We recently discussed the case of Saida Grundy, an incoming assistant professor of sociology and African-American studies at Boston University who released a series of tweets denounced by many as racist and sexist, including calling white males the main problem on college campuses and admitting how she tries not to buy anything from white people. While many called for Grundy to be fired, some of us defended her racist and sexist comments as an exercise of free speech done outside of her teaching responsibilities. However at the time, I noted “a series of tweets denounced by many as racist and sexist. “White masculinity isn’t a problem for america’s colleges, white masculinity is THE problem for america’s colleges.” Now we have such a case and it does appear to confirm some of our concerns that the same standard is not applied to those with opposing views. Duke University professor Jerry Hough has reportedly been placed on leave after posting comments online that were also denounced as racist. While Grundy was allowed to apologize for “indelicate” comments about whites, Hough is facing calls for termination and has reportedly been put on leave. [UPDATE: there are some stories indicating that Hough may have been on academic leave rather than “put on” academic leave. It is not clear from various reports.]
Hough was commenting on a New York Times editorial titled “How Racism Doomed Baltimore” and included an observation that Asian Americans don’t riot because “they didn’t feel sorry for themselves, but worked doubly hard.” He also wrote that “every black has a strange new name that symbolizes their lack of desire for integration” compared to “every Asian student [who] has a very simple old American first name.” Just as with Grundy’s comments, it is not necessary to debate the merits of such comments. What is at issue is the right to voice such views outside of the classroom and off campus as a matter of free speech. As with Grundy, these views may also be part of Hough’s academic views as political science teacher. His bio states that “his current research centers on the establishment of the state, identity, markets, and democracy in the United States.”
He later defended his comments and said that “Martin Luther King was my hero” and insisting he is “strongly against the toleration of racial discrimination.”
Duke Vice President for Public Affairs and Government Affairs Michael Schoenfeld released a statement quickly that said that “The comments were noxious, offensive, and have no place in civil discourse.” Boston University was right to treat Grundy’s comments as an exercise of free speech. If Hough has been put on leave, Duke has positioned itself on the other side of the free speech divide and has decided that it will now impose disciplinary action for academics who espouse offensive or obnoxious views outside of the class room. The problem is a lack of a standard that explains where this line. It is not simply a question of what speech will be considered permissible outside of the classroom but how the school will limit principles of academic freedom and free expression under such a standard in both academic writings and classrooms. It is a dangerous and slippery slope. The greatest problem is that the uncertain standard creates a chilling effect on academics, particularly untenured academics in what views will be tolerated. In the academic world, such uncertainty can be devastating and strikes at the very heart of the academic mission.
Here are Hough’s full original comments:
“This editorial is what is wrong. The Democrats are an alliance of Westchester and Harlem, of Montgomery County and intercity Baltimore. Westchester and Montgomery get a Citigroup asset stimulus policy that triples the market. The blacks get a decline in wages after inflation.
But the blacks get symbolic recognition in an utterly incompetent mayor who handled this so badly from beginning to end that her resignation would be demanded if she were white. The blacks get awful editorials like this that tell them to feel sorry for themselves.
In 1965 the Asians were discriminated against as least as badly as blacks. That was reflected in the word “colored.” The racism against what even Eleanor Roosevelt called the yellow races was at least as bad.
So where are the editorials that say racism doomed the Asian-Americans. They didn’t feel sorry for themselves, but worked doubly hard.
I am a professor at Duke University. Every Asian student has a very simple old American first name that symbolizes their desire for integration. Virtually every black has a strange new name that symbolizes their lack of desire for integration. The amount of Asian-white dating is enormous and so surely will be the intermarriage. Black-white dating is almost non-existent because of the ostracism by blacks of anyone who dates a white.
It was appropriate that a Chinese design won the competition for the Martin Luther King state. King helped them overcome. The blacks followed Malcolm X.”
po’s constant derision of the US reminds me of a joke.
Two elderly women were at a resort in the Catskills. One night, as they were seated next to one another at the dinner table, both bitterly complaining and griping
about the quality of the food–how tasteless, bland and unappetizing the fare at the resort had become. Suddenly, one of the women turned to the other and remarked, YES, AND SUCH SMALL PORTIONS!
Yes, po, the West and the US are horrible, and such small portions!
In a November 2009 report by Gallup, they extrapolated via polling ~700 million people would wish to leave their country and move elsewhere. Of ALL countries that people would like to emigrate, the US led by far w/ 24% of people saying this is where they would love to live. This was a massive survey of 260,00 people covering 135 countries. The region w/ the most people wanting to flee, sub Saharan Africa. LOL!
bamie, why bother asking questions you yourself answer?
seems like you know me and my circumstances better than I do, so keep soliloquizing… you got tagged in by David and taking over the debate….good for you… however, you are repeating things I have already addressed, that neither you or your other allies have yet to debunk.
You can’t attack my points? Then attack my person…keep going…sigh! nothing new…NOTHING NEW!
Though a bit tiring!
Still no answer as to why po does not pack his bags for the greener pastures of his home in Africa. Could it possibly be that his life is one that others, in his home country, can only dream of in their fantasies? Would he ever be so honest and forthcoming to admit that? He has every opportunity to return to the idyllic setting, found in his birthplace, yet, he remains. Never a word regarding America’s exceptionalism. Only criticism and condemnation for a system he milks and uses to his benefit. Tough love? Lol! With friends like you, who needs enemies?
Compared WITH the. . .
Were NOT utilized, not were utilized.
Nick, you should be ashamed of saying that America is bad. You owe everything (which isn’t much) to this country, and yet here you are bashing it! How unappreciative of you, especially on this memorial day!
So, bamie, considering that I am just as tough on my homeland, and France, and Britain, and china, and Saudi Arabia, and Egypt, and Nigeria, and iran, and israel…should I never return to my homeland? Should I move to Mars?
Why would you not be grateful for the white privilege you have?! You have it, others don’t, so yes, the minimum you can do is be grateful your ancestors were not enslaved here, and that they or you were never subjected to a racist system of oppression and discrimination. I would too be grateful!
As the French say, qui aime bien chatie bien…tough love…. my love for this country is the same love hundred of millions of its citizens have, where they see the good and denounce the bad, That’s how you show appreciation for a thing, not the hatred and finger-pointing against your fellow citizens that drive your privilege, and that privilege white, and its ugly! 🙂
po
While my predecessors were not subjected to discrimination based upon race, you make the incorrect leap to assume that they never experienced persecution, bigotry and intolerance based upon other factors, such as nationality and religion. Ask any child or grandchild of foreign relatives, who mostly fled their home countries to escape war, poverty or death, and you will hear stories of terrible discrimination and injustice experienced in this country. Unlike today, one’s roots, from 200 years ago, were utilized as a source of blame and excuse. America was, and still is, the land of opportunity and freedom, for those willing to work hard and cast off the yolk of victimhood. It is so sad, and ironic, that you, who glean every benefit and reward available from a system you routinely mention with derision, make your home in such a damaged system. The major difference, as compared the malcontents of today, is that my relatives, along with countless others arriving on the shores of this country, decided to work and persevere, despite all of the obstacles. They ceased being victims and worked seven days a week, cared for their families and became successful.
po
Asking if it is possible that, perhaps, life in the West isn’t as horribly racist and intolerable, as you routinely suggest, is not being sarcastic. Given your incessant bashing of the West–America, in particular–the question is quite logical and relevant. If I believed that the US was the racist cesspool, which you constantly allude to in every thread, regardless of the actual topic, I would pack my bags and leave for another venue more suitable to my tastes. I’m a second generation American, and I love this country and everything for which it stands. I was raised with an attitude of gratitude and deep appreciation for the opportunity, yes, opportunity to be born and raised in this country. It wouldn’t be so bad, especially today, Memorial Day, to remember that and why you choose, and are fortunate enough, to be in the West.
This “America is bad” is po’s Memorial Day tribute to the country that he, for reasons we can only guess, chose to move to as an adult.
Many liberals berate the US and steep praise on other countries. It’s an important part of the Hate America meme. A middle school kid is educated and worldly enough to ask, then why is the US where people from around the world yearn to live, and why don’t the millions of liberals who think this country is horrible, leave? The answer is simple, they lie.
bam bam
1, May 25, 2015 at 12:47 pm
po
Legitimate question. No sarcasm involved.
…Could it be, perchance, that life is actually BETTER here, for both a black and a white man? Your actions speak louder than words.
——————————————–
Damn shame that the sarcasm crept back into it, bamie,I would have otherwise loved to answer the question.
Funny thing, I added to my last reply to David before deleting it:
“I wonder if your supporters agree with your sentiments”, thinking of Paul obviously, because he can’t help himself, being a contrarian and all… Did not expect you, bam… my bad!
Come on, David, don’t BS me!
Black people have it better here than west african blacks? I am a west african black, and I call BS on your comment. I lived half of my life there and half here, and I can tell you that you don’t know what you are talking about.
Moving back to their ancestral countries? Where?
How do they know which is their ancestral country?
What a dumb idea! They are born and raised here, know nowhere else, and yet your solution for their unhappiness is, rather than solving the issues here, sending them to a country that isn’t theirs!
“ Despite all the abuses of the past, Blacks overall have done better here with the rule of the Whites. That is why they stay. All this complaining about racism and oppression is just a way to con the White man in order to get more free handouts and not have to work.
Wow! You’ve done it, boy! You’ve finally and certainly proven your racism, no doubt. I hereby take back my claim earlier that you are no racist.
In light of that comment, everything you have said before makes a great deal of sense.
And to think I used to see you as outspoken but honest!!!!!
By the way, quoting Bill O’Reilly? Really? The lying, plagiarizing, racist Bill O’Reilly? The wife choking Bill O’Reilly? If he is your intellectual and moral reference, no wonder you think as you do!
And finally, regarding Noam Chomsky. You calling him an anarchist sought to portray him as this : ” …anarchists as disenfranchised punks throwing rocks at store windows, or masked men tossing ball-shaped bombs at fat industrialists. (from the same source you quote)”.
Noam, on the other hand, and that was my view of him, frames himself thusly (and note that you did not offer his FULL answer, you stopped at the crucial point, another example of your moral and intellectual dishonesty: ”
“Well, anarchism is, in my view, basically a kind of tendency in human thought which shows up in different forms in different circumstances, and has some leading characteristics. Primarily it is a tendency that is suspicious and skeptical of domination, authority, and hierarchy. It seeks structures of hierarchy and domination in human life over the whole range, extending from, say, patriarchal families to, say, imperial systems, and it asks whether those systems are justified. It assumes that the burden of proof for anyone in a position of power and authority lies on them. Their authority is not self-justifying. They have to give a reason for it, a justification. And if they can’t justify that authority and power and control, which is the usual case, then the authority ought to be dismantled and replaced by something more free and just. And, as I understand it, anarchy is just that tendency. It takes different forms at different times.
Anarcho-syndicalism is a particular variety of anarchism which was concerned primarily, though not solely, but primarily with control over work, over the work place, over production. It took for granted that working people ought to control their own work, its conditions, [that] they ought to control the enterprises in which they work, along with communities, so they should be associated with one another in free associations, and … democracy of that kind should be the foundational elements of a more general free society. And then, you know, ideas are worked out about how exactly that should manifest itself, but I think that is the core of anarcho-syndicalist thinking. I mean it’s not at all the general image that you described — people running around the streets, you know, breaking store windows — but [anarcho-syndicalism] is a conception of a very organized society, but organized from below by direct participation at every level, with as little control and domination as is feasible, maybe none.
Anyway, you can’t debate his ideas or counter them, so what else but to dismiss him?
Finally, I think it is time you wave the white flag in earnest. The inanity and bigotry of your comments have done it for you already, listen to them. It can only only get worse for you hereon.
po – there was a big “Back to Africa” movement prior to, during and following the War of Northern Aggression. Lincoln was an advocate of returning blacks to Africa, at one time. I am sure you can name the country they were returned to. Every African born child should know it by heart.
po
Legitimate question. No sarcasm involved.
If you dispute that life is better in the West, as opposed to that found in various countries within Africa–and you state that you have lived in both the West and in Africa–why is it that you choose to remain here, in the West? If racism is such an intolerable problem here, why not return to your homeland where racism, as we know it, doesn’t exist? Yes, there are a multitude of other problems, especially economic ones, that you will face there. Could it be, perchance, that life is actually BETTER here, for both a black and a white man? Your actions speak louder than words.
By the way, if a white guy whose ancestors were slave owners says the same thing I did, he is racist too? I guess so:
“The hard truth is that my face does represent the face of oppression. I’m white. I’m male. I’m heterosexual. I’m able-bodied. I was raised Christian in a middle-class home and community. Until the summer of 2001, when I joined members of the DeWolf family on a mission to retrace the triangle slave-trade route of our ancestors, I was blissfully unaware of my unearned privilege. On that journey I was exposed to horrific truths about the foundations upon which America is built and the systems that continue to benefit people who look like me and discriminate against people who look like Sharon.
In spite of that understanding, what Sharon said did not seem fair. I am not my slave-trading ancestors. I helped expose their sins when we made the PBS/POV documentary “Traces of the Trade” and when I wrote my first book, “Inheriting the Trade”.
One great revelation along the way came from Coming to the Table co-founder Will Hairston, who said to me, Guilt is the glue that holds racism together. We build walls with bricks of denial to protect ourselves from feeling it. In the end, guilt is divisive and counterproductive. Instead of the destructive feeling of guilt, what I do feel is profound grief over the enormous damage done. I feel a responsibility to acknowledge and address the consequences of our historical inheritance. That is why I dedicate myself (and encourage other white people to do the same) to using my privilege to expose the truth and make a positive difference.
During the three years after that day in the parking lot, Sharon and I drove thousands more miles and waded ever deeper into the morass of history. Along the way, we laughed, cried, argued, and shared transformative experiences that changed the way we both look at the world. We subsequently participated in STAR trainings (Strategies for Trauma Awareness & Resilience) through CJP to seek ways to make sense of it all. Through STAR, we learned about terrifying social patterns exhibited by deeply traumatized societies and what we can do to heal their effects.
http://www.yesmagazine.org/issues/make-it-right/healing-historys-wound?utm_source=YTW&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=20150522
po quoted Will Hairston: “Guilt is the glue that holds racism together.”
What nonsense. Guilt holds racism together? That makes no sense whatsoever. These people are just merchandizing off the topic of racism. People want to buy their books because they are ex-racists who have finally seen the light and are now trying to convince the White Man how evil he is.
Black people in the United States today have it so much better than Blacks still living in West Africa. If their oppression here really was as bad as you depict it, then they should be greatly desiring to immigrate back to their ancestral countries. I’m sure there are plenty enough people living here who would fund them a free trip out of this country. It certainly would be less expensive than letting them burn down our cities. In West Africa, these so-called oppressed Blacks could be a majority and be free to govern themselves without the oppression of the so-called “White Privileged” racist class here. The problem is that deep down they know they have it better here in the U.S.A. than in the West Africa that their genetic relatives now rule. Despite all the abuses of the past, Blacks overall have done better here with the rule of the Whites. That is why they stay. All this complaining about racism and oppression is just a way to con the White man in order to get more free handouts and not have to work.
Good point, Annie! What’s the world coming to?!
Thanks, Paul, I have it filed for when I need to ask you.
Well said Po. How dare a black man complain about race relations!? The very idea….
Inga – po is part of the problem and he is having difficulty dealing with it. His people helped capture and sell his brothers into slavery. If I remember correctly he said that he himself had owned a slave at one time.
Yep, David, I am the racist one for pointing out the legacies of racism!
And yet, you, the one calling me racist, are the victim of anti-white racism.
If you had the ability to see outside yourself, you would see the awesome irony in this… so lost of you, unfortunately.
So yes, Noam Chomsky is an anarchist?. How? Where is your proof? is it another thing you throw out there without being able to back it up? (kinda like Paul.)
Look up the definitions of redress you yourself offered above, and you’d see what I am saying. If you don’t get it by now, your are really working too hard not seeing it.
Now you wonder about my “fixation” on the nation? One minute you make it personal, and the next you make it communal? Which one is it? Am I putting an unfair burden on you personally, hence your personal umbrage to my perspective, or am I putting that burden of the nation?
When it suits you, you keep framing me as attacking you personally, yet when you can’t ride that horse anymore, you challenge my “fixation” on the nation. It’s either one or the other!
And then you make it about me! I have no dog int his fight. I am one who came to these lands, who bought into the narrative of the american black as the other, the lesser, the violent and the dangerous one. I lived among them and I feared them, and I got to know them, and I learned what many have learned, that they have an unfair deal, that they suffer inside and outside from the unfair deal they got and keep getting.
Trying to make it about me and how I demand something or the other from you or the nation, and how I am this or that reflects both your confusion, your bigotry and your intellectual (and moral) dishonesty.
You are a bigot, David.
Embrace it, accept it, be proud of it.
po wrote: “So yes, Noam Chomsky is an anarchist?. How? Where is your proof? is it another thing you throw out there without being able to back it up?”
I am amazed that you don’t know this. Noam Chomsky wrote a book called, “On Anarchism.” Look it up on Amazon. Here’s a description:
“On Anarchism provides the reasoning behind Noam Chomsky’s fearless lifelong questioning of the legitimacy of entrenched power. In these essays, Chomsky redeems one of the most maligned ideologies, anarchism, and places it at the foundation of his political thinking. Chomsky’s anarchism is distinctly optimistic and egalitarian. Moreover, it is a living, evolving tradition that is situated in a historical lineage; Chomsky’s anarchism emphasizes the power of collective, rather than individualist, action. The collection includes a revealing new introduction by journalist Nathan Schneider, who documented the Occupy movement for Harper’s and The Nation, and who places Chomsky’s ideas in the contemporary political moment. On Anarchism will be essential reading for a new generation of activists who are at the forefront of a resurgence of interest in anarchism—and for anyone who struggles with what can be done to create a more just world.”
Just Google Noam Chomsky Anarchism and see what comes up. Here’s an interview with Noam Chomsky:
http://www.alternet.org/civil-liberties/noam-chomsky-kind-anarchism-i-believe-and-whats-wrong-libertarians
Noam Chomsky: Well, anarchism is, in my view, basically a kind of tendency in human thought which shows up in different forms in different circumstances, and has some leading characteristics. Primarily it is a tendency that is suspicious and skeptical of domination, authority, and hierarchy. It seeks structures of hierarchy and domination in human life over the whole range, extending from, say, patriarchal families to, say, imperial systems, and it asks whether those systems are justified. It assumes that the burden of proof for anyone in a position of power and authority lies on them. Their authority is not self-justifying. They have to give a reason for it, a justification. And if they can’t justify that authority and power and control, which is the usual case, then the authority ought to be dismantled and replaced by something more free and just. And, as I understand it, anarchy is just that tendency. It takes different forms at different times.
po wrote: “Trying to make it about me and how I demand something or the other from you or the nation, and how I am this or that reflects both your confusion, your bigotry and your intellectual (and moral) dishonesty.”
Nothing has been dishonest in anything I have said. Nor am I confused about this issue. I am part of this nation. I am a patriot too. Perhaps you do not recognize my connection to my nation. I also am a rationalist. If you want to blame the nation as a political unit, I ask what federal laws furthered the oppression of Black people. The only one I could think of was Article I in the Constitution that protected the slave trade for twenty years. That’s why I asked you for two laws, yet you gave me zero. If we look for laws and behavior that oppressed Black people, it came from a very small minority of individuals and local governments in the South. Most of the nation did NOTHING to oppress the Blacks living here. Therefore, it makes no sense whatsoever to ask for an apology or anything else from the nation. The nation as a whole had nothing to do with it. The nation continues to have nothing to do with it.
Watch the following video from Bill O’Reilly’s show for some real facts in the case against your idea of “White Privilege.”
https://youtu.be/PoE6f5dOb6c
Paul, I wasn’t talking to you. There is a reason I haven’t asked you!
po – just in case you do ask, you have my answer.
Sorry, but the second to the last sentence of my first paragraph above should read, “You don’t have time to get into specifics.”
Ari
Consider our engagement done. You avoid addressing any point I have made, instead re-interpreting them. That’s bad faith and there is no point in our continuing. Au revoir!
Thanks for giving me the words to qualify our interaction.
Ari
What was that comment in reply to?
I am the one who brought up white privilege, which you are reacting to. If you are responding, albeit indirectly to a point that I brought up, who are you responding to?
AGAIN…how many ways should I state this???? Why do you keep making this about YOU? WOuld you please move out of the way and look back and see that I am speaking of US, US as the US, US as a NATION, US?
You are doing what you can to insure a fairer society for all? Great, that is all that is asked of us individually. I am however speaking of all of us, communally, nationally, the United States of US.
po wrote: “I am however speaking of all of us, communally, nationally, the United States of US.”
po, people like Aridog and myself take our responsibility and duties seriously. If you are talking about the nation, about all of us communally, that includes me. So I own it. I ask myself, “am I acting this way? Do I need to apologize with the rest of the nation?” Perhaps this is something that defines conservatives. If someone says we need to give to the poor, and I find myself in agreement, then I reach into my pocket and give. It seems like when liberals agree with giving more, they expect everyone else to give through new laws being passed. If you say our nation is guilty of continued racism, I am naturally going to say, “Is it me? Am I a member of the privileged White men? Am I a racist?” And if I am, I am going to own it. If I am not, then I am going to say what I have been saying to you, “what are you talking about? I don’t see that.” From my perspective, change starts with each individual.