|
domiguy -> RE: HATE CRIMES = thought policing? (7/4/2007 4:58:49 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: zerosignal
In my view, the central cause of racial double-standards enshrined in the law is, ironically, the misguided benevolence of sheltered white liberals. Having lived and worked in some fairly "diverse" environments in my day, my experience has been that most minorities disapprove of the legal double-standards designed to benefit them such as "hate crime" laws or affirmative action. The biggest proponents of both of those policies are privileged white liberals who have never had a meaningful interaction with a member of a minority social group in their lives.
I'm going to take a small bit of rhetorical license at this point and make some generalized assumptions of my own with respect to these white liberals. From my experiences with them, they seem plagued with "white guilt" over their social station and economic advantages, and commit themselves to crusading for equality to assauge those feelings. But, like many members of every social group, these white liberals put unwavering faith in simple concepts to avoid having to struggle with more complex realities. To wit, problems of socioeconomic disparity and historical (not present) institutionalized racism become a nebulous, indistinct conspiracy that lurks around every corner and must be stamped out at all costs.
Confirmation bias leads these white liberals to latch onto the small scraps of evidence in support of their worldview whenever they can find some, such as violent crimes against minority groups. To liberals struggling with white guilt, these crimes stop being isolated incidents of violence or disorder, and become the very symbol of inequality in this country. Naturally, such travesties need to be stamped out right away and thus we are left with laws that treat a crime of assault very differently, depending on what social groups the perpetrator and the victim belong to.
Of course, this fits perfectly with the worldview of liberals grappling with white guilt; they are already predisposed to seeing minorities as victims and whites as oppressors. Such a simplification of social problems leads to the easy solution of giving the "victim" social group extra protections under the law. And so, to at least answer the question posed in the title, I see hate crimes not as thought policing, but as institutionalizing a distorted view of society.
Since you are an attorney...Is this the argument that you would make in a courtroom defending a white person accused of a hate crime?...That the only reason we could possibly be here is because of "white guilt" and "sheltered white liberals.?"
To quote Belushi "Seven years of college down the drain!"...Are you saying that there are never any crimes that are based sole on race and sexual preference or so few that only white liberals could dare notice? Maybe you should google the numbers, Mr attorney, or have one of your clerks do it for you.
One of the aspects of America is that we are supposed to be tolerant...you know huddled masses and all...So when a crime is committed that is based solely on race...sexual preference..etc....it becomes all the more heinous...And should be dealt with accordingly.
A hate crime is a hate crime...blacks have been charged with hate crimes against whites....the difference is that you will never hear about it in the media because it doesn't wag the dog.
When a crime is committed for no apparent motive other than race...We live in a country that simply will not tolerate such actions and we make it clear by installing the language of hate crimes.
Nothing is perfect....I'm sure there are cases where a person was tried for a hate crime that "hate" was not a motivation for the incident.
Out of curiosity, my uber conservative attorney friend, what exactly are the more "complex realities" of a hate crime.
You can bill me by the hour.
|
|
|
|
