Of course, 99 percent of southern whites will never go into a church, sit down with people and then massacre them. But that 99 percent is responsible for the one who does. We white southerners — those of us who left, the others who stayed, and even those millions who have migrated to the Sun Belt — are all Dylann Roof. We are all responsible. We cannot shirk it.The white population of South Carolina in the last census was 3,253,700 (total population * 68.88 (percent white) / 100). If 99% of them never go into a church and massacre everyone, that means that 32,537 of them do -- for which massive wave of violence the culture is certainly responsible.
No? Well, perhaps it's 3,253 massacres.
No? 325?
32?
Three?
I'm prepared to turn the other cheek at the anti-Southern rhetoric today, because I understand people are angry and afraid. But come on. Just because you hate your homeland, and therefore part of yourself, don't try to put that on me or mine. We aren't the source of your problem. We're the kind of men who stand ready to kill or die to stop such things. You may hate us, but we aren't your enemy.
10 comments:
I suspect that that this argument is being made by people who also argue that there are moderate Muslims who disapprove of jihadism in all its forms, and that they are not responsible for acts committed by Daesh and Al-Qaeda.
I don't know how this particular guy feels, but you're right: the usual line from the left is that it's bigoted to even ask Muslims to condemn violence by Islamic radicals, because of course they do.
"Here is what Muslims and Muslim organizations are expected to say: 'As a Muslim, I condemn this attack and terrorism in any form.' This expectation we place on Muslims, to be absolutely clear, is Islamophobic and bigoted. The denunciation is a form of apology: an apology for Islam and for Muslims. The implication is that every Muslim is under suspicion of being sympathetic to terrorism unless he or she explicitly says otherwise. The implication is also that any crime committed by a Muslim is the responsibility of all Muslims simply by virtue of their shared religion."
Well, it's not an implication here. It's quite explicit.
I take the unenlightened view that, as long as I'm supporting a law enforcement system that does its best to catch and punish people who shoot up churches, I'm not even remotely responsible for what some crazy jerk does along those lines. If I were out there publishing articles about how what this particular crazy jerk did really wasn't so bad when you think about it and consider the root causes, because isn't he really kind of like the minutemen in a way?--I would fully understand why people thought I shared in his guilt.
And by the way, I'm sorry someone in the church wasn't packing.
The WP writer is simply morally insane. Sorry you have to put up with this crap.
You will notice that he claims to be apologising and taking blame, yet if you read more closely, he isn't. He is confessing other people's sins, which is dishonest and reprehensible. David Foster over at Chicago Boyz had some good commentary about CS Lewis's "The Dangers of National Repentance." http://chicagoboyz.net/archives/14323.html
I've written on the topic myself.
http://assistantvillageidiot.blogspot.com/2010/08/chicago-versus-barmen.html
http://assistantvillageidiot.blogspot.com/2010/08/chicago-versus-barmen-ii.html
"You may hate us, but we aren't your enemy. "
Seems like a fair number of them DO think we are the enemy.
I'm merely referring to my own intentions. They may think what they like.
Probably ten people I know on FB have shared this Onion piece on the Georgia state flag from 1998 today. Georgia has changed its flag twice since 1998. There's no forgiveness to be had: it's too important that we be the ones who bear the sin for the sake of the rest of them, as AVI says.
Which, today, is fine. We can argue the history another day. I just wanted to point out how extravagantly ridiculous this particular claim happens to be.
That would be a cool flag.
Cool ">like this? Or cool like this? It certainly captures a unity of several anti-authority sub-cultures in one image.
That was the point. I tend to think that the adoption of 1956 design was a deliberate "F*** you" to Eisenhower and the Supreme Court. Might as well go all the way.
Liberal Hypocrisy in Two Tweets, courtesy of Salon: "White America must answer for the Charleston church massacre," versus a tweet from several years ago: "Muslims don't need to apologize for the Tsarnaevs."
Post a Comment