Under Obama, Blackness Grew Belligerent. Under Trump, the KKK Grows a Face – The Root

The last week has seen images of the Ku Klux Klan grip news coverage on Charlottesville, Va. However, they werent the images of old: that hooded, grotesque interpretation of mythical Southern-gent chivalry, who lynched and brandished fire in faceless anonymity. The new Klan had a face. To understand why, we need to talk about belligerence.

After the 2015 shooting of fleeing Laquan McDonald, a 16-year-old black boy, Lamon Reccord, went around attending Chicago protests. One of his nonviolent stare-offs with police officers was aired on Megyn Kellys old showthe one before she moved to NBC and everyone forgot her race-baiting. She and former New York City Police Commissioner Bernard Kerik sparred against panelist Richard Fowler. When Fowler dared assert that it was the boys First Amendment right to have a peaceful, silent protest, she countered: Its not a question of what his constitutional rights are. Its a question of whats appropriate.

She was right. He wasnt appropriatebut neither was the standard for what constituted appropriate anymore.

Belligerence is deeply rooted in the black community. Its the heft in the weight of the chip on our shoulder as a community that emphatically acknowledges that America is not a meritocracy. Its in the venom and praise of ruthless ambition ubiquitous throughout hip-hop. Its in the August Wilson-esque armor of pride with which were taught to carry ourselves.

In every case in which black belligerence has boiled over into new headlines, there were a variety of variables that inflated racial tensions until something gave way. Rodney Kings beating was simply the straw that broke the camels back and culminated in the Los Angeles riots. The shooting of Trayvon Martin ratcheted up the heat under Americas rising racial tension until anger spilled over into protests that birthed a new movement.

This movement was more belligerent. It worshipped the value of a black life without bending the knee to those who said that a breath devoted to proclaiming a black lifes worth should divide its time discussing the worth of other lives. This movement made poster children of poise-perfect protesters like Iesha Evans. It was, to borrow a phrase from Kanye, the abomination of Obamas nation.

President Barack Obamas election wasnt directly responsible for the creation of Black Lives Matter or the resurgence of a belligerent edge to black protests. However, to see approval, in every direction of the social pyramid, of those who mattered to youfrom those protesting around you to the leader of the entire nationmade belligerence a thing to take pride in. To know thateven when a unified message got muddled at the hands of an increasingly tumultuous crowd, and sound bite coverage would draw from the worst of itthere remained a leader with the dexterity and spotlight to give eloquence to our vehemence made belligerence a thing to have faith in.

Now its the KKKs hour for faith. The Klan never adopted the hoods for anonymitys sake. The original KKK, born in the embers of the post-Civil War South, never had the hoods. When the Klan was reborn around the same time that the 1915 film The Birth of a Nation depicted Klansmen in their more iconic uniform, the order decided to adopt it.

Amid public approval of Jim Crow laws and lynchings, they didnt need the hoods to hidethough they eventually discovered that the hoods created a sense of Stalinist terror. They created a paranoid paradigm that anyoneyour neighbor, evencould be a Klansmen. Nevertheless, as Americas moral compass changed, anonymity became important.

So what made them do away with the hoods in Charlottesville? I rather like Matt Thompsons take over at the Atlantic: The Unite the Right rally wasnt intended to be a Klan rally at all. It was a pride march. However, that conclusion doesnt leave us with much. They may have seen this as a pride march, but the risks that, say, a gay-pride marcher and a neo-Nazi face in exposing themselves are hardly comparable.

Pride is rarely enough to get people to risk their jobs and safety. Does a woman go to a Free the Nipple rally knowing that someones photo and a bosss hangups could get her fired? Does a black man risk getting arrested marching with BLM because hes proud? They march, not just because they are proud of their values or they see a problem they believe needs solving, but because something allows them to take pride in their belligerence and have faith in a leaders ability to give it voice.

Trump is that leader. His tacit approval of white pride made belligerence an object worthy of pride and faith and made Klansmen feel comfortable without hoods. When Trump struggled to call a white terrorist what he was, even as the rest of white America did; when he failed to do the calculus on the worth of Heather Heyers life, in comparison with a memorial to a racist general who died defending of slavery; when, like a petulant child, he insulted a black businessman who distanced himself from Trump over his half-assed response to Charlottesville, more quickly than the president disavowed Naziswhite supremacists saw in Trump the same support for their belligerence that we once found in Obama.

So dont be surprised if they eschew the hoods at the next rally … or if some still-belligerent black boy will be there to stare them down.

See the original post:

Under Obama, Blackness Grew Belligerent. Under Trump, the KKK Grows a Face – The Root

Related Post

August 17, 2017   Posted in: Trayvon Martin |

Fair Use Disclaimer

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

Under the 'fair use' rule of copyright law, an author may make limited use of another author's work without asking permission. Fair use is based on the belief that the public is entitled to freely use portions of copyrighted materials for purposes of commentary and criticism. The fair use privilege is perhaps the most significant limitation on a copyright owner's exclusive rights.

Fair use as described at 17 U.S.C. Section 107:

"Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phono-records or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright.

In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include:

  • (1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for or nonprofit educational purposes,
  • (2) the nature of the copyrighted work,
  • (3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole, and
  • (4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work."