I am not giving groups, as entities, a free pass. For example, I have no issue labeling anyone with nay affiliation to the KKK as a racist. Yea, its kind of hypocritical, but really the KK serves no other purpose, in my opinion, than to spread racist ideals.
I do not feel the same way about the Tea Party Express. Are some of the people in the Tea Party Express racist? I would not surprise me if there were, but it would not surprise me if some people in the Democratic party were racist. My last point was more toward the fact that maybe Mike WIlliams kept his racist attitude under wraps, and only after he got 'power' did it start to surface publicly (I am sure it would not be the first time we got to know the ugly side of someone after they reached a position of power). Not saying its true, but it certainly is possible. Now, the people who chose him as their leader have 2 options: 1. Walk away form the Tea Party Express, even if they still believe in the 'core' values of the group or 2. try to get Williams out of there and choose someone who more accurately expresses the values of the group. Again, I am not saying this is what did happen, only that it is a possibility...you know the whole innocent until proven guilty thing we are accustomed to hearing from the more liberal people among us. It is possible that some members of the Tea Party Express have perverted the values of the group to push their own agenda? Absolutely. Should the entire group be judged by those few individuals? Absolutely not. How is that any different than saying all Muslims are terrorists because some Muslims perpetrated the terrorist attacks on 9/11? On Wed, Aug 25, 2010 at 5:01 PM, Judah McAuley <[email protected]> wrote: > > I was ok with labeling the Tea Party Express as an organization lead > by a racist. Those who were members were members of a group lead by a > racist. They may have not been racist themselves but were willing to > overlook the racism at the top because other other reasons. And if > those who are not racists took it upon themselves to try and challenge > things from within, awesome, good for them. > > At the end of the day, they still have to justify themselves to > themselves. I have to justify my continuing support of Obama in the > face of policies that I consider truly odious. I have my reasons for > doing such. Folks involved in the Tea Party Express have to justify > what is so important about the group that they had to (even > temporarily) look past the blatant racism. > > I'm very much a believer in individual responsibility, as you know, > and I don't tend to belong to many groups because I don't think that a > group can adequately represent me as well as I represent myself. I get > the points you are making, Scott, but it seems like you are giving > groups, as entities, a free pass because they aren't individuals. As > individuals, we choose to associate yourself with groups. I think that > that action means something. It doesn't say everything about you, of > course, nor are you everything that a group says you are. But I can't > discount the act of joining a group or staying a member of a group. > That has to mean something. > > Cheers, > Judah > > On Wed, Aug 25, 2010 at 1:22 PM, Scott Stroz <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Here is another issue I have with the points you have made. >> >> You seem to be OK with labeling those in the 'Tea Party Express' as >> being racist because their leader has made racist statements. And you >> make a good point about being able to leave a group. But another >> viable course of action would be to try and make changes to the group >> from the inside. Which, maybe they did? >> >> It is entirely possible that his racist statements may have caused >> others in the group to say...'whoa, hold on there Mike, that is not >> really what we are all about, why don't you just step aside'. Would >> it be fair to still label these people as 'racist'? I would say 'no'. >> >> Now that Mike Williams is no longer their leader, can we assume they >> are not racist? >> >> Again, I stand by the statement that it is not fair to label or >> stereotype members of a group based on the actions or words of other >> members or even its leader. >> >> On Wed, Aug 25, 2010 at 3:35 PM, Judah McAuley <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Btw, I just looked up Mike Williams and it seems he stepped down as >>> head of the Tea Party Express. That is certainly a positive >>> development but the points are still valid for purposes of discussion. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Judah >>> >>> On Wed, Aug 25, 2010 at 12:21 PM, Judah McAuley <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>>> I'm sorta there with you. The difference is that I'm not sure what >>>> group Al Sharpton is a leader of. If Al Sharpton was the recognized >>>> leader of "Racebaiters for Christ" or something then I would say that, >>>> yeah, that group is going to be painted (both good and bad) by the >>>> actions and words of Al Sharpton. Maybe Al Sharpton thinks he speaks >>>> for me, I don't know. But I can say that I'm not a member of a group >>>> he heads. The example I gave, of the Tea Party Express and its leader >>>> Mike Williams, is an actual group with membership that raises and >>>> spends money for political purposes. It would be like if Al Sharpton >>>> became President of the NAACP and politicians were taking NAACP money >>>> and the NAACP was organizing events for them. In that case, would it >>>> be fair to make judgements about the NAACP and the candidates they are >>>> involved with based on the groups choice of President? I'd say that >>>> that isn't unreasonable. >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> Judah >>> >>> >> >> > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology-Michael-Dinowitz/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:325929 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
