Why blacks need to vote

Karl D. writes:

A black minister in Indiana has placed this giant sign outside his church to “motivate blacks to vote.” As we can see, it is of a lynching. The other side of the poster has a photo of black slaves in chains. Methinks there is just a wee bit more to this than simply reminding blacks how far they had to come to get the right to vote, which the minister claims was his motivation.


LA replies:

If whites had one ounce of honor and self-respect, they would angrily denounce this minister and say,

How dare you? How dare you suggest that America today has anything in common with lynchings of blacks? How dare you suggest that blacks are threatened with lynchings in today’s America? How dare you try to provoke and normalize such hatred of whites as this sign is intended to provoke and normalize—hatred which results in ongoing black racial wildings, murders, and maimings of whites?

Also, if this is the way blacks feel about whites, as their enemies, then why should whites continue to regard blacks as their fellow citizens deserving of their soliticitude and their massive financial support, instead of as their enemies? You blacks can’t treat us whites with hatred, and then expect that we will continue to give a damn about you.

That’s what whites would say, if they had one ounce of honor and self-respect. But they don’t, so they won’t.

LA adds:

The strongest statement your average conservative would make about this sign is that it is “divisive.”

- end of initial entry -

Ed H. writes:

That lynching photo is famous. It was taken in 1930 in Marion, Indiana. The two black youths had been accused of murder and rape. They were dragged out of the Marion County courthouse and hanged by an angry mob. Lynchings were rarely gratuitous or random, but usually involved an incensed mob looking for swift “justice.” I can understand the minister’s outrage at this event which took place a mere 82 years ago.

Now here is a homicide map of Marion Indiana in the year 2012. The map gives the race of the murder victims. It’s a mixture of black and white, but it does not give the race of the perpetrator. However, since whites so very rarely kill blacks and whites are frequently killed by blacks, we can assume that the black victims were killed by blacks, and that an overwhelming number of the white victims were killed by blacks. I count 42 victims and that’s just 2012, and the year is not over. Having been to Indianapolis I know that that black neighborhoods are extremely violent and self destructive and they stretch for miles.

But this minister wants to talk about 1930. As I have always said, the chief component of black culture is a lack of all sense of reality.

David B. writes:

Ed H. writes:

“But this minister wants to talk about 1930. As I have always said, the chief compotent of black culture is a lack of all sense of reality.”

On this subject, white liberals are not a whole lot different. When I would tell my former college professor friend about a recent black on white murder, he would say “I’m more concerned about blacks hanging from trees in the 1920’s.”

Robert B. writes:

Isn’t this in violation of the legal prohibition of electioneering at churches? It violates the federal tax code with regards to non-profits and taking part in politics. Now I know that “black folk” churches routinely violate this law, but why is it that whites are so fearful of reporting their transgressions to the I.R.S. and forcing the I.R.S. to do something about it? We know why—we live in a two-tier society where some people are more equal than others. And, as you said above, if whites had one ounce of honor and dignity, they would demand justice.

Peter F. writes:

Concerning that black minister who put up a sign of a 1930 lynching in front of his church, it is noteworthy that we see this tactic time and again from blacks and their supporters on the cultural left—constant references to lynchings, slavery, and other historical crimes committed against blacks, some dating back to the founding of our Republic. Moreover, present-day blacks who deviate from the party line are called “Uncle Toms,” after the Harriet Beecher Stowe novel “Uncle Tom’s Cabin” (1852) and other derogatory terms linked to the past.

Why the constant, unrelenting references to the distant past? The answer lies in what I like to call “remembered grievance,” the inherited outrage and resentment manifested by many modern-day blacks and leftists. This tactic even gets used by spoiled black athletes in the NBA and NFL who are seeking new contracts; one will occasionally hear of some multi-millionaire being paid a king’s ransom for playing a child’s game complain that his existing deal is akin to being a slave. All of these references share in common the appeal to white guilt (as you have noted so many times). Yet, not a single white American alive today has owned blacks as slaves, and no living black American has been enslaved by his white countrymen. Today’s black people, with some exception, enjoy opportunities and material wealth their parents and grand-parents could not have imagined. The drumbeat of white guilt must be kept beating, however, lest whites and open-minded blacks open their eyes and realize how good today’s black people really do have it—and what a complete scam the civil rights movement has become. “Remembered grievance” is the linchpin of the whole crooked enterprise; since today’s black grievance-mongers have little in the way of raw material with which to work, they must mine the past for examples of injustices and crimes committed against them … just as this black minister in Indiana did.

By the way, it is germane to note that there is one other group amongst whom remembered grievances (real or imagined) are also common—Muslims, especially those from the Middle East. Resentments are passed down from generation to generation there, as if they were precious stones, gold or silver.

Posted by Lawrence Auster at September 19, 2012 02:24 PM | Send

Email entry

Email this entry to:

Your email address:

Message (optional):