for Glenn Reynolds*
I was going to
buy a three-pack
of Fruit of the Loom
crew necks in
a nice, traditional
white
But then I thought,
What would a
white t-shirt say
about my commitment
to the colored
people?
So I went with
a pricey Benetton
V-neck, instead —
striped in seven
colors, just like a
rainbow.
Coda
Janeane Garofalo
really digs my
new rainbow
tee! And how
freakin’ cool is
that?
****
More here, here, here, here, here, and here
update: How sad. I mean, how really really really sad… (h/t Sean M.)
The moonshine-runnin’ cracker cousin of update: Baldilocks weighs in. And she brings graphics. More here, too. And here. And here. And here
“Oy,” indeed.
Good god, what a jackass.
Careful with the racist animal allusions, Russell.
Where can I get a t-shirt like Glenn’s?
You can order one here
I am agog.
The comment thread on that post is truly foul. Most of it consists of people interpreting every political and social disagreement as evidence of the racism of their opponents and then congratulating themselves that they are not racist. It truly must be read to be believed. The amount of hatred and, especially, of bad faith displayed in the thread stuns me.
Well, it’s working: I just ordered one of those shirts. I was aware of them previously, but wasn’t interested because the Glock they display is one of the 9mm models, and mine is chambered in .45 ACP.
But heck, openly displaying my vile racist credentials is far more importantg than arguing about pistol calibers (except that anyone who uses 9mm or smaller is either European or a girly-man… if there’s a difference).
I didn’t think anything could be more unintentionally hilarious than Atrios’ original thread (and the subsequent comments from hysterical bedwetters who see racists behind every tree). Thanks to Mr. Steve Gillard and his readers for proving me wrong.
http://stevegilliard.blogspot.com/2004/08/celebrate-racism.html#comments
The other threads at Eschaton have similarly vile qualities. Here is a quote from one of the threads:
A link to the comment is here Note the extreme statements, e.g., “pure evil,” and the disjunction from reality, e.g., the tacit assumption that the mainstream media leans right.
I didn’t think it was possible for the human IQ to dip so low. Being proven wrong by Gilliard and Black (as in Duncan; don’t go calling me a racist, now) is extra humiliating.
Maybe someone can help me out: I absolutely do not understand what the big deal is about Instapundit’s shirt. I’ve been trying to figure it out as an academic matter, but I’m afraid that I’m simply not getting it.
I think I get the point of the shirt: It mocks the phrase “Celebrate Diversity” and simultaneously advocates for gun rights. I suppose it’s kind of an ironic take on that favorite slogan of the Left—sort of like if the justaposition of the phrase “Celebrate Family Values” and a picture of a gay couple or a homeless family mocks a favorite phrase of the right. I personally don’t think it’s terribly funny, but that’s just a matter of taste.
Now, because the reaction to the shirt has been so bilious, I can only guess why Atrios and his kin are so a-twitter. Do they think that the shirt attacks the concept of racial equality or diversity? Do they think the shirt implies violence against minorities? Is it simply because one version of the shirt uses pan-African colors—and that the use of such colors to promote the Second Amendment is offensive to pan-Africans?
Here’s all that Atrios said: “But, look, the clear message here is that the way to celebrate diversity, particularly that pan-African diversity, is to buy a bunch of fucking guns. In other words, celebrate diversity by arming yourself.” Does that make any sense?
I really would like to figure this out, because I’m just don’t get it. Can someone thoughtfully explain this to me?
Even Freud has to put his phallic symbol malarky aside and admit that a cigar, after all, is just a smoke.
DJ – Of course you don’t get it. You’re obviously sane.
The t-shirt is satire. The designer is very cleverly saying that the vaunted diversity sought by the leftwing nutcases above is a fraud. It’s not the right that’s racist, it’s the left. They read into anything that deviates from the politically correct playbook as racism.
Can’t a protected minority like guns too? Are there no AA’s (African Americans) in gun clubs, ditto gays? Of course there are.
Why can’t guns be celebrated as being diverse?
Big question. Who authorized the 3 purple hearts,and how did he get them?
Just ordered my shirt.
And who the hell decided “diversity” means only skin color? I eat diverse food, drink diverse drinks (well, mostly diet coke, but some others), do diverse work, have diverse friends (and I’m not talking about their skin color, either). I don’t have diverse guns, since I have only one, but some of my friends do.
Bet I’m a lot more diverse than most of the lefties.
“The t-shirt is satire. The designer is very cleverly saying that the vaunted diversity sought by the leftwing nutcases above is a fraud. It’s not the right that’s racist, it’s the left. They read into anything that deviates from the politically correct playbook as racism.”
If I may object, I don’t believe that the designer is saying that diversity is a fraud, but appropriating a common saying and putting a spin on it in favor of owning guns. He’s using the phrase humorously and not attacking racial diversity at all, only that you consider the definition of the word “diversity” in another fashion.
As for the posters who acting very horribly over this, I would suggest that their rage is derived from a feeling of powerlessness. They’re not in charge, everything they’ve warned would happen—from Afghanistan becoming another Vietnam to Iraq another, well, Vietnam—has failed, and despite all the protesting, Bush has retained a great measure (note I said “great” not “majority”) of support. They feel impotent, and, hence, lash out at the nearest target.
The most amusing thing about the Gilliard thread is that the 3rd comment refers to Reynolds as “InstaCracker” no fewer three times and no one seems to object to that particular form of bigotry. Apparently the concept of irony is beyond this crowd.
How about diversity meaning [slobbering moonbat barkspittle removed by site editor. Because he can]
I can’t believe the blogging this is getting or the vehemence of the comments. Do lefties really think that taking the name of diversity in vain is proof that one is a racist, or is that just the new last refuge of someone who’s losing an argument?
The real issue here is that Atrios called Glenn a racist because he wore a shirt that used -gasp- a rainbow-like spectrum of colors. When did that become a registered trademark?
I know everybody’s nervous and up tight about this election, but it’s pretty silly to threaten violence and throw around epithets over something so trivial.
I’d lots rather talk about the fact that John Kerry is a liar almost on a par with Bill Clinton.
If we’re going to threaten fisticuffs, let it be over something significant.
And who the hell decided “diversity†means only skin color?
Barbara, you obviously haven’t received the latest edition of NewSpeak. Don’t worry, the DNC is tracking your IP address and will ship your copy immediately.
“Kerry opposes the Vietnam War. Kerry has always opposed the Vietnam War”
Remember, black is white, 2+2 is 5, Glenns T-Shirt is racist, Ignorance is Strength, Bush is a Liar, long live Oceana.
“Kerry supports and is a hero of the Vietnam War. Kerry has always been a supporter and a hero of the Vietnam War”
Hey, Sweet Thing. Check out my take on the great T-shirt..er..debacle…er..controversy…er…whatever.
DelphiGuy – LOL.
The real issue here is that Atrios called Glenn a racist because he wore a shirt that used -gasp- a rainbow-like spectrum of colors
Well, no….as later admitted, Glen didn’t – but he wore a shirt that looks a lot like another shirt that has the rainbow.
I think Cartman said it best: “Eeh, you know, you’ll just be sitting there, minding your own business, and they’ll come marching in and crawling up your leg and start biting the inside of your ass, and you’ll be all like Ay! Get out of my ass, you stupid rainbows!”
I’ve thought a little more about this, and here’s about the best I can do:
First, I’ve concluded that the shirt is intended to teach this simple lesson: Celebrate diversity indeed, but remember that gun owners are part of our society and should be celebrated too. The Left is blinkered, however, and their imagined diverse social order manifestly does not include people who fail to share their values.
Second, I think that Bill Peschel is right: the offense that Atrios and his ilk feel stems from powerlessness—not power of the presidency, but from their own weak influence in the blogosphere and mainstream American discourse. It simply galls them to see Glenn as successful and powerful as he is…and glibly modeling an in-your-face T-shirt to boot! The helplessness and rage they feel stems from the fact that Glenn EXISTS; the specific facts of his purported offense are beside the point. That’s why Glenn’s called Instacracker, and why Atrios would write this: “I’m no fan of the guy, and think he’s quite frequently been the transmitter of some truly hateful ideas.”
The Left abhors power (when they’re not exercising it, that is), and in their fury they can only brand their adversaries as racists or hateful or facsist in a dim effort to balance the scales. This desparation has pushed them further and further from the mainstream—and further and further from the power they covet. Sooner than we think, the Lift will wink out.
“And who the hell decided ‘diversity’ means only skin color?”
“Diversity” means there’s no room for decent, mild-mannered centrists like Glenn Reynolds.
I’m not sure Instaman is a centrist – my impression is that he’s moved right over the past three years. But if so, he’s a reasonable one, and as you say, decent and mild mannered. Heck, I know I’m right of center but consider it a matter of personal preferences and don’t despise people just because they don’t hold my opinions. Just because I think somebody is wrong doesn’t make him stupid and evil – which alone tags me as a non lefty.
On the other hand, I might be way off base about Reynolds moving rightwards – it’s quite possible that the lefty mainstream has gone further left, so he just appears to display rightward movement the same way the pier appears to move away from the ship.
And in retrospect I think that’s probably it. Most of the spokescreatures of the left seem to have morphed into something dark, frantic, and bloodthirsty. I’m glad they fear guns and hate the idea of self defense, because otherwise I’d be stocking up on ammo against the possibility of them winning the election. Or losing it.
I don’t think Glenn has moved right politically so much as he’s been pushed there by repulsion force.
And yes, the hooraw over the shirt is just more inane dribble from the lips of Atrios. Why expect anything different? God help us if there are more like him in academia. Can you imagine sending your kids to be taught by anything resembling Duncan Black?
And is it just me, or has anyone else noticed that Jan’s ass is getting bigger? I mean, she’s got a shelf there.
|
|
|
|
V
I see that Jeff’s page is still over 90% white, thus indicating, subconsciously at least, his racist tendencies and his reluctance to embrace diversity—even if it makes his blog less readable. Ideological purity is our strength, or diversity is our unity, or something.
How about a diversity of fingers in the shape of a [pretty pony? (comment edited to replace a repeat of yesterday’s foaming idiocy, likewise replaced by me. Because I can).]
charles austin.
You have concluded that Jeff’s page is over 90% white and thus indicates his racist tendencies.
a. How can you possibly know what percentage of Jeff’s page readers are white? Do whites have a secret sign that lets others with skin the hue of snow know they too are one of them?
Or are you psychic and can just put your finger tips on monitor on top of the comment and the skin color of the writer pops into your head which is conveniently empty of any thought thus making it easier for the skin tone to make itself known to you.
b. If you are indeed correct and only 10% of the Jeff’s page readers are non-white, how does that make Jeff a racist? Is there a secret block which only allows one in ten non-white writers on the comments page? How does Jeff do it?
Far out technology Jeff!
c. If all is as you state it, aren’t the non-whites the racists. They are choosing not to comment on Jeff’s page, a page obviously in grave need for diversity.
Charles, you are in grave need of help and you are probably young enough to be able to overcome your lifelong indoctrination in the arcana of the left. Seek help Chuck and join the rest of us, people of all colors and tints, on the side of the truth.
erp, I suspect that Mr. Austin was referring to the layout of this web page, not the readership. See, the background is white, obviously making a point about dominance, while the text is black, so it is subconsciously reinforcing the stereotype that blacks are only valid when they serve the needs and bidding of whites. See, the white doesn’t actually do anything, while the black is forced to convey the information, and yet has no part in the decision making process.
I haven’t yet figured out what the significance of the links showing up as red… its either American Indians, or Communists. Either way, it’s vile and racist.
But if you had a degree from the University of California in the late seventies, as I have, you’d be sensitized to these evidences of racism all around us. And sexism. And fascism. And, uh, lots of other isms that are eeeeeevil!
Face it, maaaaaan, if you’re a white male, and not a Democrat, then you’re racist.
Steve – best analysis yet. That fine education has done you good.
It seems to me that the right sees the left as those nasty, evil, fanatical, ideological types who go in straight lines only, and the left sees the right as those nasty, evil, fanatical, ideological types who go in straight lines only. This is wronghead and obscures the actual ideas discussed.
Would also like to point out that Steve said
“ Just because I think somebody is wrong doesn’t make him stupid and evil – which alone tags me as a non lefty.”
That sentence is an oxymoron.