When the protection of the law bends and skirts the justice system, is this the goal of White terrorism?
Today I fired up the internet to find that four people had been shot at a Black Lives Matter (BLM) rally in Minneapolis (note the framing of the gunman as ‘counterprotestors’):
“The Black Lives Matter protestors tried to move the three counter-protestors – one wearing a mask – away from the police station, but the three men started fired shots at six of the protestors.”
Sometimes I just don’t know what to make of the world.
I think it’s a worthwhile venture to unplug for a bit daily and weekly just to escape the drain of horrible deeds committed in the social media age, and the ensuing commentary that inevitably accompanies it. Everyone has a platform to be heard, for better or worse, and this irony is not lost upon me as you read these words.
When plugged in, it’s hard to miss the violence that seems completely engrained in the fabric of our daily lives. The violence has a cascading ripple effect that touches families and communities for generations to come.
Philosophically, we are lost every time the muzzle of a gun flares and a life is lost.
Black Lives Matter is a lightning-rod of controversy as it’s one of the many social justice movements underway where marginalized people are seeking to be heard. I won’t pretend to know all of the angles by which the BLM movement is analyzed, but I do know that throughout history, currents which run counter to the status quo are met with virulent opposition and violence. This is definitely evident in the rhetoric that surrounds BLM in some circles, decrying ‘social justice warriors’ as the biggest threat to both masculinity and the American lifestyle.
One of the talking points whenever people of color are killed in America is that black people should stop killing black people. People use this to discredit BLM at every turn, because why is a black life valuable if black people are willing to take it over frivolous things? There’s countless analysis on this talking point, whether you are pointing out that it is fallacious, or why exactly it is employed. Nonetheless, black on black crime is the de facto response in regards to violence in this country.
The recent events surrounding Paris, terrorists, and Syrian refugees tie into this because it helps to expose the framing of the American mind. Discussions involving whether or not states will house refugees have governors evoking the bully pulpit, chestily declaring their state will not take in these individuals, running counter to the ideals that we popularize about what makes our country great. A country that is a haven for those in need. This is further exacerbated by the swell of public support and ‘attaboys’ that they are greeted with from the crowds.
On the surface, this can be portrayed rather innocuously. Our country has been in a rhetorical wrestling match regarding immigration issues for a long time, so the idea that a large number of people, though disenfranchised, will take up residence within American borders fits right into that discussion. However, amid this discussion, supporters are either blatantly denying, consciously ignoring, or ignorantly unaware of the racialized elements in this argument.
The bottom line is that the portrayal of people of Middle Eastern descent, or Muslims in general, as perpetrators of violence has gone on for a long time.
|
Support for this claim includes the fear that we could import terrorists here, and that they could perform domestic acts of terror. Or, because of the heavy Islamic population of Syria, Islamophobia will run rampant. The bottom line is that the portrayal of people of Middle Eastern descent, or Muslims in general, as perpetrators of violence has gone on for a long time in this country, and now they are considered to be the face of terror.
Even though, there are countless crimes committed in this country that would suggest white, Christian, American men should be the face of terror (and join terrorist groups, no less). Yet, the collective consciousness reserves the harshest labels for everyone who isn’t white.
What does this have to do with BLM and black on black crime? Simply put: as a black man in America, even in the face of the statistical probability that a black person would be more likely than anyone else to commit a violent crime against me, my fear is more of white males conducting vigilante justice, especially since the protection of the law for white males seems to bend and skirt the justice system from jury selection to sentencing. That is the goal of terrorism. I’m constantly mindful of this reality more than anything else. You can talk to me about black on black crime until my ears bleed, but until we can be inclusive regarding the conversation about the perpetrators of crime and their due process in this country, feel free to shut the hell up.
Photo Credit: Getty Images
FYI; Unless you completely agree with the author, don’t bother commenting. It won’t get past moderation. The rant everyone else is having.