Welcome to The Conservative Cave©!Join in the discussion! Click HERE to register.
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Thu Aug 13, 2015, 09:49 PMuhnope (3,847 posts)"sad internalized black pathology": BLMS activist attacks Black writer, is "disgusted"QuoteCharles Mudede's writing is the most sad internalized black pathology I have seen in a long time. I'm disgusted by how The Stranger is using him in this critical historical moment. Here is what is disgusting her: QuoteThe Bad Politics of the Black Lives Matter Protesters Who Interrupted Bernie SandersBefore I criticize the August 8 disruption of the Social Security and Medicare rally in Westlake Park by Black Lives Matter activists Marissa Johnson and Mara Willaford, I want to make a few things clear. One, I support the Black Lives Matter movement, which is decentralized and more like a cloud of urgent conversations and interactions than a conventional political organization. BLM might be seen as a necessary adaptation to the ether-like age of social networks. And in this respect, it is not exceptional. Other such clouds formed in Iran in 2009 and Egypt in 2011. Only racists believe BLM is wrong to insist that black Americans are disproportionately harassed, arrested, jailed, and killed by law-enforcement officers. These claims are supported by hard data, numerous studies, and the experiences of thousands of black Americans. I also share the opinion with Seattle's BLM members that, though our city is progressive (gay mayor, socialist council member, and so on), it maintains an economic and social structure that benefits mostly whites and often blocks opportunities for blacks and reinforces black poverty....That said, I disagree with the BLM action not because Bernie Sanders marched with Martin Luther King Jr. and therefore clearly paid his not-a-racist dues and should be left alone by black activists (GOP Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell also marched with MLK). My point is simply that, as imperfect as Sanders is, and as imperfect as white progressives are in this city, it still makes more political sense to form alliances with them rather than risk isolation. As much as I may agree with the content of Johnson and Willaford's disruption, its context (an event that was not for Sanders but for a very important issue that affects millions of black Americans) and its brazen disrespect clearly closed rather than opened a lot of people to the BLM cause.True, some of the people who booed Johnson and Willaford were likely racist, but many were simply upset by what they perceived, with good reason, as arrogant behavior. The event had been happening for hours, and it had taken months to organize and promote. Speakers knew well in advance the amount of time they were allotted to express their concerns. Then, suddenly, two people break out of nowhere, take the mic, and appear by their actions to claim that their cause is far more important, more pressing than the one many had come to support. This, I'm sorry, is going to rub a lot of people the wrong way—and not because they are racist but because they are human. Rudely jumping the line rarely excites cheers and applause in any of the colors of our kind.At present, BLM is not a political organization; it is instead a movement, a mood, a roiling cloud of posts and hashtags. As such, it can for sure have an immediate impact and grab the headlines. But the big question is this: Can it have a lasting impact? If it hopes to do so, it will have to consolidate, form a clear structure, create democratic procedures for action, and make alliances with other like-minded political organizations. This is straight talk; this is political realism. BLM will certainly evaporate if it is isolated from one of the major groups that's politically open to its concerns: the progressive left.
Charles Mudede's writing is the most sad internalized black pathology I have seen in a long time. I'm disgusted by how The Stranger is using him in this critical historical moment.
The Bad Politics of the Black Lives Matter Protesters Who Interrupted Bernie SandersBefore I criticize the August 8 disruption of the Social Security and Medicare rally in Westlake Park by Black Lives Matter activists Marissa Johnson and Mara Willaford, I want to make a few things clear. One, I support the Black Lives Matter movement, which is decentralized and more like a cloud of urgent conversations and interactions than a conventional political organization. BLM might be seen as a necessary adaptation to the ether-like age of social networks. And in this respect, it is not exceptional. Other such clouds formed in Iran in 2009 and Egypt in 2011. Only racists believe BLM is wrong to insist that black Americans are disproportionately harassed, arrested, jailed, and killed by law-enforcement officers. These claims are supported by hard data, numerous studies, and the experiences of thousands of black Americans. I also share the opinion with Seattle's BLM members that, though our city is progressive (gay mayor, socialist council member, and so on), it maintains an economic and social structure that benefits mostly whites and often blocks opportunities for blacks and reinforces black poverty....That said, I disagree with the BLM action not because Bernie Sanders marched with Martin Luther King Jr. and therefore clearly paid his not-a-racist dues and should be left alone by black activists (GOP Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell also marched with MLK). My point is simply that, as imperfect as Sanders is, and as imperfect as white progressives are in this city, it still makes more political sense to form alliances with them rather than risk isolation. As much as I may agree with the content of Johnson and Willaford's disruption, its context (an event that was not for Sanders but for a very important issue that affects millions of black Americans) and its brazen disrespect clearly closed rather than opened a lot of people to the BLM cause.True, some of the people who booed Johnson and Willaford were likely racist, but many were simply upset by what they perceived, with good reason, as arrogant behavior. The event had been happening for hours, and it had taken months to organize and promote. Speakers knew well in advance the amount of time they were allotted to express their concerns. Then, suddenly, two people break out of nowhere, take the mic, and appear by their actions to claim that their cause is far more important, more pressing than the one many had come to support. This, I'm sorry, is going to rub a lot of people the wrong way—and not because they are racist but because they are human. Rudely jumping the line rarely excites cheers and applause in any of the colors of our kind.At present, BLM is not a political organization; it is instead a movement, a mood, a roiling cloud of posts and hashtags. As such, it can for sure have an immediate impact and grab the headlines. But the big question is this: Can it have a lasting impact? If it hopes to do so, it will have to consolidate, form a clear structure, create democratic procedures for action, and make alliances with other like-minded political organizations. This is straight talk; this is political realism. BLM will certainly evaporate if it is isolated from one of the major groups that's politically open to its concerns: the progressive left.
Response to uhnope (Original post)Fri Aug 14, 2015, 06:36 AMStar Member TM99 (3,701 posts)15. Typical fundamentalism mentality.If you do not think and act as I do then you are...not a true believer, are a part of the patriarchy, or in this case, have internalized black pathology.**** she might as well have called him an 'uncle tom'.It is a well-written article that encapsulates my thoughts exactly.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024891681Mississippi Rep. Not Sorry For Calling Clarence Thomas An 'Uncle Tom
Response to DonViejo (Original post)Wed Apr 30, 2014, 04:57 PMgratuitous (51,327 posts)1. "Racially charged"?Yeah, it is. And in this case, it's highly appropriate.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024571481Response to kpete (Original post)Thu Feb 27, 2014, 07:01 AMDirty Socialist (1,002 posts)49. Uncle Tom'Nuff said.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1017&pid=180846Response to GoLeft TV (Original post)Thu Mar 13, 2014, 04:50 PMradicalliberal (686 posts)13. Clarence Thomas: The Ultimate Uncle Tom(And, no, I don't believe "Uncle Tom" is a racist term; otherwise, I wouldn't use it. Derogatory? Definitely so! Racist? No way!)And to think I had once believed that Uncle Tom had fallen out of fashion for good and been relegated to the dust bin of history! Well, he's been resurrected in all his subservient, nauseating glory!Clarence Thomas is a traitor to his race, not to mention posing a serious threat to others in the long term as one of the Supremes. He should be given honorary membership in the Ku Klux Klan. After all, when does he ever fail to do their bidding? As a native-born Texan and simply as a human being, I will always hold George Herbert Walker Bush beneath contempt for appointing him to SCOTUS. Even a Jesse Helms type white bigot would be easier to stomach than Clarence Thomas.I fear troublesome times are ahead.
http://metamorphosis.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=105x2177443The Backlash Cometh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-09-04 08:02 AMResponse to Reply #57. Thank you for pointing that out. I've said many times that "Uncle Tom" was too kind a word for Clarence Thomas.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5668195Response to NNguyenMD (Original post)Wed Oct 15, 2014, 09:48 AMStar Member SoCalDem (102,269 posts)12. Ben Carson is an Uncle Toma novelty, token-black in a sea of pinkies who trot him out like Clarence Thomas as their vanguard.. He's a lackey who's paid to toe their line, and to spread their venom..and he's well-paid..
radicalliberal (686 posts)13. Clarence Thomas: The Ultimate Uncle Tom(And, no, I don't believe "Uncle Tom" is a racist term; otherwise, I wouldn't use it. Derogatory? Definitely so! Racist? No way!)
