This, from the people who claim to be against censorship and so called cancel culture.

 It's Tulsa.  All over again. Not literally  the mass murder, but the sweeping it under the rug, after.  That is what is deliberately being done with the anti anti racism laws.  They are trying to bury sordid history as well as the shortcomings of the present, under the rug.

Shussh.  Don't even talk about it.  The truth upsets us.  And only our feelings matter.

They didn't talk about Tulsa, after the massacre.

Why It Is So Easy For Me To Embrace The 1619 Project.

 Because I spit on nationalism, and national creation myths.

Why do I do that?  Even if I ended up with a Theatre Degree, I was deeply interested in History.  And I know the truth about human history, generally.

And what is the truth?  That for almost all of the time frame of human history, almost  all of the wealth created nay accumulated has been the product of lies, theft, rape and murder.  

And that is why I despise national creation myths.  And 1619 exposes the huge and obvious lie at the heart of the American myth.  No matter how noble the cause of the creation of The United States was.  It was built on the economic and social system of race based slavery, and other evil shit.

So that, and I know enough about History to know it is a form of storytelling.  And just like any other kind of writing, the author brings a point of view, and their own analysis.  And yes, they get to pick what they want to focus on, and how to start and end the story.

I am not going to say each and every person who objects to starting the story on slavery, and using the black experience during and following the slavery period is flat out a racist.  Most are, most likely.

35, not w/in 30.

 I was wrong.  It took notorious Blogging Queen Bee Ann Althouse thirty five days to restore her racist Republican dominated comment section.  It is slightly different I suppose.  More moderated to start.  But it is called a comment section.

Oddly enough perhaps, as I never tried to post there, I am not allowed to post with my account here, there.  For years I have resisted useless exchanges on line, save the now rare pissing match on FB.  The general, usual rule is, I don't swim in that shit.  My need to tell racist Republican idiots they are, mostly died off 10 or more years ago.  

But concerning my pre banned status?  As I like to say, every one censors and edits.  Even those who follow the cult of so called  free speech.  Slight correction.  They have it set up weirdly.  No one actually can post directly.  She still is clearing shit, submission by submission.  Anyway . . . 

Anyway.  She has this bad habit of directing lots and lots of hate on Michelle Goldberg.  She is one of my favorite writers and, bias alert, on my FB friends list.  So I don't like the fact Althouse allows her racist Republican haters to hate on her.

Goldberg doesn't deserve it.  And Althouse should know better than to post or allow to remain  on her blog some one hating on Goldberg saying she is isn't Jewish, even if the commenter claims to be Jewish.

That is flat out anti Semitism no matter who says it, particularly when some one else publishes it.

Do better!

You Aren't Fooling Anyone!

 

You white racist Republicans (and allies.) Using the term "woke" is pretty much the same as calling some one an en word lover.

Stop the racist bullshit.

 

I Almost Went Swimming in that Shit.

 So McWhorter is getting more on my nerves.  Not only is he everywhere lately.  But I have seen his toxic, viral effect on the conversation.  Others are repeating his vacuous theory that current anti racism is a religion.  He will never see this I bet.  But more than anything else, I want to say to him,"Professor.  Do you know how to tell if you have been spreading sophistry? When a bunch of Republican racists like what you have been saying, you likely have been spewing sophistry."

I don't really want to pick on him.  But I think he is playing into the hands of the The Great White Hope.  The racists who are going to die on the hill of white supremacy, if necessary.

Oh the other thing I really want to say to him. "You aren't helping anyone. At least no one who both needs and deserves it."

I still think I could have a civil conversation with him some day.  Again.  I am not playing the troll and bait game here.  But I agree with his self description of being a cranky Democrat.  The last thing we need is another crank.  Cranks don't get shit done.  They just increase the noise level.  Which is something we should not increase, particularly 

if one is basically doing nothing more valid than trying to out crank another group of cranky people.

Just an observation.   Feel free to carry on my wayward son.

Oh.  I almost posted on some article by him.  That is what I meant by almost swam in that shit.  I really have no interest in debating shit on line.  That is why I like FB.  Not much push back.  People get offended, cut you off their their friend's list.  Very simple!

While I Am On The Subject

 Re phrasing an idea I have expressed before.  Since I wholly believe the real question is how can any country in the Americas not be racist?  It makes sense that the burden should be on those fools who insist The USA (or any other country in the Americas,) isn't to prove it.

We all know that race based slavery used to be legal, and the rest of the institutions of society supported that racist bullshit.  And we know that freeing the slaves did not instantly end the racist bullshit.  So?  Show us.  Tell us. Exactly when did The USA stopped being racist?

Don't try to bullshit me by saying it ended when some law was passed, or SCOTUS ruling came out, or when some brown skinned man got elected POTUS.  None of that is proof of the assertion.

I repeat.  Exactly when did racism end in America.?  I want a date I can Google, and verify with multiple primary authorities.

I Think John McWhorter is a Smart Feller, But . . .

 As a lawyer who can't abide sophistry, or non linear argument, he vexes me.  Case in point is the essay on Substack, where he wastes a lot of space arguing that we should get rid of the phrase "systemic racism." Because reasons.  None of them useful.  Getting rid of the phrase is in my mind comparable to the mayor and police chief of a city getting into a discussion about the proper name of some dinosaur attacking the city, instead of devising a plan to fight the creature.

But I believe that systemic racism is a toxic feature of American life. And should be dealt with as a threat to public health and well being.  But hey.  This is not me playing on with the charade, as former posts here by me show, I have been talking about getting rid of the last vestiges of white supremacy for years and years.

So I banged out a reply, not only on that essay in question, but generally on his output on that cluster of issues.  And I say it that way because, blur.  He was on Real Time this past week, and I caught the vid on YouTube.  So blur.  Here is what I almost posted to his comment section under the essay.  But I didn't because I did not want to deal with checking for other's comments, and deciding whether they were worth a response.  I did message boards for years.  That shit is tiresome to me.  So here goes my reply:

As a threshold matter, I want to be as brief as possible, as I believe we need less words, less chatter. Anyone who believes more speech is going to be the solution, just isn't paying attention.

The problem with the professor's argument is not so much the components, but the false choice. He seems to be attached to the idea of black people doing more for themselves. Fine. But people can believe that, and at the same time believe American society is still far too racist, and we need to work at eliminating every last vestige of white supremacy. It's not an either or proposition.

And one last thing. People just need to stop making generalizations about black and brown folk. That is how this toxic, racist garbage started, back in 1619.