American myths and conversational red herrings

In every online discussion thread about oppression, there are conversational gambits used (by concern trolls and real under-the-internet-bridge trolls) with an intent to frustrate discussion rather than foster deeper understanding. I refer to those as conversational red herrings. There are some that are in regular rotation like "Stop playing the race card!" and "I don't see color", but there are other more obscure ones like "Elevate your thinking! Love is all we need!" and other such bullshiggety. 

Over the next several weeks, I'm going to be writing some shorter pieces treating with a few of these conversational gambits. I'll be offering my take on how we might respond to them. 

Given the number of red herrings there are, this could easily turn out to be my magnum opus and a literary masterpiece. LOL. A girl can dream. Anyhow, onward!

First up on my list of favorite American myths and conversational red herrings is the tried and true, "What about Black on Black crime?"

This is the kindergartenest of kindergarten responses. It's a puerile response that deflectors typically deploy when POC have the temerity to talk about the oppressions of state and local actors.

My simple response is this: we love or hate; comfort or afflict those with whom we share space and since the US government has done a masterful job of creating segregated neighborhoods and 'ghettos', Black crime will necessarily mostly impact other Black folk. The apparently invisible flip side to that is that for the same reasons - segregated neighborhoods - White crime (*gasp* yes, it exists) will mostly impact White people.  So let's just set that whole notion aside shall we? Instead, I say we should contemplate this whole other thing of which we never speak: White terrorism, White malice, White men and women, acting out against Black people. Is that not a thing equally worthy of consideration? Or does it not gain consideration because it doesn't comport with long-held notions of rampant Black criminality?

Trolls are quick to ask about Black-on-Black crime, but what about White terrorism whether physical, economic, financial or environmental? What about gentrification? What about targeted sub-prime lending? What about tagging Black borrowers with higher-priced car loans? What about all White juries convicting even where there is no compelling evidence (and acquitting when there is)? Is that not White-on-Black crime? Is that not a thing equally worthy of consideration?

If we want to talk about crime let's do that, but let's not cherry pick what kinds of crimes we're going to discuss. If we gon' talk crime, then we best be talking about all of it. Black-on-Black crime tends to be property and personal. White-on-Black crime tends to be property, personal, psychological, economic and multi-generational in impact. Surely that's something we should want to talk about?

When White people set out, with malice aforethought, to either destroy what people of color have built (Rosewood Massacre and Tulsa Race Riot (property, personal, psychological, economic and multi-generational in impact)) or to destroy Black life itself (Briana Brochu and Dylan Roof (personal, psychological)), what do we call that? We call every one of those events an aberration. We pretend that there's no pattern. I, however, have decided to frame these things differently and to call them what they are: supremacy in action; White-on-Black crime. I have also decided to see the pattern, and to call it out.

When White women and men conjure up and/or falsely accuse Black men, resulting in the (further) demonization of random Black men (see Susan Smith; Ofc. Sherry Hall; or this guy), it's White-on-Black crime.

When White women like Carolyn Donham Bryant act out and boys/men like Emmett Till end up dead or under suspicion, that's White-on-Black crime of the worst sort. When Briana Brochu puts her roommate's toothbrush into her rectum and her roommate ends up with aggressive bacteria in her throat, that's White-on-Black terrorism, but we never talk about it that way. Neither do we see a pattern. We adamantly refuse to see a pattern. We're quick to see a pattern in Black-on-Black crime, but every act of White terrorism is a single event, an aberration. We live in a nation with a history of hundreds of years of aberrations: thousands of lynchings, every one an aberration; thousands of toxic mortgages targeting minorities, every one an aberration; millions of higher-priced car loans, every one an aberration.

You want to talk about crime? Let's talk about the kind of White-on-Black crime that's been going on for 500 years.

You want to talk about crime? Let's talk about the kind of White-on-Black crime that has stolen land, wealth, health and security from people of color going back to 1492.

You want to talk about crime? Let's talk about the routine environmental racism that leaves poor (mostly Black and brown) children with lead poisoning, intellectually challenged and entirely unsupported by the private enterprise or the public purse which either caused or allowed their poisoning in the first place (hint: I'm talking about places like Flint, MI but not just Flint) or destroys their thriving neighborhoods to build highways.

And I ain't talk about mass murderers yet, 99.9% of whom are White men.

Black-on-Black crime my hindparts.