[lit-ideas] Re: Another Guardian threat: prejudice

  • From: "Mike Geary" <atlas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2008 17:10:06 -0500

LH:

>>Images of the mea culpa breast beating Southern white from Tennessee come to 
>>mind.  "Yes I'm white.  I'm ashamed to admit it.  No I never had a slave, but 
>>some of my relatives must have.  At least some of them fought for the South; 
>>so I'm guilty, guilty as sin!  ["slash, slash, slash, goes their whips as 
>>they pull up their hair shirts and flagellate themselves."]<<



There you go again, getting it all wrong.  I'm not ashamed of being white, 
that's absurd.  But I am truly ashamed of the ways whites have often behaved 
towards any peoples they could possibly find some "unwhiteness" in -- for 
instance, any non-Northern European.




>>No I never had a slave, but some of my relatives must have.<<



Must have?  I have copies of wills of my ancestors passing down slaves to their 
children.  Those were the good old days. 





>>At least some of them fought for the South; so I'm guilty, guilty as sin!<<



Yes, my grandmother's father Silvius Emory Sweet lost all his teeth and his 
right arm at the battle of Chickamauga.  But I've only ever fought against the 
South.  So I'm not guilty.  Not at all.  You're barking up the wrong tree.



Your question: what's the difference between a white person voting against a 
black person because she is black and a black person voting for a black person 
because she is black?  Let me rephrase it:  what's the difference between a 
black person calling another black person "nigger" and a white person calling a 
black person "nigger"?  If you need me to connect the dots, let me know.  I'll 
be happy to help you out.  



Mike Geary

Memphis



  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Lawrence Helm 
  To: lawrencehelm1.post@xxxxxxxxxxx 
  Cc: Lit-Ideas 
  Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2008 3:45 PM
  Subject: [lit-ideas] Another Guardian threat: prejudice 


   

  There is one Guardian threat that I forgot to mention, maybe because I didn't 
understand it.  Freedland writes,  "And the manner of that decision will 
matter, too. If it is deemed to have been about race - that Obama was rejected 
because of his colour - the world's verdict will be harsh. In that 
circumstance."  

   

  I guess I don't understand how anyone would know whether a vote for McCain 
and Palin was because of "colour."   In retrospect I am guessing that the key 
were here is "deemed" and not "known."  No one could "know" why someone voted 
for McCain and Palin. So it is left up to those European "Deemers" to deem and 
then declare a harsh verdict.

   

  Gosh. 

   

  "A few moments ago I picked up my mail and the lead article in The New York 
Review of Books is "Prejudice Against Obama" by Andrew Hacker.  I had a lot of 
trouble getting past the first paragraph which reads,

   

  "In May, Hillary Clinton described many of her core supporters as 
'hard-working Americans, white Americans.'  Primary voting in Pennsylvania, 
Ohio, and West Virginia confirmed her surmise.  Her remark seemed, without 
saying so, to claim an advantage over Obama that was due to his race.  But 
there's more we need to know.  We can see how being a farmer or a bond trader 
or a gun collector might influence your vote.  And we understand why black 
Americans would want a person of their race in the Oval Office.  But just what 
is there about being white that might incline someone toward one candidate 
instead of another?"

   

  I read that paragraph four times and still haven't made it to paragraph 
number two.  His title for his article wasn't the one the NYROB gave it but 
"Obama: The Price of Being Black" so I guess he is concerned about people being 
prejudiced against Obama because he is black but . . . but . . . but . . . why 
is it okay for black people to be prejudiced in such a way that they would vote 
for Obama because he is black?  Why is it okay for the blacks to do it but not 
okay for the whites?

   

  Images of the mea culpa breast beating Southern white from Tennessee come to 
mind.  "Yes I'm white.  I'm ashamed to admit it.  No I never had a slave, but 
some of my relatives must have.  At least some of them fought for the South; so 
I'm guilty, guilty as sin!  ["slash, slash, slash, goes their whips as they 
pull up their hair shirts and flagellate themselves."]

   

  Well, I suppose.  But I live out here in California where our goal is to be 
"color blind."  We don't vote for or against anyone because of race.   I know, 
I know.  How could anyone prove that.  But we would never go around saying it 
is okay to vote for someone because he is a particular color, and that's what 
Hacker is saying . . . unless I am misreading him, and I read that paragraph 
five times now. . . Did you ever see Groundhog Day? . . .

   

  Lawrence Helm

  www.lawrencehelm.com

Other related posts: