Common Sense Political Thought

I have resisted writing about the rape charges against three members of the Duke Lacross team until now — and I’m still hesitant. I am unwilling to prejudge a case like this, outside of a courtroom, possessing only partial evidence, evidence that is usually presented intentionally partially, because it is presented by people with an axe to grind.

In this case, you have a young woman, who happens to be black, who was hired as a stripper for a party by the lacrosse team. The woman made a complaint to the police that she had been raped by three white members of the lacrosse team.

We immediately started getting people putting in their 2¢. DNA samples taken from the woman did not match any of the three accused men, we have been told, although the people telling us this are supporters of the accused. The Rev. Jesse Jackson, who, lacking anything meaningful to say about civil rights anymore now that the civil rights struggles are long over (and won by his side), never fails to hustle a potential racial issue, immediately jumped into the fray to support the young woman. Stories about the lady’s past incidents with the law and possibly less than stellar reputation for telling the truth have abounded.

Now Tyrone of Wake Up, Black America has documented the entrance of the New Black Panther Party into the issue. Apparently the NBPP has assumed that the accused simply must be guilty, because the accuser is black and the accused are white.

I will admit that, from what I’ve heard about the case, it hardly seems likely that the prosecution could win convictions if the trial is fair and the jury unbiased. But, as noted earlier, I certainly haven’t heard everything, and it seems odd that the prosecutor would hang his reputation on a case that seems so weak according to the public information.

I bring this up due to a rather tangential issue. Oliver Willis, the DC area Democratic blogger wrote:

I admit that as a black man, the likes of Clarence Thomas embarasses the hell out of me.

I responded:

That would be like me saying, “I admit that as a white man, the likes of John Paul Stevens embarasses the hell out of me.” After all, I certainly don’t like the way he votes in the Supreme Court, and I find his occasional use of foreign precedent alarming.

So, you disagree with Justice Thomas politically. Why would that embarass you more than the white justices with whom you disagree?

To which Mr Willis replied:

Because Thomas was largely picked because of his race and because blacks in high positions reflect on the perception of the larger black community (Rice or Obama, for instance).

This seems like a hugely self-defeating attitude to me. The NBPP has hung its hat on the purported guilt of the accused lacrosse players, in a case which, on the surface, seems rather weak. Mr Willis has, in effect, said that the behavior of every prominent black man reflects on him, and on all black men.

How, I wonder, can blacks in this country ever be expected to compete, to be treated as just people, just individuals, when they so explicitly tie themselves to the fates and behaviors of other blacks? If Mr Willis is saying that Justice Thomas reflects upon the perception of the larger black community (by people who aren’t black, I presume he means), then he’s got a huge problem, and the problem isn’t Clarence Thomas (who is better thought of by whites than by Mr Willis, apparently). If the actions of individual blacks reflect upon the perception of the larger black community, Mr Willis biggest concern ought to be not the famous blacks, but the blacks who live supposedly ordinary lives in Philadelphia and Baltimore and Washington — ordinary, that is, until we read about them in The Philadelphia Inquirer for having been shooting at each other over drug turf.

If I suggested that the Philadelphia Police ought to give very close scrutiny to every black male between 15 and 35, because the vast majority of the one-a-day murders in the City of Brotherly Love are committed by (and upon) black males between 15 and 35, he’d accuse me of racist thinking and complain about racial profiling — and he’d be right. But if stating that actions of some blacks, the ones who are young thugs, say something about the larger black community is unacceptable, how can there be complaints that someone like Justice Thomas, an educated, intelligent and accomplished man who just happens to have different political views than the majority of blacks somehow reflects on the larger black community.

Well, I don’t judge Mr Willis by my perceptions of Justice Thomas — which happen to be pretty high. Nor do I hold a prejudicial opinion of Mr Willis based on the actions of Kennell Spady and Kareem Johnson. My opinions of Mr Willis stem solely from the words he has written; never having met him, they are all I know of him.

I would like to think that perhaps Mr Willis was rushed for time when he wrote his response, because I am certain that he does not wish to invite more prejudice. But by claiming that the actions or opinions or behavior of one black man reflects on the entire group, that is certainly what he has set up.