Skip to main content

View Diary: What Should Young Black Men Like Marcus Smart Do When Called a 'Nigger' by White Men Like Jeff Orr? (104 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  i love talking point racists, the tactic (8+ / 0-)

    of having the standard of proof for racism defined by white people is a classic white supremacist white privileged strategy. i love it! because of course all of black and brown folks make up all these examples because we are deranged, overly sensitive, and/or out to get white folks.

    when in doubt on these matters i side with the person of color who said they were the victim of a racial slur, women who say they were subjected to sexism, and gays and lesbians who were slurred or treated unfairly.

    there is little to be gained and often much to be lost by truth-telling on those matters. white racists usually win as demonstrated by your instinctive behavior of white bigotry and privilege with cries of "evidence!" "convince me!"

    bad comedy really.

    •  What about YOUR "standard of proof", Chauncey? (3+ / 0-)

      Jeff Orr is already a piece of shit - if he's lying, then add "racist" to his rap sheet.

      If Marcus Smart is lying, then it's because he knows he'll get away with it because of the assumptions of those like you who automatically side with him based on nothing more than the color of his skin.

      We have no proof either way - and yet you still expended much energy proceeding as if we do.

      "when in doubt on these matters i side with the person of color who said they were the victim of a racial slur, women who say they were subjected to sexism, and gays and lesbians who were slurred or treated unfairly."

      I'm glad you finally admitted to your own race-based biases.   It's shit like this that makes people skip over reports like that latest horror out of Jasper TX (slit throat = accidental overdose?)

      •  be careful. your white privilege is showing (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Richard Lyon, poco, Deep Texan, Kevskos

        what good fun! keep us entertained.

        •  You raise an interesting hyper-meta-point (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Be Skeptical

          White privilege is unavoidable--it's inherent and ingrained, assuming of course you're white--so if we're just instantiations of the structure, as we liked to say back in (white) grad school, how are we supposed to renounce it?  One way, I suppose, would be to step aside and let all black voices speak unchallenged on racialized issues.  But everything's a racialized issue in our country and I just don't have the temperament to let things pass unchallenged if I think they're wrong or dangerous.  

          It's not the side effects of the cocaine/I'm thinking that it must be love

          by Rich in PA on Wed Feb 12, 2014 at 01:36:23 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  You renounce it by ceasing (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Deep Texan, poco

            to think that white people have an inherent right to make the rules and telling people who disagree with them that their objections are out of order.

            •  OK, I feel like I've done that. (0+ / 0-)

              But not everyone will agree.

              It's not the side effects of the cocaine/I'm thinking that it must be love

              by Rich in PA on Wed Feb 12, 2014 at 01:46:41 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

            •  Sure (0+ / 0-)

              But that's what CdV is doing here to Jeff Orr and anyone who points out that there is no evidence supporting Smart's claim.

              So I ask what I sarcastically referred to in another post - do we start calling that "brown privilege" - where any minority yelling "racist!" is automatically granted Truth Teller status no matter the circumstances?

              •  It's called statistical probability. (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                poco

                The chances are that they probably are telling the truth.

                •  So, can we apply that standard evenly? (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Be Skeptical

                  If a business owner eyes every minority customer with suspicion based upon statistical probability and/or past experiences with minority customers, are we all cool with that now?

                  Did I miss a memo somewhere - is racial profiling okay again, or just for some people?

                  •  Except the business owner (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    poco, Adam AZ

                    would have to show some statistics to prove it. Racial profiling fails the statistical reality test. It is based on fevered white fantasies.

                    •  Let's try this one (0+ / 0-)

                      So, is it fair to consider Smart's reputation as a flopper?

                      Smart seems to have a flair for embellishment - if we're being fair, we should probably consider the possibility that he's not above pointing his finger and screaming "racism" to cover his own behavior.

                      •  ??? that is some inside sports nonsense. Everyone (0+ / 0-)

                        flops, coaches run flopping drills. It got so bad they made changes to how refs call the game this year. Singling out Smart is fan rage, nothing more. There is plenty of evidence (for me anyway) that the fan said something truly terrible, much worse than the supposed "piece of crap" claim. Watch the video, watch the way he whips around. I'm glad Smart was able to limit his reaction to a mild shove, for his own sake. Think of the pearl clutching if he actually became violent.

                        •  In the absence of actual proof... (1+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          Be Skeptical

                          ...anything is possible.

                          So far on this thread I've seen people who are automatically taking Smart's side because of "statistical probability", because of Orr's white skin, because of Orr's past actions as an annoying "superfan", because they themselves have been called "n****r in the past,  because racism exists in America, etc, etc, etc.    And still nobody has any proof that Orr said it other than Smart's accusation.

                          So, if we're to enter all that other shit into evidence, why do we ignore Smart's reputation as a "flopper"?   That article I linked was written a couple days before the incident with Orr.   Why are all these other things supposedly relevent but Smart's reputation is not?

        •  You use the same tactics as rightwingers (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Be Skeptical

          A few hundred words here, a few hundred words there, and eventually it just becomes conventional wisdom that Orr said it - everyone forgets that despite all your flowery enlightened rhetoric there is no proof other than Marcus Smart's words.

    •  I am white and I like to think of myself as not (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Be Skeptical

      racist.  I'm perfectly capable of believing claims of racism by "black and brown folks" because many more times than not the claims are real.

      Each of your examples; Trayvon Martin, Jonathan Ferrell, Renisha McBride, & Jordan Davis all victims of 100% pure unadulterated racism, no doubt about it.

      But here I have to disagree.  Orr seems like a real POS and I like Marcus Smart but I watched that game live and the only person I saw use the "N-word" was Marcus Smart.  Texas Tech asked a bunch of people in the area and no one said that Orr used the "N-word".  There is no proof he used that word.  And you can't claim he did without "evidence."  Calling someone a "piece of crap" is not the same as calling some one the "N-word."

      I would agree with Richard Sherman that calling someone a thug is much the same as using the "N-word."  But in my world "piece of crap" is race neutral.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site