When the Indiana Jones movies were released, I loved Raiders of the Lost Ark, hated The Temple of Doom, thought The Last Crusade was slight, and had no interest in seeing The Kingdom of the Crystal Skull so I skipped it.
Recently, I’ve been watching action movies while I exercise, so I decided to revisit Indiana Jones. I found Raiders of the Lost Ark holds up well. Marion Ravenwood is, like Indy, tough and competent. Sallah, Indy’s Egyptian friend, is fully capable in his own right, and so is a black supporting character, Simon Katanga, the captain of a cargo ship that’s attacked by Nazis. …
“Antisemitism is the Socialism of fools.” — Ferdinand Kronawetter
When Malcolm X was asked whether the Black Muslims are anti-Semitic, he replied: “Many Jews have guilt feelings when people talk about ‘exploitation.’ This is because they know that they control 90 percent of the businesses in black communities, from the Atlantic to the Pacific. And they benefit more from black buying power than blacks do from other parts of the white community. So they feel guilty about it.” He also complained that Jews can be found on the boards of such organizations as the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, but, he continued, “the same Jews won’t let you become president of B’nai B’rith, or any of their other organizations.” …
Because antiracists find racism everywhere, some insist Mickey Mouse’s gloves and spats are racist reminders of Jim Crow minstrel shows. The most entertaining version may be Ty Templeton’s The Gloves are Off!
I love Templeton’s comics, but the people he’s siding with are wrong. Here’s why:
1. Spats were popular with rich and poor for a decade after Mickey was created in 1928. One year earlier, Cole Porter wrote Puttin’ On the Ritz, which opens:
Have you seen the well-to-do, up and down Park Avenue
On that famous thoroughfare, with their noses in the air
High hats and Arrow collars, white spats and lots of dollars
Spending every dime, for a wonderful…
The rich love charity because imagining the appreciation of the poor makes them feel good. The rich love philanthropy even more because imagining the admiration of their peers makes them feel even better. They know as well as you and I do that neither charity nor philanthropy can stop the growth of the wealth gap.
What the rich won’t admit is that charity and philanthropy are not supposed to end poverty. …
In 2009, one of Harvard’s most famous scholars, Henry Louis Gates Jr., was arrested for disturbing the peace. Every race reductionist in the US insists the reason was racism, but it was actually about two things that are more fundamental to life in America: class and police power.
Before I provide the proof, here’s what’s indisputable:
Gates returned home from a trip to China and could not get his front door to open, so he went in through the back, then got the driver to help him force open the front door. A neighbor saw something unusual going on at the house and called 9–1–1, saying, “I don’t know if they live there and they just had a hard time with their key.” When the dispatcher asked for details, she replied, “One looked kind of Hispanic, but I’m not really sure. …
The pragmatic reason: He won. In his district, he is now the people’s choice and the local face of the Democratic Party.
The moral reason: He admitted that he made mistakes, he apologized to the people he made them to, and he wants to make amends. The left is traditionally associated with giving everyone a chance to do better.
Because this article will be read by people who know nothing about Aaron Coleman, and it will be read by people who know less about him than they think, here’s what everyone who talks about him should know:
At the age of 20, during a general election in which Democrats did much worse than most experts predicted, he won a seat as a Kansas State Representative by overcoming enormous…
A few years ago, I wrote this:
Many identitarians feel entitled to speak disdainfully of poor white people because, in their ideology, poor whites have white privilege and therefore must be responsible for their poverty.
I based that on observation alone. I didn’t have any proof until a couple of studies came out last year.
From Complex intersections of race and class: Among social liberals, learning about White privilege reduces sympathy, increases blame, and decreases external attributions for White people struggling with poverty:
…both studies revealed that while social liberals were overall more sympathetic to poor people than social conservatives, reading about White privilege decreased their sympathy for a poor White (vs. Black) person. Moreover, these shifts in sympathy were associated with greater punishment/blame and fewer external attributions for a poor White person’s plight. …
The other day, several white women came onto my Facebook page and demanded that I capitalize black when writing about race. I told them race is a social construct and capitalizing racial categories only validates the concept of race. I am a universalist who rejects all forms of division based on social identities, as three of my favorite quotes should show:
“I am human—nothing human is alien to me.” —Terence
“The world is my country, all mankind are my brethren, and to do good is my religion.” —Thomas Paine
“I believe in recognizing every human being as a human being, neither white, black, brown nor red.” …
When I was young, we worked for civil rights. Today people work for social justice. Superficially, only the names have changed, because civil rights and social justice are both about treating people fairly. But if you think word choices matter — which the social justice community does vehemently — these changes are significant.
1. Civil rights workers defined their causes by what they supported: equality, integration, peace. Social justice activists define their causes by what they oppose: anti-racism, anti-war, anti-capitalism, etc.
2. Civil rights workers spoke of humanity as brothers and sisters. …
The man on the left is Enrique Tarrio, leader of the Proud Boys. They are often accused of being white supremacists, but the Proud Boys are actually more dangerous than white supremacists because, as the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) notes, “While the group can be described as violent, nationalistic, Islamophobic, transphobic and misogynistic, its members represent a range of ethnic backgrounds, and its leaders vehemently protest any allegations of racism.”
Understanding the difference between nationalism and racism is essential. Because they’re not racist, the Proud Boys can attract nationalists of all races. This makes them a greater threat than any white supremacist group could ever be. We don’t know how many Proud Boys are poc, but In Black professor insists ‘Proud Boys aren’t white supremacists’ as Trump takes flak, Wilfred Reilly, associate professor of political science at the historically black Kentucky State University, says 10 to 20 percent of Proud Boys activists are people of color. …