Tuesday, April 10, 2012


I probably don't have to tell you about "The End of My White Guilt" by the Daily Caller's Mark Judge, in which the author's bicycle is stolen in D.C. and he concludes, without having witnessed the crime, that a black person was the thief, and therefore he needs to get really, really enjoyably angry at black people:

... Since the time I was an undergrad at Catholic University in the 1980s, most of the crime that has occurred on campus has come from those neighborhoods, which are predominately black. As sure as it took the D.C. cops forever to get to the parking lot to file a report, I knew that the odds were very high that a black person had taken my bike -- maybe one of the kids that had been described.

When I got home I vented to my friends. I told them I was going to scour those neighborhoods until I found the bike. In reply, a liberal friend gave me a lecture about profiling and told me to just forget about the bike. "That person needs our prayers and help," she said. "They haven't had the advantages we have."

That's when I lost it. I had been carefully educated by liberal parents that we are all, black and white, the same. My favorite movie growing up was "In the Heat of the Night." Yet that often meant not treating everyone the same. It meant treating blacks with a mixture of patronizing condescension and obsequious genuflecting to their Absolute Moral Authority gained from centuries of suffering. It meant not treating everyone the same....

I decided that I'm just going to let go of my white guilt....

It felt good....

If you're like me, you may wonder whether this "liberal friend" has also done double duty as a Thomas Friedman cab driver, i.e., whether this person exists at all except as a fictional witness who conveniently helps the author advance his thesis. You may also wonder what member of Generation X would actually have the 1967 release In the Heat of the Night as his favorite movie (Judge is the author of, among other books, Wasted: Tales of a Gen X Drunk).

But what I want to point out that Judge has tried to pull this before. He's previously proclaimed that he's lost his innocence and discovered the pure white cleansing light of political incorrectness. It's just that, the last time, hardly anybody noticed.

I take you back to an essay Judge published in New York Press in 2003 titled "Bring Back Hate," which you can still read at Free Republic:

All these years later, I still remember the woman's face. It was the early 1990s and I was working for the Robert F. Kennedy Memorial, a liberal activist group in Washington, DC. My branch dealt with juvenile justice issues. One day we had a meeting with the head of a DC youth services advocacy group and a member of the DC government. The woman from the youth advocacy group was incensed that, due to some kind of bureaucratic logjam, teenage girls in the district had to wait several days to get abortions. The woman practically climbed out of her chair with venom. "These girls need to get these abortions!" she cried.

I was a young, dumb liberal at the time, but I felt jolted. For days, then weeks, then months, now years, I never forgot her rage -- a rage that more young girls were not killing their babies. I wrestled with the power of the emotion I felt. Today, older and wiser, I have come to embrace what I felt, and feel, as a good thing. I felt hate.

It's time to bring back hate. To be sure, as a Christian it is important that I try to separate my hate for evil from the person pushing evil, whether it's a morally kneecapped woman screaming for abortion, a rapist or a thief. Hate the sin and love the sinner and all that. But increasingly in our culture, the rule is, psychoanalyze the sinner and explain away the sin through socioeconomics -- either that or it spills vats of hate on silly targets, like the president. We are in desperate need of the real thing, saved for an appropriate target.

Judge goes on in this vein for many more paragraphs, ultimately quoting with great approval a 1972 pamphlet by a Catholic psychiatrist titled ... er, "A Priest for All Seasons Masculine and Celibate."

Also Jonathan Chait questions the state of Judge's innocence, which he now claims to have lost:

Now, if you read Judge's past writings, his white guilt does not seem to have exerted an especially strong pull:
no one would have the guts to tell the truth. It was not Asians or whites or Indians who were wilding in Georgetown. It was black teenagers. Illegitimacy and fatherlessness in black urban areas like Washington, D.C. has created an entire class of youth who have been weaned on gangster culture and have absolutely no impulse control. ...
That was the old, encumbered-by-white-guilt Judge writing. I’m a little frightened of the new version.

Every time, it's the same thing: the scales fall from Judge's eyes and he sees through the pure evil of THEM, then tells the world, which won't listen. Amazing how often those scales fall.


Ten Bears said...

Indians? Indians!!? From India Indians?

It sucks being a mixed breed, to be half "white". Actually, it's rather embarrassing. Maybe it would be different if the whites were to bath more often, if they didn't smell so bad. But they don't, and they do, and I understand why Obama embraced his African-American half.

White dogs suck.

BH said...

Methinks all dogs suck, when in top dog position.

Anonymous said...

That was a waste of ink.

The MJ thing.

And why the picture of Tucker Carlson on that Chait post?

Steve M. said...

The Daily Caller is Carlson's site.