Saturday, January 13, 2018

Tear Down the Walls

Tear down the walls, tear down the palaces
Whose glory is a memory more sunless than our own.

These are tall shadows on the blighted earth
Spreading and lengthening as the day falls into the night
As we fall into our night, as every one of us
Will fall, and the always taller black
Fall with us.

What ghost knows where he goes
Or when he'll meet his brothers at what midnight?
What shall he say to them among the shadows?
Unhappy spirits squinting at the light,
History's blind and lame, the stunted ones.

Oh, not to them but to the living others
We say:
Tear down these walls, even though the sun
Must still go down and night come on
Wherever any one of us may walk;
Tear down these palaces whose past is lost,
Before they fall and falling crush us...

From the poem, Tear Down the Walls, by T. C. Wilson


Marshal Art said...

Still lying. You never stop. Such hatred. Boy, you're really embracing the hell out of that grace, aren't you?

Dan Trabue said...

By all means, point out the "lie," in the poem cited. Point out the hatred.

The grace is in the notion of coming together to tear down walls that divide us. In uniting behind love. In opposing those who espouse racism, elitism and hatred.

Perhaps you missed the point?

Marshal Art said...

The lies are those you write on that wall in your picture. Those lies are the wall YOU'VE erected and continue to maintain. The racism lie you're working now is the racism lie based on Trump's alleged use of the word "s**thole" to describe the conditions of several nations and not the people trying to escape them, and that Trump is acting immorally by seeking to better determine which of them are actual victims and not scumbags.

Dan Trabue said...

The only words in that picture are the Resident's actual words. So, if they're lies, they're his lies, Marshall (and to be sure, there are tons of his lies). But that's on him, not me.

Look, I get that you don't get it. I'm just telling you that you're not making sense. I put up Trump's words on the wall. They are his words that many people - left, right, US citizens, African citizens, global citizens - have troubles with for what we consider good reason. There is no "lie" in saying, "We find these words troubling. They are, in our reasonable and across the board opinions, racist, sexist, harmful, wrong." This is not a lie. They are HIS words and our honest reactions to them.

And read this closely and understand with your mind:


Again repeat that 5,000 times, write it on the chalkboard 500 times, think on that one sentence, strive to understand it and come back when you can say, "Oh, I get it. It's not the vulgar use of the word "shithole..." I get that now."

Then, when you can understand that, see if you can understand that many people across the board - including the Africans and Haitians and others he spoke of - find it elitist, racist and otherwise just immoral to say that those brown people can't contribute to our nation, but those white people can.

THAT is what is wrong, anti-American, anti-liberty, anti-Christian and just ugly as hell.

Not that you appear to understand that.

Again, good luck.

Marshal Art said...

So to clarify my point, I have no problem with the poem. It does nothing for me either way. As usual, it's the way you use such things to make or further your point. Your position on Trump is horribly skewed, even considering my own acknowledgement of his character flaws. More specifically, your view of his immigration/refugee position is an out and out lie and you go to great lengths to make it out to be that which it isn't. There is no racism, or elitism in recognizing the limitations and/or burdens of welcoming just anybody on as if America is a bottomless pit of largesse, as if you're willing to do more to foot the bill.

The lie is in your assigning the label of racism to Trump's concerns, as if the skin color of the people from these nations that are so great and wonderful that people are fleeing them is in any way an actual concern. It isn't, except to those like yourself who need ammunition to turn people away from Trump and his policies, because you can't argue against his real position regarding this issue.

The lie is that it is somehow immoral and elitist to hope that all who seek to come here are ACTUAL contributors and willing to assimilate to become AMERICANS, not Haitians, Syrian, Somalians merely living in America.

Gotta go. But that's good enough for starters.

Dan Trabue said...

Take it up with the good people of Africa, Haiti and El Salvador, Marshall. Take it up with the many (but way too few) conservatives who recognize the racism.

When you can convince them that Trump did not mean what he said and they all admit, "Okay, we were mistaken..." then come back to me.

In the meantime, I'm no idiot. We recognize racism when we see it embraced and supported. Just as actual racists do...

“You have white supremacists like Andrew Anglin calling Trump’s words ‘encouraging and refreshing,’” Segal said, referring to the editor of Daily Stormer, a fringe, anti-Semitic conspiracy website..."

Other white supremacists also piped in to support the president’s words on social media. Mike “Enoch” Peinovich, who helped lead the rally in Charlottesville, wrote on Twitter that “millions of white people are asking themselves today why indeed do we have to accept immigrants from shitholes?” He implied that
Trump’s words had helped to push forward a white nationalist agenda."

Dan Trabue said...

The lie is that it is somehow immoral and elitist to hope that all who seek to come here are ACTUAL contributors and willing to assimilate to become AMERICANS, not Haitians, Syrian, Somalians merely living in America.

But why would you assume that those from poor, dark-skinned nations would not be "actual contributors..."? THAT assumption is, by definition, elitist and racist.

IF one does not hold that assumption, then why suggest a predominantly white and wealthy nation as a source of "contributors" but not a predominantly black and poor one?

Read the comments, understand the obvious intent, open your mind, humble your heart.

Marshal Art said...

First off, continually citing "conservatives", as if doing so makes the false true doesn't work with someone who so well recognizes bull, especially yours, when I see it. Among the right-wing are "NeverTrumpers" who hate the guy as much as you do. REAL conservatives (and honest people in general) don't act as if they don't know what Trump means when he speaks crudely, even while they wince when he does. So, enough with that "conservatives agree" lie you so much enjoy telling when it serves your false premise to do so.

I totally doubt that you've polled all of the "good people" (meaning: anyone who agrees with you) of ANY country in order to determine who views Trump as racist, despite how pathetically desperate you are to portray him that way. I'd wager those who are suffering the most in those countries, those who are most eager to escape them, agree with Trump and likely have a far worse opinion of their homelands.

In the meantime, I'll not question the integrity of the many black people (and conservatives) that do NOT believe Trump is a racist, and certainly not for his positions on immigration and refugees. MLK JR's niece, for example, does not think so. I think she has a far more honest and truthful perspective on who might be than Trump haters like you.

More later

Anonymous said...

You still don't get it.

Read more, Marshall. Read opinions that differ from yours. Listen to people from Haiti, Africa, Latin America. Befriend an undocumented immigrant.

Open your mind, humble your heart.

You just don't get it.


Marshal Art said...

I get it just fine. You're a liar who hates Trump and is willing to say anything, believe anything or repeat anything that casts him in a bad light. You're eager to take the slightest utterance from him and twist it to be some kind of horror.

Rand Paul just came out and reminded people that Trump financed (at least in part) his mission trip to Haiti which resulted in Rand restoring the vision of 200 Haitians. Yeah. Sounds to me like Trump hates Haitians.

In the meantime, opinions don't cut it. I need to have facts that back up those opinions. You know...that which you never provide to support yours on anything. Also in the meantime, why don't you give any respect for those opinions that differ from yours. I've just given you one in particular...Alveda King. Trump put up Jennifer Hudson and family members, rent free, in his Chicago hotel, giving them the VIP treatment after her mother and other family members were murdered. I could give you a whole list of people of color and other minorities who do not agree with your baseless assessment that he's a racist.

So while I'm out of time, I'm still wondering how you resolve the contradiction inherent in your position...that the nations from which people flee for their lives are not s**tholes. We're to believe refugees are in fear so we must accept them here, but their countries of origin are not s**tholes. How does that work exactly? It seems I'm listening quite well.

I've also already given you government opinion on these countries by linking to the State Department. Our government has for years had the same low opinion of those nations in question and have warned against travel to them. Why? Because they wish to lavish visitors with all manner of pleasure?

You seem to think that Trump is intent on denying people on the basis of color, and give anecdotal examples of a Haitian guy you know who would be welcomed by Trump as exactly the type of person he is talking about attracting from ANY country. You lie by pretending he's making some statement that people from the countries in question CAN'T be contributors and that's totally unsupported by anything he's said (or said to have said). You just continue to lie. Your comments and last two posts are like a lie festival. As time allows, I'll get more detailed with each of your lies and unlike you, provide actual factual basis for my critiques.

Anonymous said...

I've known people who reserve the friendly terms "brother" and "sister" for strangers and acquaintances whose skin color matches their own. Since I aim to be color-blind, I am disappointed by this. But I imagine some people on the left embrace it as long as the color in question is a "correct" color.

I remember audience applause on an old sitcom where a black woman was proud to say she will only date a black man. How well would this go over if it were a white woman saying she will only date a white man?

I am always on the lookout for double standards within me, and I would urge liberals to do the same.

~ Hiram

Anonymous said...

I'd say context matters, Hiram.

A white woman saying she will only date a white man is almost certainly operating from a place of a privileged person who has racist reasons for making such an announcement.

A black woman saying that is almost certainly merely affirming her love for her oppressed black brothers and the historic threat minorities have lived under in this great nation and elsewhere.

Now, it's possible that a black woman might say that out of racism, but I'd rather doubt that was the motivation, most of the time someone might say that.

Here's an interesting and evenhanded article on the notion of racial "color-blindness..."


Anonymous said...

But yes, I certainly agree that we all should watch out for double standards in our own lives, even as we point them out on the "other side." Thanks.


Marshal Art said...


Your response to Hiram is absolutely racist. How dare you assume as you do of either woman. You're projecting. Way to embrace grace, fraud.

Anonymous said...

Define racism.

I don't think it means what you think it means.


Marshal Art said...

Are you really that dishonest? (No need to answer this rhetorical question...of course you are.) You just engaged in stereotyping both white and black women by pretending to know...with certainty...why either would reject dating outside their race.

Don't you dare suggest that I don't understand what racism is, as I don't abuse the word the way leftists do with impunity, and as you are now with your hate-filled rants about Trump. You absolutely reek of hypocrisy. Shame on you.

Dan Trabue said...

1. There is a difference between a qualified educated guess (again, with the caveats, "likely" or "almost certainly" being included) and a stereotype.

2. "Holding stereotypes" is not the definition of racism. Not that I was demonstrating a stereotype held.

So again, I ask you to look up the definition of racism. While you're at it, look up the definition of stereotype.

If a doctor says, "You should quit smoking as there's a good chance it could negatively impact health..." he isn't pushing a stereotype of smokers, he is making an educated guess/recommendation.

Dan Trabue said...

And in case you missed the point of the comment: It was based on years of reading and associating with black folk and white folk and hearing their comments. When white people I have met, talked with, etc, have suggested they wouldn't date black people, they are the ones who said that "they just don't like the looks of black folk.... but I'm not racist!" (although the latter caveat was not always added). When I've heard black folk say something similar about white folks (and it was MUCH rarer), it was coming from a place of protecting an oppressed people.

I haven't heard any black folk say such a thing in a long time. I still hear white folk say this sort of thing, although it is much rarer to hear it now... I believe that shame keeps them from saying it out loud or in the company of progressives much.

Now, I certainly will allow that this is my anecdotal experience (well, along with some data that I've read... but largely anecdotal) so it's not thoroughly research based. I'd gladly defer to research on the topic if it offered different data.

The point of the comment, to be clear, was to say that when black women have said something like that, the reason was NOT racism (i.e., hatred or disdain of a race) so much as it was about defending against racism (black folk have been oppressed by racism, we need to stand together in defense against racism... that kind of thing).

Do you understand, now, my point? That, for black women, it's NOT typically been about racism, at least in what I've read?

Dan Trabue said...

Craig, do you have any experience or expertise or reading on the matter?

If so, do you recognize that the reason for black women (mainly in the past) saying something like this has been as a protection against oppressive racism towards them? Or have you experienced something different?

Or are you just unaware of any reasons given?

Craig said...

According to MW, the situation you describe, using race as the primary determining factor, is literally the dictionary definition of racism. Your argument about isn’t with me,it’s with MW.

And yes, I see interracial dating and marriage as so common as to be unremarkable.

But I don’t believe that my experience defines reality, so I’m sticking with MW on this.

Dan Trabue said...

Read the definition again. You're not understanding it.

Good luck.

Oh, and no surprise, but you didn't answer the question I asked. No worries. I didn't expect you would.

Craig said...

Only following your example.

“A belief that race is the primary determinant...”

Pretty confusing stuff. Again take it up with MW, and set a better example.

Dan Trabue said...

Really? You DO understand that HALF a definition is not a definition?


a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities
AND THAT racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race

1. I did not say ever (look at my actual words, it's not there) that race is "the primary determinant of human traits and capacities."

Did not say that?

Do you recognize that reality?

Please answer or don't comment.

2. I certainly never said that race produces an inherent superiority of a particular race.

Did not say it.

Do you understand that reality?

Please answer these questions first and directly or I will just ignore your words as you are writing words that are nothing, based not on reality but some dysfunction or something, but nothing worth wasting time reading.

Dan Trabue said...

And again, READ THE DEFINITION IN WHOLE. You're not understanding it.

Take it up with MW.

Craig said...

Nice try. Dr.

Dan Trabue said...

A half truth is often a whole lie.

Dan Trabue said...

I would hope that, those times when I've made a mistake, I'd always be man enough to admit it. I would hope that for all of us.

Marshal Art said...

Spewing nonsense as you do is deceitful. To suggest that because a white woman doesn't find black men particularly attractive she is manifesting racism is asinine. Equally asinine is the alleged excuse for black women who won't date outside their race. How you can honestly sit there and type out that it isn't racism...when it is absolutely a question of race in the choice, even more so than someone who simply does find the features of another race particularly attractive.

Personally, I have absolutely NO problem with a black woman rejecting white guys on the basis of superficial preferences in a mate. Why the hell would I, as it's no different than choosing a mate in any case. If a hot black chick rejected me because, "Sorry. I'm not into white guys", I'd be disappointed...because she's a hot black chick...but "racism" wouldn't be the first thing to cross my mind. Because I'm not a leftist chucklehead. Some people have the jungle fever and some don't. It's nothing deeper than that.

But you go ahead and pretend white people are racist, just like your sock puppet feo does, and that all black people are noble beings without a racist bone in their entire population.

Craig said...

I’d hope you would too, but that would be foolish on my part. Just like my hope that you’d answer the questions you’ve been avoiding for over 2 months.

Craig said...

No, you said that women who choose who to date or not based solely on race were somehow rational. When choosing who to date is based solely on race, it’s clearly (according to MW) an example of racism.

I’ve just been choosing to ignore the hubris required to seriously presume that your opinion is in any way representative of any actual women. The fact that you (more than once) claim to speak for some vast majority (if not all) of a group of people is just one more example of your exaltation of your hunches.

Anonymous said...

Read the definition again. You're still not understanding it.

Beyond that, I'm telling you that what I've read and heard from black women who want to date black men, it's NOT based solely on race, but race in the context of a very real history of oppression.

Understand the difference?

Understand yet where you're NOT understanding the dictionary?


Craig said...

I understand both the dictionary and you. I understand that the first part of racism is placing a disproportionate degree of stock in race. I understand that unless that condition is met, nothing else matters.

I also understand that you are once again presuming to allow your alleged interactions with a tiny number of black women, to give you license to extrapolate your hunches across a much broader group of women than is warranted.

Clearly your broad over generalizations about the motives of millions of women you’ve never interacted with can only be based on your prejudiced views about how people of different races think. Clearly basing your conclusions solely on the race of people can’t be anything but racist.

What I’m not sure you understand is the fact that I’m following your example.

Anonymous said...

Craig that is literally not the definition of racism. Read it again you are not understanding. For a definition to operate correctly something has to meet the whole definition, not just part of it.

Do you understand that reality? Answer that question correctly but don't comment.


Craig said...

Of course I understand that basing any broad generalization (“white women”) by mentioning only their race, is racist.

Of course, I could just continue to follow your example.

Anonymous said...

So, by that reasoning, saying "black men suffer from higher unemployment..." is racist.

The problem is that this is NOT the dictionary definition of racism. You're not understanding the definition, Craig, or really, you're not even understanding how definitions work.

Good luck.


Craig said...

Not at all. Your “white women” statement is a gross generalization based only (given your lack of any other identifier) on their skin color. Everything else is simply your prejudice.

The unemployment is based on statistical analysis and is simply identifying hard, factual information about a demographic group.

If you actually had herd, statistical, evidence instead of prejudices based solely on race it would be a different situation.

But you don’t. Then again you don’t have a lot of things.

You do have hunches based on prejudice and the ability to set a poor example, so there’s that.

Dan Trabue said...

For any other readers, I'm sure it's crystal clear, but just to make it ever more clear.

Racism (MW):
a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits
AND capacities
AND that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race

I, of course, have never suggested that race is the primary determinant of human traits or capacities. Hasn't happened.

And I, of course, have never suggested that these racial differences produce a "superiority" of a particular race.

Hasn't happened. Nothing I have said can be remotely considered racist, not according to the very definition of racism.

And indeed, if it's not clear to anyone, I'll point out that saying SOME SUBSET of white people (those who say they would never date a black person) is LIKELY coming from a racist position (or at least that has been my experience in all that I've read and seen first hand - AND I'm entirely open to changing my opinion if other data presents itself...) is NOT to suggest an inferiority of "the white race." Rather, it is a specific criticism of racism (i.e., the OPPOSITE of racism) from certain people, NOT from a race.

What I have said, as I'm sure all rational people can see, is not racist, by definition.

If it's NOT a condemnation of a race or a belief of a superiority of one race over another, it's not racism. By definition.

Just to be crystal clear.

Prayers for those who don't understand the definition of racism or, more generally, how definitions work.

Craig said...

I get it, now you’re changing from “white women” to “some subset” of something. Of course by singling our the race of the white women as the primary determinant of certain traits and the capacity of those “white women”, you just coincidentally stumbled onto the first two prerequisites of racism.

Once again, the poor example you set is inspirational.

Dan Trabue said...

I have not changed anything. It was always about a subset of white women. I remind you of the comment that started this...

I remember audience applause on an old sitcom where a black woman was proud to say she will only date a black man. How well would this go over if it were a white woman saying she will only date a white man?

A white woman. A. What if it were AAAAAA white woman. A single woman.

ONE WHITE WOMAN. That was the quote. NOT all white people (maybe then you could make the case IF I were saying something to suggest that all white people were inferior, which I haven't said). Not all white woman. A WHITE WOMAN.

I have not changed anything.

My response to this comment was STILL about a subset of white women...

A white woman saying she will only date a white man is almost certainly operating from a place of a privileged person who has racist reasons for making such an announcement.

So, looking at my actual words in the actual context, you can see that I have changed nothing.

And no, no, no. You still don't understand how definitions work or the definition of racism.

Move on, Craig. You're just embarrassing yourself. Well, and helping to contribute to the negative stereotype of white evangelicals.

Craig said...

Now I understand why you’ve chosen to operate the way you do. Clearly you were literally speaking of one literal white woman and not painting with your usual broad brush.

Nonetheless, it’s still you making a judgement about someone based solely on their race, if you want to play semantic games go ahead.

I understand plenty, I certainly understand you setting a bad example. I’m not surprised, but I understand it.

I’ll leave you to your racial stereotypes driven by your prejudice.

It’s all good, except your example, that’s not good.

Anonymous said...

Okay, really for the last time: It was NOT solely based on race. It was based on race AND what she said.

As with definitions, HALF of the explanation/definition is not complete and leads to false/wrong understanding.

HALF a definition is NOT the definition. HALF of my explanation is NOT my explanation.

I leave you to try to understand where you keep on making the mistakes you make.


Craig said...

Really, you provided a quote of what this one specific woman said? I guess I missed that. I guess that one quote from that one specific woman is enough to extrapolate into something more general.

OK, well you just keep up with the bad example and you’ll be all set. What I do understand is your determination to be right and your willingness to do what you need to maintain that.

Marshal Art said...

"A white woman saying she will only date a white man is almost certainly operating from a place of a privileged person who has racist reasons for making such an announcement."

"Almost certainly"??? Based on what besides your own racist imaginings? Projecting "racist reasons" onto a white woman in this manner is racist. You want to pretend that Craig doesn't understand the definition of "racism", but the second description given by Merriam-Webster indicts you clearly:

2 a : a doctrine or political program based on the assumption of racism and designed to execute its principles

You're clearly assuming racism on the part of "a white woman" as the motivation for her rejection of black men as potential partners.

Dan Trabue said...

[shakes head and laughs mirthlessly...]

Marshal Art said...

Still putting together my Durbin response, which I mention to explain why I'm now continuing with my critique of your post and comments.

"If a doctor says, "You should quit smoking as there's a good chance it could negatively impact health..." he isn't pushing a stereotype of smokers, he is making an educated guess/recommendation."

In your usual manner, you fail again to provide an actual analogy to help your argument. Comparing a doctor encouraging the rejection of smoking to your assuming why a woman might reject a partner of another race is not in any way analogous at all. Your sorry attempts to formulate analogies is an indictment on your ability to think. You really should find another way to support your already bad arguments.

And by the way, your constant praising of minorities and foreigners is every bit as "racist" as those who constantly denigrate them, in that both are cheap generalizations. Both ignore the many who do not match the stereotype being perpetuated.

"Take it up with the good people of Africa, Haiti and El Salvador, Marshall."

Will a Nigerian do? This guy, at one point, seemed to state he believes Trump is racist. I haven't gone back to verify that because the point of his video is his agreement with the notion that his country is a s**thole. He is in no way unique.


Marshal Art said...

This article is of particular interest as it explains just why, even without what we might call "evil intent", bringing people from other cultures to this country rather than working to improve the country itself, is a bad idea. How can people who think so differently, and differently in a way that is in total conflict with our values and traditions, NOT have a negative impact on our way of life? This article clearly indicates that even if we concede the people of the nation the writer references are worthy of the glowing terms you apply to those of such nations, their immigration to this country in large numbers cannot help but to be highly problematic.

Anonymous said...

Marshall, just quit. You are not understanding anything. You are not understanding my actual arguments. You are not understanding the definition of racism. You are not understanding how definitions work. You are not understanding the arguments of others. You are not understanding the concern that many, many good and honest people of good will are making in regards to this latest Trump debacle.

You don't understand. And no amount of my explaining is helping you.

And I know that you don't even understand that you don't understand, but trust me, man: You are embarrassing yourself. It's gone from sadly amazing, to sadly funny, to just pathetic. Ask a black friend. Get help.


Marshal Art said...

Ask a black friend what, exactly? And if that black friend gives an answer in conflict with whatever the hell it is you need to believe I don't understand, what then? Is he, too, without understanding? Is he, too, racist and hateful of people of color or foreign origin?

I fully understand your arguments and as is so often the case, having them reflected back to you as the crap arguments they are makes you uncomfortable. All you have left is to pretend I am lacking understanding.

I find it incredibly ironic, as well as pathetic and deceitful, that considering how you lefties throw around the race card with such abandon that you now wet yourself when you're called out for your own racism. Everything a right-wing person says or does is racism when it serves you to label it so ("don't you realize how that sounds?" you like to say), but now you tighten up the definition for convenience as well. Well, don't you know how it sounds when you attribute racism as the most likely reason a white woman might reject a black man as a partner? You're incredibly hypocritical.

You insist I take it up with the good people of Africa, Haiti and when I provide links to people from any of those places who speak in a manner totally aligned with Trump's position, you write them off simply because they don't jump on Trump as you demand they should. Why would talking to black friends be any different? I'm sure I'd find some agree with Trump and others would not. Some might agree with you and others with me. That doesn't matter. What matters is what is true, and what is true is that you are far more racist in your positions than either Craig or I am, and absolutely more than Trump. This is true because you reject realities that explain the real problems of race relations, impoverished and oppressed people of other nations and why not all people are worthy of welcome to this nation.

Craig said...


Can’t you see! You just can’t understand the impeccable arguments being put forward by Dan. These arguments are so much more complex and nuanced that your tiny little brain can even begin to comprehend. It’s clear that you’re just overmatched and unable to keep up. It’s too but he sets such a poor example and is so lacking in grace.

Marshal Art said...

Yeah, Craig. Funny how our objections, criticisms, questions, etc. can only mean there's a problem with our comprehension rather than there being a problem with the premise or position he's trying to defend.

Craig said...

But Art, you just can’t understand. It’s such a burden to have to explain and provide evidence, it’s easier to just decide that lesser mortals just don’t understand.

Craig said...

Y’know what’s funny, I spent last weekend with one of my black friends who would disagree with Dan on virtually everything. I guess that doesn’t count.

Marshal Art said...

Well, it would be an anecdotal argument, but only Dan can use those. You'd have to invite the guy to join blogger so he can confirm he actually exists and then encourage him to post his disagreement. It wouldn't change anything because of the left's hateful attitude toward blacks that don't tow the lefty line, but that's the only way to have any chance of using your friend's opinion at all.

Craig said...

It’s a woman, but beyond that, your point is correct. It’s clear that when Dan speaks for someone, it can’t be questioned. But when others do...