22 Comments

1. Alex  •  Nov 21, 2006 @3:28 PM
   

   I know plenty of racists, only a couple of them are caucasian.

   What really gets me, is when I ask a black friend of mine what he would think if I said (insert derogatory phrase he just said about white people) about black people, he’d go nuts and yell at me for being a bigot. It’s frustrating to say the least.

   I grew up not really understanding racism. Sure growing up I noticed people looked different, but I never thought it mattered what someone looked like. The key is how they act.

   On that note, I think when it comes down to it, everyone’s a bigot to some extent. I know I stereotype people, and pre-judge them as groups. Because of my experiences I think of Mexicans as hard workers, Black people as slow walkers, Jews as loud talkers, etc etc. These aren’t exactly prejudices, but it’s hard to draw the line. There’s a lot more critical stereotyping that goes on in my head as well, but you get the idea.

   I *always* reserve judgement on individuals. Regardless where I’ve lumped someone in a group, the minute they step away and deal with someone else on a one to one basis it’s a clean slate.

2. Jesse  •  Nov 22, 2006 @1:07 PM
   

   I am of mixed heritage. Mexican and Irish. But I was raised white.

   First of all anyone who goes to court because they got “picked on” is a bitch. Second, when black people start fights in public with white people its ok. infact the police officers will probably get in trouble for approaching the situation.

   Michael Richards in a sense is waking up white people to realize we don’t owe these people anything. Not a dime. They should all have to work just as hard as the white man. If a white guy went to Def comedy Jam or wherever these animals meet and heckled them he would be shot. Its plane and simple.

3. Anon  •  Nov 22, 2006 @1:54 PM
   

   Why do you want to say nigger so bad? Does it give you some special joy? And comparing Michael Richards to Chris Rock doesn’t fly because his rant was not part of his act, and Chris Rock has never attacked any audience members

4. Eric Moore  •  Nov 22, 2006 @2:34 PM
   

   It’s very hard for a Black person to be a “racist.” A Black person can do acts of racism, but the word racist is misused very often. A racist has POWER & CONTROL. There’s a HUGE difference when a Black person calls a White person a “Cracker,” and a White person calls a Black person a “nigger.” We don’t need a history lesson to explain why the “n” word hurts so much. Whites aren’t in any moral position to ask the Black person why do you hate me? That’s like the rapist asking the rapee why do you hate me? Whites (not all) have an economical power base that Blacks (not all) don’t have. Blacks are still the minority. Blacks don’t have a major foot hole in economics, politics, and in power… Whites do. However, it’s not good for anyone, Black or White to use the word nigger. And it’s ignorant to HATE anyone because of one’s color.

5. James  •  Nov 22, 2006 @2:55 PM
   

   Why do you want to say nigger so bad? Does it give you some special joy?

   I don’t know what you’re smoking but I’ve never had the desire to call anyone names… it doesn’t get you anywhere and it’s immature.

   It’s very hard for a Black person to be a “racist.”

   Racism - Discrimination based on the belief that some races are by nature superior.

   Anyone that acts on an impulse with the belief that they, by the nature of being a certain color, are superior to the victim is a racist. Black people, Chinese people, Indians and White folk can ALL be racists. It has nothing to do with socio-economic status. You can be dirt poor and still think that your race is superior to all others.

   We don’t need a history lesson to explain why the “n” word hurts so much.

   Same reason people draw back in shock when someone drops an f-bomb. WE have given that word the power. The word by itself has NO power, the only way it hurts anyone is if it is given power by society. Take the word GAY for instance… prior to the rise of a prominent openly homosexual segment of society, to be gay meant to be happy. Had someone called me gay 50 years ago, I would have thanked them if I were in a good mood. Today, society has given the word gay a new power, the power of a derogatory slur.

   I’m not saying that the “n” word can be “downgraded” in any way… but to claim that the only race in America that CAN be racist is whites because they’re somehow the majority is not only ridiculous but ignorant.

6. James  •  Nov 22, 2006 @3:13 PM
   

   “The young people of America need be taught that the only pride they may properly hold is in the content of their character, and the achievements they make. There is no legitimate pride or moral credit to be gained by virtue of sharing the same race with a great and admirable individual.”

   You should be proud of WHO you are… not WHAT you are. Skin color should have NOTHING to do with your identity in my book. All it does is make you think you’re different when you really aren’t all that different in the first place.

   We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

   ALL MEN CREATED EQUAL… I don’t know how it can get any easier than that folks.

7. Alan Smith  •  Nov 22, 2006 @6:03 PM
   

   Michael went overboard but really I am sick of the overly sensitive younger black Americans. You call us “crackers” , what a stupid insult. Any white man should laugh in your face. Is that really supposed to hurt our feelings? African Americans .. what a joke. How many black people even know where they came from in Africa? Africa is a big continent so I guess I must be a European American. What tribes in Africa sold your ancestors into slavery at the hands of white slave traders? Most blacks today never experienced Jim Crow or forced segregation. Learn from your older, wiser Black Americans that marched for civil rights. You pathetic young crybabies are an insult to those whom really know what oppression was.

8. Jimmy  •  Nov 22, 2006 @11:38 PM
   

   While I understand some of the points being made here, some of you are missing the overall problem with what happened.

   1. it’s not the word, it’s the way they were said. It’s one thing for someone to joke with the intent to be funny, and use a word like nigger or cracker. It’s completely different to use a word in complete anger WITH THE INTENT TO OFFEND AND HUMILATE SOMEONE AS IF TO PUT THEM IN THEIR PLACE. It’s with the intent that these words have their power, and in this case it was not intended to be a joke. For example, saying there’s a lot of Chinese people here, and saying there’s a lot of f*cking Chinese people here. Same word, different weight and meaning.

   2. I’m actually less offended by him yelling nigger, than I am with him saying 50 years ago we would have hung you upside down…etc.. That goes to the heart of images of Jim Crow and the South. If you want to humiliate someone African American, that’s how you get to the historical pain. He basically said we used to hang you folk, and you’re lucky we don’t do it now. Similarly, calling someone a Jew derogatively, it’s nothing compared to telling someone we used to throw your kind in a gas chamber, you’re lucky we don’t do that now. I don’t think its funny or comedy material. It’s because of this that I believe he really crossed the line.

   3. If you were white and went to see Chris Rock and started heckling him - and he lost it and in REAL rage and malice, no longer joking around, started calling you cracker and talked about a painful history as if he wishes it were status quo, I would say he crossed the line as well.

   4. Also…I believe that everyone, no matter who you are, is capable of racism whether it’s a statement made in anger or a subconsciously directed act. But I don’t necessarily think it makes a person a racist. I think that’s just a normal part of the human psyche. However having said that, I think it’s naive to think that there’s no difference between the person who initiates racist comments, and one who responds in kind, and this is a micro analogy to some of the other points made here.

9. pete  •  Nov 23, 2006 @4:54 PM
   

   Jesse

   If you consider black people animals what does that say about you?

   Pete

10. Alex  •  Nov 24, 2006 @9:54 AM
    

    It’s very hard for a Black person to be a “racist.” A Black person can do acts of racism, but the word racist is misused very often. A racist has POWER & CONTROL. There’s a HUGE difference when a Black person calls a White person a “Cracker,” and a White person calls a Black person a “nigger.”

    This intrigued me, so I spent about an hour researching the word racist. I have not come across one instance where it’s defined as you have here. I’ve used 5 dictionaries, and lots of web sources. Where did you find this definition? It is definitely not the standard accepted meaning of the word.

    So I have to disagree. It’s easy for anyone to be a racist, regardless of power or position. In fact, I’d say it’s a LOT more common to be a racist when you’re NOT in a position of wealth or power. This at least is the case I see around me each day.

    We don’t need a history lesson to explain why the “n” word hurts so much. Whites aren’t in any moral position to ask the Black person why do you hate me?

    Really? There’s fully two generations since most of the modern civil rights were put into place. Yes, there’s still plenty of people alive back when they weren’t, but to anyone who’s grown up in the last 20 years this is a pretty alien concept. Excluding perhaps some rural areas in the south of the US, the concept that someone isn’t equal based on their skin colour is severely dated, and not the norm.

    Power matters of course, but only when it’s being abused. I don’t think that’s been the case in 90% of situations for at least 20 years, probably longer.

    And it’s ignorant to HATE anyone because of one’s color.

    Well here’s one thing we agree on!

11. illovich  •  Nov 24, 2006 @4:25 PM
    

    Bull, Paul… and you KNOW IT. Comedians that happen to be of a “minority” can stand on a stage and go on a 40 minute racial tirade about those ’stupid cracker, honkey, milktoast white folk’… and not reaction is to be had over something like that. Yet let some honkey cracker stand up and say the N-word JUST ONCE. Oh HELL no… his career is OVER!

    Seriously, Richards didn’t just say “nigger” like it was the punchline of a joke or something. He was calling a group of dudes niggers in a really angry, hateful way and then dredging up how 50 years ago “we” would have had “them” outside with a fork up their asses, which is pretty ignorant because it’s in effect wishing for that at the time.

    I’ve seen a lot of cases where there’s a double-standard surrounding racism or racist material, but this really isn’t one of them. For whatever reason, Richards really dredged up the much festering at the bottom of our collective cesspool and threw it out there.

    I can’t judge why he did it, but what he did is truly unacceptable, and it deserves repudiation.

12. h sofia  •  Nov 26, 2006 @8:48 PM
    

    I find it interesting that you took the time to comment on definitions of race and pride, but had nothing to say to the people who have made racist comments - such as referring to black people as “animals.” Do you agree with these people?

13. M J  •  Nov 26, 2006 @9:12 PM
    

    “o I have to disagree. It’s easy for anyone to be a racist, regardless of power or position. In fact, I’d say it’s a LOT more common to be a racist when you’re NOT in a position of wealth or power. This at least is the case I see around me each day.”

    To quote the anti-racist Tim Wise, who is white:

    “That many whites won’t be able to understand this simple point (not being able to say ‘nigger’) is testimony to nothing so much as our own sense of entitlement. In other words, we are not used to anyone telling us that we can’t do something, or shouldn’t, and as such take great offense when our own freedom, including the freedom to offend, is constrained.

    What else can explain the white hysteria over so-called political correctness, which, after all, was really never anything but the desire for folks not to be racist pricks, and to inculcate a norm of civility and respect for persons different from oneself?

    I can think of no other reason than the desire to maintain a certain form of white privilege: the privilege of saying whatever we want, whenever we want, and feeling as though our right to lecture others on their behavior should logically take precedence over controlling our own.

    As with all racism, it is power and position that gives a racial slur its ability to injure. This is why slurs against whites like cracker or honky seem more juvenile than truly offensive. And this is why the n-word, spoken by whites, is so fundamentally less acceptable than the same term spoken by blacks, however potentially problematic the latter may be.”

14. Christine  •  Nov 29, 2006 @12:21 AM
    

    James, I cannot agree with you more. Your commentary on what occurred was comprehensive. I cannot believe how these uneducated scaredy-cats are sucking up to these media prostitutes. They beg for time in the media and they were given it. Who is the official token white boy every time a black person says something rude about a white person? How about these illegal mexicans and other illegals crying poor me? When does this stop?

    Stop with the “woe is me” cr*p. Black people say the N word all the time. I find it offensive and I am white. It just makes them look like idiots and they perpetuate their own racism. I have never met a white person as racist as some of the RACIST blacks I have met over the years.

    I am certainly not saying that all whites are racist or all blacks…etc. I am saying that white people don’t look for a media circus when a minority says something racist. They do not look for handouts. We are expected to bite the bullet and keep our mouths shut.

    Apparently they know nothing about history. There have been more black people enslaved by their fellow blacks, than white Americans EVER enslaved blacks. There have been more Middle Eastern and Asian people enslaved in the world than blacks in America. They are using a brief period in history and the 1st Amendment as justification for THEIR racism.

    Should I start saying that I am Anglo-American? English-American? Caucasian-American? They are NOT African-American- they are American period!

    Where is Al and Jesse? They are not in Africa where the problems really are. Why do they not offer up all of their $?

    Now they expect Michael Richards to make a donation to a charity? OK, how about the Caucasian College Fund or the White American month or the White Entertainment Television, or perhaps the White Actor Awards Show?

15. Buggs  •  Nov 29, 2006 @11:04 PM
    

    First of all if you aren’t Black you wouldn’t understand the treatment that Black people recieve. Lets say by the POLICE then when we walk into stores or even as going to a car lot. For some odd reason we have been crucified here in America from slavery until now. So please don’t gripe about something unless you have experince it. I am not saying that all Black people are innocent. But Damn we all aren’t what legacy have us made out to be. And yes Krammer was wrong for his tirade and he deserve what he gets.

16. Charles Chy  •  Nov 30, 2006 @9:55 PM
    

    It seems as if we are misjudging the character of racism. It is not fair for some of the above commentators, to assume that racism is possessed only by whites. Examine, for instance, in a recent minimalism of the world, it was determined that if by ratio, the world was shrunk down too 100 people, only 8 would be white. Realizing this, it must be determined that on a global scale, whites are a minority. This logically eliminates arguments such as Christine’s “I am saying that white people don’t look for a media circus when a minority says something racist.”

    Furthermore, we must consider racism on a global scale, because it is an inherent value as defined by Merriam Webster’s 11th collegiate dictionary, “A belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race.” To make the discussion US-specific is an abusive declaration, as it unfairly makes disproportionate the topic at hand. Note, that although the incident occurred in the US, this does not subjugate the internal value. It is also ridiculous to stereotype whites by saying they do not act in response to racial tirades, which is an unfounded assumption that is not constructive in any aspect, it merely instigates and provokes more unnecessary disagreement. The initial post quotes Chris Rock and Paul Rodriguez, I would question James’s use of them as a viable source, as these are statements without warrants. The second comment by Alex stated, “I know plenty of racists, only a couple of them are Caucasian.” This is also a stereotypical statement which should not apply because it is highly unlikely that Alex is acquainted with all the racists in existence. This could only be merited if he did; otherwise it is making judgment off of the encounters of few. Jesse is an idiot; I’m not even going to explain that. James’s refutation of Eric Moore’s contention is correct, as Eric is stereotyping without a foundational or a viably accurate source. Actually most of the comments are stereotypical, so it would be better just to disregard all of them.

    Let’s examine this case from an unbiased succinct perspective.

    1st contention: Because we can not comprehend internally, the true thoughts of Michael Richards, we must accept his apology as the truth.

    Subpoint A: It is impossible to determine whether or not Michael Richards acted out of passion, or actually is a racist, therefore it is only logical to assume that he is telling the truth by giving him the benefit of the doubt. This is purely in the interest of social consciousness and unaffected by personal perspective.

    Subpoint B: While we accept his terms of apology, it is not necessary to forgive him for what he has done. An apology is offered in hope of mediation, if the other party is unwilling to concede their anger, then that should also be respected by the terms of apology.

    Contention 2: The African Americans lack justification in their claims.

    Subpoint A: According to John Locke’s Second Treatise of Government, in the state of nature, if an individual unfairly violates the rights of another, it is completely in the right of the victim, to retaliate in a way that he sees fit. This philosophy can be applied because Locke has not specified any theory of proportions.

    Subpoint B: Since it is reported that the African Americans were the ones who first exacted the harassment, it can be concluded, justly, that Michael Richards was in his rights to react in such a manner. Keep in mind this is just, but perhaps not moral.

    Contention 3: Every race has or had, the opportunity to relieve the burden of racism.

    Subpoint A: Since it is true that all humans at least begin with the same inherent worth, they all have had the same opportunity to come to terms with other individuals. This may not seem pragmatic but it fits in terms of ideals, which make pragmatism possible. According to Maslow’s hierarchy of the needs, ideals are placed at a lower, more essential level than pragmatism, meaning that without ideals or philosophies, certain things such as pragmatism, equality, and self actualization cannot be achieved.

    Subpoint B: Now to support the more practical side of the issue, I offer the contrast between opportunity and condition. It is true that currently there are inequalities within society, this is an undeniable fact. However, unless an institution has any outstanding discrimination policies in effect, it is impossible to say that the minority is at a disadvantage opportunity wise. However, an individual maybe conflicted by conditions and programs such as affirmative action seeks to equalize these conditions. Now it is important to recognize that every person throughout history has had the opportunity for the stability of condition. It is possible that the condition’s stack prejudicially towards a race, yet it is impossible to state that it is the fault of another races. Actions are only good to the extent of which it is intrinsically acceptable. For example, affirmative action seeks to equalize centuries of prejudice, but it does so, by discriminating AGAINST white males. It comes down to a battle of who is better, and obviously, there is no victor.

    In conclusion, it is an immature and undeveloped accusation for any person to accuse Michael Richards of being a racist for the fact that it is impossible to infallibly evaluate his character. The African American’s have a weak and counter productive case, because he cannot necessarily be accredited with racism and because of their provocation. It is reasonable that Michael Richard’s apologizes, but UNREASONABLE that any form of detrimental action be used against him.

17. Reese  •  Dec 2, 2006 @10:06 AM
    

    I thank he is telling the truth about niggers .Ther are white niggers and black niggers .Ithink its time we stand up look at public education it is the worst education possible becouse of the niggers and our nagborhoods niggers move in crime goes up property value down .I thank we need to stand up to the niggers and take back our rights befor we loss our rights for ever .

18. Angelea  •  Dec 2, 2006 @10:44 AM
    

    christine is right go girl and im black

19. James  •  Dec 4, 2006 @10:16 AM
    

    Reese, when discussing issues of education, it helps IMMENSELY if the one doing the talking can properly formulate a sentence.

    In one TINY paragraph you misspelled EIGHT words not to mention using the N-Word as many times as possible to further cement the view in our minds that you’re nothing more than an ignorant racist yourself.

    Thank you for stopping by.

20. Charles Chy  •  Dec 4, 2006 @4:29 PM
    

    ahaha, black niggers and white niggers, funny.

21. Donny  •  Dec 31, 2006 @8:09 AM
    

    Christine, I couldn’t agree more with the point you made. There is a double standard in America regarding racism. And Reese, you don’t speak for the majority of white people. In fact I find it hillarious that most racists cannot spell which just proves that most racists are ignorant and uneducated, not wealthy individuals in positions of power.

    I think we spend too much time spinning our wheels in regards to trying to solve the problem of racism. Racism is in people’s hearts and minds not in an institution. I think education is a good start and equal opportunity programs much like the one in the Armed Forces can be very productive in the capactiy of atleast eliminating hostile environments. I don’t think we can solve the problem over night because as long as one racist person draws breath than racism exists. It’s my personal opinion that disadvantaging whites in an attempt to give equal footing to minorities is unfair to poor and middle class whites who were never advantaged to begin with. I’m not saying that I am against affirmative action, BET, or minority college funds. They are necessary EVILS the way I see it. It’s unfortunate that we have them but even more unfortunate that we may need them. The fact that we have them and need them is evidence of our failure as a nation to combat racial barriers. The people who really deserve compensation from our American government are the American Indians whom we unfairly stole land from and arrogantly and unapologetically destroyed much of their culture but because they don’t complain to the press or have much affect in politics we ignore their plight and compensate all the other minorities in this country. Have you been to an Indian reservation recently to see how we compensated these poor people. Yeah, we ran up in them pretty hard.

    In summation, I would address the Michael Richards issue by saying it was wrong but I still don’t feel he should pay compensation because I think the damage he did to his career will be punishment enough. There really is not a way to aplogize for racist behavior so I think the best thing he could do at this point if he really is sincerely sorry for his comments is to say nothing and lay low. Let’s face it, the only apology the public would accept anyway is if he were to hang himself upside down and let the two gentlemen he offended sodomize him with a fork all the while calling him a “cracker”. Since it is socially acceptable to call white people crackers because of things are ancestors did, not us. Not that I personally agree that it should be that way but it is a fact!

    I’ll just leave some good talking points and questions that will keep this blog going.

    1st question: Is it wrong for white people to be proud of their culture or to even have one since it is the only culture not recognized with an awareness month?

    And if I should teach my daughter to be ashamed of her culture for the way our ancestors treated minorities namely blacks and Native Americans, should blacks also be ashamed since it was blacks who sold their own people into slavery to the white man. Or the fact that the Buffalo Soldiers helped the white man slaughter the indians and bought their own freedom by helping the white man oppress another people?

    Personally I think we all have things to be proud of and ashamed of in our history and that is why history is important so we can live and learn from our achievements and failures.

22. jim white  •  Jan 4, 2007 @8:24 AM
    

    Let me tell you what I think about the ‘nigger’ controversy. Some black people act like primitive stupid animals: they should be labelled as ‘niggers’. Others are more educated and civilized: they should be referred to as ‘blacks’. Who is going to deny that blacks are, on average, stupider, more violent, and lazier than other races? Look at the pathetic stagnant African cultural history: no inventions, no art, just poverty, aids, and begging…sorry if this hurts anyones feelings, but let’s call a spade a spade already!

Leave a Reply