Michael Richards, aka Kramer, spews racial slurs during stand-up

[hammer]

BTW, David did not take a swing at that kid. He told me he wanted to but realized he would just get into trouble and that's what the other kid wanted. Sticks and stones.

I admire his self-control...I usually hope my kids have the same. I like how he thought about the consequences before he took any action...that's not easy for kids to do.

Going back on topic, I wonder what career Michael Richards has left at this point...I'd like to think that he needs to find a new line of work but I have a feeling all he'll need to do is lay low for a while.

 

[molecan]

I don't think it's a double standard for one excellent reason...white folks have never been subjugated and forced to work as slaves for a hundred or so years. And that's going to be a tough one to ever overcome.

Not to hijack the thread, but your statement is not correct.

http://www.raceandhistory.com/cgi-bin/forum/webbbs_config.pl/noframes/read/1638
After the Battle of Kinsale at the beginning of the 17th century, the English were faced with a problem of some 30,000 military prisoners, which they solved by creating an official policy of banishment. Other Irish leaders had voluntarily exiled to the continent, in fact, the Battle of Kinsale marked the beginning of the so-called Wild Geese", those Irish banished from their homeland. Banishment, however, did not solve the problem entirely, so James II encouraged selling the Irish as slaves to planters and settlers in the New World colonies. The first Irish slaves were sold to a settlement on the Amazon River In South America in 1612. It would probably be more accurate to say that the first recorded sale of Irish slaves was in 1612, because the English, who were noted for their meticulous record keeping, simply did not keep track of things Irish, whether it be goods or people, unless such was being shipped to England. The disappearance of a few hundred or a few thousand Irish was not a cause for alarm, but rather for rejoicing. Who cared what their names were anyway, they were gone.

Almost as soon as settlers landed in America, English privateers showed up with a good load of slaves to sell. The first load of African slaves brought to Virginia arrived at Jamestown in 1619. English shippers, with royal encouragement, partnered with the Dutch to try and corner the slave market to the exclusion of the Spanish and Portuguese. The demand was greatest in the Spanish occupied areas of Central and South America, but the settlement of North America moved steadily ahead, and the demand for slave labor grew.

The Proclamation of 1625 ordered that Irish political prisoners be transported overseas and sold as laborers to English planters, who were settling the islands of the West Indies, officially establishing a policy that was to continue for two centuries.

In 1629 a large group of Irish men and women were sent to Guiana, and by 1632, Irish were the main slaves sold to Antigua and Montserrat in the West Indies. By 1637 a census showed that 69% of the total population of Montserrat were Irish slaves, which records show was a cause of concern to the English planters. But there were not enough political prisoners to supply the demand, so every petty infraction carried a sentence of transporting, and slaver gangs combed the country sides to kidnap enough people to fill out their quotas.

Although African Negroes were better suited to work in the semi-tropical climates of the Caribbean, they had to be purchased, while the Irish were free for the catching, so to speak. It is not surprising that Ireland became the biggest source of livestock for the English slave trade.

Also:
"A new study suggests that a million or more European Christians were enslaved by Muslims in North Africa between 1530 and 1780 – a far greater number than had ever been estimated before."
http://researchnews.osu.edu/archive/whtslav.htm

Rascism, Oppression, Class Systems, Exploitation, War, the repeating history of the modern world.

 

[JimG.]

Not to hijack the thread, but your statement is not correct.

http://www.raceandhistory.com/cgi-bin/forum/webbbs_config.pl/noframes/read/1638
After the Battle of Kinsale at the beginning of the 17th century, the English were faced with a problem of some 30,000 military prisoners, which they solved by creating an official policy of banishment. Other Irish leaders had voluntarily exiled to the continent, in fact, the Battle of Kinsale marked the beginning of the so-called Wild Geese", those Irish banished from their homeland. Banishment, however, did not solve the problem entirely, so James II encouraged selling the Irish as slaves to planters and settlers in the New World colonies. The first Irish slaves were sold to a settlement on the Amazon River In South America in 1612. It would probably be more accurate to say that the first recorded sale of Irish slaves was in 1612, because the English, who were noted for their meticulous record keeping, simply did not keep track of things Irish, whether it be goods or people, unless such was being shipped to England. The disappearance of a few hundred or a few thousand Irish was not a cause for alarm, but rather for rejoicing. Who cared what their names were anyway, they were gone.

Almost as soon as settlers landed in America, English privateers showed up with a good load of slaves to sell. The first load of African slaves brought to Virginia arrived at Jamestown in 1619. English shippers, with royal encouragement, partnered with the Dutch to try and corner the slave market to the exclusion of the Spanish and Portuguese. The demand was greatest in the Spanish occupied areas of Central and South America, but the settlement of North America moved steadily ahead, and the demand for slave labor grew.

The Proclamation of 1625 ordered that Irish political prisoners be transported overseas and sold as laborers to English planters, who were settling the islands of the West Indies, officially establishing a policy that was to continue for two centuries.

In 1629 a large group of Irish men and women were sent to Guiana, and by 1632, Irish were the main slaves sold to Antigua and Montserrat in the West Indies. By 1637 a census showed that 69% of the total population of Montserrat were Irish slaves, which records show was a cause of concern to the English planters. But there were not enough political prisoners to supply the demand, so every petty infraction carried a sentence of transporting, and slaver gangs combed the country sides to kidnap enough people to fill out their quotas.

Although African Negroes were better suited to work in the semi-tropical climates of the Caribbean, they had to be purchased, while the Irish were free for the catching, so to speak. It is not surprising that Ireland became the biggest source of livestock for the English slave trade.

Also:
"A new study suggests that a million or more European Christians were enslaved by Muslims in North Africa between 1530 and 1780 – a far greater number than had ever been estimated before."
http://researchnews.osu.edu/archive/whtslav.htm

Rascism, Oppression, Class Systems, Exploitation, War, the repeating history of the modern world.

Alot of bad jokes in there.

So this shows that whites also subjugated other whites to slavery...I stand corrected.

Could you direct me to the section about BLACK slave masters and owners? Because to my knowledge, blacks have never owned slaves.

 

[BeanoNYC]

Could you direct me to the section about BLACK slave masters and owners? Because to my knowledge, blacks have never owned slaves.

Good point, Jim. I don't see any evidence in that article about any white slaves being used in, what would become, the Continental United States either. Maybe the colonists were too "Squeamish" to use white slaves, which just furthers the issue of race.

About "Reverse Discrimination" I have discussed this topic at length with my students before and I'd be lying if I told you that I wasn't a bit ambivalent on the subject. In one way I feel that terms like "Cracker," and "Honkey" (That one's for you, Andy) are horribly divisive and inappropriate. In another way I feel that those terms are in reaction to a momentum that was put into motion by whites. I can't speak for other whites, but I certainly don't find being called a "cracker" by a black to be on the same "hate" level as a white spewing the "N" word.

Back on the subject of Michael Richards: There were millions of things he could have said to the heckler but he chose to cross the line. I'm sure there were others in the audience that would take offense to his words. It's not like he said it once, he repeated it over and over again in a very hateful way with no regards to ANYONE in the audience.
Inarguably, an ugly racist scene.

 

[bill9009]

Chris Rock is an equal opportunity racist...he rags on whites and blacks alike, so in that case it's comedy, not racism. He has enough sense to make fun of himself.

Not so for Michael Richards...his humor never involved the races, and his comments came from anger...he is a racist, just like Mel Gibson is anti-semitic. Big difference.

And my grandparents were not in America during slavery either...that does not change the fact that slavery existed. I didn't call YOU a racist, and I doubt when one black says "niggah" to another that they're thinking of you or me. All they see when they look at us is "white". So, unfortunately we pay for the sins of our white predecessors.

I think the comments he made were not in the line of comedy, he made them more out of anger for being heckled during his show which is something a comic hates especially if he cant come back with anything good, but lets just say he had made racial comments about whites/blacks or himself as well and it was funny like they way chris rock does then would it be allright? I still dont think he or any other white comic could get away with that, but on the other hand like you have already said chris rock does all the time, yet rarely is anything said about his act. I am by no means saying what he did was right. But in our society it has become acceptable for a black comic to do racial comedy about white people and black people, but it doesnt seem acceptable for a white comic to do the same. So to me there still seems to be a double standard. but thats just my opinion and you know the saying opinions are like a**holes everyone has one!