|The Klan is everywhere in Amerikkka|
This is the Emmett Till case of the day....America has experienced a Black Holocaust, where Black males, are concerned. Martin's tragedy triggers the reality of this history. It cannot be overlooked. This is racism in 2013, existing in what some consider a post racial society with a sitting Black President in the White House.There's more of it, but you know what it says: today is just like 1955, when most state governments still paid bounties for scalps and stuff.
One of the great ironies of Progressivism is how far they will twist logic and facts to avoid the admission that we as a society have made any progress* in the area of racial relations. It's especially funny to read statistics like "The Tuskegee Institute recorded 3,446 lynchings of Black men from 1882 to 1968" as evidence of the problem of racism in America today. 1968, for those keeping track at home, was 45 years ago.
How many of these lynchings took place in the 10 years prior to 1968? 4 of the 3446, or 1/10th of one percent. How many of them took place in the decade prior to that, a decade that includes almost the entire Civil Rights movement? 9 of the 3446, 1/5th of one percent. In fact, there has not been a year with 10 or more lynchings of blacks in America since the height of the Great Depression, 1935. Almost 80 years ago. There were more lynchings of blacks in the each of the years 1885** - 1904 than there have been in all of the years since 1936 combined. By any rational standard, we as a society have moved past it.
One and a half times as many black men were murdered in 2011, most of them by other black men, than were lynched in the entire century and a half since 1882. Did I mention that Progressives lack perspective?
So why do Progressives cling to the past so dearly? There are actually two answers.
The main reason that black progressives do it is to keep black people scared. When integration became a reality in the late 60s, there came a reaction among a certain portion of the black population against it. The Black Power movement and the Black Muslims arose around the same time. Blacks started naming their children with psuedo-African names, separating them from the American mainstream. Part of it was based on a fear that they really could not compete: if slavery and segregation did anything, they convinced much of the black population of white supremacy. Part of it was bitterness over their treatment at the hands of whites. Whatever the reason - and it doesn't matter which, the result is the same - a significant portion of blacks refused to integrate. They developed, in fact, an oppositional culture. Three generations later we have many blacks who simply cannot compete and cannot integrate. They can only be organized and motivated. They are most easily motivated by fear, which is precisely what black progressives do. White racism, real or imagined, is a great motivator because it has been so real in our history.
White Progressives, and especially white race warriors, hold onto the past because they want to set themselves above other whites. It's therapy for them. To their black mascots, they want to say, whites are racist, but I'm not (of course, this is great for organizing, but that's not its primary purpose). To whites they say, you're a racist redneck and I'm not. Holding onto the past - exaggerating racism and denying progress - makes the lines clear. If you downplay their exaggerations, it's proof that you're a racist. If you want a "dialog on race" that is more than listening to their monologue, you're a racist. And especially if you claim that the problems in Black America today arise primarily from the actions of Black Americans today, you're a racist. You're not advanced and tolerant and sophisticated like they are. No tolerance for intolerance!
But Progressives cannot do so without a little bit of cognitive dissonance. They have to chant and march about a kid killed by a half white wannabe security guard, but they cannot chant and march about 15 times that many kids killed by gang bangers every week in Chicago. If you protest that, you're blaming the victim, because even blacks with guns are victims. All blacks are to be considered victims, helpless in the face of life, infantilized, not responsible for their own actions, on account of their blackness. Only white people are to be treated as moral agents. That's not racism in their minds.
But of course, it's impossible to read any piece written by a Progressive that contains more than 5 sentences without finding at least one display of laughable ignorance***:
The American court system states that you will receive a jury of your peers...peer needs to be redefined. Peers for Martin’s case would mean young Black men on the jury. Not a one. There peers were all women, one of color.The last time I checked, Martin was not on trial, Zimmerman was. In which case, perhaps he should have received a jury of 6 Hispanic men? I'm sure Ms. Hartman might find a bit of fault with that idea...
* Assuming you consider that undeniable change "progress." I personally think some of it is, and some of it is not, but it's hard to deny that it's the change Progressives asked for.
** Ironically, the last year in which more whites than blacks were lynched.
*** If they were not unfathomably ignorant of subjects like history and the Constitution, they would not be Progressives in the first place.