The Return Of The Daily Trayvon, Continued

“We don’t need you to do that.”

Seven words. This is the phrase you need to remember throughout the trial of George Zimmerman, who is accused to shooting to death a teenager named Trayvon Martin after investigating Martin for the crime of carrying snack food in a neighborhood where Zimmerman thought Martin did not belong. Jury selection began today. I suspect it may take a while.

The judge however, did rule that a defense motion to prohibit prosecutors from using inflammatory words such as “profiled,” “vigilante,” “wannabe cop,” and “self-appointed neighborhood watch captain” would be partially granted in reference to potential jurors. Lawyers will not be allowed to use those words when questioning potential jurors.

All trials are about words. All trials are about what words actually mean. So the judge is probably correct in trying to corral loose adjectives and renegade descriptions before they trample the attempt to frame an actual jury in this case. But the words that begin this post are the ones you should remember. Fifteen months ago, when Zimmerman spotted Martin and his snack food, he called a police dispatcher — a trained law-enforcement officer, and not one of those things, like Zimmerman, that Judge Nelson has banned from voir dire — and the actual police officer told him to stay in his car and not do anything more. Zimmerman ignored this professional advice and went off on his own anyway, and what ensued then ensued and here we are.

Racist Basketball Fans PISSED a Mexican-American Boy Dared to Sing Their National Anthem

publicshaming:

10 year old Mariachi singer Sebastion de la Cruz was thrust into the national spotlight last year on America’s Got Talent. Tonight, he was once again seen by the nation as he sang the national anthem at Game 3 of the NBA finals in San Antonio where the Spurs took on the Miami Heat.

image

As you can see, patriotic Americans were NONE TOO PLEASED that a Mexican (don’t tell these people he’s Mexican AMERICAN) sang the United States national anthem - a song so beautiful that bald eagles usually cry whenever they hear it but not tonight because a Mexican sang it.

image

image

“#GoHome.” He’s already home. He lives in San Antonio. The same San Antonio where the majority of the population is Mexican.

image

image

OK THERE, “THE GREAT WHITE.”

image

image

image

“I’m highly upset that THIS MEXICAN KID is singing the anthem.” lmao. Wait a few years Grace and tell us how you feel when the majority of the country is Hispanic. I look forward to hearing from you then!

image

image

image

image

image

San Antonio may already be your own personal hell if that’s how you feel about Mexicans, Blake.

image

Correction: YOU ain’t. All of the United States ain’t racist white males like you, Thomas.

image

image

image

image

image

image

lmao, DESTIN WHITE. If “what has the world come to” is your reaction a little Mexican boy singing the anthem, just you wait! Hint: your world won’t be WHITE.

image

image

And, now, for my favorite tweets: people asking why is this Mexican/illegal/foreigner/etc. singing “OUR/MY ANTHEM”…

image

image

image

image

image

image

“Our anthem!” Our racism!

Whites might claim to be upset by problematic African Americans—criminals and ne’er-do-wells—but more frequently they lashed out at those who were industrious and successful, for it was these families whose existence set up a claim to social and economic equality. Such claims underlay the expulsion by white Democrats of about 200 African Americans from Washington County, Indiana, shortly after the Civil War. The earliest victim of the violence was John Williams, “who had acquired a farm and an unusual amount of wealth for a Negro,” in the words of historian Emma Lou Thornborough. “In December, 1864, he was shot to death in his own dooryard. In 1867 there was another murder, the victim being an inoffensive old man who had aroused the ire of some of his white neighbors by persisting in attending their church, even after he had been warned to stay away.” These and other terrorist actions led to an exodus, and Washington County remained all-white until 1990.

James W. Loewen, Sundown Towns: A Hidden Dimension of American Racism

Remember this shit next time some racist fuckhead implies that poor black people are poor because they don’t work hard enough or because they want to live off the government’s dime. The racial wealth gap is no accident.

Boley is located in Okfuskee County. Okemah, the county seat, had been founded as a sundown town in 1902. From time to time African Americans moved in, only to face violent opposition. In January 1907, for example, whites dynamited the homes of the only two black families in town. Later that year, Okemah businessmen leased a building and set up a hotel for African Americans who traded with the local merchants or had to attend court and could not always get back to Boley by sundown. By April 1908 it was doing a brisk business, which ended when other whites placed a heavy charge of dynamite under the front hall of the hotel. “The building was badly damaged,” wrote Okemah resident W.L. Payne. “Farmers living eight miles from Okemah were aroused by the terrific blast. This brought about a quick reduction in the Negro population of Okemah.

James W. Loewen, Sundown Towns: A Hidden Dimension of American Racism

Oh look, white terrorism.

anarcho-queer: NYPD Data Proves White People Are More Likely To Possess Drugs Or A Weapon Than Racial Minorities When Stopped, Yet 84% of Stop & Frisk Victims Are Black/Latino During the just-concluded trial on the New York Police Department’s stop-and-frisk program, the city argued that officers’ disproportionate targeting of black and Latino New Yorkers was not due to racial profiling but because each stopped individual was doing something suspicious at the time. The data, however, tells a different story: weapons and drugs were more often found on white New Yorkers during stops than on minorities, according to the Public Advocate’s analysis of the NYPD’s 2012 statistics. White New Yorkers make up a small minority of stop-and-frisks, which were 84 percent black and Latino residents. Despite this much higher number of minorities deemed suspicious by police, the likelihood that stopping an African American would find a weapon was half the likelihood of finding one on a white person. • The likelihood a stop of an African American New Yorker yielded a weapon was half that of white New Yorkers stopped. The NYPD uncovered a weapon in one out every 49 stops of white New Yorkers. By contrast, it took the Department 71 stops of Latinos and 93 stops of African Americans to find a weapon. • The likelihood a stop of an African American New Yorker yielded contraband was one-third less than that of white New Yorkers stopped. The NYPD uncovered contraband in one out every 43 stops of white New Yorkers. By contrast, it took the Department 57 stops of Latinos and 61 stops of African Americans to find contraband. It’s unlikely that the appropriate lesson to take from these findings is that stops of white people should increase because they are more likely to carry weapons and drugs. Rather, they suggest that police are excessively targeting minorities. Officers may be netting more successful stops of white New Yorkers because they are only likely to stop a white person when they actually suspect that person of committing a crime. Considering one officer’s testimony that superiors explicitly directed him to target young black men, minorities are judged by a much more flexible definition of “reasonable suspicion.” In general, stop-and-frisk has proven to be remarkably ineffective; nearly 89 percent of all stops result in no charges. The city has also had to settle a surging number of civil rights lawsuits against police to the tune of $22 million in one year.
Pop-upView Separately

anarcho-queer:

NYPD Data Proves White People Are More Likely To Possess Drugs Or A Weapon Than Racial Minorities When Stopped, Yet 84% of Stop & Frisk Victims Are Black/Latino

During the just-concluded trial on the New York Police Department’s stop-and-frisk program, the city argued that officers’ disproportionate targeting of black and Latino New Yorkers was not due to racial profiling but because each stopped individual was doing something suspicious at the time. The data, however, tells a different story: weapons and drugs were more often found on white New Yorkers during stops than on minorities, according to the Public Advocate’s analysis of the NYPD’s 2012 statistics.

White New Yorkers make up a small minority of stop-and-frisks, which were 84 percent black and Latino residents. Despite this much higher number of minorities deemed suspicious by police, the likelihood that stopping an African American would find a weapon was half the likelihood of finding one on a white person.

• The likelihood a stop of an African American New Yorker yielded a weapon was half that of white New Yorkers stopped. The NYPD uncovered a weapon in one out every 49 stops of white New Yorkers. By contrast, it took the Department 71 stops of Latinos and 93 stops of African Americans to find a weapon.

• The likelihood a stop of an African American New Yorker yielded contraband was one-third less than that of white New Yorkers stopped. The NYPD uncovered contraband in one out every 43 stops of white New Yorkers. By contrast, it took the Department 57 stops of Latinos and 61 stops of African Americans to find contraband.

It’s unlikely that the appropriate lesson to take from these findings is that stops of white people should increase because they are more likely to carry weapons and drugs. Rather, they suggest that police are excessively targeting minorities. Officers may be netting more successful stops of white New Yorkers because they are only likely to stop a white person when they actually suspect that person of committing a crime. Considering one officer’s testimony that superiors explicitly directed him to target young black men, minorities are judged by a much more flexible definition of “reasonable suspicion.”

In general, stop-and-frisk has proven to be remarkably ineffective; nearly 89 percent of all stops result in no charges. The city has also had to settle a surging number of civil rights lawsuits against police to the tune of $22 million in one year.

(via elhajjmalik)

Source: anarcho-queer

Nonviolence is an inherently privileged position in the modern context. Besides the fact that the typical pacifist is quite clearly white and middle class, pacifism as an ideology comes from a privileged context. It ignores that violence is already here; that violence is an unavoidable, structurally integral part of the current social hierarchy; and that it is people of color who are most affected by that violence. Pacifism assumes that white people who grew up in the suburbs with all their basic needs met can counsel oppressed people, many of whom are people of color, to suffer patiently under an inconceivably greater violence, until such time as the Great White Father is swayed by the movement’s demands or pacifists achieve that legendary “critical mass.
Peter Gelderlos, Why Nonviolence Protects the State (via tabularasae)

(via rapeculturerealities)

Source: fuckyeahradicalquotes

The 5 Most Insulting Defenses of Nerd Racism

yousaveyourselforremainunsaved:

girljanitor:

tomithejellyfish:

thesargebag:

Warning, do not read around anything both extremely valuable and breakable.

I write articles about racisms for Cracked sometimes! This is one of those times!

omfg this is literal gold

“And then what? Up will be down, dogs will marry cats, the Hot Pockets will microwave us!”

LOL

Good lord, do not read the comments.

I really like this, but the text in some of the images is really hard to read. Am I just getting old?

(via spindrift-secret)

Source: thesargebag

whydontihatemarrymyself:

theslavbarbarian:

daretobesane:

theslavbarbarian:

european heritage blogs that are actually nationalist/right wing/white supremacist blogs

you are the scum of the earth and i hope you’re taken by plague

European culture is a product of the unique racial heritage of whites. No other peoples could have created it and no other peoples could sustain it if whites were to vanish or be replaced (via immigration, for instance).
If these blogs you object to recognise this, and want European heritage and culture to survive and thrive then I applaud them.

european culture is a product of the unique heritage of whites and People of Color

You neglected the Middle-Eastern migrants of the Neolithic Revolution, and the Bronze Age Indo-European invaders of the Pontic-Caspian steppe, and the Huns and Avars, and the Saami, and the Etruscans, and the Amazigh and Arabs, and the Tartars and Turks, the Romani, that group of Ethiopians that migrated into Europe via the Romans during the Migration Period and left their y-DNA haplogroup in the population, the various Africans that came or were brought over at many ages, and all the many groups of color that migrated into Europe and made their marks here alongside white people.

Europe as we know it is the result of many ages and generations of racial and ethnic mixing, and it will continue to be that way. Without racial and ethnic mixing, the Europe as we know it would not only not exist, it would not be possible, and if were were to reconstruct a Europe that had never seen an emigration of people of color, it would be almost unrecognizable to us. There would be no Slavs and no Romans, and no Scandinavians, there would be no Celts, because all of those languages are Indo-European and were brought by invaders from the Pontic steppe, who also spread their language into the Indian subcontinent and the areas in between. And it might even still use mesolithic technology if it didn’t make its own discoveries.

i love when these racist shitbags think they know more than you do about european history

“If whites were to vanish…” SERIOUSLY? White people are not an endangered group! That’s like saying cats are an endangered species!

How about this: You’re not allowed to complain about white people going extinct until less than 2% of the people in the United States identify as white. Coincidentally, that’s higher than the percentage of the US population that identifies as American Indian or Alaska Native right now. They used to be the only ones here, and now they’re less than 2% of the population.

Because, you know, they were replaced. By immigrants.

Source: filthypolak

let me make something clear

ouyangdan:

defcock:

if we’re all proved wrong and Cumberbatch is not playing Khan, that would in no way invalidate the facts that:

  • Star Trek as a franchise in general and the reboot in particular has a race problem; instances where it was progressive do not magically cancel out instances where it was/is not
  • Western entertainment media, elsewhere defined as ‘Hollywood,’ has whitewashed so many characters of color so often that it is, essentially, the default setting
  • people of color have the right to and, perhaps most importantly, are right to complain about the erasure of their identities and cultures and bodies in Hollywood 

if Cumberbatch is not playing Khan, it further does not validate the behavior of fans who used racist rhetoric in their defense of what we thought was the casting. your shitty behavior is not mitigated if it turns out that in this specific instance, whitewashing didn’t occur. your shitty behavior is still shitty racist behavior. you don’t get a pass. 

if Cumberbatch is not playing Khan, it doesn’t meant this conversation, which has been going on for over a year in just this specific instance, is over, was pointless, or was an overreaction.  

I thought that it was confirmed a while ago that they decided to FUBAR this movie with his presence. What I mean to say is 1) yeah he’s listed as Khan and 2) either way, this conversation should have and still needed to happen.

Source: defcock

Racism is not in your intent. Your intent is immaterial in how racist your actions are. This isn’t about you BEING a racist. It’s about you DOING A THING that is racist. Your intent doesn’t change it. Your ignorance of its meaning doesn’t change it. It’s got nothing to do with you as a person and everything to do with the meaning of your action in the context of sociocultural history.

- moniquill (on red face & cultural appropriation)

I’m just going to reblog this again, since some people apparently need reminding. 

(via darkjez)

(via spindrift-secret)

Source: nemoomnianovit

Meanwhile, there’s the social justice aspect. People have dismissed male rape, racial murders and even genocides under power + privilege at one point or another. Unfortunately, “racism” is discrimination based on race. How could it be anything else? Power and privilege are held by the majority and have nothing to do with individual actions: racism is an individual action. Holding a burning hatred in your heart for everyone of East Timorean ancestry is racism, even if it’s just you. And, since all races are equal (If you disagree with this, you may be a terrible person! Ask your doctor.), so is hating anyone of any race for their race alone. Lots of people with racist beliefs working together are still racist. If you really do mean to talk about an entire system biased against race, you can say something like “institutional racism”, but institutional racism is a subset of racism and all discrimination based on race is racism, no matter what the scale.

This is clearly privilege: Why “power + privilege” is wrong 

this is such a fundamental misapprehension of the subject i don’t even know where to start, but how about, there is a difference between ‘no race is //better// than any other’ and ‘no race has //more institutional power// than any other’.  primarily, the latter is completely untrue and has been for centuries thanks to white european colonialism.

the illusion that all ‘race based prejudice’ is equivalent is based on an explicit denial of the intersection of power with prejudice.  pulling out your dictionary definition doesn’t mean you have an absolute rule about what is and isn’t racism that you get to trumpet over the heads of those whose //systemic// oppression you choose not to acknowledge.

besides, dictionary definitions only cover theory.  the power+privilege def is based on //actual practice//.  when you say ‘there is no difference between the discrimination experienced by white people versus poc’ you are lying.

(via ultralaser)

reblogged for commentary.

(via ultralaser)

Source: legitprivilege

Perpetual racial entitlements – The Aporetic

Scalia made this com­ment about the Vot­ing Rights Act:

I think it is attrib­ut­able, very likely attrib­ut­able, to a phe­nom­e­non that is called per­pet­u­a­tion of racial enti­tle­ment. It’s been writ­ten about. When­ever a soci­ety adopts racial enti­tle­ments, it is very dif­fi­cult to get out of them through the nor­mal polit­i­cal processes.

It’s dif­fi­cult to be a his­to­rian of the US and not be flab­ber­gasted by this com­ment. Because Scalia is right–for nearly all of its his­tory, the US has per­pet­u­ated racial enti­tle­ments with the great­est enthu­si­asm. Those enti­tle­ments have been for entirely and over­whelm­ingly for white people.