Search






Jeff's Amazon.com Wish List

Archive Calendar

November 2024
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930  

Archives

"NAACP's Bond Rebukes Bush"

From the AP:

The NAACP is needed now more than ever because the Bush administration has done little to support blacks, the civil rights organization’s national chairman said Sunday as its 98th annual convention opened.

Speaking before an audience of 3,000, Julian Bond, the NAACP board chairman, cited a range of concerns including the administration’s slow response to Hurricane Katrina, the war in Iraq and its handling of immigration issues.

— none of which, naturally, have anything to do with “civil rights” — with the exception, perhaps, of the President’s failed Immigration Reform Bill, which would have granted virtual amnesty to law breakers. In fact, one wonders what more the President could do to convince Bond that he’s not anti-immigrant — save maybe draping himself in a poncho and declaring himself El Presidente from atop the hand-woven riding blanket of his brand new presidential burro, Pepe.

Not that any of that matters to Bond. Because the charge of racism has become so tied to mere inference — and so cheapened by political misuse — that it no longer means much.

So congrats, Mr Bond. You’re actually doing more to mainstream racism with than you are to combat it, diluting the force of the charge to such a point that David Duke is indistinguishable from Clarence Thomas or John Roberts — a point of view most Americans rightfully reject as absurd on its face.

The number of Americans living in poverty since President Bush took office has increased by more than 5 million, to 37 million, Bond said.

“And the gap has grown between the haves and the have-nots,” he said. “Almost a quarter of black Americans nationwide live below the poverty line, as compared with only 8.6 percent of whites.”

Bond called present-day inequality and racial disparities cumulative and the result of racial advantages compounded over time.

Interesting theory — and of course the impetus and justification behind 40+ years of social policy meant to “level the playing field.”

Yet if, as Bond argues, these disparities are truly cumulative, then he must factor in the policies of the last 4 + decades. Instead, he brackets those — because they tend to seriously undercut his argument — and instead focuses on, what? A hurricane? A Supreme Court decision made less than a week ago?

“Many Americans maintain . . . that racial discrimination has become an ancient artifact,” he said. “At the NAACP, we know none of this is true, and that’s why we are dedicated to an aggressive campaign of social justice, fighting racial discrimination.”

…by way of promoting “good” racial discrimination as a “corrective” to “bad” racial discrimination.

And along the way, by redefining “social justice” to mean “justice determined by group self interest.”

He noted that the Supreme Court, which includes two justices nominated by Bush, upheld rulings saying school systems could not voluntarily use race in assigning students to schools.

“The Bush court removed black children from the law’s protection,” Bond said.

True. But in doing so, it upheld the law’s protection of all children — and the Constitutional prohibition against race-based preferences — regardless of what color those children happen to be.

Bond depicts this as a step backward for civil rights. To others, though, it marks the beginnings of a way out of the vicious cycle of race consciousness that, unsurprisingly, results in a continuation of race consciousness — and so a continuation of the kinds of artificial (but no less real) barriers that have proven so divisive to the country over its history.

Of course, divisiveness — as a way of galvanizing a core identity constituency — is precisely the intention, even as the ostensible intention is to do away with divisiveness and promote “equality.”

Which is why Bond resorts to the kind of racially-loaded language that many Americans — of all colors — grow weary of:

[…] the possibility that New Orleans’s heavily black Lower Ninth Ward, ravaged by Hurricane Katrina, will never be rebuilt is comparable to a “lynching” because the work of generations was wiped out in a single day and black landholders are being dispossessed, Bond said.

“Katrina served to underscore how the war in Iraq has weakened, rather than strengthened, our defenses, including our levees,” Bond said. “The problem isn’t that we can’t prosecute a war in the Persian Gulf and protect our citizens on the Gulf Coast at home. The problem is that we cannot do either one.”

Maybe. But who is the “we” acting as the referent here? New Orleans’ traditionally Democratic political machine? Its community leaders?

Of course not. The levees failed — and the “lynching” is taking place — because a white Republican is in the White House.

Such is the vituperative scape-goating of yesterday’s civil rights leaders, who sadly — in an attempt to remain both socially relevant and politically powerful — have become today’s race-baiters and stewards of what they characterize as a perpetual victim class.

But as Earl Hutchinson, writing at the Huffington Post, points out:

While Bond’s opening speech Bush bash was a good stem-winder, it won’t do much to bridge the gulf between the two black Americas, one poor, frustrated, and alienated and the other prosperous, and upwardly achieving. That’s what has to happen if the NAACP doesn’t want to become what many already say it is, namely obsolete.

Of course, to understand the disparity in the two black Americas, it’s worthwhile to consider how and why some blacks are “upwardly achieving” while others remain perpetually dispossessed.

Because I’d venture that the “root causes” of each trend has as much to do with the ideas about race, opportunity, education, and identity politics held by those doing the moving as does any kind of institutionalized racism or history of cumulative racial disparities — unless one counts the racial disparities and the entitlement culture nurtured and institutionalized by those who have embraced dubious social engineering programs as ways to “fix” those disparities without having thought through the unintended consequences of fighting race consciousness with race consciousness.

A message seeking comment was left Sunday night with the White House press office.

Yeah, I can imagine:

Dear White House press office,

Why do you want to keep blacks permanently enslaved? When you aren't celebrating their having been forced to eat and rape each other in the Superdome, that is?

RACISTS!

Sincerely,
Those who, unlike you, actually care about social justice

ps. Your feedback is greatly appreciated.

The best thing the White House can do is to fight back — and to point out that such charges do nothing by stoke racial animus and keep leaders like Bonds in power by providing them with a strawman to torch whenever they wish to draw attention away from the destructive fires of their own making.

Unfortunately, the White House will do no such thing — choosing instead to defer to Bond and his reputation as a civil rights stalwart.

37 Replies to “"NAACP's Bond Rebukes Bush"”

  1. RC says:

    Somebody needs to let poor Julian in on the secret.

    People have never hated him because he’s black, everybody has hated him because he’s a lying prick.

  2. N. O'Brain says:

    ““Many Americans maintain . . . that racial discrimination has become an ancient artifact,” he said. “At the NAACP, we know none of this is true, and that’s why we are dedicated to an aggressive campaign of social justice, fighting racial discrimination.””

    …and treating America’s black population as political lawn jockeys.

  3. Pablo says:

    I see a great deal of evidence that indicates that the NAACP is completely ineffective. If they weren’t, all the “Black” problems would be on the mend.

    I wonder if Bush is responsible for the out-of-wedlock birth rate. Because if you want to find yourself below the poverty line, being a young single mother is a great way to get there.

  4. shine says:

    “You’re actually doing more to mainstream racism with than you are to combat it, diluting the force of the charge to such a point that David Duke is indistinguishable from Clarence Thomas or John Roberts — a point of view most Americans rightfully reject as absurd on its face.”

    Who did he call racist?

  5. JD says:

    Race relations will get better when the media quits pandering to the Julian Bonss, Jesse Jackson, and Al Sharpton’s of the world, and allowing them to turn non-racial incidents into racial incidents. I doubt that this trio of race-pimps even believes what they say anymore, as it is simply fundraising for the NAACP, and just part of Jesse and Al’s shakedown business.

  6. JD says:

    shine wakes up, jams its head all the way up its ass to its shoulders, and goes back to nighty-night. Good God.

  7. Chris says:

    “Bond called present-day inequality and racial disparities cumulative and the result of racial advantages compounded over time.”

    Nice to see one person from the Grievance Lobby admit that 30+ years of affirmative action policies have been completely worthless.

  8. Jeff G. says:

    “The Bush court removed black children from the law’s protection,” Bond said.

    Guess that’s not technically calling somebody “racist” — though their actions are certainly racist, if what we believe they did is take away the legal rights of blacks.

    Off to do a radio show. Back later.

  9. shine says:

    “Guess that’s not technically calling somebody “racist” — though their actions are certainly racist, if what we believe they did is take away the legal rights of blacks.”

    I hear these days you have to show racist intent to show racism.

  10. rickinstl says:

    “I hear these days you have to show racist intent to show racism.”

    And it’s a good thing too, seeing as how you use a racial slur as your nic here. That kind of thing might cause some grumbling at the next grievance-fest.

  11. Rusty says:

    Comment by JD on 7/9 @ 2:08 pm #

    Race relations will get better when there ain’t no more money in victimhood.

    shortened it for ya JD

  12. Major John says:

    “Katrina served to underscore how the war in Iraq has weakened, rather than strengthened, our defenses, including our levees,”

    Yeah – the 3rd Infantry Division wasn’t there to man the levees and pour direct and indirect fire on the wind and waves…

  13. BJTexs says:

    “Nice to see one person from the Grievance Lobby admit that 30+ years of affirmative action policies have been completely worthless.”

    While, at the same time, arguing for more of the very same policies deemed, by implication, to have failed. I have a grudging admiration for this kind of self perpetuating, self replicating circle logic. The problem will never be solved and the striving to solve the problem will never cease.

    Yet Julian Bond still sees the water cannons and feels whitey’s sting as if it were yesterday.

  14. Karl says:

    I hear these days you have to show racist intent to show racism.

    Indeed. And in court — given that most lack psychic ability — it’s generally shown by pointing to racial disparities… exactly the tack Bond took here. So Bond is taking the cowardly McCartyism route, per usual. I’m sure shine will feel so much better now.

  15. ahem says:

    If it weren’t for the constant repetition of The Message, racism would largely be dead in the US. It’s certainly dead as it existed in the 18th and 19th centuries. The American Left has a vested interest in keeping racism alive. And sexism. And poverty. And homophobia, etc. A great part of its consituency consists of grievance groups. Once their problems have been solved, who needs the Left?

    A Black man who’s making 100K, driving a BMW and owning his own business is not going to be an easy mark for a socialist pitch. He has to have a problem the Left can address. Therefore, the ‘problem’ must resist all efforts to solve it. It must be eternal and unchangeable. It can never get better. As long as the Left exists, so will these ‘intractable’ social problems.

  16. Carin says:

    I say screw the NAACP. I mean, it’s not as if Rethuglians lose any votes by ignoring and laughing at them. Boo Hoo – Detroit isn’t going to vote Republican any more…

    They’re having a convention w/in miles of me. I’m leaving town tomorrow. None too soon.

  17. JHoward says:

    I wonder if Bush is responsible for the out-of-wedlock birth rate. Because if you want to find yourself below the poverty line, being a young single mother is a great way to get there.

    Given the current location of shine/actus’s head, Pablo, please don’t risk exploding it by implying a question about the sense of the now-habitual urban welfare nation enabled and kept running by DC.

  18. shine says:

    “Indeed. And in court — given that most lack psychic ability — it’s generally shown by pointing to racial disparities… exactly the tack Bond took here.”

    He pointed to racial disparities. True. But Jeff is the one that said that racial disparities are racist:

    “though their actions are certainly racist, if what we believe they did is take away the legal rights of blacks.”

    Do you think they are? If so its good that the law corrects them.

  19. Carin says:

    Well, Actus/Shine should be happy to hear that the NAACP held a “funeral” for the “N-word.”

    I wonder if all the rappers who are so fond of it (and, pretty much the only ones who use it) showed up?

  20. Jeff G. says:

    I hear these days you have to show racist intent to show racism.

    And you doubt Bond was trying to imply racist intent simply because he didn’t come out and call conservative Supreme Court justices “racist”?

    Bond was only saying that their actions were tantamount to racism because he knew that calling SCOTUS justices racists would have made him look foolish.

    At least, that’s how I view HIS intent.

    Really, actus. You haven’t been paying attention.

  21. Jeff G. says:

    Jeff is the one that said that racial disparities are racist:

    “though their actions are certainly racist, if what we believe they did is take away the legal rights of blacks.”

    Do you think they are? If so its good that the law corrects them.

    Actually, what Jeff said is that you have to believe that they took away the legal rights of blacks before you can believe their actions were racist. Jeff, though, doesn’t accept Bond’s premise — a premise Bond uses to suggest that the actions of the SCOTUS were racist without having to call the justices racist.

    You are quibbling with Bond, not me.

  22. Jeffersonian says:

    Face it, the NAACP is just MoveOn.org in blackface, a standard-issue left-liberal lobby group with a built-in guilt generator.

  23. shine says:

    “Actually, what Jeff said is that you have to believe that they took away the legal rights of blacks before you can believe their actions were racist.”

    So its a necessary, but not sufficient condition? If I use racial slurs while not harming blacks then… not racist?

    “Jeff, though, doesn’t accept Bond’s premise — a premise Bond uses to suggest that the actions of the SCOTUS were racist without having to call the justices racist.”

    The problem is that there has been plenty of concern directed at disparate impact. It’s a concern in itself. It’s something that the civil rights community, be they in blackface or not, has addressed in the past. And will continue to.

    But I think we’ve found a problem with intentionalism: how do you determine intent? You’re the one saying he’s calling people racist. Not him. He’s decrying disparate impact. Should disparate impact be fixed? I don’t know. I often don’t understand what you people go on about.

  24. happyfeet says:

    Sometimes when I read your stuff shine I just feel so smart.

  25. narciso says:

    I’ll always remember Julian as the specialist of Japanese seer sucker fear films from Saturday Night Live’s Critics corner. And that was his most credible performance.

  26. Jeffersonian says:

    But I think we’ve found a problem with intentionalism: how do you determine intent? You’re the one saying he’s calling people racist. Not him. He’s decrying disparate impact.

    By comparing it to lynching?

    I’d like to see a comparative racial impact study of, say, capital gains taxes, the AMT, etc. and a subsequent deligitimizing of them on that basis. I wonder why we never get those…

  27. Pablo says:

    Sometimes when I read your stuff shine I just feel so smart.

    My desk lamp just told me the same thing.

  28. McGehee says:

    I’ve got a box of rocks that I accidentally let read one of shine’s comments. Now they’re clamoring for me to let them join Mensa.

  29. Jeff G. says:

    Jeffersonian —

    Exactly. Ignore actus. As many times as I’ve explained intentionalism, he can’t seem to grasp it.

    But again, for the record, you TRY to determine intent. You do so by following all the clues left by the utterer/writer and then making the case for what you believe his intent to be.

    You can almost never, we absolute certainty, determine intent, because you don’t have access, generally, to the author. But that doesn’t mean that the author’s intent isn’t being appealed to.

    Intentionalism.

  30. Scrapiron says:

    Bond is no different than the racist Je$$ie and $harpton. They are all in it for the money they can sucker out of the black population, and/or steal from every government aid program that provides financial aid to the poor.

  31. Claiming that the Iraq War weakened New Orleans’ levees is pretty hilarious. Could the man be more irrational?

  32. N. O'Brain says:

    “Comment by Robin Roberts on 7/10 @ 12:08 am #

    Could the man be more irrational?”

    Well, he could be shine.

  33. daleyrocks says:

    This is all because of the PATRIARCHY isn’t it? All that bouncin’ on bellies, welfare state stuff, gangsta rap crap that Bill Cosby and other nonauthentic black people talk about. Where is that Perfesser dude to set the record straight on all that? He’s bound to have some absolutely outstanding ideas on this subject.

  34. tanstaafl says:

    “So congrats, Mr Bond. You’re actually doing more to mainstream racism with than you are to combat it…”

    Well that’s the point of all these people (see Jesse J and Al S and (possibly) Jesse J Jr.) whose point d’appui (you like that ?) rests on keeping notions of racism alive and well.

    They’re revoltin’ and, it would be hoped, more and more Michael Steeles and Thomas Sowells and (even) Morgan Freemans will eventually show ’em where the sun don’t shine.

  35. Scape-goat Trainee says:

    I figure this is nothing more than another attempt by this clown to try and continue to make the NAACP seem relevant. Out of approx. 38 million blacks in this country, approximately 300,000 are members of the NAACP. Let’s compare that to say the NRA with 4.3 MILLION members. These guys are over, they just refuse to admit it.

  36. N.O’Brain have you seen them both at the same place at the same time?

  37. Rusty says:

    #

    Comment by daleyrocks on 7/10 @ 8:49 am #

    This is all because of the PATRIARCHY isn’t it? All that bouncin’ on bellies, welfare state stuff, gangsta rap crap that Bill Cosby and other nonauthentic black people talk about. Where is that Perfesser dude to set the record straight on all that? He’s bound to have some absolutely outstanding ideas on this subject.

    He’s all wrapped up with the homos.

Comments are closed.