This Year in Feedback

Last December, we ended the calendar year with a tribute to you, our readers. We do the same this year – our first full year of blogging – in the same fashion, by reprinting your comments about our blogs throughout the year. Some were thoughtful; others not as much. Some were complimentary; others not so much. Most were posted in this space, but some appeared on a Facebook group page dedicated to the situation at the University of Delaware. We provide a sampling of all types below, with no editing. Happy New Year!

Tee Hill said...

Very good interview and observations. I'm doing a persuasive speech research paper at LASWC. I started to argue the point of pros of the word use. I thought that the word should not be banned not because of the freedom of speech, but because we as black culture should be able to create our own words and meanings to them. But as I continued my research, I found that the word breeds hatred, anger, hostility, and breaths live into negativity. Like every word in the English language, it has an origin. This word comes from hate and now it is America's responsibility to create a better word. Right now, that word is African-American.

2/12/07 10:20 PM

Anonymous said...

"This is what Al Sharpton and others have been trying to get us to understand"

Are you fucking serious?

14/4/07 1:47 PM

Chet said...

It's not at all logically necessary or clear that Gingrich was referring to Spanish specifically, as you assert.

It appears he was referring to the economic costs of any immigrant not learning the local tongues.

Indeed, while "Ghetto's" etymology may be Yiddish, its modern connotation is more African-American than hispanic. Nonetheless, it can imply a racial meaning and can imply a non-racial one (white people live in ghettos too), there is no logical necessity for your assumption, other than you want it to be so so you can bring down Newt.

Speak about contrived. You oppose language immersion - is anyone who supports it necessarily racist?

I've noticed an even more offensive stretch or strawman you've created.

You place this assumption into Gingrich's alleged views:

"...and the public sector (i.e., schools) has no obligation to help them."

I'm certain Gingrich wouldn't subscribe to such ridiculous strawman.

There's a vast difference between the state's "obligation" to help individuals in need, and catering to every conceivable individual desire. There's also a difference of opinion as to whether full-immersion is actually "better" help than fully-bilingual programs.

The state obviously has a moral obligation to help immigrants, or even illegals, equally, if, say, a firefighter shows up at a building that is known to house immigrants (or anyone), or in the enforcement of law. Where immigrants have children with language difficulty, the state obviously has an obligation to provide education (though how it provides it is a question open to empirical research). There may also be a limited obligation of the state to provide some limited physical needs for those in physical need, but I don't see the state as obligated to provide ballots in every conceivable language (or even more than one language). The person's life or liberty does not depend on it (voting is still very possible through an interpreter, etc.). For if you provide it in one, why not all 200 languages? Do we print a second (or 14th) set of traffic signs? The costs to society become ridiculous.

"Obligations to help" exist, but in some situations you give more aid by letting people become independent.

16/4/07 6:39 AM

Anonymous said...

Wow, that was such an interesting take on the [Tavis Smiley All-
American Forum for the Democratic presidential candidates]. Thanks.

30/6/07 11:41 PM

mimi said...

I've been seeing the link for this video for days and just decided to click on it. What's next? Watching people masturbate on youtube to the object of their fantasies? I think this is an invasion of privacy. So she has a crush on Obama! Who doesn't have a crush on some public figure/celebrity? What's with our exhibitionist/voyeur society that we now have to share our inner most thoughts/feelings with the entire Universe? This man is running for President. It's bad enough the dignity of this office has been so comprimised by the idiot now holding the office, now we have groupie fantasy videos taped and posted on youtube. We're headed in the wrong direction people... the wrong direction!!!

16/6/07 11:57 AM

Blogger Jeremiah said...

After looking at the video my first thought was "man this is going to hurt his campaign" then I asked myself why do "black" people always have to be attached to public, sexually explicit, lust-ladened fantasies? I cant answer that question nor do I want to. What I think is important is how the american public respond to this because I think it illustrates what we as a nation are concerned with.

17/6/07 4:04 PM

Bonnie in Albuquerque said...

This is interesting as here in New Mexico there were three students denied access to their graduation ceremony because they were late. The girls were native american and hispanic. The news coverage alluded to the fact that everyone else had gotten there on time and that they knew that if they were late they would not be allowed in. They mentioned that for some people "being on time" is not important and also that people can't take the "living in the land of manana" so seriously. There were several white people though that ran in at the last minute and were accomodated. The way the news and the comments made it sound was that it was assumed that the stereotype of the "lazy mexican" was true and that they needed to be taught how to be on time. The "lazy" stereotype is also very prominent for the native community. During my teaching in the teacher ed program I was often told to teach my student teachers how to handle the "laziness" of some of their students.

I find it very disturbing how people buy into these stereotypes when they just keep perpetuating racism. I am constantly calling people out for buying into these stereotypes, which does not make people too happy, but at least starts the dialogue.

4/6/07 1:44 PM

Anonymous said...

This article is wrong on so many levels. Dog fighting was started by rich white men. It isn't just part of counter-culture and it isn't right no matter where you come from. It is cruel, vicious, and disgusting. It shouldn't be glamorized in the hip-hop community and African-Americans shouldn't associate themselves with it. Vick is a multi-millionare so your remark about trying to get ahead makes no sense in his case. You are making excuses for him doing something no sane person would do.

19/7/07 12:30 PM

Blogger mmoe said...

no, you're wrong [in response to the comment above].
1. Dogfighting traces its history to ancient Roman coliseums. It was part of many cultures through history especially in England up until the 19th century. It became part of the U.S. culture in the early 20th century until the popularity declined in the 1950's to the 1970's. Since it has revitalized in the past few decades it has become completely recultured into what it is today. Yeah, maybe it was started by rich white men--500 years ago. Does it even matter anyway how it started-- the culture is now has established its roots and context.
2. Dogfighting IS cruel, vicious, and disgusting. This isn't promoting dogfighting, and the disgustingness of dogfighting is quite irrelevent. This article is about why dogfighting is so homogenously affiliated with black people.
3. Again, you're right dogfighting shouldn't be glamorized. You're talking about what SHOULD happen. this isn't about what SHOULD happen, it's trying to figure out WHY something IS happening.
4. Did you even read the post?? "Michael VIck is a multi-millionaire so the part about getting ahead makes no sense" They're talking about how excessive display of money by wealthy black people is a display of how they've beat the odds. Dogfighting, in this sense, is comparable to bling. Michael Vick uses dogfighting as a means to show off his wealth and power after growing up with very little of either.
I think this post is very interesting, especially because more recently there have been more investigations, and it has become very much more likely that Michael Vick be banned from the NFL.

30/7/07 1:14 AM

Blogger lindros2 said...

Isn't Gerald Poindexter black? So if you think the "19th century is alive," blame the stupid black attorney for calling one of his own a "boy."

Funny if it was a white person calling Vick a "boy" there would be riots and looting.

25/9/07 12:40 PM

Anonymous said...

Silent Racism refers to the negative stereotypes in people's minds about African Americans or other people of color. Elvis surely had many negative stereotypes about blacks, especially poor ones, and they found their way into his music.

Whether he was a bigot, a racist, or both, Elvis was like all white people, including those who are well-meaning like myself. He learned negative stereotypes from the culture he lived in, and he expressed those stereotypes, probably without even knowing it.

22/10/07 3:07 PM

Anonymous said...

You're just a dumb-ass fan who can't see the excitement of the sport. Trash talking is nothing personal it's only a competition. If you played football then you'll know what I'm talking about

29/11/07 12:25 PM

Blogger Jeremiah said...

Unfortunately black folks don't get the attention they deserve or their needs met......throughout history! Independents in NY are asking for a debate between Hillary and Obama in Harlem. Who decided Hillary is best for black people? Who decided that Independents are best for black people? As much as we want society to be inclusive rather than exclusionary productive rather than destructive at the end of the day it's up to the individual. Its up to the individual to decide whats best for themselves given the options presented. In my experience too many things have similarities while every thing identifies itself as the other or different. I've seen this in political parties, I've been observing this in people (subjectively and objectively) and as I look back it I've always noticed this. There needs to be a paradoxical paradigm shift if change should truly proceed. History hasn't shown that much of change in my experience. Okay, now I can go to school with colored and white children but I can still be called a nigger, by my teacher and class mate. I have access to things institutionally speaking but somehow it's always at arms distance just like wealth and equity no matter how I perform. Maybe GOP candidates can have a debate and have it translated in pig Latin and Ebonics so black folks can watch. Now that's an inclusive tactic.

17/9/07 9:01 PM

Blogger Mozart said...

I feel like it's so easy for a poet/rapper to say black men are crappy "Read a Mothafu-- book", when in actuality this artist is partaking in black defeatism. Which is ragging on black men for something that isn't solely their fault. Take a look at this video by carlos andres gomez which touches on what I'm talking about

http://youtube.com/watch?v=gCQA-6vtS2U

27/11/07 9:06 AM

David Faustino said...

"1) As a group, whites have benefited by the use of the n-word, so we should not be involved in the discussion about whether black folks should use it. Any attempt to do so is intellectual colonialism."

Oh my a paradox! The white debater inadvertently self identifies as an intellectual colonialist by participating in a debate. Thereby disqualifying himself from even participating in the debate.

Stop telling people what to think. It makes you look silly and its very rude!

1/11/07 1:18 PM

Blogger Summer said...

I am absolutely thrilled with this blog entry. Thank you for providing a thoughtful and intelligent analysis of [the University of Delaware] situation.

4/11/07 11:18 PM

Anonymous said...

This is the most clear, informed, sane article that I've had the privileged to read regarding the situation at the University of Delaware.

Thank you for your work and your opinion. Let us hope that this is resolved reasonably.

-Anon

4/11/07 11:27 PM

Anonymous said...

i really must applaud you for writing the first article i've seen that intelligently and fairly paints a picture of what is really at work here. the goals of this program are being distorted so disgustingly by a story hungry media and an exceedingly biased and outrageous organization. its unfortunate that so many people seem very eager to jump on an uninformed bandwagon.

thank you again so much

5/11/07 12:00 AM

Anonymous said...

Thank you, thank you, thank you.

Finally, an intelligent and informed analysis of the situation at hand. Not only are your comments spot on, but your support for our program is refreshing. The issues at UD go much deeper than diversity training in Residence Life. Just take a look at Linda Gottfredson's work - need I say more?

There is not only light at the end of the tunnel, there is a waterfall that will soon put out the FIRE.

5/11/07 12:44 AM

Anonymous said...

Thank you for being honest.
Thank you for being rational.
Thank you for being supportive.

Thank you for hope.

5/11/07 10:13 AM

Anonymous said...

I have to disagree with that has been said about the university of delaware on your blog. As a former student I faced these programs and despite what you claim students are required to attend and participate. It is an incredibly peer-pressure filled situation and simply not the way to go about exposing students to diversity. Students on each floor are gathered and specfic questions are asked. For example if you are homophobic please stand up. why should students be subjected to such humiliation its utterly ridiculous and while I believe that a program can be beneficial the current one at UD needs to be seriously reviewed.

6/11/07 1:32 PM

[An attack on Stephen by a student at the University of Delaware on the Facebook group page]:

in additon i am disgusted by your smearing of me as unintlligent, and i dont say this to many i dont know but you are a hateful and dispicable person and it is no suprise u support this program, you have a bone to pick with someone buddy but keep it out of UD.

ill leave this racist hateful man with 2 comments
1. President Bush's cabinet is the most diverse in history
2. "those who cant debate, defame--Kahane"

i have nothing against diversity as a personal initaitive but mandating it publicly is not permissible, and it is an ideology.

and the point is that ive argued you so this isnt "inarguable"

i also have the problem with the program that much of this so called inequality, isonly solvable by economic reform which can be attained by electing the right representatives into office, but you may dissagree

AND THIS IS WHY WE CANT HAVE THE PROGRAM because people dissagree on these things yet a public program asserts them

but sir you are a dispicable human being who seems like he hates this country, and its really unfortunate that you have devoted your life to such low work.

i hope you learn your goals are unattainable until you look at the big picture

ryan

ps. maybe you would still have reasonable political views if you got out of the ivory tower and had some fiscal responsibility and a taste of real life

[From the same student, in response to our blog on the U of D situation]:

the people who support this program are hateful paranoid and disgusting

i dont understand how you put up with this crap

dont you understand they are flat out calling you racist??????

[He actually called us “douchebags,” but it appears that the insult was deleted by him or by the administrator at some point.]