Posts Tagged ‘Wright’

A thought experiment

Monday, May 5th, 2008

The Washington Post today suggests a “thought experiment.

Conduct a thought experiment: Imagine that the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, former pastor to presidential candidate Barack Obama and preacher with controversial views, was not an outspoken black man but a white woman who penned her controversial ideas in a scholarly journal. If Wright’s views were the only thing that mattered, his race, sex and public style ought to make no difference.

Let’s try this. The “white woman” would have suggested the following:

At the NAACP meeting, Mr. Wright proudly propounded the racist contention that blacks have inherently different “learning styles,” correctly citing as authority for this view Janice Hale of Wayne State University. Pursuing a Ph.D. by logging long hours in the dusty stacks of a library, Mr. Wright announced, is “white.” Blacks, by contrast, cannot sit still in class or learn from quiet study, and they have difficulty learning from “objects” — books, for example — but instead learn from “subjects,” such as rap lyrics on the radio. These differences are neurological, according to Ms. Hale and Mr. Wright: Whites use what Mr. Wright referred to as the “left-wing, logical and analytical” side of their brains, whereas blacks use their “right brain,” which is “creative and intuitive.”

Does anyone imagine she would have gotten away with that ? Imagine this :

Mr. Wright also praised the work of Geneva Smitherman of Michigan State University, who has called for the selective incorporation of Ebonics into the curriculum in order to validate the black experience. Mr. Wright gave another shout-out to the late Asa Hilliard of Georgia State University, who told us, Mr. Wright said, “how to fix the schools.” Like Ms. Hale, Mr. Hilliard argued that disrupting the classroom through “impulsive interrupting and loud talking” is inherently black. His bogus Afrocentrism, propounded in his “African-American Baseline Essays,” metastasized in educational circles during the late 1980s and early 1990s. Mr. Hilliard argued that Western civilization was at once stolen from black Africa and crippling to black identity. As the late Arthur M. Schlesinger recounted in his 1991 alarum about multiculturalism, “The Disuniting of America,” Mr. Hilliard urged schools to teach black students that Egypt was a black country; that Africans invented birth control and carbon steel; that they discovered America long before Columbus did; that Robert Browning and Ludwig von Beethoven were “Afro-European

Had enough ? No ?

There is

University of Pennsylvania law professor Regina Austin. In a widely reprinted California Law Review article from 1992, Ms. Austin asserted that the black community should embrace the criminals in its midst as a form of resistance to white oppression. People of color should view “hustling” as a “good middle ground between straightness and more extreme forms of lawbreaking.” Examples of hustling include “clerks in stores [who] cut their friends a break on merchandise, and pilfering employees [who] spread their contraband around the neighborhood.

So, our mythical white female professor would suggest that

Blacks, by contrast, cannot sit still in class or learn from quiet study, and they have difficulty learning from “objects” — books.

They should embrace thievery as a cultural norm.

People of color should view “hustling” as a “good middle ground between straightness and more extreme forms of lawbreaking.

And,

In his NAACP speech, he mocked the tendency of “those of us who never got caught” to treat “those of us who are incarcerated” with disrespect.

That should certainly prove the thought experiment’s point.

a white female scholar ought to damage Obama’s popularity in the same way the pastor has done recently.

Well, she would have to suggest that he sat for 20 years listening to these theories and exposing his children to them.

Having established that as a fact, yes, I think it would hurt him just as much.

The Wright stuff

Wednesday, April 30th, 2008

The Reverend Jeremiah Wright has become famous after some of his sermons, offered for sale by the church as a “Best of…” series, were played on national TV. The resulting uproar has focused attention on “Black Liberation theology.” This church is attended by middle class people in spite of the admonition on the church web site to “Avoid Middleclassness.” That admonition has since disappeared but, by the magic of the internet, here it is. What does the statement about “middleclassness” mean ? Here is a suggestion.

Remember the fuss about “Ebonics” in Oakland school ? Well, that is only part of it.

At the NAACP meeting, Wright proudly propounded the racist contention that blacks have inherently different “learning styles,” correctly citing as authority for this view Janice Hale of Wayne State University. Pursuing a Ph.D. by logging long hours in the dusty stacks of a library, Wright announced, is “white.” Blacks, by contrast, cannot sit still in class or learn from quiet study, and they have difficulty learning from “objects”—books, for example—but instead learn from “subjects,” such as rap lyrics on the radio. These differences are neurological, according to Hale and Wright: whites use what Wright referred to as the “left-wing, logical, and analytical” side of their brains, whereas blacks use their “right brain,” which is “creative and intuitive.”

When he was of school age in Philadelphia following the Supreme Court’s 1954 desegregation decision, Wright said, his white teachers “freaked out because the black children did not stay in their place, over there, behind the desk.” Instead, the students “climbed up all over [the teachers], because they learned from a ‘subject,’ not an ‘object.’” How one learns from a teacher as “subject” by climbing on her, as opposed to learning from her as “object”—by listening to her words—is a mystery.

Leo High School seal

This is ugly stuff. Fortunately, I don’t think this is the mainstream of thought in black educational circles. For the past ten years, I have contributed to my former high school in Chicago. It isn’t too far from Rev Wright’s church, as the crow flies, but, hopefully, it is light years away in concept. When I look at the web site, I don’t see Ebonics or anything about rap music learning. I do see a 96% graduation rate and a college acceptance rate of over 90%. Note the process of application. The school interviews the parents.

This is not a prep school for wealthy black families like the Obamas. This is a blue collar neighborhood and the kids who attend Leo today are working to better themselves. The tuition isn’t cheap for a working family but the school tells me that over 95% of parents are current on tuition at any given time. This is the American dream in action. The last reunion I attended, my 50th, was two years ago. At the first one, in 1996, I saw only one table of black alumni. Two years ago, there were a least three. The white alumni turn out and contribute in hopes that the younger graduates will take over as we die off. It looks like that will happen.

In the meantime, I think a toast to “middleclassness” is in order, no matter what the black liberation theorists say.

Obama and black liberation theology

Monday, March 17th, 2008

UPDATE: Whites, including Democrats
are turned off by Wright’s sermons
but blacks are not.

Most voters, 56%, said Wright’s comments made them less likely to vote for Obama. That figure includes 44% of Democrats. Just 11% of voters say they are more likely to vote for Obama because of Wright’s comments.

However, blacks don’t respond the same way.

However, among African-Americans, 29% said Wright’s comments made them more likely to support Obama. Just 18% said the opposite while 50% said Wright’s comments would have no impact.

Hmmm…

The sermons of Obama’s minister, Reverend Wright, have upended the Democratic primary contest and exposed the ugly undercurrent of racism in the Democratic Party. I have previously linked to another column by Spengler on Obama’s mother’s philosophy. Now Spengler explains the black liberation theology that motivates Jeremiah Wright and which seems so odd to most white Christians.

James Cone, an academic black liberationist that Wright cites as an authority says:

Christ is black therefore not because of some cultural or psychological need of black people, but because and only because Christ really enters into our world where the poor were despised and the black are, disclosing that he is with them enduring humiliation and pain and transforming oppressed slaves into liberating servants.

Here is the source of some of Wright’s rhetoric about the “white Romans” killing the “black Christ.” This has nothing to do with either Christianity or history. This sort of thing:
Black theology will accept only the love of God which participates in the destruction of the white enemy. What we need is the divine love as expressed in Black Power, which is the power of black people to destroy their oppressors here and now by any means at their disposal. Unless God is participating in this holy activity, we must reject his love.

will not sound familiar to other Christians as having anything to do with religion, the Bible or Christianity.

It is also interesting in view of the level of black anti-Semitism that I first saw with my own nursemaid in the 1940s and which has continued with Jesse Jackson’s “Hymietown” remark. Maybe this all comes together in some steamy stew of self righteousness and sense of victimhood. It is now out into the Mainstream Media and Obama will have a hell of a time explaining it.