ever noticed that the people of color who have suffered under this nation's powers that be are not the ones kicking and screaming and discriminating and suing and stripping us of our right to vote or waging a war against women and the poor they really want this kind of country their actions confirm that
SORRY ABOUT DOUBLE POST ALL MY INFIRMITIES MUST HAVE KICKED IN +0)
Those are the final words of a powerful Washington Post op ed by Carol Anderson, Associate Professor of African American studies and history at Emory University, among other things.
The full title of the piece, which I strongly urge you to read, is Ferguson isn't about black rage against cops. It's white rage against progress.
She places Ferguson in as deep a historical context as I have yet seen, perhaps appropriate for the her subject matter as a college professor, going back to White rejection of the intent of the 13thj, 14th and 15th Amendments. She reminds us of the institution of Black Codes after the withdrawal of the Union Army from the South as a result of the deal that made Hayes President of the US even though Tilden had clearly won the popular vote and may have by an honest count won the electoral vote as well (shades of 2000).
She also tells us about United States v. Cruikshank, a case with which I admit despite teaching government and history I was not familiar, which limited the application of the Bill of Rights against the states and argued that the Due Process and Equal Protection clauses of the 14th Amendment applied only to actions by state governments, and thus private citizens could not be prosecuted for violating the rights of freedman - this in the aftermath of a riot against Republican Freedman by white Democrats during an election, in an attempt to keep them from voting.
As a side note, Justice Scalia and others who made the atrocious Heller ruling, this opinion ruled Justice Scalia and others who made the atrocious Heller ruling, this opinion ruled "The right to bear arms is not granted by the Constitution; neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence. The Second Amendments means no more than that it shall not be infringed by Congress,and has no other effect than to restrict the powers of the National Government. " Here I might note that this meant the Freed Slaves did not necessarily have a right to bear arms if a state wanted to restrict it.
And for context I remind people that the institution of gun control in California was in response to Black Panthers showing up at the state legislature carrying. Blacks can be killed by white police with impunity if the cop has even a hint of feeling threatened even if no weapon is evident (no doubt if a weapon is) but White militia types can aim at Federal law enforcement at the Bundy ranch and not be charged, and now we have the Oathkeepers (white) "patrolling" around Ferguson - will they shoot Blacks with the same kind of impunity we have seen over the years?
THESE ARE MY COMMENTS BELOW
i too pointed out the inconsistency with that instance and Ferguson as low as not protesting KKK's threats to kill protesters. there are distinct differences in how law applies and is adjudicated when it comes to race and what is never acknowledged when it's White on Black police action if not for cameras we would probably not know about most killings that would be labled missing or blamed on another of color.
i heard one of the youth activist from Ferguson today who nailed it he said paraphrased, "body cameras and training are not going to solve the problem when it's in their heads they lived it they were raised with that bias, training and cameras will not take that out of their head" i give hi a big "TOUCHE'"and an even greater factor sense of power and a God complex
