Race, Justice and Jena - Lacks Any Credibility
The Ecoonmist.com
Black Leadership in America
Race, Justice and Jena
September 27th 2007 Jena Louisiana
From the Economist print edition
A sign outside Jena describes it as “a nice place to call home”. But this town in Louisiana is small, poor and, for many, a new symbol of the old-style American racism. On September 20th some 20,000 people rallied in the heat to protest against racial discrimination in the justice system. (Perhaps this should read in Jena’s justice system; there actually may be a difference.) They (meaning black people do you suppose) swamped the local population of 3,000 (white and black residents of Jena perhaps, or just the white one). Dressed in black, they marched peacefully. Some exuberantly likened their protest to the civil-rights marches of the 1960s (where black marches were chewed up by police dogs and their bodies were broken by water cannon). But the campaign to free a group of black students who beat a white classmate (He was no classmate and the writer knows this to be false) somehow lacks the moral clarity of the old crusades against legal segregation and whites-only elections (you mean this has changed). Am I making my point?
Does this paragraph mean that there would have to be the lynching of a black person, man, woman, or child, before there would be moral clarity requiring something to be done by the grand white folk?
I say this because if you read the balance of the article called “Leaders divided” the only leaders divided are black including Mr. Obama, who has the good sense to stay out of it. However the same is not true of “Mr. Sharpton and Mr. Jackson”, who I believe are Christian Ministers. They “are the men every news show calls on to speak for black America. But their credentials for doing so are increasingly disputed.
Now, the Econimist.com writes American style (probably because it is American) and goes about character assassinations like Americans because it is no longer popular after the assassination of Dr. Rev. Martin Luther King and the Honorable Malcolm X to make martyrs of black men.
What about the only leaders that count, those who make the laws in Jena and who tried a young offender as an adult and as it turns out should not have does so? Where is the divided white leadership dissected for detailed explanation before the white and black worlds to see, as if there were significant truths about the explanation?
The Ecominist.com lacks any credibility in my mind. I once thought that this British news publication was impeccable, but I now see it for what it is. I am disappointed but I should not be because it too is merely part of the age of the internet chatter and talk radio.
Link: http://www.economist.com/displaystory.cfm?story_id=9867677#top
Black Leadership in America
Race, Justice and Jena
September 27th 2007 Jena Louisiana
From the Economist print edition
A sign outside Jena describes it as “a nice place to call home”. But this town in Louisiana is small, poor and, for many, a new symbol of the old-style American racism. On September 20th some 20,000 people rallied in the heat to protest against racial discrimination in the justice system. (Perhaps this should read in Jena’s justice system; there actually may be a difference.) They (meaning black people do you suppose) swamped the local population of 3,000 (white and black residents of Jena perhaps, or just the white one). Dressed in black, they marched peacefully. Some exuberantly likened their protest to the civil-rights marches of the 1960s (where black marches were chewed up by police dogs and their bodies were broken by water cannon). But the campaign to free a group of black students who beat a white classmate (He was no classmate and the writer knows this to be false) somehow lacks the moral clarity of the old crusades against legal segregation and whites-only elections (you mean this has changed). Am I making my point?
Does this paragraph mean that there would have to be the lynching of a black person, man, woman, or child, before there would be moral clarity requiring something to be done by the grand white folk?
I say this because if you read the balance of the article called “Leaders divided” the only leaders divided are black including Mr. Obama, who has the good sense to stay out of it. However the same is not true of “Mr. Sharpton and Mr. Jackson”, who I believe are Christian Ministers. They “are the men every news show calls on to speak for black America. But their credentials for doing so are increasingly disputed.
Now, the Econimist.com writes American style (probably because it is American) and goes about character assassinations like Americans because it is no longer popular after the assassination of Dr. Rev. Martin Luther King and the Honorable Malcolm X to make martyrs of black men.
What about the only leaders that count, those who make the laws in Jena and who tried a young offender as an adult and as it turns out should not have does so? Where is the divided white leadership dissected for detailed explanation before the white and black worlds to see, as if there were significant truths about the explanation?
The Ecominist.com lacks any credibility in my mind. I once thought that this British news publication was impeccable, but I now see it for what it is. I am disappointed but I should not be because it too is merely part of the age of the internet chatter and talk radio.
Link: http://www.economist.com/displaystory.cfm?story_id=9867677#top
posted by F. Stanley Boyd | 5:39 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home