A special shout out to Joan Walsh of Salon for her admirable work, bringing to our attention the noble words of civil rights hero Charles Sherrod (husband of Shirley).
Joan Walsh is a major league sucker.
People who care about civil rights and racial reconciliation may eventually thank Andrew Breitbart for bringing Shirley Sherrod the global attention she deserves. Really. Her message of racial healing, her insight that the forces of wealth and injustice have always pit “the haves and the have-nots” against each other, whatever their race, is exactly what’s missing in today’s Beltway debates about race. What’s even more amazing, but almost completely unexplored in this controversy, is the historic civil rights leadership role of her husband, Charles Sherrod, an early leader of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee, who served on the front lines of the nonviolent civil rights movement in the early 1960s.
— Joan Walsh, Salon.com
A lot of people got used in this whole sage, and Joan Walsh is the latest sucker.
h/t Riehl World View
Bob, is it just me, or is this utterly nonsensical: “the forces of wealth and injustice have always pit “the haves and the have-nots” against each other”?
What does that even mean? I can’t decide whether she means that there is a secret group dedicated to wealth and to injustice, or she means that only some people have wealth or justice. It’s obvious, though, that wealth and injustice are bad, or she would have used “wealth and justice” or “poverty and injustice”.
MissJean,
Like all good “progressives,” she’s conflating:
1) the fact-of-life that *some* wealthy-and-politically-powerful persons make use of the coercive power of government to loot those of us who are not politically powerful
with:
2) the the “progressive” religious belief that being wealth is itself evil (except for themselves, of course).
My grandmother (who was white and Indian) was a share-cropper in the South. More than once (*), she’d made a bargain with some farmer or other, only to be cheated. Now, these farmers were wealthy only in relative terms, wealthy only in relation to most people around them. But, they were big fish in the small pond — they were part of the local power-structure, and that allowed them to abuse and misuse poor persons like my grandmother.
The “progressive” “solution” to such localized injustice is to nationalize it and institutionalize it.
(*) AT THE SAME TIME, I recall my father faulting her for allowing herself to be cheated twice by the same farmer.
What happened to the intelligent Brooklynbridge? I’m disappointed.
I APOLOGIZE to B&R readers.
BrooklynBridge used to be my dorm master in high school, we met up three decades later on Facebook, catching up on old times at first before he became liberal ugly.
While using a Columbia email address, he’s nowhere near there (if his word is worth anything), I dumped his friendship on Facebook so now he’s here picking up where he left off.
He really must have no life.
A troll?
mahvelous
Thanks for the explanation, Bob. I thought two people were using the same nickname, one an intelligent older person and the other a rude troll.