Racist ad by David Horowitz? yes or no?

WriterDom

Good to the last drop
Joined
Jun 25, 2000
Posts
20,077
Brown Protest Targets Ad

BY RICHARD LEWIS
.c The Associated Press


PROVIDENCE, R.I. (AP) - Friday's edition of Brown University's student newspaper made it to newsstands Saturday, a day late and protected by campus police because of bitter protests over an advertisement.

The paid advertisement denouncing reparations for slavery ran once, on Tuesday, in the Brown Daily Herald. A coalition of mostly minority student organizations stole the newspaper's entire press run Friday to show their anger.

`````````````````````````````````````````````````````
Ten Reasons Why Reparations for Blacks is a Bad Idea for Blacks - and Racist Too


One

There Is No Single Group Clearly Responsible For The Crime Of Slavery

Black Africans and Arabs were responsible for enslaving the ancestors of African-Americans. There were 3,000 black slave-owners in the ante-bellum United States. Are reparations to be paid by their descendants too?

Two

There Is No One Group That Benefited Exclusively From Its Fruits


The claim for reparations is premised on the false assumption that only whites have benefited from slavery. If slave labor created wealth for Americans, then obviously it has created wealth for black Americans as well, including the descendants of slaves. The GNP of black America is so large that it makes the African-American community the 10th most prosperous "nation" in the world. American blacks on average enjoy per capita incomes in the range of twenty to fifty times that of blacks living in any of the African nations from which they were kidnapped.

Three

Only A Tiny Minority Of White Americans Ever Owned Slaves, And Others Gave Their Lives To Free Them

Only a tiny minority of Americans ever owned slaves. This is true even for those who lived in the ante-bellum South where only one white in five was a slaveholder. Why should their descendants owe a debt? What about the descendants of the 350,000 Union soldiers who died to free the slaves? They gave their lives. What possible moral principle would ask them to pay (through their descendants) again?

Four

America Today Is A Multi-Ethnic Nation and Most Americans Have No Connection (Direct Or Indirect) To Slavery

The two great waves of American immigration occurred after 1880 and then after 1960. What rationale would require Vietnamese boat people, Russian refuseniks, Iranian refugees, and Armenian victims of the Turkish persecution, Jews, Mexicans Greeks, or Polish, Hungarian, Cambodian and Korean victims of Communism, to pay reparations to American blacks?

Five

The Historical Precedents Used To Justify The Reparations Claim Do Not Apply, And The Claim Itself Is Based On Race Not Injury

The historical precedents generally invoked to justify the reparations claim are payments to Jewish survivors of the Holocaust, Japanese-Americans and African- American victims of racial experiments in Tuskegee, or racial outrages in Rosewood and Oklahoma City. But in each case, the recipients of reparations were the direct victims of the injustice or their immediate families. This would be the only case of reparations to people who were not immediately affected and whose sole qualification to receive reparations would be racial. As has already been pointed out, during the slavery era, many blacks were free men or slave-owners themselves, yet the reparations claimants make no distinction between the roles blacks actually played in the injustice itself. Randall Robinson's book on reparations, The Debt, which is the manifesto of the reparations movement is pointedly sub-titled "What America Owes To Blacks." If this is not racism, what is?

Six

The Reparations Argument Is Based On The Unfounded Claim That All African-American Descendants of Slaves Suffer From The Economic Consequences Of Slavery And Discrimination

No evidence-based attempt has been made to prove that living individuals have been adversely affected by a slave system that was ended over 150 years ago. But there is plenty of evidence the hardships that occurred were hardships that individuals could and did overcome. The black middle-class in America is a prosperous community that is now larger in absolute terms than the black underclass. Does its existence not suggest that economic adversity is the result of failures of individual character rather than the lingering after-effects of racial discrimination and a slave system that ceased to exist well over a century ago? West Indian blacks in America are also descended from slaves but their average incomes are equivalent to the average incomes of whites (and nearly 25% higher than the average incomes of American born blacks). How is it that slavery adversely affected one large group of descendants but not the other? How can government be expected to decide an issue that is so subjective - and yet so critical - to the case?

Seven

The Reparations Claim Is One More Attempt To Turn African-Americans Into Victims. It Sends A Damaging Message To The African-American Community.

The renewed sense of grievance -- which is what the claim for reparations will inevitably create -- is neither a constructive nor a helpful message for black leaders to be sending to their communities and to others. To focus the social passions of African-Americans on what some Americans may have done to their ancestors fifty or a hundred and fifty years ago is to burden them with a crippling sense of victim-hood. How are the millions of refugees from tyranny and genocide who are now living in America going to receive these claims, moreover, except as demands for special treatment, an extravagant new handout that is only necessary because some blacks can't seem to locate the ladder of opportunity within reach of others -- many less privileged than themselves?

Eight

Reparations To African Americans Have Already Been Paid

Since the passage of the Civil Rights Acts and the advent of the Great Society in 1965, trillions of dollars in transfer payments have been made to African-Americans in the form of welfare benefits and racial preferences (in contracts, job placements and educational admissions) - all under the rationale of redressing historic racial grievances. It is said that reparations are necessary to achieve a healing between African-Americans and other Americans. If trillion dollar restitutions and a wholesale rewriting of American law (in order to accommodate racial preferences) for African-Americans is not enough to achieve a "healing," what will?

Nine

What About The Debt Blacks Owe To America?

Slavery existed for thousands of years before the Atlantic slave trade was born, and in all societies. But in the thousand years of its existence, there never was an anti-slavery movement until white Christians - Englishmen and Americans -- created one. If not for the anti-slavery attitudes and military power of white Englishmen and Americans, the slave trade would not have been brought to an end. If not for the sacrifices of white soldiers and a white American president who gave his life to sign the Emancipation Proclamation, blacks in America would still be slaves. If not for the dedication of Americans of all ethnicities and colors to a society based on the principle that all men are created equal, blacks in America would not enjoy the highest standard of living of blacks anywhere in the world, and indeed one of the highest standards of living of any people in the world. They would not enjoy the greatest freedoms and the most thoroughly protected individual rights anywhere. Where is the gratitude of black America and its leaders for those gifts?

Ten

The Reparations Claim Is A Separatist Idea That Sets African-Americans Against The Nation That Gave Them Freedom

Blacks were here before the Mayflower. Who is more American than the descendants of African slaves? For the African-American community to isolate itself even further from America is to embark on a course whose implications are troubling. Yet the African-American community has had a long-running flirtation with separatists, nationalists and the political left, who want African-Americans to be no part of America's social contract. African Americans should reject this temptation.

For all America's faults, African-Americans have an enormous stake in their country and its heritage. It is this heritage that is really under attack by the reparations movement. The reparations claim is one more assault on America, conducted by racial separatists and the political left. It is an attack not only on white Americans, but on all Americans -- especially African-Americans.

America's African-American citizens are the richest and most privileged black people alive -- a bounty that is a direct result of the heritage that is under assault. The American idea needs the support of its African-American citizens. But African-Americans also need the support of the American idea. For it is this idea that led to the principles and institutions that have set African-Americans - and all of us -- free.


David Horowitz is editor-in-chief of FrontPageMagazine.com and president of the Center for the Study of Popular Culture.
 
I suspect...

This one's a bit too hot to handle.

I think it's a well balanced viewpoint. I think it's wrong in places, but I also think it's "right on" in places. However, no matter how screwy I think aspects of this are, I certainly see zero ground for calling it "racist." There is no prejudice or discrimination here--quite the opposite.

--Bri

ra·cism (rszm)
n.

1. The belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others.
2. Discrimination or prejudice based on race.
 
Ok, so call me ignorant, but who is that is seeking reparation? This is a reaction to a group effort? This is an ad?
 
Good question Purp....

I asked the same one of the Shebabe last week when she reported this story to me.

However - no matter how hot the topic - no matter who's money of ideals are behind it or the folks asking (and mostly getting) the ad pulled - it's a Free Speach issue plain and simple.

I would have to say - let the ad run - as long as business is taken care of. The papers that pulled the add - to not represent Journalism - they are puppets.
 
Thanks Bri, I hadn't heard of this.

This sounds like another issue where both sides are right, and both sides are extreme. It's hard to pick a side when neither end of the spectrum speaks for you.

Slavery existed for thousands of years before the Atlantic slave trade was born, and in all societies. But in the thousand years of its existence, there never was an anti-slavery movement until white Christians - Englishmen and Americans -- created one. If not for the anti-slavery attitudes and military power of white Englishmen and Americans, the slave trade would not have been brought to an end.

There go the "Christians" taking credit again. This is such a crock of shit, it tarnishes what might have been a logical view-point.
 
I'm not a huge fan of the show, but 20/20 did a piece on this subject just last week.

Perhaps the best line from the whole episode was a rebroadcast of a clip from the Chris Rock show. Had him marching around asking some professional white people what they thought of reparations, and then given three choices to pick from. I don't remember the first two, but there was something inherently funny about them all picking choice three - 'Kiss my white ass!'.

Seriously though, you might want to read the editorial at the end of the Newsweek maybe 2-3 weeks back. In a nutshell is says that reparations are inherently racist, but to the black population. What it does is gives the people of african american descent an excuse. That is, those who support reparations believe, to some small extent, that they are victims and without the money they are unable to compete in the incredibly diverse market we live in.

On that (the racist/victimization aspect, so as not to become confused), I have to agree.
 
There is nothing in that ad with which I disagree.

However, I understand that there can be interpreted a (unfounded by the text) tone of denial that might irk some. The debate over the text of the ad is not so much in regards to reparations, but a seeming dismissal of slavery as evil. It's not in the text, but I can see someone making that false assumption, if he doesn't read the ad carefuly.

[Edited by Dixon Carter Lee on 03-26-2001 at 02:45 PM]
 
For the record, the Newsweek article I was alluding to is called 'The Ultimate Emancipation' and was written by George Will in the March 5th issue.

I've since reread the article and I was mistaken, Reperations were never mentioned. Mr. Will has chosen instead to focus on affirmative action. However the 'cult of victimization' or the 'soft bigotry of low expectations', both direct quotes from the article, applies to both topics.
 
David Horowitz can kiss my ass. He went from being a defender of consumers to being a hardcore right-wing corporate apologist. Hypocrites are evil.

The slavery of Africans in America was wrong. Ripping human beings out of their homeland and bringing them here to be beated and abused was wrong. I don't care if their great-grandchildren have it better here than in Africa. It was still wrong. Period, end of story.

As far as slave reparations, I don't think money changes anything - especially since the reparations would go to the great-grandchildren and great-great-grandchildren of those who had the real complaint. Reparations to the Asians interred in camps during WWII made sense, but this does not.

Plus, not all of the Black people in the U.S. are descendants of Slaves. Colin Powell, whom ignorant people on the right like to call an African-American, is actually of Jamaican descent. That's a big difference.

I don't think reparations are racist, for the very reasons DarlingBri already stated. Look at the definition of racist, and then explain to me, via that definition, why the idea of giving money to the descendents of slaves is 'racist'. It may not be a wise idea, or a feasible idea, but it's certainly not 'racist'.

The U.S. government needs to formally apologize to the descendents of African slaves for what was done. That's certain. But I don't think monetary compensation is necessary.
 
Cync said:
For the record, the Newsweek article I was alluding to is called 'The Ultimate Emancipation' and was written by George Will in the March 5th issue.

I've since reread the article and I was mistaken, Reperations were never mentioned. Mr. Will has chosen instead to focus on affirmative action. However the 'cult of victimization' or the 'soft bigotry of low expectations', both direct quotes from the article, applies to both topics.

I saw that editorial. I think Will, like many others, confuse Affirmative Action (which gives help to those of color who don't have the resources) with quotas (which are illegal).
 
It may not be racist but it is incredibly insulting.

Black Africans and Arabs were responsible for enslaving the ancestors of African-Americans.
You started it.
American blacks on average enjoy per capita incomes in the range of twenty to fifty times that of blacks living in any of the African nations from which they were kidnapped.
You lucky bastards.
Only a tiny minority of Americans ever owned slaves.
It wasn't me.
there is plenty of evidence the hardships that occurred were hardships that individuals could and did overcome... economic adversity is the result of failures of individual character
If you would just get off your ass...
The Reparations Claim Is One More Attempt To Turn African-Americans Into Victims.
Thank me. You stupid bastard I'm only trying to help.
The renewed sense of grievance -- which is what the claim for reparations will inevitably create -- is neither a constructive nor a helpful message for black leaders to be sending to their communities
Is it any wonder you're fucked? Look at your leaders.
because some blacks can't seem to locate the ladder of opportunity within reach of others -- many less privileged than themselves?
What the fuck's your problem?
If trillion dollar restitutions and a wholesale rewriting of American law (in order to accommodate racial preferences) for African-Americans is not enough to achieve a "healing," what will?
You're screwed & will always be screwed. Why bother?
If not for the anti-slavery attitudes and military power of white Englishmen and Americans, the slave trade would not have been brought to an end. Where is the gratitude of black America and its leaders for those gifts?
Again, thank me.
Yet the African-American community has had a long-running flirtation with separatists, nationalists and the political left, who want African-Americans to be no part of America's social contract. African Americans should reject this temptation.
Where's the love?
America's African-American citizens are the richest and most privileged black people alive -- a bounty that is a direct result of the heritage that is under assault.
Quit your bitchin'. All's well that ends well.
 
Yes, it's insulting.

But I'm curious: just because you think what you think in response to those points, do you support reparation?

One doesn't necessarily follow from the other.
 
First off let me state, slavery, predjudice and ignorance is wrong. Now that I have cleared that up, here is my firey statement...

I am Jewish.
My Great Aunt, several of her cousins and others in my family were killed in the Holocaust. I am now a successful and happy person, even though everyone knows I am Jewish.

Try being Jewish in South Africa, it sux.

Still, though everyone knew I was Jewish, I grew up to be happy, well adjusted and successful.

Why?

Because I AM OVER IT.
The Holocaust happened 65 years ago. If I still blamed my personal failures on what happened to my anscestors 65 years ago, that would make me a LOSER.

I know many black people who are successful and happy people. Many of their anscestors were slaves as well. Why did they become successful and happy people? because they got over their bitching and whining and made something of themselves.

I know my statement may seem harsh to many people, but you know what? Up your butt with a coconut.

I don't like whiners in any race, shape, color or religion. The world needs to get over it. When everyone get's over it and faces up to the reality that we have now, (that they need to shut up and do something with themselves), the world will be a much happier place.

*climbing off the soapbox and cautiously avoiding snipers*

S
 
Laurel said:
Plus, not all of the Black people in the U.S. are descendants of Slaves. Colin Powell, whom ignorant people on the right like to call an African-American, is actually of Jamaican descent. That's a big difference.

Must be spring time again because somebody let this kitty loose around here again.

Laurel dear, I love you a lot, but tread carefully here. The only difference in the above statement is the "American" part. For the most part, blacks were no more indigenous to the West Indies than they were to the United States. A great many West Indians (and I realize I'm lumping a whole lot of people in a very narrow definition) are also descended from African slaves that were repatriated to the various islands in the 1600's in order to raise the crops there. Ironically, because of America's military dominance in the 1800's, coupled with a shift against slavery among Europeans (for a variety of moral, economic and military reasons), freedom came earlier for slaves within the British empire earlier than those in the this breakaway upstart.

I have an interesting question about reparations (and I'm totally serious):

In the event that the decision was made to grant them (not, mind you, a decision I see anywhere on the horizon), has anyone read how it would be determined who would be eligible to receive them? That's always puzzled me on several levels.

Would it suffice to be able to prove that your ancestor had been a slave (an incredibly daunting task given the state of 17th, a8th and 19th century records), or would anyone with black blood qualify?

Or would you have to prove disenfranchisement in addition to ethnicity?

I ask because what comes to mind is one of the Jefferson/Henning descendant lines (yeah, I know, WHICH Jefferson is still up for debate, but they've at least gotten to the point that they have admitted that it is A Jefferson). As of late, the descendants have now been admitted into the Monticello Society; however, this particular line didn't actually know they were descended from a slave (or properly, that there was black blood in the line) until contacted by a genealogist. Apparently, the progenitor of the line had been fair skinned enough to pass for white, and the knowledge of the lineage had been buried sufficiently that present day descendants were not aware of the link.

I know that that is extreme, but it does give one pause as to what would even constitute the requirements to receive reparations.
 
DarlingBri

I don't support reparation at all, in fact I'm whole-heartedly against it. I believe a little empathy & a sincere appology are what's called for here. Shit happens & you deal is my motto. But even as callous as that is, it's not as insulting as what I just read. I'm not telling anyone that shit happens & you should be grateful.
 
Actually, what IS the American obesession with modifiers about, anyway?

African American
Irish American
Italian American
Jewish American
...etc...

No other nation I'm aware of does this. You never find people referring to themselves as African English, or Dutch South African, or Italian Canadian.

What gives?
 
DarlingBri said:
Actually, what IS the American obesession with modifiers about, anyway?

African American
Irish American
Italian American
Jewish American
...etc...

No other nation I'm aware of does this. You never find people referring to themselves as African English, or Dutch South African, or Italian Canadian.

What gives?

I think it's rooted in a couple of things Bri...

First off, as superpowers go, very few are as geographically disbursed as we are. When you have this much land under single control for so long, human nature needs to build icons to collect around. Look at the Fraternity and Sorority systems at large American Universities; same principle.

Also, remember, we started life as 13 cliques, each formed for the pursuit of a particular set of ideals; hell, Massachusetts was founded to give shelter to a bunch of people that even the other Protestants couldn't get along with...and that's saying a lot! So from the very beginning, our country was founded on the power of interest groups.

Both of our national-based major wars (American Revolution, Civil War) were fought to further the economic interests of a small group of rich white men (a lot like the modern day NFL, don't you think?). Again, the interest group was tantamount. Back when we were all still English, the country divided itself along the lines of New England, the Middle States, and the South even before the ink was dry on the constitution.
 
But it's so unnecessary...

I mean, the American identity is so strong.

Loud, fat, plaid wearing, trailer living, McDonald's eating, Montel appearing, gun toting, violence breeding, and did I mention fat?

So who wouldn't want to be identified with THAT? :)
 
Laurel said:
David Horowitz can kiss my ass. He went from being a defender of consumers to being a hardcore right-wing corporate apologist. Hypocrites are evil.


Actually, David made a specific logical change of mind. He was the son of two devoted communist party members in the united states and grew up believing that was "right".

After living most of his life following the cause of liberalism, communism, and similar causes including working closely with Black Panthers, he found he had to change his mind.

At a point in time he concluded that the United States system allowed the government to change when the people decided the war in Viet Nam was wrong. This was a revelation to him. He could find no similar way for the "movements" to permit themselves to be corrected when they were wrong.

He changed his mind at that time.

His book, "Radical Son" is a very interesting discussion of his life and the transformation he went through.

It is good to change your mind when you examine your beliefs and find that you must correct them from life's experience.
 
Re: But it's so unnecessary...

DarlingBri said:
Loud, fat, plaid wearing, trailer living, McDonald's eating, Montel appearing, gun toting, violence breeding, and did I mention fat?

So who wouldn't want to be identified with THAT? :)

I DO NOT regularly appear on Montel, thank you very much!
It conflicts with my Ricki Lake and Salyy Jessy Raphael bookings.
 
Shucksters Prey on EggShell Walkers...

Always somethin' for Nothin'...

Wut field did you plow?

Wut ocean did you travail?

Wut did you Ever do?

I'll buy you a ticket back to Africa, where do you want to go?

This iz not Kunta Kinte, This is just lazy ass shit!
 
Laurel...babe...

Laurel said:
David Horowitz can kiss my ass. He went from being a defender of consumers to being a hardcore right-wing corporate apologist. Hypocrites are evil.

I'm surprised at you...you're usually sharp as a tack!

You've got your David Horowitz's mixed up. The guy who wrote this article was a far left-wing activist during the 60's, he even admits to being a self-proclaimed socialist, but is now a staunch conservative.

The consumer advocate David Horowitz is still doing the consumer advocate thing and has a radio talk show in LA, (KFI, I think).

Just thought I'd straighten that out.

BTW, how did you like soprano's last night? I thought it was a little weak, especially after last week.

:)
 
Back
Top