Filmmaker Michael Moore recently showed how polarizing our national dialogue has become over race. Moore declared that the vast majority of whites in this country “are not good people” and that others should “be afraid” of them in an interview on The Rolling Stone podcast “Useful Idiot.”
Moore’s rant itself would seem the very definition of racism. His view of the danger presented by white people appears entirely due to the fact that many voted for President Donald Trump:
“I refuse to participate in post-racial America. I refuse to say because we elected Obama that suddenly that means everything is okay, white people have changed. White people have not changed. Two-thirds of all white guys voted for Trump. That means anytime you see three white guys walking at you, down the street toward you, two of them voted for Trump. You need to move over to the other sidewalk because these are not good people that are walking toward you. You should be afraid of them.”
There are apparently a minority of white who are not raging racists who present imminent threats of physical harm. Those are whites “like him.” He noted that one of the three white people in his hypothetical group are like him and voted against Trump. He then added “We’re traitors to our race, that’s how they see us.”
Actually, most would view Moore as simply a racist as opposed to a traitor to race. Yet, Moore’s comments have not been denounced by The Rolling Stone or the media as racist. They are still part of the mainstream dialogue because they are directed at Trump supporters — much like Chuck Todd’s recent comments about Trump supporters wanting to be lied to are considered perfectly appropriate for a journalist.
Like Moore, I voted against Trump in 2016 but I find Moore’s comments deeply offensive and troubling. It is part of a view of roughly half of this country as simply borderline psychotic racists that someone has become a casual talking point in our media.
In the early 60’s the kids in my neighborhood (black, white, brown, red and yellow) would get together in the field next to my house and play football every Sat. We just did not know any better than to do it. Then a group came to town from up North and started pointing out all the evil, wicked, hatred. In the late 60’s I was out of town and someone asked me about the riots. I said what riots? He handed me a paper. The front page news would lead you to believe the town was burned to the ground. I called mom and asked about it. She had just came home from picking up the mail at the post office on Main St. The town was the same as when I last saw it. The NAACP held a meeting at a honky tonk. they had a bonfire in the parking lot. Yes there was a fire but no property damage. Someone could get that article from the paper archive and say “see”. My local paper didn’t have any front page coverage of the event. It was on page 6 or 8.
One such as Moore was spreading the news in that day. We didn’t know we hated each other until he told us.
They did tell us even when they had to misrepresent the facts.
I watched the planes hit the towers and can tell you 9-11 was and act of hatred. I see our Embassy on fire and can say it appears to be an act of hatred.
I walked though the mall in Mobile, Al yesterday and smiled and said hi to Blacks, whites, brown and yellow people. I did not fell threatened by any. Maybe Mr Moore travels in the wrong places?
Moore intentionally mis quotes and changes what was written by others or himself. He is nothing but a mercenary for hire for the socialist fascist liberals. But successful with his captive crowd we know as the machine parts of The Collective as one of the few that can think.
Recall his book on medical systems when it was fashionable. He quoted an article on the succes of the French system in number of deaths number of patients that lived etc. etc. as compared to the rest of the world especially the his favorite target the USA BUT he left out some important facts simply by not turning the page and reading the whole article.
His quotes on the success of France counted all those who lived under French Medicine but none who died if they were out of the country. But the French also took credit for those who lived through a sickness that were treated out of the the country of France. So they fudged the figures but Moore never bothered to include that in his calculations.
His greatest success. Al Bore who followed Michael Moore’s system and with one film and the connivance of the former main stream turned far left and lame stream media made hims a multi millionaire. So now All Bore is theakker-esque B Ocasio=nal 700 Club of television while Botox Pelosi is the bleached blonde 80 year old side kick;\ playing the part of Tammy
Faye Bakker. .
So whatever happened? Most got rich while the former 700 now Bore=ing network hostess with the leastest as caught by a reporter with her make up and turned out to be Jimmy Hoffa
Just to show how boring boring can really get I through in the last part maintain interest.
But I never looked at him as just a racist… mental fat butt who will do anything to milk a few more millions from the Stupid Party and it’s machine part collective. After all he’s a graduate of the James Carville school of duplicity.
Huh? Moore believes it’s not racist if you vote for a candidate because of the color of their skin and win; but if your candidate loses, then those voters who’s candidate won are racist because they didn’t vote for the right skin color. Has it not ever occurred to Moore that people may vote based on incentives far deeper than skin color, gender, religion, ethnicity and so on?
I guess with some people they’ve been reduced to making outlandish statements in order to stay relevant…because they are not as readily capable of contributing anything meaningful in the ordinary sense. It’s easier to make shocking statements than to formulate complex and nuanced ideas that account for all variables.
His entire adult career has been devoted to manufacturing political propaganda. He had no specialized training or education in any endeavour. He doesn’t know enough to contribute more than bupkis. Three of your regulars here are just the sort of people who’ve been keeping him in clover.
Yeah, sure. Moore needs to research statistics on crime. Or, watch the news on TV.
Take it that the ‘One Drop’ rule applies as to how a persons race is identified, as Obama on his mothers side is White — Can say Obama is White, therefore dangerous . . .
Absurd
and yet, if Moore were incarcerated, he would not be allowed to eat lunch at the black table in the chow-hall.
i suspect he would not be well liked by the white inmates either and would quickly beg for protective custody!
a man who presumes to represent the interests of workers,
should know better than to insult the people in such an offensive way.
The most interesting aspect of this ridiculous remark is that it reveals who is pushing a lot of the anti-white bias–
white men with no testicles like Moore!
Eunuchs like more should fear us. Good!
Kurtz, I thought there was mention of a Eunich on the blog.
I am a white male and a Trump voter.
I am definitely dangerous.
Moore understands this and he’s warning the other fools.
White men, don’t try and be less dangerous. Of course, don’t be too dangerous– be just the right amount. A little more would be good for you!
I had a white ex who tried to convince me that the reason I am charged so much for medical care is because I’m white. I’m starting to believe him. I would like to know who the cronies are behind our healthcare system, health insurance and pharmaceutical companies that say I gotta pay a fortune for care and don’t appear to give a rip that I’m going without. I’m not so convinced its all white people back there pulling the strings.
Offer Moore a greasy cheeseburger in exchange for voting for Trump…….he’ll leave you with a bloody stump.
Color is an accident of birth. It cannot determine who you are, individually, as an ethical human being. Only your actions can determine this. A person’s actions and or racism can not be determined by seeing them walking down a street. That is absurd.
Is it true that some supporters of Trump are racist? There is evidence of this being true. Is everyone who voted for Trump a racist? There is no evidence for that assertion. Some of the same “racists” who voted for Obama, ended up voting for Trump because they did not like Hillary. They also believed that Trump would bring our troops home. As many of our infantry are black and Hispanic, I would say that is evidence against racism. Wanting young black/Hispanic women and men to be taken from a war zone is admirable.
Evidently Moore has missed the whole reality of Obama and Clinton attacking people of color and laying waste to their nations through their many wars of aggression. Why isn’t anyone who voted for Clinton and Obama (the second time) a racist for supporting wars against people of color? Also isn’t it racist for Obama and Clinton to have used primarily poor people of color to execute these wars?
I find Moore and many other Obama/Clinton supporters to be frightening. I can make a fact based case that in supporting these war criminals, they are racists. They may exempt themselves from reality but I don’t have to. Like Trump supporters I understand that many Obama/Clinton supporters do not understand that they are actually supporting racist wars and economic policy. People like Moore do understand this so for him to call Trump supporters racist is laughable, hypocritical and pathetic.
Moore’s willingness to lie about himself and accuse others of what he is actually doing is fomenting evil in the world. He should immediately stop being a racist and start joining with others of good will who want a better society for all our people. He is a very bad man who should be ashamed of fomenting stupidity and cruelty towards. There was a time when he wasn’t like this. He needs to choose a better path, NOW.
Ever since his earliest, small-time days, Moore has reminded me of a clown that stopped wearing their makeup, a la the band KISS in the 80s, and the results have been equally trite and ridiculous. I have never encountered a ‘fan’ of his that was capable of cogent and intelligent conversation, and I have been to his public appearances, heaven help me. There are a great many useful idiots out there, though not as many as the MSM or social media would have us believe.
Among the left leaning, the number of true radicals is comparatively small – the rest for the most part are simply too cowardly to stand apart. That isn’t solidarity, it’s panic, and the justifications can range from the social to the financial. Narcissistic is an apt evaluation for many of these folks, and like true narcissists (perhaps I should swap ‘like’ for ‘as’?), their delusions of grandeur and relevance actually stem from a core belief they hold that they are actually precisely the opposite.
Oh, Michael Moore is sooo right! I think he should move right now to Inner City Baltimore or maybe Inner City Detroit, or the South Side of Chicago so that he can hang out with all those wonderful People of Color! Leave the white folks neighborhood Michael and you will feel sooo much better!
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
Oh, Michael Moore was born in nearby Flint. Amazingly, he was awarded the rank of Eagle Scout, too!
The new “Scouts” or whatever they call themselves now, are probably proud of him!
He could be the first transperson to serve on their board perhaps?
Trump is a racist idiot. If you support Trump you are also a racist idiot. You can not support Trump and not be a racist idiot. That would be like saying “l support Hitler but i am ok with Jews.”
this is the kind of rant that is dangerous and divisive. Accusing Pres. Trump of racism. because the media has lied so many times about the Charlottesville matter, is unhealthy and unhelpful. Other than the media’s made up lies about Charlottesville, he has done more for Blacks and minorities, than Obama did in eight years.
For anyone to try to justify Moore’s racist rants, is unacceptable and only condones his racist tones.
If Moore had said this about Blacks, he could have kissed his career goodbye. The fact that he is being supported by you, instead of being outraged, is evidence that you are a fan of Moore and his racist rants, or simply don’t understand just how reprehensible this ramark was.
“Trump is a racist idiot. If you support Trump you are also a racist idiot. You can not support Trump and not be a racist idiot.”
Prairie, TJ’s ranting is the type of ranting I have been talking about. Such ranting places TJ in the category of the Mindless and Stupid.
Get another handle TJ….TJ is taken & I don’t like you!
I dare Mick Moore to dress up like an Orthodox Jew. Then walk around NYC. Them black boys & girls sucker punch or knife you.
Prairie, take note how a rogue TJ stole the name of another blogger. That rogue TJ is probably one of the Mindless and Stupid that post on this blog continuously insulting others with rude remarks. He probably also uses an anonymous label.. The real TJ now ends up in a “fight” not of his own doing and hostility is being created. Prairie do you think you can use your type of civil discussion with such an idiot?. Tell me again why you are so worried about returning insults to the Mindless and the Stupid.
Allan,
Gerald Korman, Esq did a great job responding civilly to the faux TJ.
The real TJ did fine telling the faux-TJ to stop stealing his handle. Stealing someone else’s handle is grounds for an email to Professor Turley.
Considering it was a limited instance of posting using the stolen handle, it seems the person is a troll. Don’t feed the trolls; if necessary, feed them to Professor Turley. I do not know how the back-end of WordPress works, but I’m guessing the IP addresses are known and are known to be connected to particular people. If the person is violating the civility rule (and posting using sock-puppets or stealing someone’s handle would count), then they can be sanctioned.
“Gerald Korman, Esq did a great job responding civilly to the faux TJ.”
So?
No problem with Gerald Korman. Prairie, there is a potential fallacy in what you are trying to promote in your response.
What is the potential fallacy?
One good methodology doesn’t exclude all others.
Allan,
I did not promote one good methodology. I noted at least 3 in my response–all civil.
What are you willing to do when all your methodologies don’t work? Please, don’t again blame it on everyone else.
Prairie, there is a middle of the road where one does not act as pure as snow. Many Americans have paid the ultimate sacrifice protecting your liberties while you were safe at home. There is no problem calling people racists when they are calling you a racist making it difficult to help those facing racism. There is no problem calling those that say some people are inferior, stupid. There is no problem calling violent people violent and stupid. There is no problem returning bombs that are thrown at you.
That you have a different methodology is great. Use it.
Allan,
“What are you willing to do when all your methodologies don’t work? Please, don’t again blame it on everyone else.”
I have never once ‘blamed it on everyone else’.
I have already discussed on the Schiff thread what I am willing to do and how I’d go about it. While each situation needs to be handled uniquely, those guidelines are fine.
Prairie, there is a middle of the road where one does not act as pure as snow.
“Many Americans have paid the ultimate sacrifice protecting your liberties while you were safe at home.”
We are not discussing the Constitutional process for going to war. We are discussing how best to engage with our fellow man on matters of debate.
Regarding the “There is no problem…” statements, I disagree with using ad hominem in such discussions.
Why isn’t it a problem?
“I have never once ‘blamed it on everyone else’.“
Of course you did. Paraphrasing you said your modality didn’t work because people didn’t have the tenacity.
Quoting one of the discussions:
——
Allan: “What we do know is that the present methodology doesn’t work satisfactorily.”
Prairie: “I think the methodology hasn’t been tried particularly. There hasn’t been enough backbone, grit, and tenacity shown by enough people. Too many people have allowed themselves to be cowed into silence. Too many people tolerate or enable the problems to grow.”
—————
” I disagree with using ad hominem in such discussions.
Why isn’t it a problem?”
I disagree. I believe in some circumstances and at some times it is a good thing to throw the bombs thrown at you back to the people that initially threw them.
Allan,
“Of course you did. Paraphrasing you said your modality didn’t work because people didn’t have the tenacity.”
That isn’t at all what I said.
Civil discourse is effective. People do have backbone, grit, and tenacity; it’s there, waiting to be used.
Quoting one of the discussions:
——
Allan: “What we do know is that the present methodology doesn’t work satisfactorily.”
Prairie: “I think the methodology hasn’t been tried particularly. There hasn’t been enough backbone, grit, and tenacity shown by enough people. Too many people have allowed themselves to be cowed into silence. Too many people tolerate or enable the problems to grow.”
Prairie, I have had a major system failure and the experts have been putting everything back together. Whether I got all your responses (alot) I don’t know but I wanted to respond to you so you can let me know of anything I missed. Maybe tomorrow more will come back in. I don’t know. I fished at least some of your responses out and will respond to some or all depending on time and maybe respond to a few other people some of whom have been given the ability to write but not think.
Allan: “Of course you did. Paraphrasing you said your modality didn’t work because people didn’t have the tenacity.”
Prairie: That isn’t at all what I said.
——
I actually copied your entire quote. Whatever else you said didn’t change the quotes meaning. I repeat what both of us said again.
————
Allan: “What we do know is that the present methodology doesn’t work satisfactorily.”
Prairie: “I think the methodology hasn’t been tried particularly. There hasn’t been enough backbone, grit, and tenacity shown by enough people. Too many people have allowed themselves to be cowed into silence. Too many people tolerate or enable the problems to grow.”
—————
“Civil discourse is effective”
No one denies that but it isn’t always effective.
Allan,
“” I disagree with using ad hominem in such discussions.
Why isn’t it a problem?”
I disagree. I believe in some circumstances and at some times it is a good thing to throw the bombs thrown at you back to the people that initially threw them.”
“Why isn’t it a problem to use ad hominem in some discussions?” That is the flip side of asking, “Why ‘in some circumstances and at some times’ is it ‘a good thing to throw the bombs thrown at you back to the people that initially threw them’?”
Prairie most of the times there is more than one way of managing a problem. The way chosen depends on the variables that are noted by the one choosing.
Let me quote something from DJT Jr’s book.
Written in the Yale Daily News
“Republicans are single-handedly destroying the Yale community. They do not offer anything substantial to our campus. They are all racist, bigoted, homophobes. …”
It goes on and this is from students at Yale. When faced with this what is wrong with returning the words racist, bigoted, etc.? The writers of this piece most definitely are because they create racism where it doesn’t exist and create bigotry where it doesn’t exist as well. What is wrong with returning such insults. My answer, ‘depending on person, place and time, Nothing.’
That is essentially what I am doing. Stevej and I have had ongoing arguments through many threads yet there are no ongoing insults. He has his position and I have mine. When we deal with the usual suspects they are only being served the same or similar comments they continuously serve. That is their nature (very low on the intellectual scale) so perhaps that is a way to deal with them (very low on the intellectual scale.).
It is up to you to prove your case. I have already explained mine many times.
By the way you might be interested in reading Triggered Donald J.Trump Jr.’s book. Though not a literary masterpiece it gives you an insight of what they are seeing from their perspective that is not written about in the MSM. I like to know more about the people that represent us whether it be Obama whose books I read, Trump or anyone else.
Allan,
“Prairie, I have had a major system failure and the experts have been putting everything back together.”
Bummer. That stinks. Hope you are able to get it all recovered.
So what you’re saying is, I crashed your system with too many responses? 😉
Father Time says it is too late and I need to crash my system into bed because morning will come all too soon. Good night.
Allan,
Allan: “Of course you did. Paraphrasing you said your modality didn’t work because people didn’t have the tenacity.”
Prairie: That isn’t at all what I said.
——
I actually copied your entire quote. Whatever else you said didn’t change the quotes meaning. I repeat what both of us said again.
————
Allan: “What we do know is that the present methodology doesn’t work satisfactorily.”
Prairie: “I think the methodology hasn’t been tried particularly. There hasn’t been enough backbone, grit, and tenacity shown by enough people. Too many people have allowed themselves to be cowed into silence. Too many people tolerate or enable the problems to grow.”
—————
How can the methodology not work if it hasn’t even been tried sufficiently?
‘Enough’ is also an operative word. ‘Didn’t have’ indicates it is not present at all. ‘Hasn’t been enough’ indicates it is there but it is insufficient.
Those traits are not set in stone.
Tenacity means someone is very ‘persistent in maintaining, adhering to, or seeking something valued or desired.’
Tenacity can change as people realize the value of something. People are bemoaning now the insufficient presence of civil discourse in our culture. Newspapers have even run articles on this issue.
Silence has only allowed incivility to fill the vacuum.
As people realize the value and importance of civil discourse and the best of Western culture, tenacity, grit, and backbone will grow.
—————–
“Civil discourse is effective”
No one denies that but it isn’t always effective.”
Always is one of those words that can really only be reasonably associated with death and taxes.
Civil discourse is effective enough to preferentially use it, especially when other people are trying to get you to stoop to their level.
I was listening to Dave Rubin interview former Australian Deputy Prime Minister John Anderson on The Rubin Report when the issue of civility came up. He said something to the effect that part of civility ‘is a tough-minded” virtue that entails a deep belief in free speech, that while we may not agree with what you say, we will defend your right to say it. The focus is on disagreeing with the words, but valuing the person’s right to speak.
Allan,
“It is up to you to prove your case. I have already explained mine many times.”
You have explained, but I do not see that you’ve proved it.
“they create racism where it doesn’t exist and create bigotry where it doesn’t exist as well. What is wrong with returning such insults. My answer, ‘depending on person, place and time, Nothing.’”
Why?
What might be some hazards of returning insults?
I don’t mean to be difficult by re-asking. I don’t think these questions have been fully examined.
You also asked:
“When faced with this what is wrong with returning the words racist, bigoted, etc.?”
They can be returned civilly and in such a way as to really delve into people’s perceptions and misconceptions. Shutting down conversation with returned insults (which will be what happens rather than them seeing themselves in the mirror) will fester that abscess you mentioned elsewhere.
Insults might feel kind of cathartic, but I think they behave more like infecting bacteria.
————————–
“By the way you might be interested in reading Triggered Donald J.Trump Jr.’s book.”
Thank you for the recommendation.
Allan: “It is up to you to prove your case. I have already explained mine many times.”
Prairie: You have explained, but I do not see that you’ve proved it.”
Prairie, I don’t have to prove it. You are the one making the assertations.
“They can be returned civilly and in such a way as to really delve into people’s perceptions and misconceptions.”
That is the choice of the person responding. As a passenger do you tell the other how to drive? 🙂
Allan,
““They can be returned civilly and in such a way as to really delve into people’s perceptions and misconceptions.”
That is the choice of the person responding. As a passenger do you tell the other how to drive? 🙂”
People like to be understood and when someone really wants to understand their perspective on a topic, then mutual thinking happens and perceptions are made clear and misconceptions are untangled.
Yes, actually, I do sometimes comment on some people’s driving–generally if life and limb is at risk. I have a family member who does not always pay careful attention to road signs and we have blown thrown stop signs and have gone up one way streets. So you betcha I comment if I think such a thing is about to happen!
TJ, I think you would find this book by respected historian Bryan Mark Rigg most interesting. Reveals the complexity of social life in all its diversity!
“Hitler’s Jewish Soldiers”
https://www.amazon.com/Lives-Hitlers-Jewish-Soldiers-Descent/dp/070062340X
blurb says:
“They were foot soldiers and officers. They served in the regular army and the Waffen-SS. And, remarkably, they were also Jewish, at least as defined by Hitler’s infamous race laws. Pursuing the thread he first unraveled in Hitler’s Jewish Soldiers, Bryan Rigg takes a closer look at the experiences of Wehrmacht soldiers who were classified as Jewish. In this long-awaited companion volume, he presents interviews with twenty-one of these men, whose stories are both fascinating and disturbing.
As many as 150,000 Jews and partial-Jews (or Mischlinge) served, often with distinction, in the German military during World War II. The men interviewed for this volume portray a wide range of experiences-some came from military families, some had been raised Christian—revealing in vivid detail how they fought for a government that robbed them of their rights and sent their relatives to extermination camps. Yet most continued to serve, since resistance would have cost them their lives and they mistakenly hoped that by their service they could protect themselves and their families. The interviews recount the nature and extent of their dilemma, the divided loyalties under which many toiled during the Nazi years and afterward, and their sobering reflections on religion and the Holocaust, including what they knew about it at the time.
Rigg relates each individual’s experiences following the establishment of Hitler’s race laws, shifting between vivid scenes of combat and the increasingly threatening situation on the home front for these men and their family members. Their stories reveal the constant tension in their lives: how some tried to hide their identities, and how a few were even “Aryanized” as part of Hitler’s effort to retain reliable soldiers—including Field Marshal Erhard Milch, three-star general Helmut Wilberg, and naval commander Bernhard Rogge.
Chilling, compelling, almost beyond belief, these stories depict crises of conscience under the most stressful circumstances. Lives of Hitler’s Jewish Soldiers deepens our understanding of the complex intersection of Nazi race laws and German military service both before and during World War II.”
Great satire.
not satire. https://muse.jhu.edu/book/47776
Moore also believes that whites iz shiftless and lazy.
This is AWESOME. WHATEVER you do, keep spewing this stuff Mikey!
“Moore’s rant itself would seem the very definition of racism. ”
That is true of many of the rants coming from the left. The left IS what they are calling other people. It’s like they are looking at a reflection of themselves and responding to the reflection.
Most White People Are “Not Good People” And Are Dangerous If Encountered On The Street
____________________________________________________
To be accurate Moore said 2/3 of white men are not good people. That excludes about 2/3 of all white people.
That means there are apparently a majority of white who are not raging racists who present imminent threats of physical harm.