![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png)
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png)
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110615/ap_on_re_us/us_muslims_terror_hearings
So NY Congressman Peter King is holding more hearings, this time on violent Islam in prison. It hasn't resulted in nearly as much controversy as his previous hearing where he just attacked "violent Islam" in general, but it's still drawing some protests.
For the record when it comes to violence done in the name of Islam I tend to condemn it rather strongly. Few things annoy me more when my fellow liberals seem to give certain acts a pass, often citing cultural reasons. What gets me is if these acts (such as honor killing and/or the systematic suppression of women) were done in the name of Christianity then they'd be screaming bloody murder. It shouldn't be a different reaction just because it's done by the enemy of your enemy.
That being said these investigations are awful and hateful. I think of it this way: imagine if he held hearings on violent blacks in America. He would be rightfully tarred and feathered for even suggesting it. Why? Because it's not right to suggest an entire group of people is guilty for the actions of a few. These hearings are thinly-veiled hate speech and have no place in Congress.
I'll save you some time, Congressman King. There's violence in the name of Islam. There's violence in the name of Christianity. There's violence in the name of nationalism. There's violence done in many names, so please stop the hateful posturing and work on issues that actually matter, such as jobs.
So NY Congressman Peter King is holding more hearings, this time on violent Islam in prison. It hasn't resulted in nearly as much controversy as his previous hearing where he just attacked "violent Islam" in general, but it's still drawing some protests.
For the record when it comes to violence done in the name of Islam I tend to condemn it rather strongly. Few things annoy me more when my fellow liberals seem to give certain acts a pass, often citing cultural reasons. What gets me is if these acts (such as honor killing and/or the systematic suppression of women) were done in the name of Christianity then they'd be screaming bloody murder. It shouldn't be a different reaction just because it's done by the enemy of your enemy.
That being said these investigations are awful and hateful. I think of it this way: imagine if he held hearings on violent blacks in America. He would be rightfully tarred and feathered for even suggesting it. Why? Because it's not right to suggest an entire group of people is guilty for the actions of a few. These hearings are thinly-veiled hate speech and have no place in Congress.
I'll save you some time, Congressman King. There's violence in the name of Islam. There's violence in the name of Christianity. There's violence in the name of nationalism. There's violence done in many names, so please stop the hateful posturing and work on issues that actually matter, such as jobs.
(no subject)
Date: 17/6/11 02:01 (UTC)no, im not mistaken
they know to use precise language so they don't betray their latent bigotries
see how you are implying that skin color determines behavior? yeah, stay classy.
You're dodging because the answer is obvious and uncomfortable.
im not dodging at all. but i can't speak for herman cain.
White people especially are prone to this defense mechanism.
white people are prone to the same mechanisms as everyone else. skin color is not a determinant of behavior. your comment is especially ironic, given the fact that herman cain is black.
(no subject)
Date: 17/6/11 13:52 (UTC)see how you are implying that skin color determines behavior? yeah, stay classy.
I quite obviously never said nor implied that skin color determined behavior. That is your own invention. Some behaviors can be taught, however. For example, there is the arm-flailing of White people the moment someone suggests that they are a dominant socio-economic class that live in a society that has and continues to privilege them at the disadvantage of other groups. This is a taught behavior coming from White guilt (real White guilt, not what neo-cons accused liberals of when they say that Blacks are disadvantage.) They especially do this when they say something blatantly ignorant and bigoted (eg: King's insistence on the existential threat of radical islamists in American prisons, or your necessary defense of this charade) and are called on it. This is behavior we would expect from people of a class/cultural group, who, until recently, held all of the power of society and continue to hold most of it as the demographics and power dynamics of the state begin to really change. Of course, some White people are conscious of the class-and-group-struggles in their state and they don't necessarily apply here.
white people are prone to the same mechanisms as everyone else. skin color is not a determinant of behavior. your comment is especially ironic, given the fact that herman cain is black.
1st) Defense mechanisms? Not necessarily. You may want to define "mechanism" first.
2nd) Again, never said it was.
3rd, the first) Never said he was, although Cain certainly belongs to the White upper-economic class (making him a true WASP: Wealthy Anglo-Saxon Protestant!) I can see why you'd misread it that way, however, given that we're talking about two people at the same time and that's just confusing.
3rd, the second) That's not ironic.
(no subject)
Date: 18/6/11 01:53 (UTC)yes, you did. by saying that "white people" act a certain way you are suggesting that the color of their skin is a determinant in their behavior. again, stay classy.
(no subject)
Date: 18/6/11 02:06 (UTC)[You]
Stay a brick wall.
(no subject)
Date: 18/6/11 04:31 (UTC)