The Republican Thread

[Jenksismyhero]

He's giving a quote that essentially dismisses the widespread and systemic racial oppression African Americans faced in this country, particularly in states like Louisiana, in the 50's and 60's. He then follows it with a statement that implies that 'entitlements' and 'welfare' have made it worse for African Americans, and that this is the cause of whatever their current unhappiness is. He is literally saying that they were happier under Jim Crow than they were post-Great Society.

 

If anything, it's a great example of why "color blind" is such a stupid thing. It lets someone who isn't the target of systemic racial oppression be completely and comfortably ignorant of what's happening to everyone around them.

 

 

In other words, he doesn't CARE as much as people like you.

[Jenksismyhero]

He's giving a quote that essentially dismisses the widespread and systemic racial oppression African Americans faced in this country, particularly in states like Louisiana, in the 50's and 60's. He then follows it with a statement that implies that 'entitlements' and 'welfare' have made it worse for African Americans, and that this is the cause of whatever their current unhappiness is. He is literally saying that they were happier under Jim Crow than they were post-Great Society.

 

If anything, it's a great example of why "color blind" is such a stupid thing. It lets someone who isn't the target of systemic racial oppression be completely and comfortably ignorant of what's happening to everyone around them.

 

edit: more bluntly, every single day Jim Crow America mistreated African Americans. He claims to have not seen direct, immediate racial oppression (I am skeptical!) and from there talks about how happy everyone was. His "color blindness" is just another word for "deep ignorance"

 

Ok exactly. He doesn't sufficiently address the seriousness of the issue. Therefore, (ignorant) racist.

 

edit: and I totally buy it. I grew up in a town of 3,000-5,000 people. We had a token black family or two and NEVER thought twice about it. I moved to the big city later in life and every day there's a story about race. In my personal experience growing up I could say I never saw any issue and that every black person I knew wasn't subjected to discrimination or ill-treatment and seemed perfectly happy.

Edited December 19, 2013 by Jenksismybitch

[StrangeSox]

No, in other words, he dismisses very real racism and racial oppression and imagines that African Americans as a whole were happier under Jim Crow and are now suffering thanks to welfare and entitlements. He doesn't care at all because he doesn't even see the blatant, explicit racism of the Jim Crow south.

 

Ok exactly. He doesn't sufficiently address the seriousness of the issue. Therefore, (ignorant) racist.

 

 

No, you're still not getting. Ignorant racist because he literally dismisses the blatant, widespread de jure racism of the Jim Crow south and romanticizes it as happier times for African Americans, when they'd sing songs all day and wouldn't even complain about the white man, until that awful welfare came along. He completely dismisses the seriousness of the issue.

 

I really can't believe you have a hard time understanding why painting Jim Crow Louisiana as happy fun time when asked a question about racial issues is absurd. He is literally recollecting Uncle Remus as his lived experience in pre-CRA Louisiana. Uncle Remus was pretty damn questionable in 1947, let alone 2013.

Edited December 19, 2013 by StrangeSox

[Jenksismyhero]

No, in other words, he dismisses very real racism and racial oppression and imagines that African Americans as a whole were happier under Jim Crow and are now suffering thanks to welfare and entitlements. He doesn't care at all because he doesn't even see the blatant, explicit racism of the Jim Crow south.

 

 

 

 

No, you're still not getting. Ignorant racist because he literally dismisses the blatant, widespread de jure racism of the Jim Crow south and romanticizes it as happier times for African Americans, when they'd sing songs all day and wouldn't even complain about the white man, until that awful welfare came along. He completely dismisses the seriousness of the issue.

 

I really can't believe you have a hard time understanding why painting Jim Crow Louisiana as happy fun time when asked a question about racial issues is absurd. He is literally recollecting Uncle Remus as his lived experience in pre-CRA Louisiana. Uncle Remus was pretty damn questionable in 1947, let alone 2013.

 

See my edit above. I can see his personal exposure being limited to the point where he didn't see the problem. And he's not alone in thinking that welfare and entitlements have made mentalities worse for some people.

[StrangeSox]

Ok exactly. He doesn't sufficiently address the seriousness of the issue. Therefore, (ignorant) racist.

 

edit: and I totally buy it. I grew up in a town of 3,000-5,000 people. We had a token black family or two and NEVER thought twice about it. I moved to the big city later in life and every day there's a story about race. In my personal experience growing up I could say I never saw any issue and that every black person I knew wasn't subjected to discrimination or ill-treatment and seemed perfectly happy.

You didn't grow up in Jim Crow Louisiana where there was de jure racial oppression, though. And if you had, and you based your entire views of race relations based on what you saw happen in front of you while ignoring the rest of society around you, you'd be just as ignorant. It's actually pretty much a textbook example of racial privilege if you don't even have to consider the realities of racial oppression, only what you personally saw other people exposed to.

Edited December 19, 2013 by StrangeSox

[StrangeSox]

See my edit above. I can see his personal exposure being limited to the point where he didn't see the problem.

 

That would be a pretty good example of "color blind" ignorant racial privilege if you didn't think Jim Crow was all that bad. These black farmers he describes as happy-go-lucky never got mistreated directly in front of him, but he doesn't even stop to consider the realities of racial segregation, vote suppression, etc.

 

And he's not alone in thinking that welfare and entitlements have made mentalities worse for some people.

I know, there's an awful lot of ignorance out there!

[Jenksismyhero]

You didn't grow up in Jim Crow Louisiana were there was de jure racial oppression, though. And if you had, and you based your entire views of race relations based on what you saw happen in front of you while ignoring the rest of society around you, you'd be just as ignorant. It's actually pretty much a textbook example of racial privilege if you don't even have to consider the realities of racial oppression, only what you personally saw other people exposed to.

 

That would be a pretty good example of "color blind" ignorant racial privilege if you didn't think Jim Crow was all that bad. These black farmers he describes as happy-go-lucky never got mistreated directly in front of him, but he doesn't even stop to consider the realities of racial segregation, vote suppression, etc.

 

Again, not caring enough/appreciating the problem for your liking, so, racist.

Edited December 19, 2013 by Jenksismybitch

[StrangeSox]

 

Again, not caring enough/appreciating the problem for your liking, so, racist.

No, again, being completely unaware that there was actually a problem at all, so ignorant in the 50's and 60's and yeah, pretty much just racist in 2013. That statement in 2013 is just willful ignorance of the status of African Americans as 2nd class citizens in the Jim Crow era. It's white-washing a pretty horrible but factual history.

[Jenksismyhero]

No, again, being completely unaware that there was actually a problem at all, so ignorant in the 50's and 60's and yeah, pretty much just racist in 2013. That statement in 2013 is just willful ignorance of the status of African Americans as 2nd class citizens in the Jim Crow era. It's white-washing a pretty horrible but factual history.

 

Wait, when did he say he wasn't aware? Oh right, because he was talking about his PERSONAL EXPERIENCE and wasn't giving a 25 minute stump speech on the severity of racism in Louisiana during the 50's and 60's.

 

 

[StrangeSox]

Wait, when did he say he wasn't aware? Oh right, because he was talking about his PERSONAL EXPERIENCE and wasn't giving a 25 minute stump speech on the severity of racism in Louisiana during the 50's and 60's.

 

It doesn't take a 25 minute speech to say something non-offensive about Jim Crow. When asked about the Jim Crow south, he related a couple of personal anecdotes that are literally classic racial stereotypes of African Americans from that period and before. The fact is that just waking up each day in Louisiana in the 1950's and 60's, he was witness to explicit and legal racial oppression. Yet he's willfully blind to that, and instead likes to imagine it as happier times for everyone, and then goes on to decry welfare, which itself just gets into another racial stereotype.

 

He could have said "I didn't personally see things as that bad where I was, but [...]" Instead he chose to describe how happy they all were, singing songs in the field, the happy negro stereotype that goes back to at least Uncle Tom's Cabin.

 

[EvilMonkey]

It doesn't take a 25 minute speech to say something non-offensive about Jim Crow. When asked about the Jim Crow south, he related a couple of personal anecdotes that are literally classic racial stereotypes of African Americans from that period and before. The fact is that just waking up each day in Louisiana in the 1950's and 60's, he was witness to explicit and legal racial oppression. Yet he's willfully blind to that, and instead likes to imagine it as happier times for everyone, and then goes on to decry welfare, which itself just gets into another racial stereotype.

 

He could have said "I didn't personally see things as that bad where I was, but [...]" Instead he chose to describe how happy they all were, singing songs in the field, the happy negro stereotype that goes back to at least Uncle Tom's Cabin.

Why did he have to go any further than "I didn't see anything badwhere I was"? Why does he have to add a 'but'?

[Balta1701]

Why did he have to go any further than "I didn't see anything badwhere I was"? Why does he have to add a 'but'?

You know what, f*** it, I've had holocaust references thrown at me so often, here's one back at people.

 

"I didn't see any Jews getting murdered where I was".

[Jake]

What, in your mind, is sinful?

 

“Start with homosexual behavior and just morph out from there. Bestiality, sleeping around with this woman and that woman and that woman and those men,” he says. Then he paraphrases Corinthians: “Don’t be deceived. Neither the adulterers, the idolaters, the male prostitutes, the homosexual offenders, the greedy, the drunkards, the slanderers, the swindlers—they won’t inherit the kingdom of God. Don’t deceive yourself. It’s not right.”

 

 

 

Read More http://www.gq.com/entertainment/television...n#ixzz2ny4xTdxU

 

When Phil Robertson thinks of sin, the first thing that comes to his mind is gay people. That's not being religious, that's wanting an outlet to vent your hate. Homosexual behavior is so far outside of the main aims (and there are sound arguments to be made that it is completely outside the purview of Christian theology) of Christianity that this quote is utterly ridiculous. He doesn't want everyone "to love each other and love God," he wants everyone to think alike.

[Jake]

You know what, f*** it, I've had holocaust references thrown at me so often, here's one back at people.

 

"I didn't see any Jews getting murdered where I was".

 

This is actually essentially a cultural meme in Germany. They had some serious issues coming to terms with what they all allowed to happen and pretended they didn't know about. There's a movie called The Nasty Girl that details the true story of the borderline murderous persecution a young girl faced when trying to learn about the Holocaust-era history of her hometown.

[Jenksismyhero]

When Phil Robertson thinks of sin, the first thing that comes to his mind is gay people. That's not being religious, that's wanting an outlet to vent your hate. Homosexual behavior is so far outside of the main aims (and there are sound arguments to be made that it is completely outside the purview of Christian theology) of Christianity that this quote is utterly ridiculous. He doesn't want everyone "to love each other and love God," he wants everyone to think alike.

 

I'm sure that was a context-based answer. They were clearly talking about sex or sexuality or something, since his initial comment was about finding vaginas more attractive than dude's buttholes. But even then we have no idea what precipitated those comments or in what order he made them.

[Jenksismyhero]

You know what, f*** it, I've had holocaust references thrown at me so often, here's one back at people.

 

"I didn't see any Jews getting murdered where I was".

 

Saying that doesn't mean you're a holocaust denier or that you hate Jews and think they're an inferior race. You're simply stating where you lived you didn't see Jews getting murdered.

 

I think you guys should read more into what people don't say. It fits with your narrative that everyone is racist/homophobic/whatever except you, because you care and no one else does.

[StrangeSox]

[Soxbadger]

I just dont see why people care what idiots say. If I spent all day worrying about what dumb people said Id have no time to enjoy life.

[StrangeSox]

Phil Robertson's America

[witesoxfan]

Phil Robertson's America

 

I think this article is loaded as all hell and tries to connect very, very loose ends. Phil Robertson is an idiot. He is also incredibly naive or he is a great actor. Frankly, I could not care less. He probably did see nothing but happy blacks in Louisiana and he thought no different. He's not a senator or a mayor or anyone that holds any sort of public position. Let him believe what he wants to believe, and if you are smart, you will ignore it and allow the village idiot to believe what he wants to believe.

 

My problem is not with Phil Robertson. My problem is when actual, intelligent people agree with him. I do not believe he should have been suspended, but everything he's said is incredibly ignorant on a deeper level. I shared my thoughts with someone close and they said "frankly, I agree with him." Yes, I personally find a woman's vagina more appealing as well - I'm guessing all straight males agree -but I don't go talking about it. First and foremost, you don't talk about any of that stuff publicly because it's simply not politically correct - frankly, it's disgusting. Of greater note, you don't talk about that stuff because it is highly offensive to the LBGT community.

 

Trying to even come up with a comparison for what he said is impossible for me. To imitate his speaking style, it's like "Hey Phil - shut up. Just go shoot stuff. Dinner will be ready when you're back."

Edited December 20, 2013 by witesoxfan

[Jenksismyhero]

I think this article is loaded as all hell and tries to connect very, very loose ends. Phil Robertson is an idiot. He is also incredibly naive or he is a great actor. Frankly, I could not care less. He probably did see nothing but happy blacks in Louisiana and he thought no different. He's not a senator or a mayor or anyone that holds any sort of public position. Let him believe what he wants to believe, and if you are smart, you will ignore it and allow the village idiot to believe what he wants to believe.

 

My problem is not with Phil Robertson. My problem is when actual, intelligent people agree with him. I do not believe he should have been suspended, but everything he's said is incredibly ignorant on a deeper level. I shared my thoughts with someone close and they said "frankly, I agree with him." Yes, I personally find a woman's vagina more appealing as well - I'm guessing all straight males agree -but I don't go talking about it. First and foremost, you don't talk about any of that stuff publicly because it's simply not politically correct - frankly, it's disgusting. Of greater note, you don't talk about that stuff because it is highly offensive to the LBGT community.

 

Trying to even come up with a comparison for what he said is impossible for me. To imitate his speaking style, it's like "Hey Phil - shut up. Just go shoot stuff. Dinner will be ready when you're back."

 

Why the f*** not? Seriously, is that how far we've come now? We can't even express to people what we like and don't like at the risk of offending someone? Jesus Christ.

 

 

 

 

[StrangeSox]

I think this article is loaded as all hell and tries to connect very, very loose ends. Phil Robertson is an idiot. He is also incredibly naive or he is a great actor. Frankly, I could not care less. He probably did see nothing but happy blacks in Louisiana and he thought no different. He's not a senator or a mayor or anyone that holds any sort of public position. Let him believe what he wants to believe, and if you are smart, you will ignore it and allow the village idiot to believe what he wants to believe.

 

My problem is not with Phil Robertson. My problem is when actual, intelligent people agree with him. I do not believe he should have been suspended, but everything he's said is incredibly ignorant on a deeper level. I shared my thoughts with someone close and they said "frankly, I agree with him." Yes, I personally find a woman's vagina more appealing as well - I'm guessing all straight males agree -but I don't go talking about it. First and foremost, you don't talk about any of that stuff publicly because it's simply not politically correct - frankly, it's disgusting. Of greater note, you don't talk about that stuff because it is highly offensive to the LBGT community.

 

Trying to even come up with a comparison for what he said is impossible for me. To imitate his speaking style, it's like "Hey Phil - shut up. Just go shoot stuff. Dinner will be ready when you're back."

 

I think someone in the comment thread on that TNC article did a good job of pointing that out. It's not Robertson himself that people are reacting to, really, but to the mindset he's representing with those comments.

 

edit: some background, TNC has been writing about domestic terrorism used to further racial oppression for a while now, so there may be some context in his post that's missing if you haven't read his past pieces. He's basically using Robertson as a jumping off point of the mentality behind his words.

Edited December 20, 2013 by StrangeSox

[Balta1701]

Why the f*** not? Seriously, is that how far we've come now? We can't even express to people what we like and don't like at the risk of offending someone? Jesus Christ.

You can say "I'm not attracted to men sexually" without the description. It's really not hard. Here's an example..."I'm heterosexual. I'm attracted to women and I'm not attracted to men."

[StrangeSox]

Why the f*** not? Seriously, is that how far we've come now? We can't even express to people what we like and don't like at the risk of offending someone? Jesus Christ.

 

You're free to say just about whatever you want. Others are free to judge you based on that. I'm glad we've come far enough that expressions of homophobic and racial bigotry are widely decried. We're a better society when that garbage isn't able to be said in public without backlash.

 

That said, I'll again go back to my initial posts and agree with wite in that I don't really like his being suspended over this. I'm sure A&E has some morality clause in the contract, and they absolutely have the power to fire him over this, but I generally oppose employers having such broad powers. What I find funny though are the people who #standwithphil are often the same people who approvingly post/forward those (fake) emails about the boss/owner who was going to fire all of his employees with Obama bumperstickers on his car.

[Balta1701]

You're free to say just about whatever you want. Others are free to judge you based on that. I'm glad we've come far enough that expressions of homophobic and racial bigotry are widely decried. We're a better society when that garbage isn't able to be said in public without backlash.

 

That said, I'll again go back to my initial posts and agree with wite in that I don't really like his being suspended over this. I'm sure A&E has some morality clause in the contract, and they absolutely have the power to fire him over this, but I generally oppose employers having such broad powers. What I find funny though are the people who #standwithphil are often the same people who approvingly post/forward those (fake) emails about the boss/owner who was going to fire all of his employees with Obama bumperstickers on his car.

From the accounts I've read including the one presented by him in that article, this TV show made a really big deal out of "staying out of the politics". They wanted to be able to market to as wide of an audience as possible by building a show around a conservative family in that arena, but they wanted to keep the anti-gay, quasi-racist stuff completely out of the show because otherwise they'd wind up with criticism and backlash that would completely undermine their marketing.

 

This interview was the exact opposite of what they wanted for the show. Even by his own account during that interview, they don't want political talk of the sort that would cause controversy.