this is actually a few weeks old but sadly constantly relevant
Hubski, read this article. I'd like to know your thoughts. Surely these people must have done something to invite their deaths at the hands of law enforcement? Meanwhile, a white Christian man plans and executes a terrorist attack in Texas’ capital and he’s just a nice guy who lost his way, a Renaissance Faire enthusiast in a tricorn hat who enjoyed tubing and trying to blow up government buildings.A New York Times piece described Brown, who was stopped for jaywalking before being shot and killed by officer Darren Wilson, as “no angel.” After officer Tim Loehmann shot and killed Rice at the park gazebo where Rice was playing with a replica gun, the Cleveland Plain Dealer hurried to run a story about Rice’s parents’ criminal records, apparently desperate to associate the boy with criminality any way it could.
You've got a visible pushback on the internet among white males who don't want to be vilified and it asserts itself with stuff like men's rights, the red pill on reddit and people who think social justice warriors on Tumblr represent anything other than misguided social conscious. No one wants to hear that a group they're a part of has an obvious tendency to murder strangers. It turns into " What did I do?" "I never owned slaves." "Why are we still talking about racism? It makes me uncomfortable." I think this carries over to media reports of these type of crimes. It's a sin to generalize any group but white men seem to exclusively go on these rare kill crazy rampages and pointing that out might make a large audience uncomfortable. Saying black men or Muslims do something is done with more tact or careful wording, so flat out stating the obvious, that white men are the only group that goes on murderous rampages directed at certain groups, becomes a difficult topic to carefully word
I don't think it's okay to generalize anyone. People say "the poles are coming over here and talking our jobs" but oh well. They're here legally same with all of the immigrants to the UK. I think the US has some seriously bad ideas regarding race, social standing and class. Not to mention that but gun legislation is so neanderthalic that there seems to be no stop to this violence now. As for villified white males, I don't think it's fair to say that we all share the same ideals just as people shouldn't think of all muslims as terrorists. The kid was crazy and racist and radicalised. I'm not blaming it on mental illness because it's obvious it was a hate crime. But surely there is something wrong with the system which means that the government, schools and workplaces allow this kind of kid to be spat out. Just as people in the middle east are being taught of IS ideals and then joining IS. People in the US are taught to be racist. John Stewart made a point. The US celebrates it's history and to be honest most of US history is terrible and just plain wrong. I think the US needs to move on from it's past and teach kids the things that make them fucking tolerant.
The problem is that the US as a nation was built on land stolen from others by genocide, and labour stolen from others by slavery. These are the only reasons it could ever reach the heights it did and hold the power it does. This racism is a core, inseperable ingredient of the US identity. A celebration of the USA and to some extent a celebration of capitalism are the celebration of some of the most unspeakable acts that a civilisation could undertake. Combine this with the chauvinistic rhetoric of US social politics, and is it any wonder that racism is such a big problem? Dare I say I see no solution so long as the USA as a concept maintains credibility. Note I'm focusing on the states because it's particularly easy. Europe has an equally large race problem, but I find it's slightly more nuanced, and slightly harder to define. As for the other continents, I don't feel like I know enough to confortably comment.
Of course it wasn't, that's why the race dialogue in Europe is very different. We very much still have a problem with racism, though.
You say "I don't think it's okay to generalize anyone" but say "I think the US has some seriously bad ideas regarding race". Care to explain?
White men aren't the only people who go on rampages directed at certain groups. I think you're certainly right that people don't recognize the problems with racism in the US, but the response to that shouldn't be more racism. Stereotypes about black people shouldn't be met with stereotyping white people, it shoulds be met with admonition against stereotypes. Race isn't essential to behavior. It's important that we understand one another's experiences, but hyper-focus on race doesn't decrease racism. The violence of some individuals doesn't belong to white men as a group any more than it belongs to black men as a group. Violence is something that individuals who commit violence are responsible for, regardless of their race or gender or any other demographic consideration. Associating the actions of individuals due solely to their race is racist.
Michael Brown was not 'murdered for jaywalking'. Even the outside Department of Justice report decided the tragic killing of Michael Brown was in self-defense. The evidence was overwhelming. He literally did invite his death at the hands of law enforcement and Darren Wilson wasn't given much of a choice. Eric Garner was murdered by a cop. That was a filthy a disgusting crime. So was Mr. Rice. So were many, many other black men, but Michael Brown being called "No Angel" is accurate. He had a criminal record and was stopped for matching the description of a shoplifting suspect, which he turned out to be guilty of. We can't just rewrite history to help solve a very disgusting problem. In fact, the fact that everyone was so willing to believe and riot over Michael Brown shows how serious the problem is. But that doesn't excuse us from telling the truth. Did McQuilliams have a criminal record that the media didn't talk about? He's disgusting yes, but it's hard to say that everyone ignored his criminal history (including this article by not talking about it), if he doesn't have one. But instead lets talk about some other white men who are well known for violence. Dylan Klebold, Timothy McVeigh, James Eagan Holmes, Lee Harvey Oswald, James Earl Ray and a whole bunch of others. It's not ignored in the way that the author tries to push. Even most of these guys to play the insanity defense (if they're not killed in the process of the crime) and get sentenced as normal assholes anyway. Even today, no one is talking about the mental illness of the Charleston shooter, Dylann Roof. They're just calling it how it is, a white supremacist asshole who killed a bunch of people.
I remember seeing on twitter someone write: This is scary stuff. I don't live far away from where the psycho from Charleston was caught. I liked that our president called it like it is. "This type of violence doesn't happen in other advanced countries..." -He's right. The data shows that he's right. It's Way more prevalent here. Sadly. muslim shooting= terrorist black shooting =thug white shooting = mental illness.
I think that sums up how our media presents these things. They do it because we like to have clearly defined bad guys. We don't want our really bad guys to look like "us" and the us that runs the media isn't black or muslim.
Find me a non-racist country. It's not a good enough excuse. We need to keep the noise going so we can have real discussions about race and class. We have gone through several evolutions on our racism, but we clearly have more to do.
There was a great Commie/Socialist paper in town years ago, the editor died and the heart of the thing died with it. They did a several month break down of our local media's handling of race and the media. I wish I still had a copy of this issue because it was fine work, sadly the paper was never online. During a newspaper or television report of a crime, if the perpetrator was black, the odds that report would say the race of the criminal was way higher. The odds of a picture of the perpetrator would appear in the paper or on the news cast was way higher if the criminal was black. A black crime victims picture would appear, or be quoted or interviewed at a much lower rate than a white victim. And it went on and on like that. I wish that I hadn't lost that issue and that the editor hadn't died, it was a great red rag that served the community well. The local paper of record changed how it reports crime as a result, now it never reports the race of a perpetrator even if the criminal is still at large. It will describe height, weight, cloths and age but won't say shit about race. I think they missed the point.
I have noticed this in the past and fully agree. The author could have even gone a step further to point out all the cases of people who are labeled immediately as terrorists. Generally, if you are Muslim and attack people, you are immediately labeled as a terrorist. However, if a white Christian attacks people because they are too liberal/ruining your country/whatever, it was often just some guy that was "crazy." There seems to be a disconnect in the general willingness to label such persons as something other than crazy. There are perhaps some nuiances that need to be discussed, but I do think we need to work on how we address these topics in the U.S.
I don't even think most of these guys are crazy. They could be making rational decisions based on faulty evidence. Storm roof thought he would be a hero (and is to some extreme racists), Anders Brevik, the guy who flew his plane into the IRS building, Christopher dorner, the list goes on. These people were not mentally ill. They made a conscious decision and carried it out. They felt (in some of the manifestos) that there was no other choice. I mean some are mentally il some arent, but we have problems underlying our society that go ads this behavior in a way.
I just saw this: This shit just blows my mind. Like, I comprehend it, but I can't understand it. So frustrating and angering and saddening.