Pick Your Wardrobe Wisely: A Lesson in Racial Politics

Rodney King famously said after his beat-down by LA cops 

and the ensuing riots, "Why can't we all just get along?"

Probably not a Sunday School Teacher - One of theproblems we face when choosing our wardrobe.

 

In the wake of the recent racial unrest over the Florida courtroom drama surround the Trayvon Martin shooting, the political ideologues have fired up their spin machines. Both have come out in support of their own rigid ideologies, of course, but what's been appalling about the whole thing is how little regard is being paid to what we are teaching our kids with all this rhetoric about race.

Like Mr. King's question suggests, it ought to be a simple thing. Let's focus on fixing the problem rather than fanning the fires of hatred based on skin color.  But both sides are doing it. It would be nice if we could get everybody to back off the angry rhetoric and be nice to one another. Unfortunately, it's hard to do that when people see only what they want to see! A million black mothers see in Trayvon Martin their 12 year old child's face. Their real child may be 38 years old and a steel worker, but to his mama he will always be that little innocent boy going to the store for some candy and a Coke.

But a bag of Skittles can be a candy treat or a key ingredient in a vicious street drug called "purple drank" that makes you paranoid and aggressive if you add Arizona Watermelon Drink and a bit of cough syrup.

On the other side, millions of non-blacks see the carnage in places like Detroit, Chicago and L.A. and the gangs of young men in hoodies and sagging pants committing violent crimes and react with fear and with sympathy for George Zimmerman. Many wonder if they should get that conceal and carry permit for themselves.

It's hard to forgive and forget when you are so angry you see only what you want to see and only from your own perspective. It's true, when young black men protest that not everyone who dresses like a thug is a thug. This is no less true than the idea that everyone who dresses and talks like a preacher is a man of God. Evil people like Jim Jones and David Koresh dressed themselves up like preachers in order to make people think they were men of God and then stole from them, raped them, abused them and even got them all killed.

The message of the recent Martin/Zimmerman tragedy should be one that speaks to self-preservation. It's a message I used to try to get across to the kids I worked with. If you don't want people to think you are dangerous, don't dress like a dangerous person, don't act like a dangerous person and don't take substances that make you paranoid and aggressive.  If you do, then you frighten people and frightened people can be far more dangerous than you are, as that poor boy found out. Someone should have done a better job of teaching lesson to Trayvon.

But isn't this a free country?  Shouldn't I be able to dress like a thug if I want to and shouldn't people not assume that I am a thug no matter how I dress?

Well, let's look at that idea a bit.  I, for instance, have every right to put on a KKK hood and walk down the street,  But does it follow, using the reasoning above, that black people should not assume that I am actually a member of the KKK even though I'm wearing a Klan hoodie?  And furthermore, do I have the right to be surprised if black people become angry and feel threatened if I confront them wearing that kind of outfit? 

Of course not. There are thugs and there are thugs.  The Klan guys are thugs as much as any Italian, black, Russian or Hispanic gang member.  Thugs wear outfits that make them look like thugs so people will fear them. There really isn't any good reason to dress like a thug. If there were a war going on and I wasn't a soldier, I certainly would not put on a soldier uniform and go out on the battlefield - not if I expected to live. It wouldn't matter that I wasn't "really" an enemy soldier. It would only matter that I looked like one.

If we lived in a kinder gentler world we could all dress like we wanted to and no one would think any the worse of us. But we live in a world full of real threats to our lives and safety.  In a world where people who dress like thugs often attack you, shoot you or rob you, we are conditioned to treat such people as a threat. It would have taken a huge leap of faith for Mr. Zimmerman to assume Trayvon wasn't going to kill him when the young man was on top of him administering what his girlfriend called a well-deserved "whoop a@#$%" and beating his head against the sidewalk. It's probably a bit more than anyone of any race has a right to expect.



Alright, I get it. Black people have a lot of anger over how they've been treated by white people. But is fanning that anger in our communities, and particularly in front of impressionable children, any way to end the hatred? And if you fan the anger of blacks against whites and say things like, "Sure Zimmerman is half Hispanic, but it was his whiteness that made him murder that boy," are you not inviting a violent reaction from the white community? Not everyone in the white community is over racism yet and most of us, even those who do find racism reprehensible, aren't prepared to submit to, as Martin's girlfriend, Rachel Jeantel, so colorfully put it, the "whoop a@#$%" we deserve.

If we grownups in the community are not careful there is going to be blood in our streets and I will grieve just as much over the blood of black and Hispanic children caught up in the violence as I will for white children. Jesus, Martin Luther King and Ghandi all taught that the way to respond to racism was to resist nonviolently. If there is still racism in our country and my black brothers and sisters wish to resist it nonviolently, I will once again stand beside them.

I'm afraid though that those with an interest in fomenting violence over race in this country are not trying to end racism at all. I think they are trying to use it as a means to seize political power. I don't think they care who gets killed to feed their ambitions and lust for power. Such people do not serve God, I promise you that, whether they have Reverend, Senator, Congressman or President in front of their names or not.

The moral of the story here? If you don't want to be treated like a dangerous thug, don't dress like one, talk like one or act like one. Let your words be "yes" and "no" without all the name-calling and labeling. Don't be afraid to stand against even your loved ones and closest friends if it is the right thing to do.  It's that simple and a lesson that can be learned by both sides in this conflict.

© 2013 by Tom King

Protect Our Bears - Move a Democrat to Seattle

Recent efforts by the city of Seattle to legislate political correctitude by banning from use words like "citizen" and "brown bag", have made people wonder just what those people have been smoking up there in the Pacific Northwest. Just for clarification, I'd like to explain the phenomenon of liberal loonification that is apparently going taking place in places like Seattle and Olympia.

In Washington State, we like to keep all our Democrats in large "sustainable" cities like Seattle and Olympia.  We also tolerate a manageable population in Tacoma and Forks (liberals do love their vampires for some reason and they whine if you don't let them live near pretend ones).

In any case, we dare not let them loose in the surrounding forests and wilderness areas. It's not that we worry about them getting lost or anything. We can afford to thin the herd a bit anyway. What we are concerned about mostly is that they might be mistaken for food by our wild bears and be accidentally eaten. The bears would be in danger of death by food poisoning, should they inadvertently ingest a Democrat due to the high-toxicity levels often found in Democrats, particularly those from Seattle; especially those of the Lyndon LaRouche sub-species.

We love our bears up here in Washington and we try to protect them from harm so far as possible. Once in a while, though a liberal will sneak past us and drive out into the country, get naked and wander off into the forest on a "spirit quest" or some other such nonsense. Sometimes they take cameras with them, presumably to take pictures of the bears and mountain lions. These liberals often do not come back, not that it's a problem for us mind you. We just have to hope that the bear population is robust enough to handle the occasional toxic take-out dinner that comes their way.

(c) 2013 by Tom King

So Tell Me What's Wrong With This Shirt

Available at Apocalypse Gear

Alright, I admit it. This design is supposed to be provocative. I would feel a wee bit uncomfortable wearing a shirt that says "Cracker American" across the chest in certain neighborhoods (and not all of them in America).  What I'd like is a reaction from my friends who read this. Tell me why this T-shirt (yes it's a "hoodie") should be offensive?  We'll start with my reasons as to why it should not.

Reason 1:  Sauce for the Gander

Apparently it is okay for a racial slur to be used by a person of the race in question to refer to himself or his fellows of the same race.  It is not okay for someone of another race to use that term.  Therefore if the term "cracker" is a disparaging term for white people, is it not okay for white people to use the term to refer to themselves?  If not, why not?

Reason 2: Neutralizing Hate

If someone uses hate speech against you and you turn such speech into a joke, does this not neutralize hate speech. So if someone were to use an ugly racial epithet against me, what if I ignored the hatred behind the word and made the word mean something else more benign. What if I embraced the word with pride.  Then, isn't the only reason anyone ought to be at all angry about that is because it robs the word of the power of hatred against my race; a tool they wished to retain?

Reason 3: Racial Disarmament

If I am not hurt, but rather am amused by the racial epithet "cracker" does that make certain people angry because I am not hurt by the racial epithet? Is this not why, when you ignore an insult or a slur, the bully using it inevitably screams at you, "Hey @#$$%!  I'm talkin' to you!" Is the source of their anger at the message on the shirt above because it shows that calling me a "cracker" doesn't bother me? I'd like to know.

Reason 3: Managing Agreement

So if I wear a shirt proclaiming proudly that I am a cracker, why should that make anyone mad? I am agreeing with them. I am quite obviously of the race called "cracker" by certain people.  I am proud of who I am, although I'm really Scotch-Irish-English-German-Cherokee, but "cracker" is far shorter. Shouldn't any person of any race be entitled to be proud of their race. If I agree with you that I am, in fact, what you say I am, (a cracker) should that not make you happy instead of making you want to get three or four friends and beat me senseless in a back alley?

These are questions that trouble me. If you have answers, I'd like to hear them. Really. And before I go, I want to point out that I do not think being a cracker makes me superior to anyone. Just equal as it says in the Declaration of Independence.

Only equal.

© 2013 by Tom King