There is another controversy over the veracity of representations of minority status in Washington. We previously discussed the controversy raised by the allegedly false claims of Senator Elizabeth Warren that she is a Native American. In this case, however, the accused is the head of a NAACP chapter and she is being accused of lying by her own mother. Worse yet, some have suggested that Rachel Dolezal, who is the head of the NAACP’s chapter in Spokane, planted hate mail at her office.
Dolezal has described her ethnicity as white, black, and American Indian in past papers and applications. However, her mother, Ruthanne, said that she is Czech, Swedish, and German, along with some “faint traces” of Native American heritage.
That has led to angry responses from different groups that she represented herself as a minority when she was selected for different positions. Dolezal has called the controversy a “multi-layered issue” and insisted “That question is not as easy as it seems. There’s a lot of complexities … and I don’t know that everyone would understand that.” She then added “We’re all from the African continent.” Many have interpreted that statement as a claim that, since mankind itself has been traced to Africa, everyone is an African to some degree. The definition is not sufficient for various groups. It raises, as did the Warren controversy, the basis for claiming minority status — a status that can give an edge in applications or hirings.
In addition, critics have raised suspicious racially motivated incidents reported by Dolezal while she was in Coeur d’Alene, including the discovery of a swastika on the Human Rights Education Institute’s door. Likewise, Spokane police records for February and March of this year showed that a hate mail package Dolezal reported receiving at the NAACP’s post office box did not bear a date stamp or barcode. Dolezal denies responsibility for those incidents.
The question is how to handle such cases in not only definition how to prove or what constitutes minority status or how to respond to allegedly false claims. If one receives payment for holding a position secured by assurance of minority status, can it be an actionable from of fraud or misrepresentation for the purposes of criminal or civil liability?
Source: Spokesman
The term “feral” is used to describe animals, not human beings. I recall someone in this blog once protesting when someone else used the term “animal” to describe Hitler. This person went on to say that yes Hitler was the worst of human beings, but that we must not forget he was human. Yet this same person appears to agree with American blacks being called “drooling feral blacks”. How can that be? A dichotomy certainly. Or is it because Hitler was white?
You could not be more wrong, feral is used to describe humans. Particularly those raised in the wild.
There is an accusation going around that Mitt Romney is a Gypsie. Is that true? Would that be a negative thing for him in a presidential campaign? Would it be politically incorrect to call him a Gypsie if he was a Roma in fact? Is the word Gypsie a slur? How about Gypsie Rose Lee?
Jim Crow – What to we care about Mitt Romney, he isn’t running anyway.
Perhaps this blog should have a topic on free speech on this blog. Would Lee Atwater’s speech to the fellow Republicons back in the Nixon era be acceptable to reprint here? You know that one. Where he says to the Republicans that they dont need to say the N word three times anymore and get get by with just saying Welfare Cheat et al.
Perhaps we need a Contra Blog which allows free speech on all the topics raised on this blog on a daily basis.
Squeeky Fromm,
I don’t see the option to quote you, maybe because I’m still on my cell phone until I get back to my apartment. However, even if take you at your word that you view whites and blacks equally as feral savages when engaged in rioting and looting whether prompted by frustration with inequality or anger over a sports game, the media will not do the same. The blacks in this situation were labelled as thugs for creating property destruction in their own neighborhood. I have never once heard hockey rioters labeled as thugs for the same action. And their actions are less justifiable.
Could you imagine if the black Cleveland Cavaliers fans started burning cars and looting when they lose to the golden state warriors?
These people are not thugs or feral savages in either case. They are frustrated individuals responding in the moment. The kids who committed those actions in Baltimore planned those raids in response to injustice. It was poorly planned, but they were angry and had a reason to be. If they were feral savages that is how they would act every day and all the time. Instead unlike the hockey fans that is how they are viewed all the time.
If Jamaican Americans are making manager most of the time it doesn’t mean they aren’t forced to combat the same stereotypes. It just means they work twice as hard to push through it. I know quite a few Jamaican Americans and the old adage among them is that if you aren’t working 3 jobs you aren’t working. If a Jamaican american is working that hard at one job they should probably be directors and are capped at manager. That still doesn’t mean they aren’t discriminated against in public or private by police or employees initially as a result of such views about blacks. The difference is they’ve historically had more opportunity to succeed in jamaica especially if they make it here. Carribean universities are some of the best in the hemisphere, most of these countries have running water and yet because of the same discriminatory views you’ll rarely if ever see them among the top places to live, in favor of places such as Colombia, where blacks and indigenous are numerous but even more discriminated against than here, and outside of bogota and Cartagena running water is not a given. If I take you at your word you think white privilege is just some made up term and that discrimination is over and done with. However if it were up to older white males who run the businesses we’d have had a president McCain or a president romney, so it’s not fair to claim that because Obama broke the highest glass ceiling in the country that discrimination is dead. He was elected by youth, women, and minorities. Not people in power. And he had more opportunity than your average inner city black, instead growing up in Hawaii etc…
CK – this feral thing first started when we were talking about The Feral Kid from Mad Max 2. Clearly a white person. I have contended that there is a point when mobs, regardless of who is in them, turn feral. And I also think teen girls who fight, regardless of color, turn feral.
Darren Smith,
I was not aware of the 2 link policy. I think that is the first time I ever tried to post more than 2 in my 4 years here so thanks for the info. The policy seems reasonable.
CK07 – the two links is not a policy of JT but rather WordPress, I think.
Professor,
You have a robust and vigorous set of readers and writers here. You also have a set of racists and homophobes.
You’ve made it clear that “drooling feral blacks” is permitted language.
You’ve also made it clear that the protest of that language is not permitted.
Your reputation rests on your defense of Free Speech and the strength of Political Correctness.
Perhaps you might write about such activities that take place on your blog every day and why some language is permitted and those who protest are silenced.
Craven. Feet. Of. Clay.
Are you so enamoured of yourself that you keep tabs on what you write? Or are you OCD?
I gave kudos to Annie who has the courage of Obama in standing up to the hoards every day.
That got deleted.
I said Paul got a small wave for his half hearted courage in support of drooling feral blacks.
That got deleted.
I said Karen got minus 10 points for posting a retread and providing cover for Nick.
That got deleted.
Let’s recount the names that I have used in my robust protest of drooling feral blacks.
racist
homophobe
barbarian
To be accurate, I did not call anyone a barbarian. I said I left the field to the barbarians. That got deleted.
There is plenty of proof that racist and homophobe are spot on, true characterizations of popular commenters.
Here’s another one that was deleted. It was in response to Paul Schultz.
Why the silly subterfuge? (Paul said W was the only one saying drooling feral blacks)
Yes, I repeated the racist slurs of drooling feral blacks. They need to be shouted to the heavens. Silence only condones the racist slurs. It needs to be made quite clear that Sqeeks is repeatedly using offensive racist slurs. It needs to be protested. Silence makes us complicit. .I am not complicit.
Yes, Readers. That got deleted.
Craven. Feet. Of. Clay.
Note:
Here’s a comment of mine that offended the Professor:
Oh shut up Sqeeks.
That was the extent of it. That was deleted. That offended the Defender of Free Speech. That offended the Concerned Professor of Political Correctness.
Craven. Feet. Of. Clay.
Nice job deleting, Professor.
I guess we have your position on the repeated use of racist slurs by sqeeks. Perfectly acceptable..
Notice to Readers: drooling feral blacks is quite acceptable.
Wade Williams calling for readers to take a position – to either condemn or support such racial slurs is not permitted. Those go poof!
Professor, the hypocrisy of your defense of free speech and your condemnation of political correctness is astounding.
I anxiously await your decision on the use of ‘hypocrisy’.
Craven feet of clay.
@CK07
Since your 9:42 comment got freed from moderation, let me respond:
Let’s assume you are right and white will view Jamaicans as savages. I don’t think so, but let’s assume it for now. In that case, one would expect Jamaicans would have the same problems as American blacks. Do they???
Apparently not:
https://books.google.com/books?id=KobgOKo2lVwC&pg=PA73&lpg=PA73&dq=median+income+jamaican+americans&source=bl&ots=QhnhzmxBPl&sig=lxhQj61KGimTAc2KwRiauxyBejI&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CDcQ6AEwA2oVChMIl8GkpYGMxgIVBEKSCh2DNwBf#v=onepage&q=median%20income%20jamaican%20americans&f=false
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
@BFM
Gee, that was a brilliant analysis! Not. Kind of dumb, actually. With my choices, you have relevant, reasonable, different but applicable choices. You don’t. Let’s make this easy for you. Here is my example, rephrased:
[assume video of Jack the Ripper here]
Which answer best describes Jack:
1. Law abiding citizen
2. Spree killer
Now, Jack obviously isn’t a law abiding citizen, and technically he isn’t a “spree” killer. But “spree killer” better describes him.
Now, here is your ignorant comment, rephrased:
[assume video of Jack the Ripper here]
Which answer best describes Jack:
1. Republican
2. Democrat
Here is how you messed up. On me, first, you did not provide any behavior of mine to be analyzed. Then you proceed to present two subjective choices that are not greatly differentiated on any scale. And your choices were not relevant.
Now, the rephrased Jack The Ripper example as hypothetically done by you, the choices of Repub and Dem do not relate in any reasonable fashion to Jack’s behavior. My choices in that example, do relate in a reasonable fashion.
You also screw up the concept of “dichotomies.” First, just a plain old dichotomy is a division or contrast between two things that are or are represented as being opposed or entirely different.
A false dichotomy, is a logical fallacy which involves presenting two opposing views, options or outcomes in such a way that they seem to be the only possibilities: that is, if one is true, the other must be false, or, more typically, if you do not accept one then the other must be accepted.
Sooo, in my original example, i presented you with a plain old dichotomy, relevant and reasonable. Merely giving someone two choices does not a FALSE DICHOTOMY make. For it to be a FALSE dichotomy, two non-acceptable choices must be presented, with the proviso that one excludes the other. Which mine didn’t. I clearly presented two possible outcomes, and then gave some qualitative wiggle room with a “best describes” qualifier. This does not in any way limit the universe of possible choices to two, but only to the best of the ones presented in this particular question.
By your clumsy and inane attempt at philosophy and argument, and perhaps humor, you simply revealed that you do not know what you are talking about. By your definition, any two answer multiple choice question would automatically be a “false dichotomy.” Nope.
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
” Merely giving someone two choices does not a FALSE DICHOTOMY make. For it to be a FALSE dichotomy, two non-acceptable choices must be presented, with the proviso that one excludes the other. Which mine didn’t.”
As I understand it you are claiming the video is presenting behavior that could be both 1) drooling feral and 2) typical average at the same time; but that maybe one or the other is a better description.
Sorry Squeeky, I don’t think I find it convincing that the behavior we see could be both: 1) typical average and 2) drooling feral. For example feral does occur but I am pretty sure it is fairly unusual. Further I find it hard to characterize drooling as typical or average.
Does anyone else think that drooling and feral is characteristic of or consistent with typical and average. Because I just don’t see it.
In contrast to Squeeky I claim that the only possible answers are that the behavior is 1) typical average or 2 drooling feral or 3) neither – neither answer is better than the other.
I claim that neither of these answers is a better description of the behavior of what we see in the video because both 1) typical average and 2) drooling feral descriptions miss essential characteristics of the behavior we see. The right answers is nether is best because neither describes what we see.
For example I think we can immediately eliminate 2) drooling feral as a description because I did not see any drooling at all. Nor did I see any feral behavior – perhaps anti social, self destructive, or argumentative but not feral. Not a one of anti social, self destructive, or argumentative and many many other descriptions are in and of themselves feral. Do we have any evidence of decline which is a key characteristic of feral – I don’t think so? So drooling feral is eliminated – that one is out.
But I don’t think typical average describes what we see either. On the contrary I claim that what we see is atypical and unusual. I am not claiming that it is rare or unheard of.
But this is not typical for the streets or an evening out. The whole point of the video is that something out of the ordinary is going on. If it was typical and average why would the video be made, posted, noteworthy, and attract our attention. It was posted and it attracts our attention precisely because it is unusual. So typical average is also eliminated – that one is out too.
I claim Squeeky has given us a false dichotomy – that she is claiming we have to choose one answer or the other answer. But both her descriptions are clearly eliminated as descriptions of the behavior we see.
The only possible answer to her question of ‘which is best’ is that neither is best, neither is better than the other because neither of Squeeky’s answers describes what we see.
So what does the reader think?
Has Squeeky made her claim that the behavior is typical average or drooling feral or maybe both?
Or has Squeeky revealed herself to be an incompetent racist manipulator who is trying to put racist words in the mouths of anyone who tries to give a fair answer to her question?
What do you think?.
“Which answer best describes Jack:… 1. Law abiding citizen … 2. Spree killer …
Now, Jack obviously isn’t a law abiding citizen, and technically he isn’t a “spree” killer. But “spree killer” better describes him.”
I think you just confirmed my point that neither is a good description. Jack is also a citizen whether he is a law abiding one or not. And Jack is also a killer though not a spree killer.
Both have aspects that are true and aspects that are false. This is a near perfect example of choices where neither answer is best because both are false they just don’t describe the subject.
You are the one who tried to force us to make a false choice by ordering us to choose the best answer. But neither answer was best. Both 1) typical average and 2) drooling feral are false. Neither is better than the other. They are both wrong and misleading.
Further you clumsy examples to try to save you racist manipulation just confirm the observation I made: neither answer is best because neither answer is better than they other. Both law abiding citizen and spree killer are wrong and misleading just as typical average and drooling feral are both wrong and misleading.
Give it up Squeeky – we see through your manipulations.
bfm and Squeeky – this is why teacher always give at least three choices on multiple choice exams. Jack is law abiding when he is not being a serial killer and he is never a spree killer, so he has be a third answer. Jack is a serial killer. However, the term had not been invented yet, so Jack was just a killer.
I remember hearing about those rape allegations. A quick search yielded 10 accusations of sexual assault ranging from forced fondling to rape. And there is a history of these women stating that they were harassed, intimidated, and frightened to force them to keep silent, sometimes by Hillary Clinton herself.
Since charges were never filed these remain allegations. What we do know is there is a long list of women who have made sexual assault and sexual harassment allegations against Bill Clinton, and accusations of intimidation against Hillary Clinton. This is very similar to Bill Cosby, who is still in the allegation stage.
Since Hillary Clinton is running for the White House, and has been repeatedly accused of intimidating the rape victims of her husband, I believe these allegations should be investigated as much as possible. She has a well documented history of lying, and she is on tape laughing about getting a pedophile off, these accusations show a troubling possible trend in her character.
She certainly has not been willing to do any tough interviews, or even a soft ball interview by her adoring fans in the media, so it’s up to journalists to do the digging. We need to find out as much as we can about what the real facts are.
http://www.mofopolitics.com/2013/09/27/bill-clinton-a-long-history-of-alleged-rape-and-sexual-assault/
@CK07
Sure. If white people were acting feral, I would call them that, and worse. And nobody would call me the first name at all. But, if I call black people acting feral, “feral drooling blacks”, then I am a racist.
Actual real live black people are trying to tell you what is going on. The problem is that their story does not jibe with the white, liberal Democratic Party, victimology narrative. If you truly have any interests in this stuff, and if you really give a hoot about black people, you can read this by one of them:
Uncivil Wars by Taleeb Starkes. One of his videos is above, the Black Peoples Court one. I have his book, and am about half way through it.
You might also want to listen to this, to get some background on Mr. Starkes:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VzqFhXLuyTU
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
Squeeky,
Do you label angry white mobs as feral whites?:
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=T3n_ifSoCtg
You know black people didn’t invent rioting and looting.
I’d venture to say if you saw some of the bus burnings in Bombay after police brutality (that may have resulted in the death of said officer to appease the masses) you’d find the response in the black community pretty tame by comparison.
CK07 – you forget Watts and Detroit.
@Wade
Gee, Wade. I give you two simple little tests, and you haven’t answered either one of them. You have done some more name-calling. Are these questions too hard for you??? Or, are you really a closet racist who really thinks these are typical average black citizens.
Remember the other night when I called you a racist??? When I said you were just the flip side of the KKK coin. . .a white person who thinks all these “feral drooling blacks” are what makes up black America. I guess I was right, you racist! Here, listen again to Taleeb Starkes explaining the difference:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zB–BC71ueU
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter