Digital clock

Monday, July 11, 2011

My Answer to Michael Richards
(Re: alleged defense speech in court after making racial comments in his comedy act)©Susan Elizabeth Dykhuis, 11 July 2011


According to Urban Legends the speech [which follows at the end of My Answer] is falsely attributed to Michael Richards. Michael Richards most likely did not write this speech, but I will respond to the speech most likely written by that most famous of all authors, Anonymous AKA Anon.

See http://urbanlegends.about.com/od/dubiousquotes/a/michaelrichards.htm
To open URL links in this Blog, hover over the link and click on it or cut and paste link into your browser.

Dear Anon,

The White 'race' never has, so far as I know, been the underdog race in World History. Not facing what other 'races' or 'ethnics' have to deal with means white people do not need an organization to promote white rights.

Whites never needed that because, as white people, they had rights and they considered themselves the regular people AKA just Americans, just Canadians, just French, just Italian. "just" meaning not a hyphenated-person. Hyphenated persons did not choose this; it was the "just" Americans, Canadians etc., who hyphenated the others.

An aside:
I wonder:
Who is White? Who defines who is white?
Is White defined as Euro White Christians and their offspring?
What about Whites who are not Christian?

"White" folks as an identifiable group were rarely on the short end of the stick thus never needed a Proud to be White organization to promote their civil rights. It was understood that a White person was Proud to be White because White persons often think they are, pardon the pun, the cream of the crop, the elite, the natural leaders...

Whites are an identifiable group just as are Blacks, Asians et cetera but it is the White is Might crew who had control for centuries. That fact created the need for Black / Asian / various religious / nationalities / groups to promote and guarantee that human rights would now include ever human.

Anon, your speech means you haven't even reflected on the subject, or read up on the battles all through human history where White = Might and for everyone else, too bad for you! Research and reflection on the actions and history of the Whites in The Americas immediately shows that White = Might. White Euro peoples went to war Vs Indigenous peoples (AKA Natives), won the battle and grabbed The Americas, claiming vast lands and great riches in the name of the Royalty of France, England, Spain, Portugal et al, and began the pushing of the Indigenous peoples to the brink of extinction.

White Christian people insisted the cultures and religions of the First Nations Peoples of The Americas were not equal to white peoples' cultures/religions.

How the Canadian Government tried to assimilate First Nations: they developed a policy "Aggressive Assimilation" to be taught in Church-run, government-funded industrial schools called "residential schools". From 1931 to approximately 1996 about 150,000 aboriginal, Inuit and Métis children were removed from their communities and forced to attend these schools. They suffered much abuse at the hands of their “educators”.

In the U.S.A., boarding schools were started in the sixteenth century and were operated by Catholic missionaries whose goal was primarily to acculturate Native children.

In the 1880s, the U.S. government began the “boarding school experiment”, whereby Federal Indian policy now attempted to eradicate Native culture through the forced education and assimilation of Native children.

Treaties signed between the Federal government and Tribes included the “six to sixteen” clause – a provision which obligated the Federal government to provide schools and teachers for Native children between the ages of six and sixteen.

Native children as young as six years old were taken from their families to these institutions, in many cases deliberately far away from their homes so that distance would strengthen the process of forced acculturation and education.

It also happened that children as young as three and four years old were sent to boarding schools.

Similar boarding schools were created in both Australia and New Zealand where White = Might also had a program to acculturate New Zealand’s Maori and Australia’s Indigenous peoples. “Aboriginal” was the term first used in Australia to describe Native Australians.

The result of the Euro-White invaders "boarding schools" experiment caused great damage to Indigenous Peoples all over the Globe.

White settlers in The Americas realized how large the task would be to control and farm the land, to create wealth and harness natural resources. One solution the White people used was to "import" Black people from Africa, forced into slavery, to clear the land, grow the crops, be servants in homes, and worse, used and abused sexually – but not entitled to reap any of the benefits of their labour because, as slaves, they had no rights.

White People then established categories of non-white humans creating terminology to describe them such as: Half-Breeds, Mulattos, and many more: read --> http://www.smoot-family.us/terms.html and http://blendedunity.com/history-and-politics/terms-of-race-culture-and-ethnicity/

Euro Whites in The Americas created laws that allowed slavery; they entered into Treaties with the First Nations Peoples of North America and did not honour those Treaties.

The "Forefathers" in the U.S.A. believed in manifest destiny and thought they had the right to disenfranchise all non-Whites of their human rights.

Mr. Anon, regarding your query: "So why are ghettos the most dangerous place to live?"

Well, the answer is denying equality to non-whites or half-breeds in most "white" invaded and conquered-countries gave way to the White elite creating big compounds called "reservations" and, later, "ghettos" where the Indigenous peoples, the former slaves and most new immigrants would live.

So ironic that today we see a new kind of ghetto:
Rich White People living in "Gated Neighbourhoods" where they lock themselves in and lock out not only the "non-Whites" but the Whites who have yet to attain the uber rich and/or celebrity- status persons wealth and life-styles.

All in all, Anon, this means I have come to the conclusion that White People need no special organizations to set up White College Funds, White History Month, White Pride Day et cetera because white peoples’ experience in The Americas is not akin in any way to the experiences of the Indigenous peoples, none-white "races" and bi-racial people.

Today the President of the United States of America, Mr. Barak Obama, is called “the first black president”. His maternal family – white people – are forgotten by Americans when describing their President. Only the black ancestry is mentioned. Does this mean one drop of "Black" blood means one is a "Black Hyphenated American"? Why can't one born in the United States just be "American"?

President Obama is the first bi-racial American President, not the first Black American President. Being bi-racial, he truly represents every American. Prepare yourself, Anon because one day in the near future, “White” will blend into café-au-lait colour as marriage between people of different “races” increases, making the majority of the next generations multi-racial. It will become harder and harder for White to equal Might or "just" Canadian, American, British, French, blah blah blah status.

My Answer to Michael Richards alleged defense speech in court after making racial comments in his comedy act)©Susan Elizabeth Dykhuis, 11 July 2011

Alleged speech of Michael Richards from the website: http://urbanlegends.about.com/od/dubiousquotes/a/michaelrichards.htm

Michael Richards better known as Kramer from TV's Seinfeld, does make a good point. This was his defence speech in court after making racial comments in his comedy act. He makes some very interesting points.

Proud To Be White
Someone finally said it.
How many are actually paying attention to this?

There are African Americans, Mexican Americans, Asian Americans, Arab Americans, etc. And then there are just Americans.

You pass me on the street and sneer in my direction. You call me 'White boy,' 'Cracker,' 'Honkey,' 'Whitey,' 'Caveman' ... and that's OK.

But when I call you, Nigger, Kike, Towel head, Sand-nigger, Camel Jockey, Beaner, Gook, or Chink ... You call me a racist.

You say that whites commit a lot of violence against you, so why are the ghettos the most dangerous places to live?

You have the United Negro College Fund.
You have Martin Luther King Day.
You have Black History Month.
You have Cesar Chavez Day.
You have Yom Hashoah.
You have Ma'uled Al-Nabi.
You have the NAACP.
You have BET.

If we had WET (White Entertainment Television) we'd be racists.
If we had a White Pride Day, you would call us racists.
If we had White History Month , we'd be racists.
If we had any organization for only whites to 'advance' OUR lives we'd be racists.

We have a Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, a Black Chamber of Commerce, and then we just have the plain Chamber of Commerce. Wonder who pays for that?
A white woman could not be in the Miss Black American pageant, but any color can be in the Miss America pageant.

If we had a college fund that only gave white students scholarships you know we'd be racists. There are over 60 openly proclaimed Black Colleges in the US. Yet if there were 'White colleges' THAT would be a racist college.

In the Million Man March, you believed that you were marching for your race and rights. If we marched for our race and rights, you would call us racists.

You are proud to be black, brown, yellow and orange, and you're not afraid to announce it. But when we announce our white pride, you call us racists.

You rob us, carjack us, and shoot at us. But, when a white police officer shoots a black gang member or beats up a black drug-dealer running from the law and posing a threat to society, you call him a racist.

I am proud. But you call me a racist.
Why is it that only whites can be racists?

--------------------

Comments: Though this racist rant has been widely disseminated online and seems especially popular on Neo-Nazi and "white power" websites, it dates from well beforeMichael Richards' infamous onstage tirade against African-American audience members at the L.A. Laugh Factory on November 17, 2006. He did not write it, nor could it have constituted his "defense speech in court," given that there were no charges filed and no court trial ever took place.

It is also at odds with Richards' stated apology after the videotaped incident, in which he said he was "deeply, deeply sorry" for shouting racial epithets at two black men who had heckled him during his performance at the comedy club.

The true author of the text is unknown.


My Answer to Michael Richards
(Re: alleged defense speech in court after making racial comments in his comedy act)©Susan Elizabeth Dykhuis, 11 July 2011