which is often supported by the media and educational curricula, is misleading and marginalizes “third race” people in ways that they are only just beginning to articulate.

    Oftentimes these efforts are misinterpreted as anti-Blackness. Blacks have good reason to suspect as much. But sometimes people need to listen. And this is when “third race” people feel that they are being pushed aside when they are not heard. They are written off as complicit in anti-Blackness or as attempting to be honorary Whites, as Asians are often accused, and have their own concerns trivialized.

    I am not making this up. The majority of psychology literature concerning race, for example, discusses Blacks even though most Americans of color are not Black anymore. I do not believe Black people’s psychological needs are of greater weight or importance than that of all non-Black minorities combined. Pointing this out may be perceived as anti-Blackness, but people who notice these things simply want to draw attention to the fact that Americans’ views of race have been distorted, largely as an accident of history.

    As I mentioned, the vast majority of people of color in the US during the Civil Rights Movement were Black. This has profoundly shaped how the narrative of race relations is told in the US, which has an increasingly multiracial future. In my school, which was majority Asian, US race history was mostly taught as a Black and White thing. We went into great detail about the Harlem Renaissance, the Great Migration, famous Black writers, and did presentations etc. but we at best glossed over Asian Americans history.

    A lot of the criticism on this blog is directed towards Asian faux activists who put other races interests above their own. At times this is seen as anti-Blackness, and sometimes the allegation is correct. But the fact remains that an uncanny phenomenon has arisen where Americans are taught Black American history but not Asian American history and are left to fill the gaps with stereotypes like the Model Minority. This is in big part why many Asians such as those on this blog feel alienated by US liberalism and become skeptical of it.

    Asian Americans continue to face racial discrimination, including in the form of racialized violence, yet they are often silenced when their concerns are dismissed as those of a minority that doesn’t have it as bad as Blacks. This idea doesn’t come from a close observation of reality. It is rooted in a stereotype. In fact, even the original 1966 New York Times article that first promulgated the term “model minority” argued that Japanese Americans faced worse discrimination than Blacks.

    It wasn’t until the Reagan era of the 1980s that the Model Minority stereotype was used by White conservatives to argue that racism didn’t exist, period. White liberals took an alternate view, arguing that Asians didn’t experience racism, unlike Blacks, or at least that racism against Asians wasn’t as big a concern because it didn’t result in the same “pathologies” that afflicted Blacks, such as poverty and educational underachievement. Obviously, both views are flawed.

    Unfortunately, many race activists today, including those of color, have taken the White liberal view of writing off Asians as “honorary Whites” whose concerns are dismissed as being not as big a deal or not even a real concern. This is the viewpoint that some on this blog are accusing you of. Your misstatements about racialized violence against Asians by police was evidence of that.

    I think many of the commenters lack either the patience or the language to explain this phenomenon to you, but I tried. I’m just hoping my words don’t fall on deaf ears.

  66. Snoopy:

    None of this is emotional for me. I simply lack respect for the sort of reasoning that always justifies the taking of Black lives, in all circumstances. That is the reasoning you employ here, Byron. For you, police officers should not be held accountable for killing Black people.

    It IS emotional for you, Snoopy, both in your reading and your words. I don’t walk into debates using logic to try to come to the conclusion that I emotionally desire. In fact, I’m not emotional at all. I use logic to debate an issue so that the argument leads me to a non-predetermined conclusion. That’s why my opinions rest on the individual merits of each case. I thought Peter Liang should have been guilty (though I didn’t think he deserved the ridiculous punishments the SJW’s were supporting), and I thought the cop who shot Walter Scott was clearly guilty of murder. On the other hand, the facts indicate that the cop who grabbed Eric Garner was only doing what he needed to do. The courts agreed with me. I don’t always side with the police.

    You, on the other hand, emotionally decide that Black means innocent in 99% of cases, and then you try to use logic to justify that conclusion.

    Your son will never have to deal with a cop who assumes he is a violent, uncontrollable threat, in the way Darren Wilson and Daniel Pantaleo assumed danger from Mike Brown and Eric Garner. You couple privilege with inhumanity, Byron, because other people outside your community endure what you will not.

    Kiwi answered this above, but there’s more. Darren Wilson WAS dealing with a violent threat. It wasn’t an assumption; it was a fact. You would have shot Mike Brown too. Again, it’s not a race issue, despite what your hatred of Whitey is telling you. When you’re a cop and a large man tries to grab your gun, you’re under threat. Eric Garner wasn’t a threat, but cops are paid to enforce the law. That’s not inhuman; that’s common sense. And it has nothing to do with race.

    You, who will never deal with anti-Black prejudice from police officers that threatens your life as well as your livelihood, have zero understanding of what Black parents endure to raise children, and as such have no ability to predict what I would do as a parent.

    So…you are saying that you’d tell your kid to run out in traffic because it’s not his responsibility? You’d tell him to feel free to point realistic toy guns at officers because they’re adults and should know whether the gun is real? Because that was all I said. I’m finding it baffling that you’re fighting me on this.

    Come back to me after you have a kid. I have a feeling that once you have one, you’re going to let the intelligent parent overrule the emotional Social Justice Warrior. That’s just my prediction. I could be wrong, but I see no reason why you’d endanger your child’s life. Right now, you’re talking in hypotheticals, and your online persona has always been “ME FIRST!” Everything is about your victimization and your emotions regarding your supposed victimization. I don’t think that philosophy will continue once you have a kid.

  67. Kiwi,

    Well said.

    Notty,

    I can’t really say either way. Studies have shown that black people are actually less likely than whites to be shot by cops in comparable situations (though I think the study also said that they were more likely to get roughed up).

    What I can say is that that gun looked very real. Kids do shoot each other, and in this day and age, shootings are becoming more and more common. I agree that Tamir didn’t deserve to be shot. But there’s simply no reason for a kid to be playing aggressively with a gun that looks real. In fact, people around told Tamir to put it down. Being a cop is a risky job. It’s difficult. People could help make everyone’s job easier by practicing safer habits.

    Again, I don’t think it’s Tamir’s fault. I’m not putting the blame on him; I’m just saying that it’s near impossible for a cop to safely and accurately assess the situation every time under pressure. But I still think kids, even a 12 year old kid, should behave in a way that minimizes the danger of being shot or harmed.

  68. Byron,
    Black parents don’t have to teach their kids to not acting like kids around the police. A white guy with an AR walking on the streets would be watched by the police, a black guy carrying an AR on the street would be apprehended. There’s clearly racial discrimination against black people. You can’t blame them for not acting “reasonable” around the cops. Do you blame rape victims for wearing provocative clothes ?

  69. I’m not blaming anyone, Kyrie. I don’t see Eric or Tamir as responsible for their deaths (Michael Brown is another story.). Eric and Tamir shouldn’t have died. I’m simply saying that some of these problems could have been prevented.

  70. Here’s an example of a clear abuse of cop power:

    The poor guy did nothing wrong.

    But we have to take each case on its own merits. Michael Brown shouldn’t even be on the lips of BLM activists. Darren Wilson defended his own life against a man who was trying to take it. He’s not a bad guy–at least not in that instance. BLM could find more supporters if they went after the real bad people, rather than just every white person who tangles with a black person. They could get more supporters if they valued facts over emotion and tribalism.

  71. Just now catching up.

    Yes Byron, I agree that Michael Brown was a bad choice as poster boy for BLM, but it took a long time for the evidence to come out as to what really happened in his particular case. But in any case, it was probably a hard thing to control. MB just happened to be the wrong guy who’s story erupted into violence at the wrong time.

  72. Kiwi — The difficulty I have with the ‘third race’ phenomena you discuss is that when people make the attempt to define and discuss race in America for more than their own perspectives, from more than just the Black/ White paradigm, none of that absolves them from the moral obligation to oppose White supremacy.

    BigWOWO’s not really interested in that project. At best, he’d prefer to sidestep any meaningful critique of White supremacy in order to avail himself and his people of White privilege. This dynamic finds support from many of the first generation Chinese ChineseMom represents in this space. In this vein they display a callousness toward institutional bias and systemic racism as it affects Black people that is difficult to stomach.

    Is it always anti-Blackness? A desire to focus conversations on race on people who are neither Black nor White is not anti-Black, obviously. Justifying the killing of Tamir Rice? Yes, that’s anti-Black. Not to mention inhumane.

    To be frank, White supremacy leaves Blacks, Latinos, and Asians in dire straits in America. But everyone’s struggle isn’t identical, which is why it’s so important to approach these issues with a firm grasp of the historical record, to avoid misunderstanding. Of course the original 1966 New York Times article that coined the term ‘model minority’ argued that Japanese Americans faced worse discrimination than Blacks: the entire point of the article was the suggestion that liberal sociological theories on American race advancement that referred to the effects of racism to explain Black political and economic stagnation were, in effect, wrong, given Japanese Americans who suffered internment’s indignity, and quietly applied themselves to American educational and economic pursuits.

    What isn’t mentioned in the article are the multitude of federal and state laws that curtailed full Black civic and economic participation in 1966, laws people were only able to dismantle through the Civil Rights Movement’s public agitation and civil disobedience — the opposite of the quiet studiousness promoted as positive by the article. Don’t take my word for it: read the article yourself. You’ll find that sociologist William Pedersen casts Japanese Americans as productive, efficient, and academically interested, in comparison to other people of color, especially Blacks, whose neighborhoods enjoy elevated criminality.

    The point is that from the outset, the model minority stereotype was crafted in a racially multicultural sense: it’s not just that the Japanese Americans were educated, productive, upwardly mobile, and socially unobtrusive, but that the Japanese Americans were all these things that Blacks were not. Conservatives ran with this perception, especially after 1980, but it was always there, and not universally refuted by Japanese Americans in particular or Asian Americans generally.

    Actually, the only consistent refutation of the model minority myth within Asian American circles stems from people associated with Asian American Studies. There, academics and students parse the historical and sociopolitical record and locate the damage model minority thinking causes Asian Americans. For their trouble, they are denigrated as “Asian faux activists who put other races interests above their own”.

    I certainly do not support the view of Asian Americans as “honorary Whites”, anymore than I would expect Asian Americans to join every protest in lockstep with Black Americans against White supremacy. The only just position here is to expect Asian Americans to forge their own self-determined path forward, without any expectation that they will promote anyone’s interests but their own.

    That being said, wealth, educational attainment, and social acceptance prove seductive. Asian Americans are not White, but it’s clear that for some people privilege envy is a real thing. For many Chinese Americans and Asian Americans generally, the Peter Liang protests proved a wonderfully self-affirming moment, were a community stood up and refused to be relegated to second class status. For many other people of color, the Peter Liang protests were a gaudy overreach, a public request from a non-White people to be treated with White privilege, and nothing else. These debates have yet to find resolution, and the lack of prominence of Asian Americans Studies in college curricula proves determinate. Frankly, if BigWOWO enjoyed just one semester of Asian American Studies courses at Cornell, I doubt he’d embrace the ahistorical stances on race we find so often here.

    But the dynamic where race activists, liberal and conservative, ignore or undercut Asian American experiences is real, and occurs in large measure because of both a lack of Asian American Studies promotion in higher education, and disinterest in this material from far too many immigrant Asian Americans. We’ve noticed an explosion in Asian American college enrollment in selective American colleges and universities over the fast fifty years, with conservative complaints that affirmative action unjustly curtails Asian American enrollment numbers, but abject silence from these conservatives (Asian American and otherwise) on promoting Asian American Studies so that those students learn about their history. This is the model minority myth realized as diversity rendered compatible with White supremacy, and I find this abhorrent.

    Kiwi, if you wish race activists to take Asian Americans seriously, not as honorary Whites, a useful first step may involve convincing fellow travelers like BigWOWO to reject the model minority myth. His “Whitey and Chang” perceptions do not display a meaningful path forward for Asian Americans; rather, he asks Asian Americans to give up knowledge of themselves for thirty pieces of privileged silver.

  73. King,

    I agree. But I do think something should have been said about that. They spent tons of time perpetuating something that happens to be false, so I believe they owed it to the rest of us to set the record straight. They might think that it would cause them to lose credibility, but the opposite is true. They’d gain credibility by telling the truth, and then they could move on to Walter Scott and other cases that truly were abuses of power.

    Snoopy:

    I’m about to blow a big giant hole in your nearly 1000 word essay with a single link.

    Ready….aim….fire.

    http://reappropriate.co/

    Look through that site and read about how the author feels Peter Liang deserved HARD punishment for an accident–even though that would be unusual punishment. Read how the author attacks David Choe by accusing him of rape (with no proof). Read about how the author promotes a higher bar for Asian American college applicants. It has since been deleted, but look at how Chinese immigrants are treated when they try to come to the table. Look at how you both refuse to challenge Karthick Ramakrishnan on his lies–simply because it helps discredit the poor Chinese immigrants who are standing up for equality. That’s emotion over fact.

    This is not my vision of Asian America. Life is confusing enough without having a world where Trumpian/Far Left emotion takes the place of cold, hard fact and logic in the sphere of debate.

    As I’ve always said, much respect to both of you for stepping up. Even if y’all are misguided, we can still all respect the energy you bring. But it’s not for me. Nor is it for most people who value understanding over dogma.

  74. @ Snoopy

    I don’t think race tribalism is something exclusive to Asians and that Blacks are somehow never guilty of. Chinese people supported Peter Liang for the same exact reason Black people supported OJ Simpson. If Obama were to be prosecuted today and put on trial for his drone murders of Middle Eastern women, children, and elderly, I suspect Black Americans would turn out by the millions, protesting his indictment as racist and unjust.

    Even then, nobody would accuse Blacks of demanding White privilege. But when Asians make the same demands, suddenly they’re written off as demanding White privilege and wanting to be honorary Whites. This double standard is what has many Asians angry. Asians should not have to reject the Model Minority stereotype anymore than Blacks should have to reject the Thug Stereotype.

    This is starting to drift into respectability politics. If Asians should behave a certain way (e.g.: protesting, being political) in order for other races to take them seriously, then so should Blacks (e.g.: not rioting, not looting). But apparently, among liberal circles, while it has become unacceptable to stereotype Blacks, people still see nothing wrong in stereotyping Asians.

  75. Peter Liang was convicted. OJ Simpson was acquitted. Yet somehow, Asians are the ones accused of aspiring to Whiteness whereas Blacks are not.

  76. @ bigWOWO

    Yeah, it would have been better, but the climate would not allow it. The problem was that BLM was right about Fergusson, but wrong about Michael Brown.

    According to the United States Justice Department investigation, Fergusson was in fact a hotbed of racist anti-Black police action. These conclusions were drawn, siting specific instances and statistics.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2015/03/04/the-12-key-highlights-from-the-dojs-scathing-ferguson-report/?utm_term=.210c493ee6d5

    So, after years of racist abuse under color of law enforcement authority, the Black population of Fergusson snapped. But they snapped under the strain of a demonstrated and proven system of police abuse. The Black community in Fergusson had no reason to trust the police. The police had been acting as criminal robber barons for decades. All of this is outlined in the D.O.J. report.

    Therefore, days after the protest, when the tape of MB robbing the store was released, few Black people in Fergusson cared. MB was just a fulcrum, but the protest was really about the way the Fergusson police had been treating their Black population for many years. Even months later when it looked like MB had been struggling for officer Darren Wilson’s weapon, few of them cared, because all of the other shit that had been going on in Fergusson.

    I admit it looks bad, and that it would have been far better had the protests coalesced around a more righteous figure. But the police are the ones who systematically abused their authority and thus created the circumstances that led to them not being trusted or loved in Fergusson.

  77. @Kiwi —

    Asian Americans, individually and collectively, have every right to adopt whatever position(s) on White supremacy they deem necessary and just, from overt support to resigned acceptance to overt conflict. But choices have consequences, and no one imposes a respectability politics framework on Asian Americans when people disagree with the White privilege envy some Asian Americans express.

    Chinese American Peter Liang supporters openly suggested during their protests that Liang should escape prosecution for killing Akai Gurley in the manner that other White officers escaped prosecution for killing Black people. That’s not about ethnic pride in a member of one’s community who ascends to a high office, that is an endorsement of state sponsored killing of Black people by law enforcement, with the caveat that the privilege to escape prosecution as a police officer for killing a Black person should not discriminate based on race. The privilege in question here is the privilege to kill Black people without criminal or civic sanction (read: White privilege).

    In contrast, the prosecution of an American President for executing the inhumane foreign policy of the United States of America would drive millions of Americans from all backgrounds into public protest, since such a move would constitute the most severe breach of American sovereignty since the War of 1812. But if I take your point to mean that Black Americans would view a possible prosecution of President Obama as selective justice based on support for White supremacy (since it cannot be argued that President Obama’s foreign policy is any more or less inhumane than his White male predecessors), I suspect the effective, if obvious rejoinder from The Hague would amount to a version of “even were that true, President Obama’s predecessors’ crimes are not relevant to an evaluation of Obama’s foreign policy conduct”. And The Hague in that instance would be correct.

    We should expect rational, reasonable adults to recognize the facts that lead to the conclusion that O.J. Simpson, Peter Liang, and Barack Obama are all individuals who made choices that killed people. Leaving Obama’s complex, if amoral geopolitics aside, race tribalism does not absolve anyone of their ability to reason; that’s why it was wrong, given the facts as we knew them then, to support Simpson or Liang. (Frankly, Kiwi, if you’re placing Peter Liang on the same moral parallel as O.J. Simpson, that makes its own statement.) It is also why many with knowledge of African American Studies and Asian American Studies publicly questioned community support for both these individuals. Lest we forget, support for O.J. in the 1990’s was not ubiquitous then, nor is it now, and the massive generational schism over Peter Liang offered if nothing else a reminder that older, first generation Chinese Americans experience real social and political isolation that many Asian American race activists struggle to address.

    We should also recognize that other’s groups’ difficulty with seriously parsing claims of race discrimination from Asian Americans is a more complex picture then that which you’ve presented, Kiwi. Learned people have no struggle with the notion that Asian Americans experience serious prejudice in our society. But many Asian Americans do have trouble with that claim. Discussions of bamboo ceilings and rampant misogyny imposed by White supremacy fall on deaf ears in many Asian American circles; places like this site routinely attempt to ally Whites and Asians in opposition to race activism from Blacks and Latinos, even when those Blacks and Latinos recognize White supremacy as a social construct that harms all people of color, including Asian Americans.

    Further, some Chinese American immigrant circles have yet to interrogate their ready acceptance of African American stereotypes, as evidenced by practically everything ChineseMom has ever written here. These groups reverberate misinformation and innuendo about affirmative action and data disaggregation, as if demonstrable untruths should expect the same respect as observed fact to reasonable people outside their ethnic and age demographics.

    Certainly all Asian America is no more responsible for WeChat or reddit.com/r/asianmasculinity anymore than #BlackLivesMatter is responsible for the infinitesimal fraction of people who attend their rallies and marches with the intent to destroy property and harm people. But we all respond to stimuli from a great many sources, and misunderstandings are likely. This is why the ethnic studies academics are so important to our communities, and to debates like this.

    Kiwi, I stand by my claim. It’s not respectability politics to expect people of color to assume a position on White supremacy that recognizes the damage to all people of color White supremacy imposes. When certain Asian Americans find it more advantageous or useful for their own interests to ally themselves with a White supremacist state or clamor to benefit from the privileges afforded a select few within a White supremacist state, the rest of us have the duty to challenge those odious views with detailed reminders drawn from Asian American history.

    That means that, at some point, Asian Americans who support the model minority myth will have their views challenged by people who do not look like them. At some point, Chinese American antagonism to affirmative action — a policy that assists Asian Americans, especially South Asians — will be challenged by folk from outside that community. At some point, Asian American anti-blackness and misogyny has to go. Because White supremacy harms all of us, and I can’t allow the infantile hate Chris Rock used at the Oscars to impede my communities’ ability to band with yours to fight it.

  78. @ Snoopy

    Nothing in your reply addressed the main thrust of my post: that among US race activist circles, a double standard is applied to Asians. Asians are accused of “White privilege envy” but when other races do similar or equivalent deeds, those other races are not accused of White privilege envy. The reason for this is that other races see little problem in applying the Model Minority stereotype to Asians, which depicts Asians as gravitating towards Whiteness in ways that other races do not.

    A big reason for discontent towards US liberalism is that Asians feel like no matter what they do, they will be told that they are trying to be White unless whatever they do receives “the Black stamp of approval” or “the Hispanic stamp of approval” because Asians are not readily accepted as real minorities. Asians do not feel that they are being respected. They feel that other people of color are only using Asians as their pawns against Whites, only to cast Asians aside as honorary Whites once Whites are out of the way.

  79. In Asian American studies courses, students are taught about Vincent Chin’s murder. But what they don’t teach us about is Joel Lee’s murder. Both men were murdered in hate crimes against their race. The only difference was the race of the killer. Chin was murdered by a White man while Lee was murdered by a Black man. I take that back. Chin’s killer received a conviction but Lee’s killer received an acquittal- by a Black jury. Nobody ever talks about that.

    The simple fact is that every race just wants to get away with the same shit that Whites do all the time. Freddie Gray was murdered by a Black cop who was then acquitted by a Black jury with the help of a Black judge. Even Peter Liang received no jail time because the Black prosecutor demanded no jail time. The only difference is that when Asians do it, they get slapped with the “honorary White” label.

  80. but we have to pick a side ( left or right), which side is the lesser of the two evils ?

  81. Snoopy wrote:

    At some point, Chinese American antagonism to affirmative action — a policy that assists Asian Americans, especially South Asians — will be challenged by folk from outside that community. At some point, Asian American anti-blackness and misogyny has to go. Because White supremacy harms all of us, and I can’t allow the infantile hate Chris Rock used at the Oscars to impede my communities’ ability to band with yours to fight it.

    Would you lay off Chris Rock? To call that “hate”…that’s just emotional anger. Again.

    Affirmative action helps South Asians? I don’t know about South Asians in general, but it helped Vijay Chokal-Ingam. Dude wouldn’t have gotten into med school had it not been for affirmative action.

    http://almostblack.com/

    Your “community” (Far Left Liberals) can’t band with mine (moderate Americans). I know you’re trying to make it seem like your “community” is Black people and ours is “Asian,” but we’re not dividing on race here. We’re dividing according to whether or not we employ logic over emotion and whether we believe in equality or special privileges.

  82. King,

    No disagreement here with the facts.

    I think you may be right about the order of events. I think the Ferguson police investigation report came out after it was revealed that Michael Brown attacked Darren Wilson. Perhaps at that point, they made a decision to go with the momentum. I understand this. Since the police investigation report was the only loose end, they could have decided to just wait until the results of that investigation before re-evaluating.

    But at some point, they should have re-evaluated. I know Snoopy is against respectability politics, but if people don’t act respectably, they get less respect, which is what happened. With BLM, I suspect that even public figures who verbally support them don’t fully think of them as equals in the fight for justice. It’s hard to respect people who are lying–and in most of these cases (i.e. over 50%), the BLM accusations are exaggerated or false. I still can’t get over how that guy from Mizzou got away with that.

    Sure, if they’re trying to recruit people like the woman who assaulted Tim Tai or Shrieking Girl, it doesn’t take much. They just have to gin up the emotional levels, and they’ve got themselves a fan. But at some point, they have to go after the moderate thinker–because we’re the majority. They’re not going to get many moderates if they don’t hold themselves to a reasonable ethical/moral standard.

    I’ll be the first to admit that the protesters achieved something with the Ferguson police department. I just don’t think they’d lose anything by making this an honest fight. If they want to make lasting change, they’re going to have to conduct themselves with honor. I don’t see it going well any other way.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *