« Blogbat's Site of the Day: Beautiful Atrocities | Main | Educrat Scramble »

March 24, 2005

The Hidden Racism and Sexism of Liberalism

About the pernicious pleasantries of the power monger

 

 

 

-Martin Kite-Powell

 

 

Stanley Crouch today wrote what I think is a terrific article for the New York Daily News about the misogyny of much of the rap music scene, but something which I think could be applied to the misogyny of Liberalism today in general.

 

 

The regular defense of the worst of hip hop is that these images should be accepted because they provide a way for black men at the bottom to become successful. An additional aspect of this defense is that young men are making so much money one should not mess with the flow of the dough. The next defense is that anything that makes money is good - especially if it is not illegal. At the end of the argument is the manipulative racial ploy that black people should not use "white" standards to attack something that comes out of the neighborhood, that arrives from black street culture. This last point has been far too successful for far too long among middle-class blacks, who are often made to feel as if they have lost contact with their roots and should never question anything "authentically" black, lower class and street.

 

 

He went on to point out that while many justifiably say it is no different than “…the behavior of Paris Hilton or on ‘Girls Gone Wild,’ with white college women exhibiting all kinds of nude, lewd and dubious behavior” those who try to justify as acceptable for young, lower-income blacks or the poor in general seem to readily be saying that anyone poor must necessarily therefore become a prostitute or sell themselves in other ways, which is completely opposite of what we should be teaching kids of lower incomes. The reality is, the only way out for lower-income children is through being sober, legal and classically educated. It is not only the “way out”, it is the way up in terms of individual power and what an individual can provide for family members and community.

 

It seems as if Stanley Crouch’s timely article is true on many levels though. I think the broader and most powerful from this is that liberalism is the true home of the misogynist and that misogyny is part of what leads to crime and poverty.

 

Are there other high-profile examples of Liberal misogyny? You bet. How about the notion we should understand and tolerate Islamofascists who beat or kill their wives and force them to wear heavy burquas in the middle of summer. Of course most recently we had to live through the tragic saga of the man who hated his wife enough to kill her, Michael Schiavo. There certainly will be undesirable repercussions throughout our society as a result of the sanctioned murder of Terri. For another example of Liberal misogyny there is, without fail, the Liberal ACLU guy who takes the position that trades which exploit women directly and indirectly (such as porn and prostitution) should be made legal. Finally, we have the rather more infamous but strangely less-widely known Supreme Court case which has already arguably affected the lives of untold women and children across this country: in it Justice Powell, who as part of the 1977 majority decision which struck down a Georgia statue that included rape as a capitol offense worthy of death (Coker v. Georgia, 433 U.S. 584) stated in his opinion, “the crime was not committed with excessive brutality and the victim did not sustain serious or lasting injury.”

 

"...[D]id not sustain serious or lasting injury."

 

Need I even point out how detached from reality that opinion was?

 

A wise man once said that we would be able to know folks by their fruits. Judging by the high volume of cases at Poison Control the last few decades, I think we can safely state what fruits the Left has born.

 

 

Hat-tip, Drudge Report for the Crouch article.

 

Posted by Martin at March 24, 2005 07:20 PM

Comments