Racism is not dead, but it is on life support — kept alive by politicians, race hustlers and people who get a sense of superiority by denouncing others as "racists.”
Why should they - or anyone - "obsess" over *any* trial? How about we just watch and listen and learn and pay attention?
FTA: "One of the many lessons of the Kyle Rittenhouse case—a lesson that some conservatives are learning at long last—is that the state is not always a force for good."
What a ridiculous straw man or false premise, whatever. The idea that conservatives until just now used to think that the state is always a force for good - "ALWAYS" - is pathetic laziness.
Just ask us about the Kelo v. City of New London case. Just ask us about Resident Biden's efforts to force-inject all Americans with an experimental drug. Just ask us about Waco and Ruby Ridge and No Child Left Behind and little Elián González.
Good grief, Leftists are so predictable and simpleminded.
There is a quite good (actually bad) reason that the Kyle Rittenhouse case has gotten so much more publicity than the Ahmaud Arbery case. The Kyle R. case is tied to a BLM protest / riot. Since BLM is a sacred narrative on the left, of course it is more important than a mundane murder/self-defense case in Georgia.
Kyle Rittenhouse despoiled a religious ritual of the left / media (but I repeat myself). The folks in Georgia did not.
Meanwhile in Wisconsin, a black felon already deemed a sex offender kills 5 people and injures dozens more and nothing to see here because it doesn’t really fit the white supremacy narrative. Neither does the blatant looting by those people of color in this authors home town of San Francisco. What looting?
Systemic racists on a rampage it seems. If the left wants a race war, they sure are stoking it.
Two things are true about this terrible case. (1) In all probability, the murder of Ahmaud Arbery was racially motivated. (2) Despite everything it has been brought before a jury. Let's wait for a verdict before we come to sweeping conclusions about "systemic racism" & etc.
I do agree that "antiracist" progressives have concentrated on a case that hardly serves their ideological purposes. In order to fit it into their preferred frame, progressives have been compelled not just to ignore every salient fact about the Rittenhouse case, but to inhabit an alternate universe where up is down, black is white and the evidence of one's eyes is irrelevant. It is indeed a surreal experience to watch pundits and journalists on MSNBC, CNN & etc. talk that case. The prevailing mental atmosphere seems to be controlled insanity.
No reason to focus on this case because their agenda has nothing to do with black lives . It is all about tearing down western-liberalism and given that the Georgia will almost 100 percent result in a conviction, it actually proves that the system of justice works . They use the narrative of systemic racism (which has existed) as a means to an end
Oh, for God's sake - if you are really a professor of law, learn to think clearly, will you? From what I have seen, Aubery was murdered. Period. Yes, he shouldn't have been snooping around a partially-built house - likely "casing the joint" for later - but at most that's a trespassing charge. These three yahoos were well out of bounds, and when they trapped Aubery, he panicked and fought back, trying to get away, and they murdered him. Open and shut. You don't shoot people or get three guys around them to threaten them just because they trespassed.
But, I suppose, to a hammer everything looks like a nail. To an erstwhile Social Justice Warrior who makes her living by holding "racial justice clinics," everything looks like RACISM!!!! Find a real job, will you?
I'm not sure where Professor Bazelon gets the idea that conservatives think "the state is . . . always a force for good." For my adult lifetime, distrust of the state has been a core tenet of American conservatism and the left has been the champion of the state controlling everything.
Also, I gotta admit, when I hear "slave patrols" my hackles get raised, because of the absurd claim made by some in the BLM/Defund the Police movement that all policing traces to slave patrols. The claim is so abused I'm reluctant to give it any credence. I'll credit the author here though for making a narrower claim about a particular Georgia law and offering some actual historical evidence in support of it, so maybe she's right about this particular law. It is, in any event, a law not suited to 21st century American conditions. Armed vigilantes chasing down people they "suspect" of crime is bound to lead to trouble far more often than it does any good.
I agree with Prof Bazelon where she notes the obvious differences between the Rittenhouse and Arbery cases but to say the Arbery case proves the existence of systemic racism is a stretch.
The Cathedral Media has missed this point on purpose. I believe firmly that at least the shooter in the Georgia case will be convicted and will receive heavy time. Jurors mostly reach verdicts based on the real evidence in the case. There was no probable cause to make a "citizen's arrest" of Mr. Arbery, much less to have shot him with a shotgun. Plus the GA prosecution team does not include Binger, so there's that, too.
I did not subscribe to Bari Weiss' Substack only to read authors who link to CNN to establish contested facts in a highly controversial legal case like this. Shame on you!
Oh brother another liberal who doesn’t understand Self-Defense and Citizens Arrest laws. It seems that political affiliation can even turn off the brains of law professors. My state has a citizens arrest law. If anyone directly witnesses a felony being committed they can use force to stop the criminal and hold them for the police.
Its this bizzaro progressive logic that this is somehow a bad thing. Without this law I could be arrested for intervening to stop an assault or a rape. I would have to sit and watch as someone stole my car or broke into my home. No where in Georgia’s law does it say one can shoot people for trespassing. Again making everything about “systemic racism” is moronic. Georgia was a slave state, look far enough back and you can “Oh my god this law was created by a white supremacist” and clutch your pearls. Since at one point nearly everyone in the state was racist. Being a mature adult capable of dialectical thinking one could say “Ah yes bad people can do good things too” not every old law in Georgia is bad because its old and some racist wrote it.
Maybe the author should stop, turn her brain back on, and ask “Why does Georgia have the Georgia Bureau of investigation?” Oh right because its a problem in Georgia that po dunk small town cops and prosectors do stupid things so the GBI comes in and takes over investigations. This would be a problem of systemic incompetence with prosectors and police, not systemic racism, that would need to be further addressed. Simply having the GBI is a big step forward.
All this piece shows is that Lara Bazelon is just another rabid partisan leftist professor. A big fail. To take just one example of her naked partisanship: linking to a Forbes piece listing all the stupid, misleading reasons leftists have for asserting that the judge in the Rittenhouse trial was showing favoritism - I mean, really?! Every single one of those "reasons" have been addressed, some by the judge himself (how would you like to be on trial for self-defense and have the prosecution refer to the complainants as "victims" - wouldn't this be a misuse of state power to stack the deck against you?), or they can be been easily rebutted ("Schroeder called for a break in the trial Wednesday after Rittenhouse broke down on the witness stand, which many left-leaning activists and public figures dismissed as fake emotion" --- oh really, that's some compassion for PTSD the left has there!) Note to self: don't bother reading Lara Bazelon again. There are much more thoughtful leftists worth reading than her.
Systemic racism is an invalid concept designed to instill guilt for being white. I am "white" and I am not racists. I do not feel in the least bit guilty. But those that use the term systemic racism to "brand" me racist are indeed dishonest and hateful.
Word. The Left are very good at barking up the wrong tree concerning all the issues they purport to care deeply about, whether it is racism or police misconduct.
I realized this morning the reaction from the left is not about vigilantism, racism or equality.
Think about what Rittenhouse really represents: individuals taking care of their community as best as they know how. He was trying to do what the state and local governments failed to do: a failure that was intentional.
While they may make a lot of noise about a "white man getting away with murder", that is all it is - noise.
If you are faced with a similar decision in the near future, will you be willing to risk your life and your future to save someone you don't know? Probably not - you'll think "that's the governments job".
And that is what the elite really want - to create a culture of government dependence. That is being displayed in everything they do. Their candidate for Comptroller of the Currency wants the government to take over individual bank accounts. The FDA/CDC want to force you to take a jab against your will. They have created a supply chain crisis that they now claim only they can fix. They have created election chaos and now hope you will acquiesce to their control over your votes. They shut a great number of small businesses and now employees are dependent on either big government or big business. They are siccing the DoJ on parents who object to how their children are being taught.
They want you to accept "the futility of individual effort" and submit to their whims.
Thomas Sowell (@ThomasSowell) Tweeted:
Racism is not dead, but it is on life support — kept alive by politicians, race hustlers and people who get a sense of superiority by denouncing others as "racists.”
Why should they - or anyone - "obsess" over *any* trial? How about we just watch and listen and learn and pay attention?
FTA: "One of the many lessons of the Kyle Rittenhouse case—a lesson that some conservatives are learning at long last—is that the state is not always a force for good."
What a ridiculous straw man or false premise, whatever. The idea that conservatives until just now used to think that the state is always a force for good - "ALWAYS" - is pathetic laziness.
Just ask us about the Kelo v. City of New London case. Just ask us about Resident Biden's efforts to force-inject all Americans with an experimental drug. Just ask us about Waco and Ruby Ridge and No Child Left Behind and little Elián González.
Good grief, Leftists are so predictable and simpleminded.
There is a quite good (actually bad) reason that the Kyle Rittenhouse case has gotten so much more publicity than the Ahmaud Arbery case. The Kyle R. case is tied to a BLM protest / riot. Since BLM is a sacred narrative on the left, of course it is more important than a mundane murder/self-defense case in Georgia.
Kyle Rittenhouse despoiled a religious ritual of the left / media (but I repeat myself). The folks in Georgia did not.
Meanwhile in Wisconsin, a black felon already deemed a sex offender kills 5 people and injures dozens more and nothing to see here because it doesn’t really fit the white supremacy narrative. Neither does the blatant looting by those people of color in this authors home town of San Francisco. What looting?
Systemic racists on a rampage it seems. If the left wants a race war, they sure are stoking it.
Two things are true about this terrible case. (1) In all probability, the murder of Ahmaud Arbery was racially motivated. (2) Despite everything it has been brought before a jury. Let's wait for a verdict before we come to sweeping conclusions about "systemic racism" & etc.
I do agree that "antiracist" progressives have concentrated on a case that hardly serves their ideological purposes. In order to fit it into their preferred frame, progressives have been compelled not just to ignore every salient fact about the Rittenhouse case, but to inhabit an alternate universe where up is down, black is white and the evidence of one's eyes is irrelevant. It is indeed a surreal experience to watch pundits and journalists on MSNBC, CNN & etc. talk that case. The prevailing mental atmosphere seems to be controlled insanity.
No reason to focus on this case because their agenda has nothing to do with black lives . It is all about tearing down western-liberalism and given that the Georgia will almost 100 percent result in a conviction, it actually proves that the system of justice works . They use the narrative of systemic racism (which has existed) as a means to an end
Oh, for God's sake - if you are really a professor of law, learn to think clearly, will you? From what I have seen, Aubery was murdered. Period. Yes, he shouldn't have been snooping around a partially-built house - likely "casing the joint" for later - but at most that's a trespassing charge. These three yahoos were well out of bounds, and when they trapped Aubery, he panicked and fought back, trying to get away, and they murdered him. Open and shut. You don't shoot people or get three guys around them to threaten them just because they trespassed.
But, I suppose, to a hammer everything looks like a nail. To an erstwhile Social Justice Warrior who makes her living by holding "racial justice clinics," everything looks like RACISM!!!! Find a real job, will you?
I'm not sure where Professor Bazelon gets the idea that conservatives think "the state is . . . always a force for good." For my adult lifetime, distrust of the state has been a core tenet of American conservatism and the left has been the champion of the state controlling everything.
Also, I gotta admit, when I hear "slave patrols" my hackles get raised, because of the absurd claim made by some in the BLM/Defund the Police movement that all policing traces to slave patrols. The claim is so abused I'm reluctant to give it any credence. I'll credit the author here though for making a narrower claim about a particular Georgia law and offering some actual historical evidence in support of it, so maybe she's right about this particular law. It is, in any event, a law not suited to 21st century American conditions. Armed vigilantes chasing down people they "suspect" of crime is bound to lead to trouble far more often than it does any good.
I agree with Prof Bazelon where she notes the obvious differences between the Rittenhouse and Arbery cases but to say the Arbery case proves the existence of systemic racism is a stretch.
The Cathedral Media has missed this point on purpose. I believe firmly that at least the shooter in the Georgia case will be convicted and will receive heavy time. Jurors mostly reach verdicts based on the real evidence in the case. There was no probable cause to make a "citizen's arrest" of Mr. Arbery, much less to have shot him with a shotgun. Plus the GA prosecution team does not include Binger, so there's that, too.
I did not subscribe to Bari Weiss' Substack only to read authors who link to CNN to establish contested facts in a highly controversial legal case like this. Shame on you!
Oh brother another liberal who doesn’t understand Self-Defense and Citizens Arrest laws. It seems that political affiliation can even turn off the brains of law professors. My state has a citizens arrest law. If anyone directly witnesses a felony being committed they can use force to stop the criminal and hold them for the police.
Its this bizzaro progressive logic that this is somehow a bad thing. Without this law I could be arrested for intervening to stop an assault or a rape. I would have to sit and watch as someone stole my car or broke into my home. No where in Georgia’s law does it say one can shoot people for trespassing. Again making everything about “systemic racism” is moronic. Georgia was a slave state, look far enough back and you can “Oh my god this law was created by a white supremacist” and clutch your pearls. Since at one point nearly everyone in the state was racist. Being a mature adult capable of dialectical thinking one could say “Ah yes bad people can do good things too” not every old law in Georgia is bad because its old and some racist wrote it.
Maybe the author should stop, turn her brain back on, and ask “Why does Georgia have the Georgia Bureau of investigation?” Oh right because its a problem in Georgia that po dunk small town cops and prosectors do stupid things so the GBI comes in and takes over investigations. This would be a problem of systemic incompetence with prosectors and police, not systemic racism, that would need to be further addressed. Simply having the GBI is a big step forward.
All this piece shows is that Lara Bazelon is just another rabid partisan leftist professor. A big fail. To take just one example of her naked partisanship: linking to a Forbes piece listing all the stupid, misleading reasons leftists have for asserting that the judge in the Rittenhouse trial was showing favoritism - I mean, really?! Every single one of those "reasons" have been addressed, some by the judge himself (how would you like to be on trial for self-defense and have the prosecution refer to the complainants as "victims" - wouldn't this be a misuse of state power to stack the deck against you?), or they can be been easily rebutted ("Schroeder called for a break in the trial Wednesday after Rittenhouse broke down on the witness stand, which many left-leaning activists and public figures dismissed as fake emotion" --- oh really, that's some compassion for PTSD the left has there!) Note to self: don't bother reading Lara Bazelon again. There are much more thoughtful leftists worth reading than her.
Systemic racism is an invalid concept designed to instill guilt for being white. I am "white" and I am not racists. I do not feel in the least bit guilty. But those that use the term systemic racism to "brand" me racist are indeed dishonest and hateful.
Word. The Left are very good at barking up the wrong tree concerning all the issues they purport to care deeply about, whether it is racism or police misconduct.
I realized this morning the reaction from the left is not about vigilantism, racism or equality.
Think about what Rittenhouse really represents: individuals taking care of their community as best as they know how. He was trying to do what the state and local governments failed to do: a failure that was intentional.
While they may make a lot of noise about a "white man getting away with murder", that is all it is - noise.
If you are faced with a similar decision in the near future, will you be willing to risk your life and your future to save someone you don't know? Probably not - you'll think "that's the governments job".
And that is what the elite really want - to create a culture of government dependence. That is being displayed in everything they do. Their candidate for Comptroller of the Currency wants the government to take over individual bank accounts. The FDA/CDC want to force you to take a jab against your will. They have created a supply chain crisis that they now claim only they can fix. They have created election chaos and now hope you will acquiesce to their control over your votes. They shut a great number of small businesses and now employees are dependent on either big government or big business. They are siccing the DoJ on parents who object to how their children are being taught.
They want you to accept "the futility of individual effort" and submit to their whims.