(Ed – Edited and shortened original version of this post.)
I have not posted about (former) agricultural official Shirley Sherrod because frankly am mighty tired of talking about “race”. And boy are we talking about it a lot since 2008. Which is strange.
The significance of this story lies not with Ms Sherrod but with how everyone reacted. This is where it gets messy and ugly. Because everybody – excuse me almost everybody – looks bad. Prominent left wing organization looks bad. White House looks bad. Leftist aka “liberal” Mainstream media looks bad. Liberal aka “conservative” media look bad.
Ann Althouse as always finds the subtle truth that eludes everyone else including me:
To react like that [ed - see edited video and condemn Ms Sherrod as racist] is to display the same human weakness that underlies racism itself. You see one thing, you see the whole person as nothing but that one thing, you feel instinctive aversion and fear, and you reflexively push that person away. Blaming those who showed you that one thing does not absolve you from your responsibility to rise above the level of instinct and fear. It is up to you to go beyond your first perception, to search for the truth, and to use reason and judgment before you make a decision about someone.
The Anchoress has an exceptional post on this mess. May she forgive me for quoting her at length but I want everyone to read this:
This whole sordid mess of a story–which is clearly not over–may tell us that it is past time for people of good will to stop tolerating politically-expedient charges of racism [ed - link added], regardless of whether they originate from genuinely from overzealous, malicious bloggers or from Congressmen who are confident that any charge they make will be deemed insta-credible, or from journalists who ignore real racism while trying to ignite the charge elsewhere, for the advancement of their own partisan agendas, or from the rightly marginalized, fringe-living, stupid people who every sensible person condemns.
The NAACP’s maneuver last week was an attempt at cynical manipulation, a lazy card they thought they could play, because it’s always taken the pot, before. They ticked off Breitbart, who upped the ante, but appears to have done so recklessly.
Everyone’s credibility is now strained, and perhaps that is a good thing. Perhaps the left should finally leave behind the smug instinct to sniff, “racism, straight up” over sincere disagreements on policy. If they can manage that, then perhaps the right can stop feeling so defensive.
There is absolutely nothing simple about the matter of race in America; there is a ways to go before content of character will finally overcome color of skin. But I am not sure if further progress toward a truly color-blind society can be made until the manufactured cry of “raaaaacism”–by people who know that their are merely fanning flames or manipulating movements–has finally been rejected by both the right and the left. Race-baiters must be made to understand that their cheap tactic will no longer bear weight among fair-minded people, who are horrified by genuine racism but tired of its weaponized unreasonable facsimile.
In a nation that has come far enough to see African-Americans hold its highest offices, and wield enormous power–power given to them by people of all races and backgrounds, who can and will take it back at their own pleasure–the overplayed charge of “racism” among the chatterers is not only toxic, it is self-revelatory: it betrays their own tawdry cynicism, and their own racial fixations. (emphasis in original)
Word.
She also provides a list of links. Check some of them out. Here are a couple extra:
- Politics, Policy, Pathology and Hope within the Black Community – “I a black conservator support Shirley Sherrod” (addresses issue of statements taken out of context and problem with “gotcha” journalism)
- The Right Scoop – “Glenn Beck Defends Shirley Sherrod” (calls into question the charge of racism within the NAACP)
During the last few years I have become more interested in reading and watching mysteries. Stay with me.
There is a theme one finds in nearly every mystery story. There is a crime. The main character(s) investigates the crime. And uncovers a host of sins and smaller crimes that are not always connected to the main crime.
Several years ago there was one of those excellent films that not many people watched. “Snow Falling on Cedars” based on the novel by David Guterson.
Set on the fictional San Piedro Island in the northern Puget Sound region of the state of Washington coast in 1951, the plot revolves around the murder case of Kazuo Miyamoto, a Japanese American accused of killing Carl Heine, a respected fisherman in the close-knit community. The trial occurs in the midst of deep anti-Japanese sentiments following World War II. Covering the case is the editor of the town’s one-man newspaper, Ishmael Chambers, a World War II veteran who lost an arm fighting the Japanese. Torn by a sense of hatred for the Japanese, Chambers struggles with his love for Kazuo’s wife, Hatsue, and his conscience, wondering if Kazuo is truly innocent.
Spearheading the prosecution are the town’s sheriff, Art Moran, and prosecutor, Alvin Hooks. Leading the defense is the old, experienced Nels Gudmundsson. An underlying theme throughout the trial is prejudice. Several witnesses, including Etta Heine, Carl’s mother, accuse Kazuo of murdering Carl for racial and personal reasons.
Snap judgment. Kazuo is guilty. Racial and personal reasons.
And yet during the trial we discover that those who accuse Kazuo themselves harbor prejudice. They did not support or defend their Japanese-American friends and neighbors when they were taken to internment camps. We also learn about a disputed parcel of land which the Miyamoto family was going(?) to purchase from the Heine family. To simplify a complicated story the Heine family kept most of the money paid for the land but sold it to another family. That must be why Kazuo murdered Carl.
Here is the point. Those who accuse Kazuo reveal their own prejudice and cynicism. In the same way how we judge(d) Shirley Sherrod reveals much about ourselves.
Can you believe the nerve of that woman who washes the feet of Christ with her tears and dries them with her hair?!?
Lord have mercy on me.
