tv Book Discussion on White Rage CSPAN August 4, 2016 8:00pm-9:08pm EDT
emory university professor carol anderson argues the racial divide in america is fueled by white resentment over progress by african-americans. she discussed her book at the ferguson, missouri, public library. this is just over an hour. >> we're going to get started. hello and welcome to left bank books for our event with carol anderson. this is not left bank books. sorry. i'm shane, host for left bank books and want to thank or cosponsor, the ferguson library. their work is incredible and inspiring. they're a wonderful partner to have for this event. left bankbooks hosts over 300 author events and with your help we can continue bringing bringir favorite authors.
win you support us your tax dollars are going into her to schools and community projects at a higher rate. we give back to tower community by partnering with charities and organizations and we are doing our summer fundraising for our river city readers from. we have brochures at the back. we several public school children by building a home library and encouraging literacy. the students get to keep five books each year and meet authors. i would like to ask you to make a donation tonight of any amount, you can do so at the sales table or ask the me about sponsoring a child. this program is near and dear to my heart and it's wonderful i and will tell you all about it. so i would like to thank all of you for your continued support for us left bank books. for information about our upcoming events and information on our reading group, ferguson reads, and much more, please
visit our web site, left -- bank.com. grab a newsletter at the back -- left-bank.com. and now, i am very proud to introduce carol anderson for left bank books. as ferguson eresulted in 2014 and media commentators across the spectrum referred to the angry response of african-americans as black rage, anderson wrote a remarkable op-ed in the "washington post" showing that this was instead why who -- white rage at force. linking when -- by african-americans was counselor bid cleverly drafted on six. white rage pulls back the veil of actions immediate in the name of protecting democracy. there are a handful of writers whose work i consider
indispensable, proffer -- -- and the jettor of "white aim" vase this one of the most important books he has work on. carol anderson is professor of african-american stewedies at hemry university. she author of many books, including bourgeois radicals, the naacp and the struggle for colonial libberration, 1941 to 1960 and numerous articles. anderson's opinion article from the "washington post" will appear in "the fire this time" a new generation speaks about race which comes out in august and i highly recommend that book as well. that article shaped and helped define this book, and a movement. "white rage" is inspiring and necessary. from the epilogue, it's dime to diffuse the power of white rage. time to finally truly move into
the future. tonight carol will be discussing "white rage: the unspoken truth of racial divide." please help me in welcoming carol anderson. [applause] >> and thank you. thank you for coming out on a -- what day is this? i really truly appreciate it. and i appreciate what ferguson public library has done and is for this community. thank you. and i appreciate left bank books as well. thank you. i wanted to spend some time first talking about how i got to "white rage." what white rage is and then move into several excerpts from the
book and then enup for q & a. when i first began to wrestle with the concept of white rage, it wasn't ferguson. it was in fact in february 1999. when a black man in new york city, stepped out on his doorstep after a long, hard day's work, to go get something to eat, and he was greeted with 41 bullets. 19 of which hit him. his name was amadou dialo and he was gunned down by the nypd. amadou was unarmed. that was bad enough. but as we know from these killings, it is the response that begins to tell you what is
happening in society, and so i'm sitting there and i'm listening to mayor rudy giuliani in an interview with ted koppel, on "nightline" and ted koppel is talking about the nypd texas the amadou diallo killing, talking about 41 bullets. talking about stop and frisk, talking about police brutality, and rudy giuliani says, i have the most restrained and best behaved police force you can imagine. okay, yeah, i had one of those scooby doo moments, what? and then he began to talk about how his policies were working. that what he had put in place in new york city has brought down crime. new york city is a safer place
because of his policies, and he has flow charts and graphs and bars, everything, and what you don't hear is that an unarmed black man stepped out on his porch and was gunned down. i'm sitting there going, something is fundamentally wrong. structurally wrong. i didn't know what to call it. didn't know what to label it. put i knew something was going on. and i continue as a professor began working and thinking and working and thinking, and then august 2014. the television is on and i'm watching, and i see ferguson in flames. and then i hear the pundits talking. and what they were talking about was black rage.
why are black people bushing up where they live? what is wrong with black people? our can they burn up where they live? there's something wrong with black people. why are they burning us. didn't matter what ideological stripe. it was all centered, the baseline, the starting point, was black rage. and i found myself in this moment shaking my head. you know that moment when you shake your head, something is going on and you realize, that's not right. that's not right and that's when it hit me. said, no, what we're really seeing is white rage. what we are really seeing is that we have been so focused in on the flames, we have missed the kindling. we have missed what has soaked the fire. we have missed the disenfranchisement of the black
community in ferson, through all kind shenanigans and rigmarole have created where, in the 2013 municipal election in population that is 67% of ferguson's population, you had a six percent black voter turnout. you got to work really hard to make that happen. we missed in ferguson schools that had been on probation for 15 years. 15 years. where a state had an accounting system of base accreditation of 30 points and ferguson public schooled were getting ten points a year, and we have allowed that to happen for 15 years. we have allowed an entire generation of students to go through from kindergarten to graduation, with a school -- in a school system we know doesn't work. kindling.
we have a police force that didn't see that its role was to protect and serve, but saw african-americans as a revenue-generating source. that could provide 25% of the city's budget. kindling. what all of this kind ling -- as i began to wrestle with white rage and began to understand what we're looking at are the policies. as a nation we are so drawn to the spectacular. we are so drawn to what we can see. that we miss those tectonic plates that are actually moving. white rage moves subtly. almost imperceptibly.
crosssive cor rosesively, through the courts, legislatures, government, bureaucracies, through the white house, through congress, and it wreaks havoc subtly. it's hard to discern what is the source of what you're seeing. so i set out to make white rage visible because the first thing is you have to see this thing. the trigger for white rage is black advancement. it is not the mere presence of black people that is the catalyst for white rage. but it is blackness with ambition. blackness with drive. with purpose. with aspirations. with demands for full and equal
citizenship. it is blackness that refuses to accept subjugation. black mass that refuses to fifth -- to give up and through a formidable array of policy assaults and legal maneuvering, white rage consistently punishes black resilience and black resolve. how else can we reasonably explain why government after government fought so hard to keep black children from getting an education? we saw it after the civil war. we saw it all the way through the brown decision. we see it now. why is it so difficult to educate black children? why do we have this, even when
at least since 1957, and sputnik, when the u.s. said, oh, we have a national security crisis, we must educate as many of our citizens as we can to be able to effectively wage the cold war. but brown was not going to get implemented. so even in the face of a national security crisis, even in the tase when we say this is what our nation needs, white rage says, i don't think so. why? what this nation -- this nation design a war on drugs, that incarcerates most those who sell and do drugs the least. why?
and why particularly, after the triumphs and the successes of thesive rights move with the civil rights act of 1964 and the voting rights act of 1965? why would we incarcerate communities? why would be overwhelm state budgets? why would be destabilize families? why would be do this to those who aren't the primary users and sellers of narcotics? why? why would state after state develop ruse after ruse to keep american citizens from being able to vote. and to have a say in their own democracy. why? when we say we value democracy,
when we say this is why we fight, then why would be have such mass voter suppression? and understand that none of this was done with a mere klan cross, right? there weren't any cross burnings that just made all of this happen. all of this was done coolly, methodically, systematically, and so in my new book "white rage," i trace this historical pattern with sign posts. reconstruction. the great migration. the brown decision. the civil rights movement. and the election of barack obama. and i also trace it through three key sectors.
education, the criminal justice system and the right to vote. and so now i want to read some excerpts. >> as you know, in 1954, the u.s. supreme court ruled that separate but equal was unconstitutional. overturned the messy decision and said that we must integrate. jim crow was no longer the law of the land. the south rows rose up and said, huh-uh, and used a series of ruses that dragged this process out for a long, long time. well, in 1973, the battle -- the court battles are still going on. in 1973, there was an area in san antonio called "the edgewood district.
and in the edgewood neighborhood it was 96% mexican-american and african-american. it was the poorest neighborhood in san antonio, with the lowest median income and the lowest property values. they taxed themselves at the highest rate in order to try to fund their children's education. by taxing themselves at the highest rate, they garnered $21 per capita. meanwhile, alamo heights, predominantly white neighborhood in san antonio, taxed themselves at a much lower rate. they garnered over $300 per student. lower rates, 1500 percent more
in funding. now, what we know is that property values have a lot to do with public policy. world governments choose, say, to put the landfill. where they choose to put the highway. where they choose to zone certain types of businesses and not others. has a lot to do with property values. so, the parent in the edgewood district took texas to court. and said, this violates our children's 14th amendment rights to have equal protection under the law. it violates brown. the u.s. supreme court ruled in a 5-4 decision, 4 of the justices were appointed by richard nixon, and one was appointed by eisenhower.
that quote there is no fundamental right to education in the constitution. they said that the state funding scheme did not systematically discriminate against all poor people in texas. and that because districts across the united states used property taxes that this method was not so irrational as to be discriminatory. thurgood marshall, his dissent and that's what i'm going to read. fully recognizing the implications of rodriguez, the name of the case, justice thurgood marshall was an electric tick. more than 40% of black children, 14 and under, lived with families below the poverty line. as compared with 10% of white
children. under those circumstances, marshall feeder -- feared, african-american children wouldn't stand a chance. the decision, he wrote in his dissent, could only be seen as a retreat from a commitment to equality of educational opportunities, as well as an unsupportable capitulation for a system which deprived children of the chance to reach their full potential as citizens. he was simply dumb found that the majority would acknowledge the existence of widely disoperate funning for schools across texas, and then instead over focusing on the cause of the slumsly pirouettes to the state's efforts to close the gaps etch the issue, marshall complained, is not whether texas is doing it best to ameliorate
the worst features of a discriminatory scheme. but, rather, whether the scheme itself is in fact unconstitutionally discriminatory. moveover, he found it the height of absurdity that texas could actually argue that there was no correlation between funding and school quality. you can't make this up. and then from that faulty premise, deduce that there were no discriminatory consequences for the children of the disadvantaged districts. he was equally unimpressed with texas' tendency to parade before the justices the stories of children who had excelled. despite living in underresourced districts, as some sort of proof that funding wasn't relevant. that a child could excel even when forced to attend an
underfunded school with poor physical facilities, less experienced teachers, larger classes, and a number of other deficits compared to the -- to a school with substantially more funds, marshall barked, it is to the credit of the child cannot the state. but rodriguez placed the onus slowly on the backs of the most vulnerable. while walling off access to the niece resources for quality education and played beautifully into the coral-blind, post civil rights language 0, of substituting economics for race yet achieving a similar result. the simple truth was that. by virtue of the sheer demographics of poverty, rodriguez would have not only a disparate impact on african-american children but also a disastrous one. i know, sobering.
and i then move into the war on drugs. because it has so warped american society in ways that are so profound, and so i walk us through how the war on drugs emerged. i then walk us through the court cases, the supreme court decisions that michelle alexander in the new jim crow so beautifully laid out, and then i begin to lay out the consequences, and so as i go through the court cases, i then say, taken together, those rulings allow inteed encouraged, the -- indeed encouraged the criminal justice to run racially amok and that's exactly what happened. on july 23, 1999, in texas.
in the dead of night, local police launched a massive raid and busted a major cocaine trafficking ring, at least that's how it was billed by the local media, which after being tipped off, lined up to get the best, most humiliating photographs of 46 of the town's 5,000 residents, handcuffed, in pajamas, underwear and uncombed bed hair. paraded into the jails for booking. the local newspaper ran the headline "streets cleared of garbage." praisees law enforcement for ridding the city of drug-dealing scum bags. the raid was the result of an 18 month investigation by a man who would be named by texas' attorney general as outstanding lawman of the year. attached to at the federally
funded panhandle regional narcotics task force, based in amarillo, he didn't lead a team of investigators. instead he single handedly identified eve member of the massive cocaine coercion and made over 100 drug purchases. he was hailed as a hero and his testimony immediately let to 36 -- 38 of the 46 being convicted. with the other case just waiting to get into the clogged court system. joe moor, a pig farmer, sentenced sentenced sentenced to 99 years for selling $200 worth of cocaine to the uncover narcotics agent. his wife received 25 years. while her husband, william, cash love, landed 434 years. for possessing an ounce of
cocaine. well, the case began to unravel, however, when tanya went to trial. coleman swore she sold him drugs. tanarch however, had video prove she was at a bank in oklahoma city, 300 miles away, cashing a check, at the very moment he claimed to have bought cocaine from her. then another defendant, billywaver had time sheets and his hiss boss' eye witness testimony that he was at work and not out selling drugs to coleman. and when the outstanding lawman of the year swore under oath that he has purchased cocaine from all bryant, tall, bushy-haired man, only to have bryant, bald, and 5'6", appear in court. it finally became very clear that something was awry.
coleman in fact had no proof whatsoever. that any of the alleged drug deals had taken place. there were no oddow tapes -- no audiotapes no, photographs, no other police officers presence, nobody's fingerprints but his on the bags of drugs no records. over the spain of an 18-month investigation, he never wore a wire. now, he claimed to have written each drug transaction on his leg. but to have washed away the evidence when he showered. so, i'm either thinking he showered once in 18 months, or -- additional investigation led to no corroborating proof. when the police arrested those 46 people and search their homes
and possessions no drugs were found. no were weapons, money, paraphernalia or any other indication at all that the house wife, pig farmer, or anyone else arrested, were actually drug kingpins. what was discovered, however, was judicial misconduct running rampant in the war on drugs in tulia texas, with a clear racial bias. coleman had accused ten percent of tulias black population of dealing in cocaine. based on his word alone, 50% of all of the black men in the town were indicted, convicted, and sentenced to prison. randy credit of the williams moses fund for racial justice todd tia a mass lynching, taking down 50% of the male black adult
population like that? it's outrageous. it's like being accused of raping someone in indiana in the 1930s. you didn't do it. but it doesn't matter. because a bunch of klans men on the jury are going to string you up anyway. but this wasn't 1930. it was the beginning of the 21st century. and a powerful civil rights movement had bridged those two eras. and then the last excerpt i want to read. the last chapter deals with the election of president obama. and how white rage reared up in really deep, profound ways. almost in ways we hadn't seen in years. and so as i walked through voter
suppression, and then i move into the threats on his life, and the disrespect that the office of the president received, i then began to deal with the violence. black respectability or appropriate behavior doesn't seem to matter. if anything, black achievement, black aspirations, and black success, are construed as direct threats. obama's presidency made that clear. aspirations and their achievement provide no protection. not even to the god-fearing. on june 17, 2015, south carolinaan dylann roof, a white, unemployed 21-year-old high school dropout, was on a mission to take his country back.
every since george zimmerman walked out of the courthouse a free man, after killing trayvon martin,, in a racially polearizd nation. -- civil rights law. but despite the groups of vowed racist belief system in the mid to late 1990s as the southern poverty law center reports the group bloses of having 43 members in the mississippi legislature and hard powerful republican party allies including trent lott of mississippi. by 2004, mississippi governor
hailey barber, the chair of the republican national committee, and 37 other powerful politicians, had all attended the event in the 21st century. earl hope, the chair of the tri-c, gave $65,000 to republican campaign funds in recent year, including donations to the 2016 presidential campaigns of rand paul, rick santorum, and ted cruz. the tri-c enjoyed the cachet of respectability that racism required to achieve its goals in american society and the web site of hatred and live provided the self-serving education that dylann roof -- the drank in the
poise on of its message, got into this car, trough to charleston, entered ame church and landed in a bible study with a group of african-americans the model of respectability. roof played -- prayed with them. read the bible with them. thought they were so nice. and then he shot them dead. leaving just one woman alive. so that she could tell the world what he had done and why. you're taking over our country, he said, and he knew this to be true. well, not even a full month after dylann roof againsted down nine african-americans at emanuel ame in charleston, south carolina, republican presidential front-runner, donald trump, fired up his silent majority audience of thousands in july 2015 with a
macabre promise. don't worry, we'll take our country back. no. it's time instead that we take our country forward. into the future. thank you. [applause] >> thank you. and now i'm going to open it up for questions but i would ask, because c-span is filming this, that if you have a question, please go to the mic. ask. ask. yes. thank you. >> is this on? i have read your book.
and we have discussed it with ferguson book group here, readings on race book group. my one question that i -- i find it very helpful and a good compendsum of things that i kind of know but good to have it all in one place. the one concern i had was that seemed that you really detailed problems that happened under republican administrations. and what the eisenhower, to nixon, to bush, and then the present situation under obama but you didn't talk much about, say, what -- say, framework clinton's ending welfare as we know it or other things that might happen under democratic administrations which also had disproportionate affects on black people. >> absolutely. thank you. and one of those -- one of the reasons behind that is because i
was looking at these moments of advancement, and in those moments of advancement, where you're seeing the pushback comes before '68 from the -- you have the republicans and the democrats. but one of the things i -- in a piece i did in "salon" i begin to unpack, just somewhat, bill clinton and what he has done. now, the article focused on the g.o.p. but understand that there are a couple of things happening here. is that white rage moves through parties. it isn't just isolated, like in the republicans or isolated in the democrats, and that is also really important to understand. so just the epochs that i looked at, that did that. i could have easily, for
instance, during the great depression, when franklin delano roost -- roosevelt is creating programs the southern democrats say we need relief, we need agriculture funding and support, we need social security. but black people can't have that. so, you can create this whole new deal compendium of programs and you have to exclude african-americans. i could have talked about that but crunch time. thank you. >> thank you. >> hi. i really just wanted to thank you so much for this work. it's incredibly profound, and the things in here that yao cited i -- that you cited i was unaware of.
the state of mississippi didn't ratify the 13th amendment until 2013? >> yes. the date -- state of mississippi finally got around to ratifying the 13th amendment, which abolished slavery in 2013. they said it was an oversight. >> well, so, the other -- really difficult pieces in here. i want to thank you for telling the story of mary turner, which i had only recently learned about, but i think being a witness to her story is so important and so powerful. so, i read the book for the ferguson readings on race book club, too. >> i love this. >> it's a great group. i learned so much. and so i was really diligent about reading it, and i had to put it down sometimes, and it was so difficult and painful.
my question for you is, was it like that for you writing it? it had to be so much more difficult to write it and research it. >> it was tough. one of the things that i -- but i've been through this before in the first book "eyes off the prize" i had to deal with the lynchings that happened after the first world war and talking about blood boiling so hard that his eye balls popped out of his heads and anytime those records, i'm reading through this. so i've been in the bowels and so that is how it felt in these moments going through this, but one of the things -- i had the mary turner lynching is just --
it is tough, and it is a woman who protested because her husband was lynched. she is angry. eight months pregnant. and so the lynchers come after her because she didn't know her place. how dare she protest that her husband was lynched, and so they snatcher head, they stripped her, they hung her upside-down from a tree, doused her with gasoline and set her on fire, and then they saw her stomach -- she is eight months pregnant -- they saw her stomach quivering and they got a knife and sliced it open. the baby pops out and they stomped on the baby's head. win you're reading through those records, because one of the things i think is also important to understand about the way white rage works is that we focus in on this kind of
violence but it is the system arou that condones condones cont -- everybody knows who killed mary turner. you go through the naacp's papers as walter white, the head of the naacp is writing to the governor of georgia and is naming the names. so and so, and he works at standard oil, and and so and works at the furniture shop. so and so and da da da. and nothing happened. and so when you have that kind of violence that happens in a community, and then the powers that be are like, yeah, that is white rage, because it creates the kinds of policies, the kinds
of judicial system, that allow that to occur. in order to keep african-americans in their place, to stop that advancement. thank you. >> i have another question. we talked about this a lot in our book club. what can we do? >> you're doing it. and this is the thing about -- i study movements. i love movements. my -- i love what i -- how too we change a norm? there are these moments -- for instance, before the civil war, 80% of the nation's gnp was tied up in slavery. tied to slavery. 80% of the united states gnp tied to slavery.
when we got to the point we had to fight a mean, hard war, but where the norm changed, when we knew that slavery was wrong. we came to know that jim crow was wrong. we came to know that apartheid was wrong. the movement that it takes to change those norms, it's bit by bit. it's neighbors talking to neighbors. it's mobilizing, it's organizing, it's writing, it's talking, it's thinking, it's voting. it's voting. it's laying pressure on policymakers to make this a much more just and decent nation and world. that's how we do it. that's how we do it, by working
together. >> good evening, everybody. how are you doing? >> fine. >> recently i was completing a job application, and under the nationality it listed latin, spanish, or mexican, list evidence african-american, said african haitian, island pacific or japanese but just said white under caucasian but not to reference who you're european or. why is so it hard for some caucasians to recognize that it there areles immigrants to this country and also quick to say this is their country?
>> i think a lot of that has to do with the way that history is taught k through 12. it creates a civics lesson but not a history lesson. it creates citizens in terms of a very kind of flattened narrative, about how -- by whom and how the nation was founded, who built the nation, who created the railroads, who built the cities, who invent this, who invented that, and if you go through those standard textbooks, what you will find is very minimal discussion about anybody else; that it is whites
who have built america. whites who have sustained america. whites who created america. whites are america. and it's that framing in our textbooks, from k through 12, that have really solidified this narrative. so, we do get what we're a nation of immigrants. you get that kind of thrown out there, but then we have the melting pot. and we all become one. but not really. and so when you -- and i think i saw a statistic that said only about 20% of americans have a bachelors degree. so, that means somewhere around 80% that this is the history they know. this is the history they know. and you know how it is when somebody tells you something the
first story you hear, is the one then that everything else has to be weighed against? so if the first story you hear, and it's the story you have heard over and over and over again, then trying to say, you know, your folks came over from poland, hmm? tell you a quick story. i have tons of stories. i was teaching a u.s. cold war foreign policy class. and i broke my students up into research teams, and they were to be the president's transition team for a series of issues. so, we had things like human rights, and energy, the environment, and i had one on immigration. and so that team actually wrote
a great policy paper on immigration. really good policy paper on immigration, but i required that they then present it to the rest of the class as part of the president's team. the responses were so vitriolic. things like, well, yeah so, my parents were immigrants but i do think we need to build a wall. wow. wow. wow. >> so you talked about that we only pay attention to the flash points. right? here in ferguson, michael brown is shot and killed. sorry. you talk about the fact that people only pay attention to the flashpoints.
here in ferguson, michael brown is shot and killed. people take to the streets. the police, politicians, the governor overreact. ferguson blows up and suddenly it's national and international news. right? in baltimore, people march peacefully and then nobody pays attention until people start looting and rioting and suddenly once again it is national and international news. so my question is, as member who is about as nonviolent as you can get, right? like, how -- it seems like the only thing that people pay attention to, the only thing that white people pay attention to is when things turn violent. how do you protest peacefully and still get attention and make a difference when its seems like the flashpoints are the only
thing that people listen to. >> one of the reasons i wrote "white rage" is so that we begin to pay attention to the consistenting, we real -- kindling, the understand the power of policymaking and pages paying attention and asking the next questions and push back on a bit on whites only pay attention when somebody blows up, because in movement, in struggle, you have whites who are there, on the ground, who are doing that hard, heavy lifting. you have asias who are on the ground, doing that hard, heavy lifting.
as well as having latinos and having african-americans. you have people who are doing the base work, the organizing, the strategizing, the letter-writing, and social media has helped so much with that kind of mobilization. so you have that going on. the thing that happens then is, though, is that we don't see it but it is happening, and that is why when something jumps off mad, crazy, because that kind of organizing has already been in place, you have people and organizations that step into the breach. who help provide policy rational, policy options, who
provide safe spaces. we just don't see that heavy lifting initially but it is there. and that's why we have to keep at it. keep doing it. it's not sexy. we love sexy. and this kind of heavy lifting isn't sexy, but as i documented, tried to go through looking at what the supreme court is doing, this is why we have to pay attention to who the supreme court nominees are. we have to pay really close attention because their decisions help shape the roof of this nation. >> to follow up with his question, i think we really do pay attention. we whites but in a different way. let's go back to charleston. one thing i noticed, when one of
us whites don't act appropriate as whites do, then the media starts talking about, well, was it parents, environment, and we go on to this and intellectual assessment so we can figure it out so we can keep our image intact, while we never grieve the deaths of eight -- nine of our brothers and sisters, but they're african-americans so it doesn't count. we judge ourself by our best examples and be judge you by your worst so there's violence in that by never allowing ourselves -- we call it, it's not safe. no. it's not comfortable but we mislabel it. so, the media then presents in a narrative that we whites want and tours and supports and that's violence for me. we know flashpoints. when we are stepping out of line we make sure we come back looking good. could you comment on that? >> that was a boom. i'm working on a piece right now
dealing with the politics politf respectability. and one of the elements in this politics of respectability is how african-americans don't get the bin fit of the doubt. -- benefit of the doubt. and i walk through -- i walk through why the politics of respectability was deployed during the civil rights movement. as a means to try to humanize african-americans to the larger american society to the power brokers and to white citizens, because there had been a series of killings, brutal, horrific killings, like the lynching of quad neil in 1934.
where he was dragged out of an alabama jail, sent through a gauntlet of torture into florida, hoisted unon a stand and tortured. with -- tortured. and the florida said there's no crime here because he wasn't from here. alabama said there was no crime here because he wasn't killed her, and the naacp turned to the fbi because now we have the lindbergh kidnapping law can that if you cross state lines it's a federal offense, and j. edgar hoover said, there was no ransom required. no crime. and so seeing what this kind of violence on the black body has done, you saw the civil rights movement deploy the politics of respectability as a way to make visible that the only way, the only reason that you're seeing
mrs. amelia boynton yanked on to the concrete in selma, is because she is black. this can't be anything but racism. so, it was a way to say you can't say, you don't have a criminal record. and so this is why you see this deployed. the politics of respectability does have some good pieces in it. i just plop it off at some kind of bourgeois victorian thing because being sober is not a bad thing. we know that alcohol and drugs destroys families. being sober is not a bad thing. education is a good thing. so there are these -- but what it doesn't do is to protect black bodies from white violence. and so i look at one of the things about charleston,
charleston drove me to this. because i looked at that. because the nine who were killed were the model of respectability. and you saw nikki hailey and south carolina going, oh, that was really bad. that was really bad. then you had to have their killer -- so you got respectability, if the killer had to be an avowed white supremacist. they had to find incontro veritable proof that he was an avowed white supremacist so he had to have the are par tied south africaing. >> the confederate flag. and then he had to have his manifesto where the says i want to start a race war. but that's still not enough.
the same kind of rationale being used for instance with timothy mcveigh. and so, that is part of the way the narrative's work and the way that they begin to undergird policy. you hear as they are talking about, muslims and terrorists. they are in fact talking about what policies to put in place, based on this, yes. >> when they looked up and saw them flying at half mast and the confederacy at full mast, and then it strategized a white tall
guy at the bottom and they were to taste her. they looked at the white man that killed her, and though they backed off and let her live. the only reason that she's alive today is he grabbed the pole and told him to kill him and people don't know that story because they won't report it. >> i am a historian so i'm going to run with this. in 1946 in columbia tennessee, a white shop owner smacked a black woman, a black veteran was standing next to her. you do not lay your hands on somebody's mother. that veteran picked him up and flew him out the glass window to lynch the black man.
the black veterans in that town were not having it and basically it was called the race riot. after it was over, they were arrested for murder although as you know, shooting and killing happened. thurgood marshall came to defend the black man in columbia tennessee but he couldn't stay in a hotel because they were white only hotels. after court every day he would have to drive so thurgood marshall one of his colleagues was a white man driving out one night after court he looks behind and they go left, the cop car goes right.
finally the cops pulled him over. they were like you need to come with us. thurgood was like snape. he gets in the cop car, the white man looks up and realizes they were several cars behind that and they don't turn around to go back to columbia tennessee. instead they are heading off into the woods. thurgood marshall was getting ready to get going lynch to. they hop over to the seat and he starts following. and he's scared. but he is like i am not going to let this happen. they turned left and he turns left. finally they stopped like what
are you doing and he says i am not going to let you do this. now, think about the courage that it took in 1946, in the middle of tennessee. this loan white man standing up before the sheriff and his posse saying i'm not going to let you do this. it was one of those moments i'm so glad i've got some folks my age appear. remember those aqua velvet commercials? thanks, i needed that. they had never seen anything like this before. they went okay, fine. so, there is history in this
kind of solidarity. it's absolutely essential to. >> [inaudible] >> and you got it. that's half the battle. >> i remember the problem involved with a lot of groups concerning racism is all screws holding it, getting rid of it. but i think we have a problem. we need to know more about what happened and we haven't been told the truth. it may have been my caucasian friends, but i'm sorry. i think they need to be offended. if the truth is going to send them, it will help them become whole and that is one of the problems is that we are not really telling the truth, and
i'm glad that you and michelle alexander r. writing the way that your writing. as an example, i heard others which i enjoy ms. hunter. she always talks from a historical point of view about the lynchings that took place. then they would bring the person and to be lynched. then they would cut off their head and they wouldn't eat it, they were thrown away. things like that we need to know more about. they are saying that the people that were killed in orlando, the
worst massacre that we ever had, and i think it is someplace in arkansas. >> i've been looking at some books by fraser. i read about him in the 50s and 60s and i would like to know where i might re- tree of those books about the lynchings that took place, but a lot of these are out of print now. >> there are some good books i use in my class because my studentsav