> Falsely accusing others of racism is worse than irrational memes. It is
> malicious, vindictive, and salacious. I suspect the underlying reason for
> objection to the Fred Reed spoof is that it so effectively illustrates the
> absurdity of the reparation schemes
I see plenty of cause to object to Reed's "spoof" independent of
his position on reparation. And while I can't definitively speak
for other posters internal motivations, I've seen nothing so far
that supports your suspicion.
My own view of "reparations" is that holding me liable for the
crimes of long-dead slave owners is no more rational than holding
the descendents of the slaves responsible. I have no more
control over those events than they do. This "reparations
silliness" is much more than just silliness. It vilifies modern
day whites not for doing something wrong, but just for being the
same race as someone who did something wrong. And it gives
preferential treatment to modern day blacks not for being
oppressed, but just for being the same race as someone who was
oppressed. This, in itself, is racially motivated injustice.
I recognize that these are some of the same points that Mr. Reed
was making in his article. And I recognized when he was
demonstrating the absurdity of "guilt by association" by
reversing the roles. But he played the role reversal so well
that it left me with the uneasy feeling that the sarcasm might
have been only a thin disguise for genuinely held views. I don't
know enough about Mr. Reed to know whether he is racist. But the
impression, even if accidental, is strong enough to be patently
obvious to me even though I agree with his main argument.
If anything, I think that being on the same side of the
reparations issue only serves to increase the article's
offensiveness to me. A certain well worn phrase that begins
"With friends like that,...." comes to mind.
--- Peace, William Kitchen
The future is ours to create.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Oct 12 2001 - 14:40:00 MDT