So...We Gonna Talk About This Speech?

[Ford]

http://www.bet.com/video/betawards/2016/acceptance-speeches/jesse-williams-receives-humanitarian-award.html


"The burden of the brutalized is not to comfort the bystanders...if you have a critique for the resistance, for our resistance, then you better have an established record of critique of our oppression.

If you have no interest in equal rights for black people, then do not make suggestions for those who do. Sit down."



I won't risk being admonished by directing this at anyone in particular, but Mr. Williams makes the case in under 5 minutes that if you think black people are somehow possessed of a level of privilege and social acceptance that makes the centuries of oppression irrelevant, you're wrong.

 

[Angry Floof]

if you think black people are somehow possessed of a level of privilege and social acceptance that makes the centuries of oppression irrelevant, you're wrong.

To put it politely.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Didn't we already give a half-hearted and insincere apology for the whole slavery thing because we felt kind of obligated since there were people watching us?

What more do they want?

 

[untermensche]

Anything can be condemned if it is clearly misguided.

Nobel aspirations do not excuse all behavior.

But I think what the speaker is saying is that double standards should not be applied.

And I think some people who criticize black protest do so without a bit of empathy. Without for a second imagining the shoe on the other foot.

 

[Tigers!]

Didn't we already give a half-hearted and insincere apology for the whole slavery thing because we felt kind of obligated since there were people watching us?

What more do they want?

When did Canada apologise for slavery?

 

[Tom Sawyer]

2004. We're Canadians, dude. We've apologized for everything at one point or another. I'm sorry that you didn't already know that. That was our mistake in not being more proactive in getting you that information.

 

[Angry Floof]

Didn't we already give a half-hearted and insincere apology for the whole slavery thing because we felt kind of obligated since there were people watching us?

What more do they want?

When did Canada apologise for slavery?

Probably a bunch of times. They're Canadian.

 

[Harry Bosch]

When did Canada apologise for slavery?

Probably a bunch of times. They're Canadian.

The whole world should continue to apologize for slavery. It continues today. In fact, there are more slaves today than at anytime in history. Not many attempt to do much about it.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

Probably a bunch of times. They're Canadian.

The whole world should continue to apologize for slavery. It continues today. In fact, there are more slaves today than at anytime in history. Not many attempt to do much about it.

Sadly, not many truly care about it. People care about the image of it and how they can use it politically.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

2004. We're Canadians, dude. We've apologized for everything at one point or another. I'm sorry that you didn't already know that. That was our mistake in not being more proactive in getting you that information.

Typical Canukastani, apologizing for the apology.

 

[repoman]

 

[Tom Sawyer]

2004. We're Canadians, dude. We've apologized for everything at one point or another. I'm sorry that you didn't already know that. That was our mistake in not being more proactive in getting you that information.

Typical Canukastani, apologizing for the apology.

I'm sorry if that caused a problem for you. That wasn't my intent.

 

[TSwizzle]

Talk about it ? Are you crazy ?! White people are not allowed to even mention it lest they get the Twitterati on their case. Justin Timberlake made the mistake of saying something in public and is having to lie low just now.

 

[ronburgundy]

if you think black people are somehow possessed of a level of privilege and social acceptance that makes the centuries of oppression irrelevant, you're wrong.

I highlighted the crux of the problem and objective error in the racial politics of the left, which is the major source of contention between them and true liberals who are strongly opposed to racist conservatives but also have issues with the dogmatic (and racist) left fond of tossing around terms like "white privilege".

There is no such thing as "a" level of privilege or social acceptance for either black people or for white people. These things exist only at the level of each individual person with a massive continuum of variance between individuals overall and within every conceptual category of persons. While the average level of privilege and acceptance (which like all averages exists only as a statistical artifact) is higher for the conceptual category of whites than blacks, there is notable overlap in the continuous distributions of these groups. It is very much like the gender differences in things like spatial ability and other psychological traits on which genders differ on average but with huge overlap in the distributions. This overlap means that many people in the category that is lower on average are actually higher than many members of the category that is higher on average.

Making it even more complicated is that no individual has only a single level of privilege. Near infinite factors play a role in impacting the outcomes of a person's life, and relative to each other individual they are more or less privileged on each of the those factors. A person more privileged than another in how their math teacher views them can be less privileged in countless other ways, such as the type of parents or siblings they have, the neighbors they happen to live near, etc..

Bottom line is that statements about a person being privileged due to their race are similar in their objective error and bigotry as statements about a person being more intelligent based on their gender.

 

[dismal]

Talk about it ? Are you crazy ?! White people are not allowed to even mention it lest they get the Twitterati on their case. Justin Timberlake made the mistake of saying something in public and is having to lie low just now.

That's cause talking about is cultural appropriation.

 

[Ford]

There is nothing in the OP speech that a reasonable person would think suggests such a distillation.

A reasonable person would be able to watch the speech without forming a knee-jerk reaction based upon the color of the speaker's skin.

A reasonable person would take the time to consider the points made in the speech before rushing off to misinterpret the whole thing through the lens of this odd notion that somehow white people are the real victims in all this.

A reasonable person would put themselves in the shoes of the speaker and ask if they'd feel the same way given the circumstances. Or in the shoes of the audience members who were in 100 percent agreement with the sentiments expressed and see if they could understand why. Why did that message resonate with them? Is it because they're all radical black supremacists?

A reasonable person wouldn't make that conclusion, but I was expecting someone would. I was not disappointed.

 

[Derec]

A reasonable person would be able to watch the speech without forming a knee-jerk reaction based upon the color of the speaker's skin.

I don't even know what this guy looks like. I read the transcript rather than endure watching the video.

A reasonable person would take the time to consider the points made in the speech before rushing off to misinterpret the whole thing through the lens of this odd notion that somehow white people are the real victims in all this.

I saw a lot of racist statements like "invented whiteness" or "we are magic", blaming all white people, cultural appropriation BS (saying that whites are stealing culture from blacks), nonsensical statements like "gentrifying our genius) (I'll rec anybody who can explain to me what the hell that even means) etc.

A reasonable person would put themselves in the shoes of the speaker and ask if they'd feel the same way given the circumstances. Or in the shoes of the audience members who were in 100 percent agreement with the sentiments expressed and see if they could understand why. Why did that message resonate with them? Is it because they're all radical black supremacists?

I do not think black racism should be excused just because they are black and their ancestors were enslaved a long time ago. A similar speech by a white person against blacks would be deemed white supremacist. I am a firm believer that sauce for the goose should be sauce for the gander.

A reasonable person wouldn't make that conclusion

I beg to disagree. Racist bullshit does not become any less racist if spewed by members of certain groups.

 

[untermensche]

Excusing such behavior is tantamount to holding black people to a lower standard - textbook racism.

The issue here is police violence against people standing on the street.

The issue of black poverty is related though.

Poverty has always led to crime.

To think it is a black issue is to have ulterior motives.

 

[TSwizzle]

I had no idea who Jesse Williams is so I looked him up on Wiki. What a load of claptrap, he's not even black. Talk about cultural appropriation. An utter tosser of the worst kind.

 

[Rhea]

I had no idea who Jesse Williams is so I looked him up on Wiki. What a load of claptrap, he's not even black. Talk about cultural appropriation. An utter tosser of the worst kind.

I'm trying to figure out what this means. Are you suggesting that no non-black person can actually be an ally to the cause of racial equality? Or, beyond ally, can feel that racism against black people has been ongoing for a very long time and has been detrimental to our society for all that while?

It seems to me that an open-eyed person possessing a modicum of empathy could reach the conclusion without even being black.