Falsely accusing others of racism. Even if Clyburn did hear the N-word, (I think he’s probably lying), it doesn’t justify tarring (and I choose that word deliberately) everyone at the protest. This, and similar comments by Janeane Garafolo, is contemptible. And I and a lot of other people are getting pretty damned tired of it.
[Update a couple minutes later]
I agree with Dana Loesch:
I mean, if you’re going to smear a group of people by claiming that they were shouting slurs, perhaps make sure you don’t post video that completely refutes your claim and makes you look like a race hustler. Just saying.
That’s exactly what it is: race hustling. Identity prostitution and the Democrat party is the biggest pimp of all. To say nothing of Al Gore’s fleecing of the Cheyenne and Arapaho (I take interest in indigenous affairs because of my family’s proud heritage); the evisceration of under-privileged kids in DC to go to better schools via vouchers; Obama bringing in Sharpton to quiet the black community’s concerns that the administration’s economic policies are hurting them; or the cover up of the Gladney hate crime (and the socialists who called him an array of slurs); Democrats use minorities as nothing more than tools to claim power. It’s disgusting and as many, including Jay Stewart, Andre Harper, Charles Lollar, Stephanie Rubach, and others have said, inherently racist. These activists have spent so much of their lives asking the Democrats where is the progress? and pointing out how certain policies destroy their communities.
Socialists go about their concern for civil rights in the same manner that fake Christians go about their faith: they only take it out for the times they think people are watching or when they think that they could gain something from it. They hang it up in the closet when not in use.
And they keep them on the “liberal” plantation. Where they want to put all of us, and this bill, if it survives the vote and the courts, will be a big step in that direction.
If opposing this health care nonsense makes me a racist, then I am one. Remember: dissent against anything Obama comes up with is proof you didn’t want a Black Man ™ to be president!
You Know What’s Worse Than Being A Racist? Falsely accusing others of racism
I agree that falsely accusing people of racism is very bad, if it is done with ill-intent (and not, say, a case of not hearing someone correctly.)
But why is it worse than racism itself (if the racism is expressed – I assume “thought crimes” are beneath mentioning)?
I think you can believe that an unjust accusation of racism is worse than racism (as expressed) only if you believe that racism isn’t bad at all.
For example, unjustly accusing someone of rape is very bad indeed, but actually raping someone is orders of magnitude worse. On the other hand, unjustly accusing someone of wearing unfashionable clothin is rude, while actually wearing unfashionable clothing isn’t bad at all – it hurts no one. An unjust accusation of an action is only worse than the action itself when the action isn’t very bad. Why isn’t rasicm (as expressed) bad enough to be worse than an unjust accusation?
Because racists have no power any more? So just being a racist means you just sit around powerless, hating people who aren’t like you? Where on the other hand race hustlers — that is, people who make a living ferreting out bogus or trivial incidents of purported racism in order to gain power and influence — are a continuing problem in society. Think about it mentally! If you are charged with being a racist, and enough people believe the charge whether it is true or not, depending upon what your position in society is you could find yourself with not only your reputation destroyed, but your ability to provide for yourself and your family severely curtailed. Is that the sort of society we want to live in, one where you have to conform to one way of thought and living less we be accused of something even worse?
Institutional racism has been prohibited by law, but that leaves people who make their living off of the trouble of others with one less thing to use. That won’t do! Obviously there are people who still think bad thoughts — we can use the existence of these people to prove that all these other thoughts and actions are also part of that bad thought. Since people are wired to see patterns all the time and thus often see patterns where none exist, this works well. Thus the people who don’t want the government to take over increasing control of more of our lives can be labelled “racist” because the person in charge of all these wonderful government schemes happens to have dark skin.
Bob-1,
I can’t speak for Rand, but I can tell you why I agree with him. It is ALWAYS worse than the crime to accuse someone of it falsely. When a false accusation is acceptable, or at least more acceptable than the crime, then one can always claim the side of righteousness by accusing one’s enemies of any crime one wishes, whether they committed it or not, and say that, because they are bad people (in one’s estimation), it doesn’t matter what crime one’s enemies are convicted of, they deserve that they get. A society’s justice system cannot be based on hatred; it must be based on truth. False accusations are an assault on society itself.
If you want to take the more moral rather than practical approach, the foundation of modern justice is “an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth,” that all sins against another are a debt incurred against the perpetrator by the victim and it must be repaid. Even the death of Christ makes a point of reconciling this in its teaching of Christian forgiveness. The lie against the falsely accused incurs a debt against the liar of all the consequences that arose against the falsely accused as a result of the lie, PLUS THE EXTRA PENALTY OF THE LIE ITSELF. Whatever magnitude that extra is, it will always be greater than the crime the liar accused the victim of perpetrating.
Jonathan,
Thank you for the thoughtful reply. I disagree with you, although it appears that we agree that it useful to think about unjust accusations in terms of all crimes and evils, rather than just rape. Since that’s so, I’ll explain why I disagree with you using rape as an example, and I’ll return to the subject of racism when I reply to Andrea below.
In the case of comparing an unjust accusation of rape vs rape itself, there are three possible victims to consider — 1) a rape victim, 2) the unjustly accused, and 3) as you point out, society itself.
If I were to gather all three victims in a room, I would be very hard pressed to look the rape victim in the eye and say “what that rapist did to you was not as bad as what happened to this fellow over here, who was unjustly accused of rape, or what happened to society at large.” Someone unjustly accused of rape has the possibility of clearing his name. A rape victim can’t be “un-raped”. As for society-as-a-victim, our adversarial legal system is well-equipped to deal with people who perjure and with people who lie on the witness stand.
And judges, juries, and legislatures agree with me — the penalties for rape agree with me — the penalty for rape is far worse than for lying under oath in every jurisdiction in the free world.
I’d be interested in your reply.
—
Andrea,
Racists are not powerless. My newborn is crying but I’d be happy to discuss it further with you as soon as I can.
I meant “rather than just racism”. Bad daddy — gotta go!
NINE: ‘You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.’
Bob-1,
The trouble is that I don’t believe that morals are subject to empirical evidence. A discussion of empirical morality must be accompanied by other evidence, such as the perception of the validity of the justice system itself, the trends of the perceived validity of the justice system compared to rates of change of the difference in penalties between crimes and the perjurious accusations (filtering out perjury unrelated to direct accusations), etc, and I’m not sure that I would accept it, in any case. There’s no reason to believe that mankind, or her societies, are moral enough to take that evidence as proof that my morality would not create a better society, rather than evidence that societies don’t do what is best for themselves in domains where collective action is required, which is already accepted.
Nor do I take your, or my own, inability to speak the truth when it is difficult, as evidence that the truth isn’t true. Are you so certain of your own righteousness that you can take your own visceral reaction as good guidance of the moral path? I’m not.
Someone unjustly accused of rape has the possibility of clearing his name. A rape victim can’t be “un-raped”
How do you give someone back the twenty years of their life that they spend falsely imprisoned? I’d rather be raped.
Racists are not powerless.
Which is worse, Bob? A few racists in a large movement, most of which condemns them, or accusing those millions of people of being racist?
My willingness to die for my country and its imperfect constitution and legal system indicates that I do have that kind of certainty. I don’t want to stop thinking because I’m patriotic, but I am patriotic! It is ok that we disagree – thank you very much for the food for thought.
My last comment was for Jonathan, whose contributions I really enjoy. Rand, your reply leaves me speechless. I’ll get back to you (and to Andrea, thanks Andrea) when I can think of a thoughtful reply.
Which reply leaves you speechless? And why?
Rand, I meant to say “slander” when I said “perjury” above. Getting unjustly accused of rape usually amounts to slander, and yes, slander can be damaging. Perjury can be even more damaging, particularly if it actually leads to an unjust long-term imprisonment. But I wouldn’t have the confidence in the US legal system that I do if perjury leading to an unjust long-term imprisonment was not quite rare! On the other hand, completely ordinary every day rape, the kind that happens to people every day in this country, is incredibly damaging. What I find shocking about your comment is that you seem to think that an unjust accusation of rape will lead to long term imprisonment. I have confidence in my family, friends, acquaintances to ignore unjust accusations, and I have confidence in the US legal system to protect me from both slander and, in an extreme case, from perjury. I expected you to have that confidence too.
So that’s my argument: ordinary slander and even perjury are not likely to be very damaging, while rape is extremely likely to be very damaging. And again, our justice system reflects those values by punishing rape much more severely than slander or even perjury.
cindy sheehan called baracky a war criminal yesterday but that didn’t make the “news”
Newrouter, today is Sunday. Are you posting on the day you consider to be the Sabbath, and if so, are you keeping it holy?
Bob-1, I’m afraid you’ve muddied the waters with “rape.” “Rape” and “Racism” aren’t the same thing, even though they both start with “RA.”
However, you could say in a sense that a person who is not a racist being charged with racism is, in a sense, being raped — as in, he or she is a blameless person being violated by someone with power over them. Some might claim that this is all right because in the past, when racism still held sway in parts of society, that victims of racism were the ones being raped. However, that would be a misapplication of the law. “Turn about is fair play” is no way to run a country, especially when the ones you’re taking revenge on are not the ones who perpetrated the acts you are avenging.
Sorry, Bob. The rape of a man’s good name is roughly equivalent to the rape of a woman’s body. Interesting red herring of yours, however.
Back OT, yes, I’d have to say that a member of the ruling class deliberately lying about someone calling him a nigger is actually much worse than having one of the proles shout “nigger” at him. It should be obvious why.
non of your business. just pointing out one of the judeo-christian roots of the country.
Regardless of the personal morality involved, is there any question that racism has historically been a much bigger problem than false accusations of racism? For most of our country’s existence racism made a mockery of its ideals, and came quite close to destroying us as a nation. Isn’t that the sort of thing we should be on our guard against?
Titus, is the “murder” of a man’s good name roughly equivalent to the murder of the man? I ask because I’m tempted to call you sexist, and I wouldn’t want to be wrong about that.
Jim, historical problems are not contemporary problems.
Bob, clearly you think it’s no big deal to throw around false accusations (consistent with your threat to make them against me) so it’s clear we have nothing to discuss, but I’ll just leave you with this: what IS a man APART from his good name? A man with no friends, no family, no job, no credit, no future? He is nothing. He is already dead.
Consider that a false accusation of a crime is essentially an attempt to inflict, via the criminal justice system, a particular form of punishment upon someone who doesn’t deserve it. If the punishment for Crime X is ten years in prison, and I falsely accuse Joe Sixpack of that crime, then whether or not he is convicted and actually suffers the ten years of imprisonment, I have willfully and maliciously attempted to inflict that loss upon him. If the punishment for Crime X is death, then whether or not Joe is executed, I have quite literally attempted to murder him, if not with my own two hands.
In this sense, a false accusation of a crime is very much like attempting a crime. As a baseline (that is, absent mitigating circumstances), we aren’t in the habit of waving away things like attempted murder or attempted rape or attempted robbery just because there was no or little harm done in the end. The reasons for this include disincentivizing the crime itself as well as establishing structures for the orderly management of society, the same as all law.
To suggest that a false accusation is not especially significant because it’s not likely to result in a false conviction misses the point: if our notions of justice were so focused on the mere presence or absence of harm done, we would not treat attempted crimes with such gravity. (Indeed, under the Model Penal Code, provisions of which have been adopted by some two-thirds of US states, attempted crimes are punished with the same punishment as committed crimes.)
Regardless of the personal morality involved, is there any question that racism has historically been a much bigger problem than false accusations of racism?
WTF difference does it make? The topic of the discussion is what’s going on today, not what happened historically. At this point in history, America is one of the, if not the least racist countries on the planet. And the main thing that perpetuates it is racist policies by the government (e.g., demanding to know one’s race on a census form, affirmative action, etc.).
“Bob, clearly you think it’s no big deal to throw around false accusations”
Clearly I don’t think that. Scroll back up and read what I wrote.
I’m just shocked that people here are willing to consider actual assault as comperable to slander and/or perjury. You seem very willing to imagine the effects of an unjust accusation in the worst possible case, but you don’t seem to easily imagine the effects of a rape, murder, or even simply being on the receiving end of racism in the typical case. As I keep pointing out, the justice system does not agree with this view with respect to rape and murder. As for racism, racism can be expressed in varying degrees of horribleness — everything from yelling offensive labels at people to job discrimination to lynchings. In the typical case, being called a racist is no worse than having a racial slur directed at you, unless you factor in the weight of history, and the weight of the perceived majority. The other more evil ways of being racist are far worse than unjustly being called racist, and yet, in Rand’s formulation, being unjustly called racist would be worse than even job discrimination, lynchings etc. I’d like to be generous and say that surely Rand doesn’t think that — I just think his formulation was sloppy.
At this point in history, America is one of the, if not the least racist countries on the planet. And the main thing that perpetuates it is racist policies by the government (e.g., demanding to know one’s race on a census form, affirmative action, etc.).
At this point in history white job applicants with a criminal record are more likely to get a job interview than equivalently qualified black applicants without a criminal record. Doesn’t that seem like a bigger problem than race questions on the census form?
Bob and Jim are both trying to derail this thread, one onto discussions of rape, the other onto discussions of historical racism. I’m through discussing anything with them.
Actually, I do. My point is to make sure that YOU do, too. You are conflating differences of DEGREE with differences in KIND. Worst case rape is roughly equivalent to worst case false accusation. We can compare milder degrees, too — casual false accusation (like in a flame war) is roughly equivalent to hitting on a girl that ain’t into you (which also goes nowhere).
Probably there were several, if not many, participants the the original Tea Party who had less-than-enlightened views on race. Didn’t invalidate their fight against the Crown, and more than Jefferson’s slave-owning invalidated the Declaration of Independence. Also, is racism worse that statism? If a guy is a racist, his racism, in Jefferson’s words, neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg. (I’m talking about racism qua racism, not coercive racism like Nazism or Ku-Kluxery.) Statism certainly does the first and threatens to do the latter, and more, if I don’t submit gracefully.
Titus, do you think there is a mild degree rape? The heart of my point is that there isn’t really such a thing — candidates for such often end up causing post-traumatic stress.
Andrea, I’m not trying to derail. I brought up rape because I thought it would be a good example of something so horrible that it is obviously worse than an unjust accusation of it. I contrasted it with rude comments about clothing as the other extreme. To my surprise, people are pushing back on the idea that unjust accusations of rape and murder are not as bad as rape and murder. I’m horrified, and intrigued, in the same way that looking at a horrible auto accident is intriguing. But by all means, go back to talking about racism, which, as Jim rightly points out, is where our focus should be.
I’m just shocked that people here are willing to consider actual assault as comperable to slander and/or perjury.
Is successful assault worse than, or as bad as, attempted assault, from a moral standpoint? What about a judicial one?
For that matter, why shouldn’t actual assault be considered comparable to perjury? One reason perjury is a crime is because the justice system must maintain the confidence of the people in order to remain legitimate. While a specific incident of perjury may not result in harm to the perjured, if not roundly condemned and punished then it threatens to undermine the entire justice system. The offense then, is not only to the perjured, but also to the entire nation, and to everyone who might have to suffer more later on due to a lack of confidence in the judicial system or an incentive to perjure.
I feel that it should be noted, too, that there is a distinction between saying something that is merely untrue about another person (slander) and actually accusing another person of committing a crime. Similarly there is a distinction between being racist toward someone (as in hurling racial epithets) and in the actual commission of a crime (such as lynching).
As it stands right now, racism itself is not a crime, but with some of the trends we’ve been seeing, I wouldn’t be surprised if that eventually changed, and at that point a false accusation of racism would be much more than mere slander.
Bilwick, racial slurs only get the attention they do because racism in its more virulent forms picks people’s pockets (slavery in the past, discriminatory employment practices today). There’s also “driving while black”, neglect at emergency rooms and even in during routine meidcal checkups, and a host of other evils. Racial slurs are seen as warning signs for the more virulent forms. If only slurs were left, it would be no big deal.
Screw the rape talk Bob and the history lesson on racism. We all know it. Clyburn knew very well what he was doing. Just like Sharpton knew what he was doing in the Brawley case. Accusations of racism are used to destroy the message by associating it with racism. You know that even if you won’t admit it. All of this other BS is obfuscation. The media gets in on the act all the time. They purposefully look at the fringe for sound bites to tarnish everyone. The Dems know they have to discredit the TEA partiers. The press are their willing allies.
Shorter Bob: A Democrat did a disgusting and heinous thing, but because he was a Democrat, Bob will defend him.
Shameful, Bob. I hope that newborn of yours finds a better role model than his father.
You know what, I think being thrown in a pit to be torn apart by bears would be worse than being subject to racism and being called a racist. But it has no bearing (hehe see what I did there) on the subject, so no one brought it up.
Hey wait a minute — what if the people being thrown to bears were known racists, would that be okay? Or — I know, what if we just let the bears rape the racists? I’m just trying to keep this topic on subject.
DaveP: My comments were solely focused on Rand’s formulation regarding unjust accusations. I never suggested the accusation was just. Don’t make stuff up.
Frankly, I’m unclear on why some people are so sure the congressman lied. I haven’t followed this story closely, but I did follow Rand’s links, and I was under the impression at least one person yelled “nigger”. I did watch a 23 second video where no one audibly yelled “nigger”, but what are the grounds for calling the congressman a liar?
Bob, I think you’re being obtuse here. I think that lynching someone is worse than calling them a racist. I don’t think that being a racist (i.e., someone who believes that one race is intrinsically superior to another) is.
Another thing to consider here is that even if a group of this nature is completely non-racist, it’s trivial to insert shills to shout racist epithets. Basing political dialogue on the racism, real, imagined, or faked, of the opposition leads to the sort of uncritical hysteria related to witch hunts. Vilifying an opposition on these grounds won’t lead to any sort of rational discourse.
Remember even racists can be right once in a while too. I think it’s foolish to claim that someone can’t have an opinion on something important to themselves because they don’t have some moral code (especially one that is rigged against the opponent in question).
Which is worse is often a difficult question. It’s much easier to just quantify things as good or bad which often has more agreement. The problem with which is worse is what metric do you use? One potential metric is how many people are hurt by an action. While both are bad, using that metric I would think a false accusation is worse than a racial slur because their is no easy defense. Call me a wop and I can ignore you. Call me a racist and the damage is done… much harder to ignore. Using it to discredit a group means that metric comes into play to a greater extent than a racial slur.
” I ask because I’m tempted to call you sexist, and I wouldn’t want to be wrong about that.”
Huh? I don’t believe anyone restricted the discussion to male-on-female rape. Their are other kinds. Expand your horizons.
Tehag, scroll up and look again. I was gender neutral, and then Titus said “Sorry, Bob. The rape of a man’s good name is roughly equivalent to the rape of a woman’s body. “
It is absurd and offensive, of course. If someone smears my name, I’ll probably be able to laugh it off. In the worst possible case, I’ll want jail time for the offender. If someone rapes me or, God forbid, one of my loved ones, I’ll want the death penalty. I really don’t care if it just a “mild” rape – rapists should be killed. A man’s good name is not equivalent to anyone’s body in my mind. That’s why it is ok for Rand to call the congressman a liar, but he better not lay a hand on him (and I’m sure he won’t.)
Bob, the thing to remember here is that false accusations dilute the effectiveness of justice. If false accusations of rape are commonplace, then it becomes hard to take a real accusation seriously. I hear that person X has been accused of being a rapist. Are they rapists or merely the accused who happened to cross someone? People who accuse unjustly muddle the waters and reduce the penalty for really committing a crime.
Further, it’s worth noting that racism and bigotry are not crimes in the US. I can’t discriminate due to those beliefs, but it is not illegal for me to have them. The ostracism towards racism has as a pernicious secondary effect the marginalizing of a group of people. Even if I have beliefs and self-interests that you consider vile, why shouldn’t I be able to have an opinion on taxation and other actions of government and society that affect me? That’s the fundamental use of racism in today’s world. It allows politicians to say that the views of a large group of people don’t count, because they hold beliefs that are reprehensible. This is antithetical to a democracy.
Even the worst of bigots deserve a chance to stand on the soapbox and to have their perceived injustices, real and imagined, addressed by society.
“It is absurd and offensive, of course. If someone smears my name, I’ll probably be able to laugh it off. In the worst possible case, I’ll want jail time for the offender.”
Yes, go down that slippery slope of thought police. It works so well in Canada and the Netherlands. Speech is a civil issue and should remain that way.
“Bilwick, racial slurs only get the attention they do because racism in its more virulent forms picks people’s pockets (slavery in the past, discriminatory employment practices today). There’s also “driving while black”, neglect at emergency rooms and even in during routine meidcal checkups, and a host of other evils. Racial slurs are seen as warning signs for the more virulent forms. If only slurs were left, it would be no big deal.”
True enough, as far as it goes, although your philosophical confusion is evident in your equation of slavery with discriminatory hiring practices. One involved the threat, and often the practice, of physical violence; the other did not. It involved people exercising their right to hire or not hire whoever they wanted to. If you think that not hiring someone is the moral equivalent of threatening to beat or kill them, you’re sense of ethics is seriously skewed.
But the overall point is that the more virulent expressions of racism you mention involve the initiation of force. Sane as statism. It isn’t the racism that makes them especially evil; it’s the coercion.
I should also add that I’ve known la number of racists, people who are one time might have participated in lynchings, cross-burnings and the slave traffic; yet now they espress their prejudices verbally, usually among their own kind. I don’t care for such people, but they don’t threaten me. or anyone else. On the other hand, there are lots of “enlightened” and “progressive” people who want to use the coercive power of the State to force me to do all sorts of things I don’t want to do. I’d prefer it is they were racists and kept their guns and their bludgeons to themselves.
I don’t care for such people, but they don’t threaten me. or anyone else.
You don’t think they discriminate against blacks in hiring, housing, etc.?
“You don’t think they discriminate against blacks in hiring, housing, etc.?”
They may; but as long as it’s their own businesses and housing, I have no right to interfere. What part of “liberty” do you seem to have such trouble understanding?
Look, we don’t know if he was lying. I have met Reverend Cleaver, for example, and he does not strike me as a dishonest man. If he says someone spit at him and called him a particular name, I bet he felt moisture and heard that name.
It doesn’t mean he was spat on and called that name. It’s easy to feel moisture and it’s easy to hear things that aren’t said, particularly when it’s noisy and your ears are old. (I mishear people all the time. Usually it sounds like real words with some nonsense words thrown in. Repeating what I heard ususally amuses my daughters.)
OTOH, that video proves nothing. Some of the things the microphone picked up were very clear, and some were not at all. If the microphone wasn’t pointed in the right direction it could easily miss one or more individuals yelling racial slurs.
On the gripping hand, it could be a false flag op, in which case Cleaver (and others) were telling the truth.
Not enough evidence, folks.
I’m very pleased that Reverend Cleaver chose not to press charges. That was a Christian thing to do, and commendable.
Tea Party Patriots like me need a plan to handle racism. I have seen only one inappropriate sign at a Tea Party (and never heard anything inappropriate), and I didn’t know what to do. It was, if not borderline, at least close to the border. Eventually someone told the two guys with the sign to get rid of it. If you hear someone yelling racial slurs at a protest, you need to be on it. Personally, I find tar and feathers or a liberty pole to be more ethical than racial slurs.
First stab at my plan:
1. Be grounded in the Scripture.
2. Pray.
3. Publicize and encourage your plan with handouts at the rally.
4. Record audio and take pictures if possible.
5. Get in the offender’s face.
6. Ask the offender’s name.
7. Tell the offender in no uncertain terms the behavior will not be tolerated.
8. Pubically name and shame the offender, if possible.
9. Team work helps.
10. Note: Anyone who calls the Tea Parties racist, is an offender. Calling the Tea Parties racist is racism. This sword can ethically be used to defend the Tea Parties both from within and without.
If you are not a believer you may wish to make a slightly different plan. 😉
Yours,
Tom