22nd May 2013
"Through a career that has included crotch-grabbing, nudity, BDSM, Marilyn Monroe fetishizing, and a 1992 book devoted to sex, Madonna has been viewed as a feminist provocateur, pushing the boundaries of acceptable femininity. But Beyoncé’s use of her body is criticized as thoughtless and without value beyond male titillation, providing a modern example of the age-old racist juxtaposition of animalistic black sexuality vs. controlled, intentional, and civilized white sexuality."
14th May 2013

RNC Director Of Hispanic Outreach Quits Party And Registers As A Democrat

rubyvroom:

lagertha-lodbrok:

theuppitynegras:

justinspoliticalcorner:

When Republicans appointed Pablo Pantoja to State Director of Florida Hispanic Outreach for the Republican National Committee, they hoped he would be able to bridge the sizable gap that only expanded during the 2012 elections, when the state’s 4.7 million Hispanic voters supported Barack Obama over Mitt Romney by a 20 percent margin.

But after months of inaction by Congressional Republicans on comprehensive immigration reform and stiff resistance by Republican-leaning groups like the Heritage Foundation, Pantoja has had enough; on Monday, he announced via email that he was leaving the party and registering as a Democrat:

Friend,

Yes, I have changed my political affiliation to the Democratic Party.

It doesn’t take much to see the culture of intolerance surrounding the Republican Party today. I have wondered before about the seemingly harsh undertones about immigrants and others. Look no further; a well-known organization recently confirms the intolerance of that which seems different or strange to them.

Pantoja goes on to specifically cite last week’s revelation — that an author of Heritage’s false report on the cost of the Gang of Eight’s immigration bill wrote a dissertation in which he suggested that Hispanics are at a permanent disadvantage because they have lower IQs — as the final straw in his political evolution.

h/t: Adam Peck at Think Progress Justice

haha i was just reading this and cackling

beautiful

I’ve been seeing that Heritage propaganda reported as fact in US newspapers. Will they report this? Doubtful.

5th Dec 2012

inkdot:

clickthefrog:

tomhardies:

alisonofagun:

aragingquiet:

tranzient:

girljanitor:

toonsketchbook:

Okay so I know this is kinda taboo but anyways.

Frida Kahlo: Not too easy on the eyes. I mean she’s got the lady-mo and the monobrow thing going on. She didn’t know where to put her blush or what shade lipstick would obviously suit her skin tone. Really, she’s a bit of a wreck. So this got me to thinking. What would have happened if her girlfriends had done the right thing and taken her to a beautician, (which clearly needed to happen)? I did a subtle re-paint over the top of her original self-portrait to “conceptualize” what it would have looked like if she had been whisked off to Beauty Works or the likes….I didn’t want to alter the integrity of the original painting too much. What do you reckon?

Did you really just skin-lighten a Frida Kahlo self portait

and remove her facial hair

and call her “a wreck”

and then say she couldn’t choose a fucking lipstick to suit her skin tone

after you changed her skin tone

how can one person be everything that is wrong with the world at once

remember that time frida kahlo said white people were boring and had faces like unbaked rolls

yeahhhh

What the sweet fuck just happened?

image

Kahlo’s eyebrows and mustache were a purposeful rejection of white colonizer standards of beauty; she didn’t just leave them on her face they way they grew, she groomed them and darkened them with makeup. Her appearance was beautiful, and it was intentional. I just—

you lightened her fucking skin, what the fuck is wrong with you?

How dare you. that’s all I have to say. How, fucking dare you. Get the fuck on with your ‘standard of beauty’ bullshit. Never tell a woman how they need to look. Fuck the fuck off. Obnoxious jerk-off

Oh my god

image

someday when someone asks me the exact moment when i just lost my goddamn shit so completely i wanted to reach through the internets and shove a cluebat right up someone’s nose like i have literally never wanted to before:

it was this one. this one right here.

14th Nov 2012

I’mma need

girljanitor:

witchsistah:

The History channel NOT to call indigenous peoples “primitive” simply because they don’t want none of your White Western technologies an’ shit.

They always edit out the fact that like 80-90% of those “primitive” people have cell phones and other technologies that are just damn convenient, and integrate them seamlessly into traditional life.

The Maasai, traditional pastoral and nomadic folk use cell phones to coordinate business and everyday life as well as call doctors, and gain access to apps for weather and grazing information. (article has video)

And just text each other and bullshit.

Also, traditional Cambodian folks

Traditional Mongolian folks (dressed for Naadam in the photo)

And traditional Inuit living in arctic Canada generally use the internet to connect and also pass on those traditions to the next generation…

So yeah a ton of those documentary-anthropology shows are editing out things that don’t fit their idea of “primitive” and then ramble on and on about how “primitive” the people they’re following around with cameras are.

It’s total bullshit.

20th Sep 2012
nervousacid:

The Mitt Romney secret video scandal has really caught fire, as it should, because it paints a less rehearsed portrait of a man who has been often charged with saying anything to get elected and gives us a glimpse at what he’d say if being elected didn’t matter. But while I understand the focus and concern on Romney’s contempt for the alleged 47 percent of Americans who “pay no income tax” — a distortion that has been debunked several times now — I am concerned about the second-tier relegation of Romney’s deluded insinuation that had his father “been born of Mexican parents, I’d have a better shot of winning this.” Because this is something worth talking about too.
First things first: The cynicism embedded in this remark is insanely racist. Let’s not be polite about it. A subnarrative concerning Romney’s beliefs about race in America can be drawn out from this statement alone, and it’s important that these points be raised and explored for what they’re worth. That so many of the news establishments reporting this story have treated this as a somewhat throwaway remark belittles the relation between race and the American political process and hints at the media’s own subtle racism. So even if this post exists solely for the sake of saying it out loud, the discursive implications of such a statement need exposition. Full disclosure: I am an Hispanic American and my shots at winning the presidency are not as good as Mitt thinks. 
Inference #1: Mexicans and other Hispanic Americans are becoming a majority class and white people will suffer under this population shift.
In the 2010 U.S. Census Report, Hispanics in America topped 50 million and accounted for one out of every six Americans. It is predicted that by 2050, Hispanics will make up as much as one-third of the American population. This is only a cause for alarm if you conflate America and so-called “American values” with whiteness and so-called “cultural superiority.” We already know that Romney believes that cultural superiority translates into economic prosperity; he literally said that in a slight to the Palestinians on his botched foreign relations tour. It is not a stretch, therefore, to assume that this version of ethnic anxiety extends to his own white-washed perception of America, and this is perhaps what compels Romney’s surrogates to fearlessly call press conferences and say things like “I wish this president would learn how to be an American” in reference to our first African American president. It’s the reason Romney himself is able to make “jokes” about how no one has ever asked to see his birth certificate. “I’m white,” he is saying, “so of course I’m American!”
In a great moment of candor, Rush Limbaugh perfectly expressed the kind of fear these implications are meant to generate: Obama hates white people, Limbaugh says, and he’s going to send us (ostensibly white) Republicans “to the back of the bus.” In other words, if we don’t “take our country back,” we are going to live under the thumb of the new majority — and if they treat us the way we treated them, we’re fucked.
Inference #2: Hispanic Americans are the recipients of handouts by birthright.
If we were to assign the “47 percent” that Romney has segregated into a categorical position, the implication is that there are two types of Americans in Romney’s mind: those that depend on government assistance and lack a sense of “personal responsibility,” and those who work hard and are “vilified” for their success. The hard-working success stories are Republican voters — natch! — while the 47 percent of Americans on the government teat, he clearly assumes, vote Democrat. Now, combine those numbers with the figures that represent Republican voters, and an even more interesting picture emerges. Indeed, almost 90 percent of all Republican voters in presidential elections are white. Which is to say that, in Romney-math, only 10 percent of all hard-working Americans are not white.
The sense that “they” are taking our jobs and that “they” are living off government programs is statistically untrue, but popular nonetheless, and in this case, Romney seems to be feeding into this white racist fiction while also alluding to the notion that Obama did not earn the presidency, but had it handed to him by virtue of his race alone. It has nothing to do with the fact that Obama is the only candidate in this race who does not treat people of color like unwanted statistical abstractions, Romney believes, but because “they” have it easier than we do. Obviously.
Inference #3: As a white man in America, Mitt Romney wasn’t privileged enough.
When you’re in a room surrounded by wealthy white men like yourself, it is important to assert your power not only with a copy of your bank balance, but with a Homeric-like myth that asserts your own storied ascent to the aristocracy. Nobody wants to hear about how easy you had it; they want to trade war stories and buy $150 shirts with WE BUILT THIS! slogans on them. So by mourning the purity of his Anglo-Saxon heritage, Romney is simply adding another layer to the epic. Elsewhere in the video, he explains:

I have inherited nothing. There is a perception, “Oh, we were born with a silver spoon, he never had to earn anything and so forth.” Frankly, I was born with a silver spoon, which is the greatest gift you can have: which is to get born in America.

Which is, like, yes Mitt. Totally. Being born in America is the only reason you are successful. You never had a leg up. You were never the recipient of a handout. Your birthright only guaranteed your chiseled facial features. You’re a self-made man and this is your Odyssey. Except that it’s not and you weren’t. The New Yorker’s Amy Davidson sums it up quite nicely:

Romney was the son of a governor and an auto executive who gave him a wealth of connections, a private education, college tuition, a stock portfolio that he lived on while in graduate school, help buying a first house. That he recognizes the value of none of these things is both dismaying and discouraging for anyone who thinks that he will be able to do much to actually encourage opportunity in America. He is clear enough about one difference money can make in life, when he tells those present, “Frankly, what I need you to do is to raise millions of dollars.”

In other words, if only Mitt Romney were Mexican, only then would he have everything. For now, he’ll just have to settle for the privileges and entitlements awarded for being white, wealthy, and male. If only he were Mexican, he might finally become president too. What else could explain it? He’s worked harder for this than for anything else he’s ever done, so if Mitt Romney loses this election, it’s going to have to be somebody else’s fault. If only he could find someone to blame.

nervousacid:

The Mitt Romney secret video scandal has really caught fire, as it should, because it paints a less rehearsed portrait of a man who has been often charged with saying anything to get elected and gives us a glimpse at what he’d say if being elected didn’t matter. But while I understand the focus and concern on Romney’s contempt for the alleged 47 percent of Americans who “pay no income tax” — a distortion that has been debunked several times now — I am concerned about the second-tier relegation of Romney’s deluded insinuation that had his father “been born of Mexican parents, I’d have a better shot of winning this.” Because this is something worth talking about too.

First things first: The cynicism embedded in this remark is insanely racist. Let’s not be polite about it. A subnarrative concerning Romney’s beliefs about race in America can be drawn out from this statement alone, and it’s important that these points be raised and explored for what they’re worth. That so many of the news establishments reporting this story have treated this as a somewhat throwaway remark belittles the relation between race and the American political process and hints at the media’s own subtle racism. So even if this post exists solely for the sake of saying it out loud, the discursive implications of such a statement need exposition. Full disclosure: I am an Hispanic American and my shots at winning the presidency are not as good as Mitt thinks. 

Inference #1: Mexicans and other Hispanic Americans are becoming a majority class and white people will suffer under this population shift.

In the 2010 U.S. Census Report, Hispanics in America topped 50 million and accounted for one out of every six Americans. It is predicted that by 2050, Hispanics will make up as much as one-third of the American population. This is only a cause for alarm if you conflate America and so-called “American values” with whiteness and so-called “cultural superiority.” We already know that Romney believes that cultural superiority translates into economic prosperity; he literally said that in a slight to the Palestinians on his botched foreign relations tour. It is not a stretch, therefore, to assume that this version of ethnic anxiety extends to his own white-washed perception of America, and this is perhaps what compels Romney’s surrogates to fearlessly call press conferences and say things like “I wish this president would learn how to be an American” in reference to our first African American president. It’s the reason Romney himself is able to make “jokes” about how no one has ever asked to see his birth certificate. “I’m white,” he is saying, “so of course I’m American!”

In a great moment of candor, Rush Limbaugh perfectly expressed the kind of fear these implications are meant to generate: Obama hates white people, Limbaugh says, and he’s going to send us (ostensibly white) Republicans “to the back of the bus.” In other words, if we don’t “take our country back,” we are going to live under the thumb of the new majority — and if they treat us the way we treated them, we’re fucked.

Inference #2: Hispanic Americans are the recipients of handouts by birthright.

If we were to assign the “47 percent” that Romney has segregated into a categorical position, the implication is that there are two types of Americans in Romney’s mind: those that depend on government assistance and lack a sense of “personal responsibility,” and those who work hard and are “vilified” for their success. The hard-working success stories are Republican voters — natch! — while the 47 percent of Americans on the government teat, he clearly assumes, vote Democrat. Now, combine those numbers with the figures that represent Republican voters, and an even more interesting picture emerges. Indeed, almost 90 percent of all Republican voters in presidential elections are white. Which is to say that, in Romney-math, only 10 percent of all hard-working Americans are not white.

The sense that “they” are taking our jobs and that “they” are living off government programs is statistically untrue, but popular nonetheless, and in this case, Romney seems to be feeding into this white racist fiction while also alluding to the notion that Obama did not earn the presidency, but had it handed to him by virtue of his race alone. It has nothing to do with the fact that Obama is the only candidate in this race who does not treat people of color like unwanted statistical abstractions, Romney believes, but because “they” have it easier than we do. Obviously.

Inference #3: As a white man in America, Mitt Romney wasn’t privileged enough.

When you’re in a room surrounded by wealthy white men like yourself, it is important to assert your power not only with a copy of your bank balance, but with a Homeric-like myth that asserts your own storied ascent to the aristocracy. Nobody wants to hear about how easy you had it; they want to trade war stories and buy $150 shirts with WE BUILT THIS! slogans on them. So by mourning the purity of his Anglo-Saxon heritage, Romney is simply adding another layer to the epic. Elsewhere in the video, he explains:

I have inherited nothing. There is a perception, “Oh, we were born with a silver spoon, he never had to earn anything and so forth.” Frankly, I was born with a silver spoon, which is the greatest gift you can have: which is to get born in America.

Which is, like, yes Mitt. Totally. Being born in America is the only reason you are successful. You never had a leg up. You were never the recipient of a handout. Your birthright only guaranteed your chiseled facial features. You’re a self-made man and this is your Odyssey. Except that it’s not and you weren’t. The New Yorker’s Amy Davidson sums it up quite nicely:

Romney was the son of a governor and an auto executive who gave him a wealth of connections, a private education, college tuition, a stock portfolio that he lived on while in graduate school, help buying a first house. That he recognizes the value of none of these things is both dismaying and discouraging for anyone who thinks that he will be able to do much to actually encourage opportunity in America. He is clear enough about one difference money can make in life, when he tells those present, “Frankly, what I need you to do is to raise millions of dollars.”

In other words, if only Mitt Romney were Mexican, only then would he have everything. For now, he’ll just have to settle for the privileges and entitlements awarded for being white, wealthy, and male. If only he were Mexican, he might finally become president too. What else could explain it? He’s worked harder for this than for anything else he’s ever done, so if Mitt Romney loses this election, it’s going to have to be somebody else’s fault. If only he could find someone to blame.

18th Sep 2012
ronniedobbs:

Everybody should just shut down their computers and read a book. This is the funniest thing (from Twitter’s #MuslimRage page) anyone will say on the internet all week.

ronniedobbs:

Everybody should just shut down their computers and read a book. This is the funniest thing (from Twitter’s #MuslimRage page) anyone will say on the internet all week.

(Source: madrassoup)

11th Sep 2012

ClutchMag: A Black Mom-in-Chief is Revolutionary: What White Feminist Get Wrong about Michelle Obama

onecatch:

Feminists who wish that Obama would strike a blow for feminism and against stereotyped roles of women, too easily forget that all women are not burdened by the same stereotypes. The way sexism visits white women and women of color, including black women, is similar in its devastation but often unique in its practice.

Wow, this is really great. There’s this assumption by mainstream, usually white feminists that everyone’s gotta fall in line with their party platform, regardless of history or context or if it’s even applicable to a black woman in the position Michelle Obama is. 

(Source: glossylalia)

4th Sep 2012
"[M]any nations of the third world are described as ‘underdeveloped’. These less wealthy nations are generally those that suffered under colonialism and neo-colonialism. The ‘developed’ nations are those that exploited their resources and wealth. Therefore, rather than referring to these countries as ‘underdeveloped’, a more appropriate and meaningful designation might be ‘over exploited’. Again, transpose this term next time you read about the ‘underdeveloped nations’ and note the different meaning that results."
Source: Robert B. Moore, “Racist Stereotyping in the English Language” (via wretchedoftheearth)
30th Aug 2012
Ignore all the bullshit platitudes and obscuring language they spewed at us this week and will over the next two months, the real message of the Republican Party in 2012 is right there. I mean, it’s right there. That’s what they think is okay to think and do and say, in their heads and in private and on national television. That’s what they expect and plan to do to all of us who aren’t like them.

Ignore all the bullshit platitudes and obscuring language they spewed at us this week and will over the next two months, the real message of the Republican Party in 2012 is right there. I mean, it’s right there. That’s what they think is okay to think and do and say, in their heads and in private and on national television. That’s what they expect and plan to do to all of us who aren’t like them.

30th Aug 2012
rubyvroom:

bioticbootyshaker:

TW: Racism
afroboheme:

-osito:

suzy-x:

fatbodypolitics:

gop-circus:

no other confirmation aside from tweets right now….looking for a link currently

Here is an article


OH MY FUCKING GOD WHAT

They also booed a speaker from Puerto Rico (who had an accent) and started chanting “USA! USA!” and “America!” before she could speak.
The racism is astounding and terrifying but not all too surprising

Racist ass bastards. Fuck you assholes

What the actual fuck.

And anybody who’s willing to turn a blind eye to the racism in the Republican party and support them anyway is not allowed to claim they’re not racist themselves. Because this shit matters. It matters.

rubyvroom:

bioticbootyshaker:

TW: Racism

afroboheme:

-osito:

suzy-x:

fatbodypolitics:

gop-circus:

no other confirmation aside from tweets right now….looking for a link currently

Here is an article

OH MY FUCKING GOD WHAT

They also booed a speaker from Puerto Rico (who had an accent) and started chanting “USA! USA!” and “America!” before she could speak.

The racism is astounding and terrifying but not all too surprising

Racist ass bastards. Fuck you assholes

What the actual fuck.

And anybody who’s willing to turn a blind eye to the racism in the Republican party and support them anyway is not allowed to claim they’re not racist themselves. Because this shit matters. It matters.

7th Aug 2012

racebending:

Modern Day Yellowface in Cloud Atlas

aka: Um, excuse me, but your fake slanty eyelid was applied crooked.”

and also:  Why hire Asian American men when we can put white guys in yellowface?

as well as: Warner Bros trying to be all “edgy” and “diverse” in the trailer by making the only Asian actors sexualized voiceless clones.

maybe: Someone needs to tell Jim Sturgess (21) to stop trying to become the most famous young white actor with the most high profile whitewashed/yellowface roles

and because someone is going to say it: It doesn’t matter if it is “artistic” and putting the Asian actress in whiteface doesn’t even things out when you have a fistful of white guys in yellowface as the only representation of Asian men.

why not:  Hire a well known Korean American hapa actor like Daniel Henney, the same way you hired Halle Berry, if you really wanted to “go there”?

how much: Money did you spend on make up and why do all these “Asian” guys have hooded monolids?  Because they look terrible.

last word:  This is from the same studio that wanted to whitewash Akira, Death Note, Bleach, and cast Tom Cruise as a 16 year old Japanese mecha driver in All You Need is Kill/We Heroes All.  And then put several Asian male characters in yellowface.  

easier: To come up with excuses to defend this rather than examine how practices like this perpetuate racism and discrimination.

(Someone please turn creepy Elrond in yellowface into a meme.)

6th Jul 2012
"Chris Rock seems to have tweeted up a bit of controversy over the July 4th holiday. The comedian, whose latest project is executive producing ‘Totally Biased’ with W. Kamau Bell for FX, ruffled more than a few feathers after sending out this message to his followers: “Happy white peoples independence day the slaves weren’t free but I’m sure they enjoyed fireworks."
3rd Jul 2012

supersandys-space:

Last night in my hometown a man named Lucas Dane Stevens fled police in his vehicle leading to a high-speed chase in which he rammed a patrol car, then pulled a knife on officers after fleeing his car on foot.

He was on methamphetamine and had 5.2 grams of the drug on him. And he had a knife. The cops didn’t think he had one, he had one, and he tried to hurt them with it. Nonetheless, he’s alive and well and sitting in an air-conditioned jail on a $173,000 bond.

Unlike Michael Laney of Charlotte, North Carolina, Stevens was arrested. Stevens was not handcuffed and shot in the back of the head and written off as a “suspect” simply because he was riding a red scooter.

One of these men had a weapon. One did not. One was on drugs. One was sober. One is alive. One is dead. One was the suspect. One was the victim.

One is white. One is—was—black. That’s all it takes, folks. That’s white privilege. Check yours, fellow white people. Seriously. We call 911 for help all the time and don’t get shot execution style. This shit has to stop!!

27th Jun 2012

ONLY FOR THE PRESSED: A huge side-eye to all the newly revealed racism/homophobia/(white,...

stopwhitewashing:

fromthemargintothecenter:

catface-mcgee:

pleasecarrymehometonight:

onlyforthepressed:

A huge side-eye to all the newly revealed racism/homophobia/(white, straight) privilege apologists who just made themselves known by reblogging that post on Martin Freeman and adding their shitty commentary.

I see you bending over backwards to give dude a pass for some CLEARLY UNACCEPTABLE comments. Good to know that it’s just another regular day on Tumblr where straight white dudes can do and say the worst shit and it’s cool bc HE’S JUST SO ADORABLE and bc HE’S A GOOD ACTOR AND IN SOME OF MY FAV SHOWS/MOVIES.

So in your eyes, anything discriminatory is absolutely acceptable as long as the speaker/writer is black/gay/disabled etc. Because in the real world, any kind of remarks with malicious intentions are unacceptable regardless of what kind of person they are. Have you ever thought that people are not defending him because of his race etc.? But instead because there’s a thing called humour and common sense. Either of which, if you possess some, would see the lack of malicious intentions behind any of his remarks. 

So honey, please, grow up and shut up; you’re lowering the IQ of the entire internet.

Ok, I’ll bite.

So, to begin with, the original poster is obviously not saying that white, straight men are the only people who should be called out on their offensive behaviour/statements.  What they’re saying is that they tend to be exactly the people who never are.  The point is that people will bend over backwards to defend the honour of white doodz, while happily vilifying poc for the same crimes.  (Compare feminist reaction to Chris Brown with feminist non-reaction to Michael Fassbender, Gary Oldman, Sean Connery, Sean Penn etc etc.)  The OP is basically reacting here to the way in which white men exclusively get a free pass for anything and everything they say and do, on the basis of their attractiveness or ability to make RLY GUD MOVIES.  Martin Freeman is simply the latest in a long line of tiresome examples of this trend.

Secondly, I’ll address your point about ‘malicious intent’.  You know, there are very few people in the world who wake up in the morning and think: ‘You know what I’m going to do today? I’m going to be really fucking racist!’  What happens is that people have ingrained beliefs and attitudes which - often unbeknownst to them! - happen to be really fucking racist. And these beliefs and attitudes naturally come out in the things they say and do, which leads to that familiar phenomenon we call ‘saying really fucking racist shit’.  No ‘malicious intent’ required!

So, regardless of the fact that Martin Freeman almost certainly did not walk into this interview with the stated intent of making poc cry, nonetheless much of what he says reveals some seriously rank attitudes that mark him out as, I’m afraid to say, a big fat fucking racist.

Let’s take a look:

“The idea was that I was going to complain because there weren’t enough blues dances out here; not enough ragga around. But I’m not bothered by it.”

Obviously what he’s saying here is that his acquaintance expected him to object to the dearth of black people in his neighbourhood.  He chooses to express this through stereotypes. He then follows this up with this sadly illuminating comment:

“Multiculturalism hasn’t and doesn’t help, because rightly or wrongly it polarises people so much”

So what Freeman is saying here, it seems, is that he is quite happy to be surrounded almost exclusively by white people, because ‘multiculturalism’ is not a good thing (or ‘doesn’t help’ as he so diplomatically puts it).  If this little series of comments isn’t already throwing up all your racism red flags, your flagging system is broken. 

“Racism is one thing ? and I don’t agree with that in any form ? noticing that there are differences is normal and fine and to be encouraged.

He starts off reasonably well here.  Yes, we should acknowledge our differences!  Let’s all stop acting like accepting people by pretending really hard that they’re white is a means of combating racism and not, you know, a particularly egregious example of it!  Maybe Martin Freeman does get it after all!

“We’ve reached a state now where it’s, ‘You shouldn’t notice. Why are you noticing he’s got a bomb and has a beard and is Muslim and wants to kill your family?”

OhI see. Those kinds of ‘differences’ (fabricated ones based on misinformation and stereotypes).  That kind of ‘noticing’ (judgement and hostility ‘justified’ by the above).  I see where we’re standing now.

“There is no country in the world like this. If all of a sudden all the traffic wardens in Ghana were Welsh, they’d really notice and might not love it? We give ourselves a hard time in this country in a sort of mea culpa way. But if we were that racist, people wouldn’t come. Very simple.”

So this is the really telling comment, in my opinion.  I think we can quite reasonably assume that ‘Ghana’ and ‘Wales’ are being used as stand ins for ‘black’ and ‘white’ by Mr Freeman here.  So what he’s saying is that no-one in <predominantly black country> would feel badly (‘mea culpa’) about objecting to an influx of white people (welsh traffic wardens).  And yet ‘we’ (white British people) give ourselves a hard time over the reverse (the implication being that this is unnecessary).  Or in translation: White British people shouldn’t feel bad about objecting to the number of poc in ‘their’ country.

Ladies and gentlemen I present to you: a big fat fucking racist.

#HE THEN PROCEEDS TO USE THE N-WORD 6 TIMES #JUST IN CASE WE HADN’T GOT THE POINT #I MEAN SERIOUSLY - THIS IS NOT COVERT RACISM FOLKS #ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU CONSIDER THAT PEOPLE WILL ALWAYS TRY TO PRESENT THE BEST SIDE OF THEMSELVES IN PUBLIC #SO THIS IS PRESUMABLY HIM PUTTING FORWARD THE MOST DIPLOMATIC FORMULATION OF HIS VIEWS #AND ALREADY THEY’RE THIS FUCKING SKEEVY AND AWFUL #WHAT DOES THIS TELL YOU? REALLY #THAT’S NOT EVEN TOUCHING ON THE HOMOPHOBIA #SO YOU CALL GAY PEOPLE ‘P—FS’ AND THEN YOU WONDER WHY THEY DON’T WANT TO COME OUT? #YOU MARTIN #YOU ARE THE REASON THEY DON’T WANT TO COME OUT #YOU AND SCUMBAGS LIKE YOU #TW: RACISM #TW: HOMOPHOBIA 


Kamanitree: Here’s the interview they’re talking about.

26th Jun 2012

Scalia's Arizona Immigration Dissent : The New Yorker

And what authority did Scalia cite for his broad conception of the role of the state? He went back into history to examine the role of states in policing immigration. He pointed out that

In the first 100 years of the Republic, the States enacted numerous laws restricting the immigration of certain classes of aliens, including convicted criminals, indigents, persons with contagious diseases, and (in Southern States) freed blacks. State laws not only provided for the removal of unwanted immigrants but also imposed penalties on unlawfully present aliens and those who aided their immigration.

It’s worth pausing to remember what kind of immigration the states (especially the Southern ones) handled in those bygone days; much of it had to do with slavery, of course. To be sure, Scalia is not endorsing slavery, but his invocation of that ugly chapter in American history suggests, at a minimum, a loss of perspective.