Ken Berwitz
Is it ok to support a racist hate group? If you happen to be the New York Times editorial board, the answer seems to be an emphatic yes.
I\’m sure you have heard of the #blacklivesmatter group – those nice folks who overtly advocate killing police, do not distinguish between justifiable and unjustifiable shooting of Blacks by police, and who do not give a damn about any Black lives except the ones they can use to spread their racism and hatred.
Well here is just the first paragraph of the lead idiotorial in today\’s New York Times, which tells you what the Times editorial board thinks of #blacklivesmatter:
The Republican Party and its acolytes in the news media are trying to demonize the protest movement that has sprung up in response to the all-too-common police killings of unarmed African-Americans across the country. The intent of the campaign – evident in comments by politicians like Gov. Nikki Haley of South Carolina, Gov. Scott Walker of Wisconsin and Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky – is to cast the phrase “Black Lives Matter” as an inflammatory or even hateful anti-white expression that has no legitimate place in a civil rights campaign.
It\’s hard to know where to begin. Let\’s just do it in order of appearance:
-The Times editorial board starts with the premise that “demonizing” the “blacklivesmatter” movement (the Times thinks it\’s a movement, I think it\’s a hate group) is the exclusive province of “The Republican Party and its acolytes in the news media”.That is a flat-out lie.FYI, here are key findings from the latest poll on acceptance or rejection of #blacklivesmatter that I have found – the latest Rasmussen poll, issued just 2 1/2 weeks ago:Thirty-one percent (31%) of black voters say black lives matter is closest to their own views, but just nine percent (9%) of whites and 10% of other minority voters agree. Eighty-one percent (81%) of whites and 76% of other minority voters opt instead for all lives matter, and 64% of blacks agree.Does the Times think that 91% of Whites and 69% of Blacks are Republicans?-Next we have the charge that there are “all-too-common police killings of unarmed African-Americans across the country.”HOW MANY police killings of unarmed Black people are there across the country? The editorial board doesn\’t say. Is it referring to instances such as the shooting of Michael Brown – high on pot and attacking the officer? Media, obviously including the Times, never failed to tell us that he was unarmed. But how about an actual number, guys? Is the fact that you don\’t supply one because it would be so tiny that it would blow your idiotorial out of the water?-Then there the board\’s whine that Republicans are casting the “Black lives matter” phrase as inflammatory. That is another lie. No one is saying that it is inflammatory to value Black lives. The reference is to the #blacklivesmatter GROUP, the one that has spent the last year inciting crowds where there have been shootings, no matter how justified they were, and which marches through the streets chanting about killing cops. If that isn\’t inflammatory, what is?-And regarding the racist nature of the group? Have you ever heard one #blacklivesmatter spokesperson state that, yes, there are instances where police are justified in shooting? That there are violent Black thugs who pull guns on them, that shoot at them, that physically attack them, and sometimes police have no other choice? Or note that Black police, when faced with the same situation, react the same way, therefore citing race alone is untrue and unfair? Me neither.
Let me also show you the idiotorial\’s last paragraph:
The “BlackLives Matter” movement focuses on the fact that black citizens have long beenfar more likely than whites to die at the hands of the police, and is of apiece with this history. Demonstrators who chant the phrase are making the samedeclaration that voting rights and civil rights activists made a half-centuryago. They are not asserting that black lives are more precious than whitelives. They are underlining an indisputable fact – that the lives of blackcitizens in this country historically have not mattered, and have beendiscounted and devalued. People who are unacquainted with this history areunderstandably uncomfortable with the language of the movement. But politicianswho know better and seek to strip this issue of its racial content and contextare acting in bad faith. They are trying to cover up an unpleasant truth andasking the country to collude with them.
That is an odious misrepresentation – one which, if any appreciable number of people paid attention to Times\’ editiorials anymore, could conceivably incite violence in the streets.
Yes, it is true that, historically, Black lives in this country have not mattered — to some people – and, at one time a great many more people than today. But what is conveniently, and intentionally, left out is that Black lives have mattered to others. A great many others. That is why there was a civil rights movement and why all the progress that has been made toward equality has taken place. Without the fact that Black lives mattered to many, many White people – who are invisible in this idiotorial – none of the racial progress we have made could have happened.
To make a one-size-fits-all comment like “the lives of black citizens in this country historically have not mattered” as though that was some kind of universal truism of the USA, is no different than saying all Black people are on welfare and eat fried chicken and watermelon. It is a mindless, stupid stereotype.
I often write that it is amazing how much racist garbage is spewed by people who claim to be against racial racial garbage. Chalk this up as the latest example.
