I'd almost like to take pride as the first man who identifies himself as Quaker to be accused of racism. Yippie.
There is a song called "George Fox" about the founder of Quakerism. We used to sing it in the camp I went to in South East, PA, home of a huge chunk of the countries Quakers. I still hum it often, and sing it aloud to myself. The lyrics are as follows:
There's a light that was shining when the world began.
And a light that is shining in the heart of a man,
There's a light that is shining in the Turk and the Jew
And a light that is shining, friend, in me and in you.
CHORUS:
Walk in the light, wherever you many be,
Walk in the light, wherever you may be!
"In my old leather breeches and my shaggy shaggy locks,
I am walking in the glory of the light," said Fox.
With a book and a steeple, and a bell and a key
They would bind us forever but they can't (said he).
For, the book it will perish and the steeple will fall
And the light will be shining in the end of it all.
CHORUS
"If we give you a pistol, will you fight for the Lord?"
"But you can't kill the Devil with a gun or a sword!"
"Will you swear on the Bible?" "I will not!" said he,
"For the truth is more holy than the book to me."
CHORUS
There's an ocean of darkness and I drown in the night
Till I come through the darkness to the ocean of light,
For the light is forever and the light it is free
"And I walk in the glory of the light," said he.
CHORUS
As I said in the comments. You want to get "pats racism" then you make it a fucking joke. If I call my short friend shorty, no one bats and eye because no one thinks that height chauvinism actually exists.
Until we get the point where racial epithets are treated with the same ridiculousness as entreaties for Jesse Helms to be gang rapped, then we are a racist society. And that means YOU, you PC little bastard who's too ashamed to say the word "nigger" out loud even when referring to the word and not the sentiment.
Some of you can't believe the racist tone that I take. Fair enough.
I can't believe that you people don't all see how racist you are for feeling that way.
Until all racial epithets are free domain for the theater of the absurd, we will be a racist society.
Maybe in another 100 years.
Thursday, August 14, 2008
Rumors of my Chauvonism have Been Greatly Exageratted.... by a bunch of WOPS, Kykes, Spics, Crackers and Coons
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
13 comments:
Um, I think causation runs the opposite way here. Blatantly racist jokes stop being offensive when there is no real racism. Blatantly racist jokes don't make racism disappear.
That's what they said about segregation in the schools.
So desegregating schools is just like telling racist jokes?
I agree words only have the power you give them.
I don't agree it's up to you to determine that degree of power for others.
Uh, can my quote please be removed from this post? I don't want to be associated with hijackings. Thanks.
khanxbai
Nut, in reference to this:
"[Quakers were] early pioneers for humane treatment of the disabled and mentally ill."
Please show me the evidence--any evidence--you have of this. This is my field of specialty. You're pulling this out of your propaganda-spewing ass.
And joke or not, this is NOT being a "pioneer" for the treatment of the mentally ill--it's being downright cruel:
"...to reconcile his own mental retardation..."
And:
"The pacifism of Quakerism is based on the belief that all humans are equal. It's based on the belief that God is in every living thing on earth."
But you don't think Matt is equal, do you?
I could go on, but what's the point? You're convinced you're right, have absolutely no grasp of rhetoric (the Plato reference), and clearly have chosen to be a self-righteous asshole.
Yeah, I said that, and here's why--Nut, a good rant is at the very least thought out in some way. This is just raging lunacy.
Brad, I love this blog, but if I wanted to read this kind of crap.
you're right, d.p. I sound quite obnoxious if you take me completely fucking literally.
The mentally ill bit I pulled from Wikipedia without fact checking. It may be wrong but the others are true. Actually, I'm also slightly unsure about the suffrage movement.
Fine, then it's not a good rant. That makes me bad at rants but not a racist asshole, which is my point. No one is saying "Nut, this post failed in the humor department" They're going all "ZOMG IT WAS SO BAD IT'S OFFENSIVE"
which is what strikes me as self-righteous.
This boils down to me having said things in a way people don't like. I hold no views in seriousness that would make any of you cringe, but you're all throwing this huge shit fit over my fucking LANGUAGE.
The words may have sucked, but the meaning was clear. I won't be vilified for faults I don't have. I said in my very first post on this blog that I hold no pretensions about being a good writer.
And anony, that's not what I said and is completely idiotic. Comparing and equating are different animals. That seems fairly obvious.
and clem, sorry. My intent was not to associate you with my words. I actually meant that as a disclaimer. As you were my only defender in the last post I assumed you'd be OK with it. That was presumptuous of me and I apologize.
It wasn't me who removed it, but I would have done it had I been the first to see your comment.
OK, so you were comparing the desegregation of schools to making racist jokes, and not equating the two. Am I being "idiotic" for pointing out that there are some significant differences between the two? The obvious one is that the primary beneficiary of desegregation is the target of the racist joke. The comparison isn't valid. Rickm's comment about causation is on the nose.
Sigh. The point was that sometimes changes in behavior can dictate changes in attitude, and that it's not always the other way around.
As to who's spot on, the presumption that you can know is pretty fucking arrogant. I believe that it can, rick apparently doesn't. Neither of us has any way to prove it.
So, the only person spot on here is you. You are spot on being an idiot.
So I'm presumptuous and a fuckin' arrogant idiot for agreeing with rickm, but when you disagree with him, you're just...what?...expressing an opinion that nobody is allowed to disagree with?
"I'd almost like to take pride as the first man who identifies himself as Quaker to be accused of racism. Yippie."
I know this may be surprising but didn't Richard Nixon identify as a Quaker?
Post a Comment