George Zimmerman or Piers Morgan:Who Is the Real Racist?

By | July 22, 2013 | 3 Comments


There has been much commentary about the testimony of Trayvon Martin’s friend Rachel Jeantel at the trial of George Zimmerman, as well as her subsequent interview with self-anointed pundit Piers Morgan. Morgan insisted that she “speaks three languages fluently,” presumably referring to English, Spanish, and her mother’s Haitian Creole.

I have never heard Jeantel speak Spanish or Haitian Creole, but I have heard her speak English, and she is very far from fluent. As one example of many, she said of the jury, “They old” instead of “They are old.” Some languages have no present tense of the verb to be – for example, Russian and Hebrew – but English is not among them. I had to strain to understand her testimony and her interview, and I found some of her speech unintelligible.
In addition, she insisted that when Trayvon referred to Zimmerman as a “creepy-ass cracker” on the phone, he was not using the word as a derogatory, offensive term for a white Southerner, as the dictionary defines it, but merely as a term for a cop. This, of course, is ridiculous. Would Trayvon have referred to a black cop as a “cracker”? And Zimmerman didn’t look like a cop – if he had, Trayvon would never have assaulted him. But the point is that using a term that is widely understood as racially offensive, and then claiming you didn’t really mean it, is (pun intended) a cop-out. This would be seen as a feeble attempt to excuse racism if it were used by whites.
The purpose of speech is to communicate meaning to others, not to delight in your own idiosyncratic expressions or to be understood only by your particular group. Children often use a form of baby talk among themselves to avoid being understood by adults. But adults want to be understood by other adults. Or at least most of them do.
Despite all this, Morgan called her “fluent,” while an “expert” declared, “Rachel Jeantel speaks English; it’s just not your English.” No, I don’t speak “my” English; I speak standard American English. I can be understood by anyone who speaks American or British English, the most widely understood language in the world – which gives me an enormous advantage over Rachel Jeantel.
Note that Jeantel is a senior in high school, reportedly with a 3.0 average. What, if anything, does this mean? Today my wife asked the young man who bagged our groceries when the Civil War was fought. He replied, “The 1960s,” mistaking it for the civil-rights struggle. This is not a racial issue – the young man is white. Have we reached the point that a high-school diploma isn’t worth the paper it’s printed on? About 40% of high-school graduates are not prepared for college or the work force. There, doesn’t that make you proud of our “progressive” educational system?
Growing up, I knew kids with foreign-born parents who spoke their native languages at home. But the kids all spoke standard, unaccented English. Their parents insisted on it, and if they hadn’t, their teachers would have. But note that Jeantel doesn’t speak her own brand of English only with her friends, while she speaks standard English in court and for a TV interview. No, her own brand is the only brand she knows, because her teachers in primary school, middle school, and high school never corrected her – either because they didn’t care to, or because they didn’t dare to, for fear of being called “racially insensitive.”
As a result, this young woman has seriously impaired prospects of ever getting a good job, or earning a decent income, or being able to support children without government aid. And that, of course, is the object – to create a generation of dependent subjects of a parentified government, rather than independent citizens of a constitutional republic. You voted to “fundamentally transform” America, but did you stop to ask into what?
“Community leaders” claim that African Americans suffer from racism daily. Is this objectively true? Or is it true only in the sense that young African Americans are taught by their “leaders” to see racism daily?
Only a fool would deny that racism exists in America, though it is probably the least racist of nations. Police brutality exists as well. But much of what is called racism is in the eye of the beholder. If we look for trouble, we are likely to find it. And much of our trouble is caused – or at least aggravated – by our own paranoia.
Sometimes bad service is just bad service by lazy employees. Sometimes bad food is just bad food prepared by sloppy cooks. Sometimes rude cops are just responding to our rudeness. Sometimes hyper-vigilant cops are just responding to our potentially threatening moves. There is an abundant supply of real racism in the world. I know – my father’s eldest brother was murdered in the Holocaust. We don’t need to invent more racism by seeing it in the problems of daily life.
Those who teach young African Americans that they will suffer from racism daily must share the blame for inciting anger and suspicion. We can only guess how much inter-racial violence is caused by this anger and suspicion. Equally regrettable, over 90% of blacks who are killed are killed by other blacks. We can only guess how much intra-racial violence is caused by turning this anger inward against their own people. Florid rhetoric may stir up crowds and win elections, but in the end it will ruin lives.
So who is the real racist? Is it George Zimmerman, who is one-half Latino and one-eighth black? Is it Zimmerman, who is thus doubly eligible for affirmative action? Is it Zimmerman, who as a child ate dinner regularly with two black children? Is it Zimmerman, who mentors minority children, expecting to improve their academic performance? Is it Zimmerman, who was taken by surprise when a young black male violently attacked him because of being followed by a “creepy-ass cracker”?
Or is the real racist lily-white Piers Morgan, who has such low expectations of a black high-school senior that he accepts her ungrammatical, partially unintelligible jargon as “fluent” English – something he would never accept from a white student? Is it Morgan, who finds it unremarkable that a young black male reacts violently to a nonviolent situation? Is it Morgan, who looks down on us with the patronizing condescension of the self-anointed elitist?
If you look in the encyclopedia under “soft bigotry of low expectations,” you will find a photo of Piers Morgan, along with those of his fellow liberals who imagine themselves the friends of downtrodden minorities, but who in fact work to keep them downtrodden.
Hopelessness ends when learning begins. And learning begins when excuses end.
Contact: You are welcome to publish or post these articles, provided that you cite the author and website.

Social Widgets powered by