RSS
Exploiting Trayvon Martin
The indispensable Shelby Steele on the Trayvon Martin tragedy.
What is fundamentally tragic here is that these two young males first encountered each other as provocations. Males are males, and threat often evokes a narcissistic anger that skips right past reason and into a will to annihilate: "I will take you out!" There was a terrible fight. Trayvon apparently got the drop on George Zimmerman, but ultimately the man with the gun prevailed. Annihilation was achieved.
If this was all there was to it, the Trayvon/Zimmerman story would be no more than a cautionary tale, yet another admonition against the hair-trigger male ego. But this story brought reaction from the White House: "If I had a son he would look like Trayvon," said the president. The Revs. Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, ubiquitous icons of black protest, virtually battled each other to stand at the bereaved family's side—Mr. Jackson, in a moment of inadvertent honesty, saying, "There is power in blood . . . we must turn a moment into a movement." And then there was the spectacle of black Democrats in Congress holding hearings on racial profiling with Trayvon's parents featured as celebrities...Read it all. And don't miss the finish.
The tragedy surrounding Trayvon's death is not in the possibility that it might have something to do with white racism; the tragedy is in the lustfulness with which so many black leaders, in conjunction with the media, have leapt to exploit his demise for their own power.
posted by Spencerblog at
11:43 PM
10 Comments:
"The tragedy surrounding Trayvon's death is not in the possibility that it might have something to do with white racism; the tragedy is in the lustfulness with which so many black leaders, in conjunction with the media, have leapt to exploit his demise for their own power."
WOW, I wish I could write like that!! Very powerful and true statement!
Hi All!! I'm placing this link up here to get Bob's attention on why you might not want to listen to a police dispatchers "orders"!
http://news.yahoo.com/denver-911-apologizes-deadly-instruction-202932590--abc-news-topstories.html
Go ahead, Bob. Explain to me how this is different.
The police have no legal requirement to protect you, do you know that? So why would anyone expect a dispatcher sitting in a room 10 to 20 miles away to understand YOUR circumstances?
You have a right to defend YOURself!
<<>>
Cricket, cricket
This comment has been removed by the author.
This comment has been removed by the author.
From Darryl Owens of the Orlando Sentinel
Ever since Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton parachuted into Sanford demanding justice for Trayvon Martin, the unarmed teen who a community watchman insists he shot to death in self-defense, a subversive meme has picked up steam.
It goes something like this: Why are Jackson and Sharpton (and by extension, the black community) so worked up over the death of one black kid? Why aren't they barnstorming Chicago, which endured a spasm of violence last month, including a deadly six-hour stretch in which 13 men were shot, and two died?
Critics loved the smell of hypocrisy in the morning. Where is the outrage over blacks killing one another?
How's this for outrage: Of all the overheated, distractive rhetoric spewed in Trayvon's name, this bunk is particularly noxious. We don't care about black-on-black crime? We've gnashed our teeth to nubs over it. We've waged war against self-destruction for more years than anyone cares to remember.
Groups ranging from the NAACP and the National Urban league to a posse of hip-hip artists who in 1989 released "Self Destruction," which became the theme song of the "Stop the Violence Movement," have deeply invested in saving our sepia skin.
Over the years the strategy has evolved.
In the '80s and '90s, we rallied to prick the public's consciousness. Now, even monastic monks probably know the bane of black-on-black violence.
Of course, rallies aren't going to curb a complex issue with deep socioeconomic, cultural, and moral roots. That's accomplished through policy and problem-solving.
That's where groups such as the NAACP, on a national level, bring outrage to bear.
"We demonstrate to lift it [an issue] up, and then begin moving to create an institutional approach to address it," says Hilary Shelton, the NAACP's senior vice president of policy and advocacy.
That means working with law enforcement to bolster patrols and cultural understanding for cops who patrol urban communities. It means programs that attack the fatalistic mind-set of urban youth who believe crime and despair are their lot. It means advocating sensible gun control to dam the flood of cheap guns into black communities that fall into the wrong hands (good luck with that one). And it means trooping to Capitol Hill to fight for money for crime-prevention programs.
Today, violent-crime rates have fallen to the lowest levels since national stats were first kept in 1965. Yet black-on-black crime remains epidemic. And like health epidemics, after years in the headlines, the initial buzz has faded.
Not that anyone has lost interest in stamping out the epidemics. The fight's just more low-key, behind the scenes.
"Even though don't see the marches at this level, there is still action," Shelton says.
For die-hards, who need a rally to believe concern exists, take heart. We still take to the streets. Last July, after a deadly wave of violence, Bishop Calvin Woods, president of Birmingham's Southern Christian Leadership Conference, announced a march against black-on-black crime, pleading for "you men to put your weapons down."
And last week, hundreds of marchers took to Chicago's streets calling for an end to gun violence — and justice for Trayvon.
Every senseless act of violence deserves our outrage. However, it's a sham, an insulting insinuation that just because many in the black community are laser-focused on a singular perceived miscarriage of justice that blacks somehow are cavalier about self-destruction.
We burn — even if Jesse and Al aren't the faces of our collective outrage.
deowens@tribune.com or 407-420-5095
I would say D. Owens is mostly full of crap. National black leaders do very little to support police their efforts to stem black on black violence.
Instead, they encourage civil rights suits against stop-and-frisk laws, perceived racial profiling, and protest the incarceration rate of young black men.
Their concern may be real, but these vigils against violence are useless.
They aren't speaking out about family break-down, fatherless boys, and the no-snitching gang culture that permeates the inner city.
The few black leaders who do speak out against these cultural realities are criticized for "blaming the victim."
A real war on black on black violence would encourage black communities to support their local police instead of being suspicious of them and cooperate with legal authorities to bring killers to justice.
Instead leaders like Jackson and Sharpton foment suspicion and distrust of cops and the legal system to the point where in many sections of many cities the police have simply given up enforcing the law. Open air drug markets are allowed to operate and the law of the street reigns.
This is no great credit to city law enforcement agencies but, generally a community gets the law enforcement it demands. If the community doesn't help the police force catch the bad guys, many of them won't get caught.
The greatest tragedy is that many law-abiding and hard-working black people get held hostage in that situation. They get caught between the criminals and the black leaders who look to hold the police in more contempt than they do the gangsters who ruin their neighbors.
As I've said before, white racism is far down the list of the things that are preventing black people from living good and successful lives. Bad schools, broken families, crime, etc. these are the thing hurting blacks, not to mention low-income whites today. And these things are much more intractable than white racism, which has been on the retreat and considered retrograde since the 1960s
Gil - You say he's mostly full of crap, but he makes some valid points as do you. You write "A real war on black on black violence would encourage black communities to support their local police instead of being suspicious of them and cooperate with legal authorities to bring killers to justice." Darrly writes "That means working with law enforcement to bolster patrols and cultural understanding for cops who patrol urban communities. It means programs that attack the fatalistic mind-set of urban youth who believe crime and despair are their lot." You're not so far apart on that. Darryl also writes "Jesse and Al aren't the faces of our collective outrage." I'm sure you would agree with that.
And I think he's dead on with this statement "It means advocating sensible gun control to dam the flood of cheap guns into black communities that fall into the wrong hands (good luck with that one)." Would you agree with that?
Gun control?? Seriously, that's what you got?? Look at DC and Chicago, Bob. They have gun control. No guns in either. Death tolls are the highest in the country per capita. Pick a subject I can't beat you at with both hands tied behind my back!!
Lets' pick another constitutional amendment, how about we hammer your right to use the first amendment?? I would like to have mouth control on Sharpton and Jackson, as the count on white people beaten in the name of Trayvon Martin the last 2 weeks now runs into being 7. It is by the grace of God that these innocent whites were not killed. But in your world this was OK since it was only a punching and beating, and the victims could have fought back?!?
If you want to have a debate on gun control, get the 2nd amendment overturned. Go ahead, I will wait.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home