| Senate plans to apologize to blacks. Do you know there is STILL no federal anti-lynching law?
Posted: 6/13/2005 6:39:51 AM | from: http://www.imdiversity.com/villages/african/civil_human_equal_rights/ofair_lynchings0609.asp
Senate Apology For Lynchings, None For Hate Crimes
By Earl Ofari Hutchinson
If they were still alive, NAACP executive directors James Weldon Johnson, Walter White, and Roy Wilkins would smile at the Senate's plan to apologize for lynching. But their smiles would be faint. They fought a tireless, frustrating battle for a half century to get eight presidents and Congress to pass an anti- lynching law. The White House and the lawmakers ducked, dodged, and stonewalled their efforts to get the law passed.
That was their shame. Lynching was the dirtiest of dirty stains on American democracy. Between 1890 and 1968 nearly 5,000 known persons were lynched. The carnage was probably much higher since many of the killings weren't reported. The majority of the lynch victims were Black. The non-binding Senate resolution offers "solemn regrets" to the descendants of the lynching victims. At least that makes it official that the feds fumbled the ball badly when it came to protecting Blacks.
The Senate resolution, however, doesn't answer the tormenting question why eight presidents and Congress did nothing to stop lynching. It also doesn't tell why Congress still refuses to go all out to nail hate mongers today. The foot-dragging presidents and Congress rebuffed the NAACP with lame excuse after excuse. Some claimed that if they pressed too hard for the law the Southerners that dominated Congress would filibuster the bills to death, paralyze the government, and bottle up other more "important" legislation. Others claimed that it was up to the states to prosecute the lynch killers and if they didn't there was nothing the federal government could or should do. Still others were mute on the issue and hoped that it would go away. They were disingenuous and hypocritical.
Presidents Harding, Coolidge, Hoover, Roosevelt had enough congressional votes and the executive muscle to pass or at least get a close vote on an anti-lynching law. They didn't even try. Presidents Eisenhower and Kennedy had the votes, the political muscle and the country's changing racial mood to power an anti-lynch law through Congress. They made only a half-hearted attempt to do so. The only arguable exceptions to the pattern of White House inaction were Lyndon Johnson and Harry Truman. They made modest efforts to strengthen and enforce federal laws against racial violence. But they didn't act because of a sudden moral epiphany or out of racial enlightenment. They urged prosecutions of white terrorists only in select high profile cases that provoked public fury and triggered mass pressure by civil rights groups.
The eight presidents and Congress didn't act because they were trapped by the savage history and legacy of slavery and segregation that for two centuries systematically devalued Black lives. Throughout the slave and segregation era Black inferiority was enshrined in law, custom and practice. The color Black symbolized evil, villainy and criminality. The negative racial typecasting of Blacks was an intimate part of the political and cultural ethic that tainted law and public policy in America well into the 20th century. It seeped into and deeply colored the thinking of the men that sat in the White House and Congress.
Some of that thinking sadly is still there. In 2004, the Senate grudgingly passed an expanded hate crime law. It would've designated crimes motivated by sexual orientation as hate crimes. It permitted federal officials to prosecute them as hate acts when local authorities refused. House Republicans killed a similar bill. The excuse they used to dump it was a virtual carbon copy of the excuse the White House and Congress used to scuttle an anti-lynching law. They claimed that it violated states rights, and would stretch the constitutional power of the federal government way to far.
The Congressional inaction on an expanded hate crimes law reinforces the public perception that terrorism comes only in the form of Al-Quaida attacks, and presumes that gender and racially motivated violence are isolated acts committed by a handful of quacks, and unreconstructed bigots, and that state authorities vigorously report and prosecute the perpetrators of these crimes.
This is a myth. In its annual reports on hate violence in America, the FBI notes there has been only a marginal decline in the number of hate crimes during the past decade. Nearly forty percent of the hate attacks were racially motivated, with Blacks the most frequent target of hate mongers. But even the number of reported hate crimes scratches the surface on hate violence in America.
The Southern Poverty Law Center, a public advocacy group which tracks hate crimes, claims that the 9000 hate crimes the FBI reports each year is a gross undercount. The Center puts the actual number at closer to 50,000.
The Senate apology is a small step toward righting a huge wrong. Congress could take an even bigger step by strengthening the hate crimes law. That might bring a real smile to the NAACP leaders who fought long and hard to wipe away the stain of racial hate violence that soiled America for a century. It still soils it today. | |
|
| |
| |
| Senate plans to apologize to blacks. Do you know there is STILL no federal anti-lynching law?
Posted: 6/13/2005 5:02:14 PM | Murder is illegal, but there is no special law against citizens breaking into, or being allowed to break into a jail cell and taking someone out and having a public lynching.
Because many times this has happened and NOBODY has been prosecuted because of the vagaries of state laws concerning this, many people have felt that this should specifically be outlawed and enforced by the federal government.
States have done little to prevent them.
http://crimemagazine.com/Lynchings/photos1.htm
http://crimemagazine.com/Lynchings/photos3.htm
http://www.crimelibrary.com/notorious_murders/mass/lynching/index_1.html
http://www.ogrish.com/archives/2004/july/OGRISH-dot-com-lynch7.jpg
http://www.ogrish.com/archives/2004/july/OGRISH-dot-com-burn1.jpg
STRANGE FRUIT
Southern trees bear a strange fruit
Blood on the leaves and blood at the root
Black body swinging in the southern breeze
Strange fruit hanging from the poplar trees
Pastoral scene of the gallant south
The bulging eyes and the twisted mouth
Scent of magnolia sweet and fresh
And the sudden smell of burning flesh!
Here is a fruit for the crows to pluck
For the rain to gather, for the wind to suck
For the sun to rot, for a tree to drop
Here is a strange and bitter crop.
-Lewis Allan | |
|
| Senate plans to apologize to blacks. Do you know there is STILL no federal anti-lynching law?
Posted: 6/13/2005 5:20:45 PM | | So congress of this day on age is apologizing for the lynchings that occured before 1968??????? What the hell for. Although I do believe it is a terrible crime, they didn't do it, why apologize? I know that I have never been involved in any such action so if someone demanded an apology from me because of what my "ancestors or forefathers" did, I would tell them to kiss my azz. This seems as ridiculous to me as reparations. But that is a whole other topic. | |
|
| |
| |
| Senate plans to apologize to blacks. Do you know there is STILL no federal anti-lynching law?
Posted: 6/13/2005 5:52:13 PM | What would even be the point of passing a "no lynching" law? I really don't think that's much of a problem in this day and age. I certainly don't recall ever hearing of one in my lifetime. Might as well put a ban on steam-powered cars for all the effect it would have.
And just for the record: I, for one, would like an apology from the dinosaurs for their millions of years of mammal opression. We'd have been running this place long ago if it weren't for them thinking all of our ancestors were so tasty! | |
|
| Senate plans to apologize to blacks. Do you know there is STILL no federal anti-lynching law?
Posted: 6/13/2005 6:11:35 PM | I can't remember the source of this bit of information...but I heard it recently and the source did appear to be credible. The statement was that more WHITES have been lynched than blacks have in US history.
I can't confirm that is true, but I can confirm that anything to do with race is a hot, comtroversial subject. And hot, controversial subjects often cause people to react with emotion, rather that rational common sense. Too much "PC" becomes "BS" after a while.
Let's do something important...
SAVE THE UNBORN, GAY WHALES! | |
|
| Senate plans to apologize to blacks. Do you know there is STILL no federal anti-lynching law?
Posted: 6/13/2005 7:24:21 PM |
The statement was that more WHITES have been lynched than blacks have in US history.
So uh... are you saying that therefore we should NOT have an anti-lynching law?
Do you have something against white people?
The PC = BS and "save the unborn gay whales" stances indicate you have an attitude that people who are different than you are subhuman and shouldn't have the same rights.... or are you saying everyone should be disrespected?
The rest of us should be careful you don't drag the rest of us down to your level. | |
|
| Senate plans to apologize to blacks. Do you know there is STILL no federal anti-lynching law?
Posted: 6/13/2005 7:38:29 PM | Hi Foxefire,
I think we have to put this all in context. Blacks were specifically targeted by hatefull people. The Blacks complained and ask for protection from Law makers but instead the laws condoned the continued lynching of Blacks. Whites, Mexicans, Indiginous Americans and Indians were lynched too but none so specifically targeted and dehumanised as the Blacks. This apology is merely a recognition that the law should have protected Blacks. It does not mean the lynching of other races was ok. Is it really too much to ask for? What does the Senate lose? | |
|
| |
| Senate plans to apologize to blacks. Do you know there is STILL no federal anti-lynching law?
Posted: 6/13/2005 8:15:21 PM | Meh. Fine. They can apologize all they want. In fact, I hope this congress takes the initiative to apologize for every single thing that was done since the beginning of time. That way, we can set aside all the "outrage" and get on with things. I hope they pass an "anti-lynching" law, to make it illegal to break into a jail cell (which I thought was illegal already), kidnap someone (again, illegal I thought), and murder them (ok, this one I'm pretty sure is illegal right now). Congress should really just appoint an Apology Committee to listen to people's complaints, and apologize on behalf of the US govt.
Btw, when is the NAACP going to apologize to America for all the race riots in the past? Or apologize for the enormous burden that african-americans have put on our prison system? | |
|
| |
| Senate plans to apologize to blacks. Do you know there is STILL no federal anti-lynching law?
Posted: 6/13/2005 11:35:17 PM |
Murder is illegal, but there is no special law against citizens breaking into, or being allowed to break into a jail cell and taking someone out and having a public lynching.
You don't need a special law. Breaking someone out of jail is already illegal. Murdering them is already illegal. The public lynching makes everyone who watched and did nothing an accessory to murder after the fact, which is already illegal. There'd also be charges of conspiracy to commit murder. We didn't need new laws, we just needed to enforce those that already existed. | |
|
| Senate plans to apologize to blacks. Do you know there is STILL no federal anti-lynching law?
Posted: 6/14/2005 9:23:45 AM | I believe this is a case where a special circumstance is involved that a special law MUST be created because the present laws aren't specific enough to protect the victims. Courts have been able to throw charges out because of the ways the above laws are written. The special circumstances of lynching should be articulated and described so no easy way out is found by racist courts and prosecutors and defense attorneys.
I believe we need it. | |
|
| Senate plans to apologize to blacks. Do you know there is STILL no federal anti-lynching law?
Posted: 6/14/2005 9:35:34 PM | I'll do my hardest not to rant TOO long on this...
Lets first take a look at history. Go back 200 years, pick any then-current country, and there's a 99% chance there was legal slavery there. It may have hidden under names like "indentured servitude" or "sharecropper", but it was still there.
And "slavery" means one PERSON who owned another PERSON, not a white who owned blacks. Every race in history has had some of it's people owned and enslaved at some point. I'm sure most of us are familiar with the book of Exodus, whereby Moses (white) led the Israelites (whites) out of captivity (slavery) in Egypt (Egyptians). When did we demand reparations from Egypt?
From the information I hear, Native Americans had it worse than blacks.
Also know that slaveowners did not own exclusively blacks. Slaves were purchased off the slave auction, and slaves who were not born here were imported from any country where slavery was legal. Slaveowners didn't care about the color of their skin, they wanted to own their employees for economic reasons. Chinese people were owned as slaves, as were Mexicans. So were Italians, Irish and Jews. Some worked in fields picking cotton or fruit, some worked in coal mines, some laid down railroad track, some worked in factories making textiles and whatnot. Some were called "indentured servants," others "sharecroppers", and there's a whole host of other titles. Nonetheless, the people were outright owned, on paper, here's the title and deed to So-and-so, when winter comes I'll sell him to ya for $50.
* * * *** * * *
I'm loathe to buy into this "hate crimes" bullhonkey. When a white gives a funny look to a black it's a hate crime. When a black murders a white family it's a false accusation.
I will play devil's advocate against myself, though. When a crime is committed, the state has financial incentives to put SOMEONE (anyone!) in jail. People do have emotional "comfort zones" that can be played on, and the fastest way to get someone in jail, especially on far-reaching BS evidence, is to put a black on the stand and pick a white jury. This, I feel, creates a vicious cycle whereby many blacks, especially young, realize (and rightfully so) that they may end up in jail for something they didn't do, and are more likely to be jailed for minor infractions than others are for even major infractions. This induces a "might as well enjoy the benefits of criminal activity" mentality, which in turn fuels the subconscious prejudice that's at the top of the vicious circle. Furthermore, it only takes a few people like this (giving up) to make a whole race have a prejudice against it.
We don't need "anti-discrimination" laws, we need to stop a rampaging "justice" system that feeds on prejudice and bulldozes everybody.
* * * *** * * *
The people who live 2 houses down from me have a handicapped child, and a caretaker who comes by almost daily. The caretaker drives a van w. special equipment in it. The caretaker likes to make a U-turn in the driveway of the people who live right across the street from me, because that house has sidewalk-grade concrete "extending" the width of their driveway. So the lady across the street is talking to me one day and says maybe I could talk to the driver of the van, because the weight of the van is cracking their sidewalk. Otherwise she's written down the licence plate of the van and plans to call the cops.
Why couldn't the lady across the street just talk to the driver of the van herself? The van is parked all afternoon in the street just two houses down. Ring the doorbell -- you can tell which house is it -- or just leave a note on the windshield. But NO, people want to rely on the "authorities" to solve everything for them.
And this is my thing about most laws, on whatever subject. Let's learn to work through our differences like civilized adults, and save relying on the government as a last resort. Let's learn to communicate, to solve our own problems, to stop worrying about whether or not people hate us for legitimate reasons and instead do what we can to be likable. Giving Congress the authority to make any crime worse if it's white-on-black? This won't lead to peace and prosperity, or racial harmony, or any of that PC mumbo-jumbo. It will lead to more and more laws, more oppression, more people in prison, and stiffer wallet-draining tactics for people who may have trouble feeding their families enough as it is.
* * * *** * * *
Re-read my 1st paragraph. This world has made phenominal progress just in the last couple centuries. I think people of all races should rejoice in the fact that we don't call our landlord "Master" and live in fear of being sold to someone across town. We need to continue moving forward, not looking back and trying to grab rocks out of the past to throw at others in the present. | |
|
| |
| |
| |
| Senate plans to apologize to blacks. Do you know there is STILL no federal anti-lynching law?
Posted: 6/15/2005 11:39:52 PM | | Has anyone noticed that some of the very people who stomp their feet for reparations, are working to abolish the Confederate flag, and rehash all this lynching po-do, are CONSISTENTLY anti-gun and anti-second amendment? Pick one person on the Congressional Black Caucus and look at their gun rights voting record. If everything is as bad as they make it out to be, they'd be handing out every surplus firearm to every poor potential victim they could. They should be out supporting the right to bear arms and self defense on a regular basis. They sound like a BUNCH OF HYPOCRITES to me! | |
|
Suther
|
Joined: 5/20/2005
Msg: 22 | |
| |
| Senate plans to apologize to blacks. Do you know there is STILL no federal anti-lynching law?
Posted: 6/16/2005 11:54:44 AM | What Andrew Johnson did was to UNDO almost everything Lincoln did in regards to freeing the slaves and it was immoral, illegal and hyprocritical.
As far as I'm concerned, the federal government should make the current owners give all the land previously owned by the black community back to them or their ancestors and a mule to anyone who wants one. They purchased stolen property. Rescind the statutes of limitations and give the lawyers some work.
It couldn't cost the rest of us more than the 650 billion dollars that was stolen out of our social security money to give a "tax cut" to the richest 5%. | |
|
| |
| Senate plans to apologize to blacks. Do you know there is STILL no federal anti-lynching law?
Posted: 6/18/2005 8:41:43 AM | Man it is time for people to get over the past.I didn't hang anyone and neither has anyone I knew,know or will ever know.What about some apologies for my irish ancestors that built the railroads along with the chinese.Theses 2 groups were treated terribly as well.
I am sick of this whining .It is time to get over it, and move into the future.They have already been given more free passes and extra help than any other group in the history of our country and I am tired of trying to swallow the crap being forced down by throat for things I had nothing to do with and most certainly didn,t condone. | |
|
Home
login 
