• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

What's wrong with Derrick Bell?

Caper said:
There is nothing racist about that ad. Jesse Helms may be a racist. That Ad might promote a view shared by 100% of white racists. But it is not racist itself.
Click to expand...
But it was aimed at racists and the racist voted about 100% Helms.

Yes, that old redneck fart was a hard-core racist. Never wanted to admit that there was a thing wrong with Jim Crow laws.
 
Unabogie said:
Of course not. How anyone could see racism in an ad that shows white hands and tells the viewer that undeserving minorities are stealing your jobs is beyond me and...

Ok, I can't continue. Some people just can't see racism anywhere unless the speaker explicitly says "I hate black people". It's hopeless.
Click to expand...


What are they supposed to use black hands in the commercial? Would the commercial make much sense if they used black hands?

The policy created an uneven playing field when applying for jobs. In many cases it took jobs that would have went to white candidates and gave them to minorities. Some people disagree with those policies. That's not a racist position to be against those policies...... and it would be incredibly stupid and make absolutely no sense to use black hands in that commercial. Not like it matters, but I would disagree with the position of the commercial.
 
Brainster said:
Certainly it gives a troubling rebuttal to the claim that Obama was a post-racial black a la Tiger Woods.
Click to expand...

Mumbles said:
what interests me the most in this quote is the implication that it's black people that need to become "post-racial", whatever that means.
Click to expand...
What interests me the most in that quote is how divorced from reality it is. When faced with the fact that the brief relationship between Obama and Bell was before the slavery and Farrakhan quotes, and that the Farrakhan quote was edited to remove context (not an unusual tactic), this is somehow still supposed to be damming evidence about Obama's character that we should find troubling.

That is not to diminish your excellent point. We do not live in a post racial society, partially evidenced by the use of the term "post-racial black" as opposed to post-racial individual, or person.

Daredelvis
 
Ausmerican said:
It nevcer ceases to amaze me that there are still people in the 21st century that think of Africa as the "true home" of African Americans. When it is quite possible, if not probable that they may have been here for more generations than this knuckle draggers family. But hey, they arent the same color so they dont really belong. Except for the few that think the "right" way.
Click to expand...
I'm still trying to calm down after seeing that fool refer to that torture monkey West as a "true patriot."

Can we send selected white people back to Europe?

Don't look at me. One lineage of my family came here hunting elephants with a sharp stick.
 
Caper said:
What are they supposed to use black hands in the commercial? Would the commercial make much sense if they used black hands?
Click to expand...

considering the country's long standing and continuing pattern of discriminating against black people in hiring, yes, that would have made much more sense.
 
Mumbles said:
considering the country's long standing and continuing pattern of discriminating against black people in hiring, yes, that would have made much more sense.
Click to expand...

Really? A commercial attempting to argue the unfairness of discriminating against white people (forget about whether they are right or wrong, that isn't the point) is not going to use an angry black guy.... it wouldn't make sense. It's going to use the group that is discriminated against. Again, whether the policys are right or wrong are beside the point.
 
So, we are in agreement that this doesn't say anything negative about Obama?
 
angrysoba said:
I don't see how it does. The quotes you object to about 1992 being worse for black people than any time since slavery and his statement that he thought Louis Farrakhan was a hero to the people, while qualifying it that he disagrees with a lot of things that Farrakhan says and does as well as the story "Space Traders" came from 1992. In other words, this happened after the video was filmed.

Unless we presume Obama has the gift of second-sight, how can he be blamed for not distancing himself from comments Bell hadn't even made yet?

Besides, who is making the claim that Barack Obama is a "post-racial black"? And what exactly is a "post-racial black"? And one more thing, what is wrong with Louis Farrakhan?
Click to expand...

You don't have a clue what a post-racial black is? And you don't know "What is wrong with Louis Farrakhan?" That's either incredibly naive or disingenuous. Either way, I suggest you Google those terms and educate yourself.

You make a valid point about Obama's defense of Bell coming before he had made those particular comments. However, if you read anything about Bell's critical race theory, you will begin to understand that those thoughts were already explicit or implicit in the man's work.
 
And has Obama ever indicated he shared those views?
 
Travis said:
And has Obama ever indicated he shared those views?
Click to expand...



"The excellence of his scholarship... his scholarship has opened up new vistas and new horizons... open up your hearts and minds to the work (words?) of Professor Derrick Bell...."
 
That seems pretty innocuous to me. Pretty standard opening for someone about to give a speech.
 
Brainster said:
You make a valid point about Obama's defense of Bell coming before he had made those particular comments. However, if you read anything about Bell's critical race theory, you will begin to understand that those thoughts were already explicit or implicit in the man's work.
Click to expand...
What we know about Bell is that he was aware that there has been an effort since the Civil Rights Act to push back the gains that black people have made.

Where was he wrong?
 
Brainster said:
Did I say that Obama should be tarnished?
Click to expand...

You're certainly trying very, very hard to associate Bell with Obama. And it's not because you think this is a good thing for Obama.

As for the film (I'm not inclined to go looking for the short story), I prefer my blaxploitation to feature some action sequences with Pam Grier. The story is wooden, the characters one-dimensional. But (like the Pam Grier movies) it's entertaining if you take it as comedy instead of drama. I did get a horselaugh out of the woman who claimed that the biggest drawback to getting rid of all the blacks would be the guilt that whites would feel about it. If I felt that Bell was doing his story tongue-in-cheek, I might give him some credit as a satirist.
Click to expand...

Watching the HBO version will give you a good idea of the general storyline and plot elements in it, but without reading Bell's original, how can you make any statements about the original tone and context of those elements?

Especially since he didn't just write that story out of the blue and all on its lonesome, but as a part of a book that contained a number of allegorical stories (stories that Bell himself, in the book's preface, specifically says "were written to facilitate classroom instruction") and other essays, a book described by the New York Times review linked by Wildcat as "Jonathan Swift come to law school".

But if your marketability is based on being a crusader against white racism, then you have a vested interest in telling people that racism is bad and getting worse.
Click to expand...

Is that what you think Bell was all about? Ensuring his "marketabilty" by telling people that "racism is bad and getting worse"?
 
I have hard time picturing anyone introducing their professor as some "insane sack of **** you should all ignore" but maybe I just need more imagination.
 
Brainster said:
You make a valid point about Obama's defense of Bell coming before he had made those particular comments. However, if you read anything about Bell's critical race theory, you will begin to understand that those thoughts were already explicit or implicit in the man's work.
Click to expand...
After you are done moving those goalposts, could you please illuminate us with Bell's critical race theory?

Daredelvis
 
The question remains...

Brainster said:
...if you read anything about Bell's critical race theory, you will begin to understand that those thoughts were already explicit or implicit in the man's work.
Click to expand...
... so the **** what?

Assuming Bell is wrong, what is the point of thought purity? Why should anyone care about Bells opinions as they relate to Obama? Why is anyone threatened by Bells opinions. Are we in danger of mass lynching of white people? is the govt on the verge of making it legal to own white people?

Also, given the degree of hell black people have experienced in our history I would think we could cut a little slack for opinions like those of Bell. Just speak out in the market place of ideas.

One last thing, can we stop with the utter inanity of "post racial" as if it were some objective fact? Believing and asserting something is true doesn't make it so. If you want to argue for "post racial" then lets see A.) a definition and B.) facts to support that definition.
 
Last edited:
Brainster said:


"The excellence of his scholarship... his scholarship has opened up new vistas and new horizons... open up your hearts and minds to the work (words?) of Professor Derrick Bell...."
Click to expand...
How does this demonstrate the proposition? Seriously? One can recognize the excellence of a person's scholarship and not share every opinion of that person. Why would you think otherwise, I'd really like to know.

FTR: Had Obama shared those views then, I WOULDN'T give a damn. Given the BS we've put blacks through I'm more than willing to cut them a little slack for opinions. I don't find the opinions particularly odious and no one has told me why I should. I don't agree with them.

I'm curious, has Obama advocated radical race based policies or proposed laws in favor of radical race based policies? Is it possible, just possible, that Obama's words and actions since he hugged Bell are a reliable source for his opinion about race relations?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom