Leave it to Shiksa Malkin to once-again stand-up against racism - something she only does when she can actually distort what is being said by anyone left-leaning in order to then use those paid-for talking points to help the GOP machine. Here is what Malkin writes this morning about Rev. Wright's speech:
"Good morning, people. I’ll be on Fox and Friends at around 8:15am to
talk politics. Today’s engine-starter is The American Digest’s post on Jeremiah Wright’s racial brain theories.Do you remember nutball racialist professor Leonard (Blacks are “sun people,” whites are “ice people.”) Jeffries?
<snip>
As I noted yesterday, Wright acted out the differences between black and white marching bands.
<snip>
If he’s this comfortable mocking black/white differences in front of
media cameras, I can only imagine what he says in private to his
faithful black liberation ideology adherents."
Well Michelle proves finally what I have always suspected. The right-wing brain does not see complexity nor does it understand metaphor. It does, however, appear to hate rather well and so this sudden race to defend black America from a popular black pastor leaves me baffled.
After all, is this not the same bigot who argued in defense of Japanese concentration camps? Is this not the same bigot who routinely attacks Muslims and Islam? How very strange that this bigot would suddenly care about black America being insulted by what she now is trying to spin as racists slurs of a black minister. Quite simply put, what Malkin does not get is everything and what she is paid to parrot is garbage.
Let me just say what I got out Rev. Wright's speech. What Malkin points to as white-left brain theory is really what is generally referred to those who study the brain as creativity and emotion vs. logic and how the brain controls both. To say someone is creative is not to say they are unintelligent. By the same token to say that someone is logical does not make them intelligent. But Wright is NOT talking about intelligence in this regard.
Wright is appearing to use this as a metaphor to emphasize how the culture of the American black community is one of storytelling and song from a slave-history in which those were the only tools of expression and documentation available to an enslaved people. He discusses how those traditions have been attacked as matters of intelligence, when they are in fact matters of culture.
Why is that so difficult to understand for Shiksa and the other brain-dead that walk among us? What Wright appears to be saying is that the Euro-centric way of speaking and expression is acceptable no matter how crude, illogical or how un-artistic, while the black-centric way of speaking and expression is seen as a deficiency that must be remedied, even if not remotely crude and entirely logical and artistic.
He shows how an opera singer conveys story through song and also how stories are expressed in black folk music and blues. In other words, what Wright is saying is that the black culture is itself being judged as deficient by a society that views intelligence not based on culture, but on test scores. Now does that sound remotely racist to anyone with any sense? No, it only sounds racist to a bigot.
I urge you to watch the speech in its entirety and not just the snips culled for sale by paid propagandists.
Now for another example of bigots running to defend black America. This one is from the mental-all-star Ed Morrissey:
"This sounds oddly similar to claims made in The Bell Curve by
Charles Murray and Richard Hernstein, a book that created a firestorm
of controversy with claims that race made a difference in IQ scores,
among other claims. The two authors got reviled as racist enablers and
their work became denigrated among a wide swath of researchers for
seriously overreaching the science on which they relied for their
conclusions. Bob Herbert wrote in the New York Times that The Bell Curve was
“a scabrous piece of racial pornography masquerading as serious
scholarship,” and that the book was “just a genteel way of calling
somebody a n****r.” The American Psychological Association dismissed
the racial differences hypothesized as “unsupported”."
Now see, this is really interesting. I have read the Bell Curve - because I had to for a debate class in which I argued against its assertions (which were not all that difficult to debunk). The fact that Morrissey can compare Rev. Wright's metaphor to the racist drivel of the Bell Curve indicates that Morrissey has never read the book, but simply Googled around for something "intelligent" to say.
The Bell Curve argued that certain "races" (as though the human race is actually a variety of different species or something equally idiotic and bigoted) were more intelligent than other races. The authors of this piece of shite were white "intellectuals" for starters, which made their message that much more offensive. More importantly, the authors, Charles Murray and Herrnstein are conservatives, with Murray as a fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. In other words, these fine bigots come from the same side of the bigotry isle as Ed Morrissey and Shiksa Malkin.
Unlike Rev. Wright, Murray and Herrnstein were not using metaphors. They were claiming actual scientific proof of the intelligence of the various "races," based on so-called "scientific" studies they had conducted. And what did they base their findings on? Well, they gave tests to immigrants, uneducated migrant workers, the poor, natives of various tribes, and university students and such (among the larger testing pool).
Do you think they tested black university students and white university students from the same type of socio-economic background as well as other similarities that would ensure that the research was not skewed toward a particular group of people or a particular definition of intelligence?
Nope. They tested highly educated whites against the same measurements they applied to uneducated blacks and from this they got the results they claim as proof.
In addition, cultures that had better educational models, like Japan, were identified as genetically and inherently "more intelligent", as though the quality of the system of education had nothing to do with the level of intelligence measured subsequently. But even we take the quality of the education system of the equation and look simply at all poor people in the US, regardless of gender, "race" etc., would these authors have found a better testing method? No. Because they also don't seem to account for cultural variants.
When testing indigenous people of various African tribes, what types of "intelligence measuring" tools did they employ? Right, the types of measurement tools that don't apply to the culture. In some cultures, for example, the measurement standard for intelligence is in the ability of the person or group to organize the food supplies and resources for an entire tribe. In this country, we cannot seem to manage that even though we have all of the wealth and resources that should make such a task much easier.
Bell Curve does not make that distinction, Rev. Wright does. In other words, Wright argues precisely against what the Bull Curve asserts. So how did Ed Morrissey happen to confuse this? Well, as I have said, he likely did not read the Bell Curve, but simply Googled for something inflammatory to use in his swift-boating of Rev. Wright.
Finally, why are bigots feeling so insulted by something that has nothing to do with them? Let the black community express their feelings on the matter. Shiksa Malkin tries to do this with topics related to Jews and Israel, despite her not being a Jew or a citizen of Israel. Why? How does this in any way affect you, Michelle? Oh wait, I forgot, they get paid to be part of the nationalistic swarm that is released to help swift-boat someone or something that their handlers fear.
