There's a discussion in the comments at Crossroads about Brooks Simpson's pet white supremacist, Hunter Wallace. Apparently some of the regulars over there aren't comfortable with the forum Simpson gives to Wallace. One of them asks, "Any chance of him getting permanent deleted?"
Simpson pontificates, "I make my decisions on a case-by-case basis. In this instance Mr. Wallace has not attacked another poster and has offered an explanation of a term much in use in some places. Should I ban the posting of comments with which I disagree simply because I disagree with them?"
Why not, Simpson? You ban mine because you disagree with them.
He continues, "I suspect that Mr. Wallace is not making any converts here; what interests me is how much he has in common with those Confederate “heritage” advocates who feel uncomfortable about his acceptance of the role of white supremacy in the Old South and the Confederacy. I suspect they share much more in common when it comes to present-day attitudes about race, as we’ve seen."
Wonder which Confederate "heritage" advocates he's talking about. I haven't noticed that many of us feeling uncomfortable about Wallace's acceptance of the role of white supremacy in the Old South and the Confederacy. I think, quite the opposite from what Simpson suggests, it's that most Confederate heritage advocates do not share his blatant racism and resent his using Confederate heritage to promote it.
Most of us know quite well that white supremacy existed in the Old South and the Confederacy. We also know it existed in the north and the USA as well, and we simply don't relate to folks like Brooks Simpson and his Dixie-bashing brethren giving the north a pass by ignoring its white supremacy and its crucial role in slavery to focus their total evilization campaign on the South.
No comments :
Post a Comment
Comments are welcome, but monitored.