Conspiracy Theories and Victimization

As the reactions to Barack Obama's speech continue to emerge, there is a striking disconnect that appears repeatedly in the pieces written by some of the liberal white supporters of Obama.   Nicholas Kristof is typical.  In his op-ed piece on Obama and Race in the Times this morning he addresses the different world view that blacks and whites have in America:

Many white Americans seem concerned that Mr. Obama, who seems so reasonable, should enjoy the company of Mr. Wright, who seems so militant, angry and threatening. To whites, for example, it has been shocking to hear Mr. Wright suggest that the AIDS virus was released as a deliberate government plot to kill black people.

That may be an absurd view in white circles, but a 1990 survey found that 30 percent of African-Americans believed this was at least plausible.

“That’s a real standard belief,” noted Melissa Harris-Lacewell, a political scientist at Princeton (and former member of Trinity church, when she lived in Chicago). “One of the things fascinating to me watching these responses to Jeremiah Wright is that white Americans find his beliefs so fringe or so extreme. When if you’ve spent time in black communities, they are not shared by everyone, but they are pretty common beliefs.”

Occasionally, we’ve had glimpses of this gulf between white and black America. Right after the O.J. Simpson murder trial, a CBS News poll found that 6 out of 10 whites thought that the jury had reached the wrong verdict, while 9 out of 10 blacks believed it had decided correctly. Many African-Americans even believe that the crack cocaine epidemic was a deliberate conspiracy by the United States government to destroy black neighborhoods.

In the almost surreal unreflective post-modernist posing that passes for intellectual discourse among the self-designated cognoscenti, Kristof takes the widespread acceptance of paranoid conspiracy theories in a large part of the black community as evidence that whites have neglected to listen to blacks:

What’s happening, I think, is that the Obama campaign has led many white Americans to listen in for the first time to some of the black conversation — and they are thunderstruck.

All of this demonstrates that a national dialogue on race is painful, awkward and essential. And that dialogue needs to focus not on clips from old sermons by Mr. Wright but on far more urgent challenges — for example, that about half of black males do not graduate from high school with their class.

Then maybe we can achieve our goal of getting, finally, to the point where there is “not a black America and not a white America... . There’s the United States of America.”

It is not readily apparent what point Kristof is trying to make.  Is Kristof suggesting that if only we whites take the time and energy to lend credence to black paranoia, we would facilitate the more complete integration of blacks into America?  I can't quite tell from the piece exactly how Kristof imagines such ideas as "the AIDS virus was released as a deliberate government plot to kill black people" or "that the crack cocaine epidemic was a deliberate conspiracy by the United States government to destroy black neighborhoods" is related to the fact that "half of black males do not graduate from high school with their class."  There is a significant connection between the two data points but I suspect it is not one Kristof would allow himself to consider.

Until Kristof or anyone else can provide some evidence to show that government scientists invented the AIDS virus and then introduced it into the black community or unearth the policy papers describing how introducing Crack into black neighborhoods would somehow achieve whatever goal fevered imaginations can come up with, these ideas, along with many others that Jeremiah Wright promulgated with minimal demurral from Barack Obama, must be considered nothing more than the worst kinds of paranoid conspiracy theories.  These are not just different perspectives or different opinions but bizarre and damaging fantasy structures that infect the thinking of those who hold such ideas.   

Human beings are prone to believe in nonsense.  We typically find ways to use our rational thinking to support our nonsense theories, and usually the nonsense we believe in is harmless so long as it doesn't interfere with our ability to work, love, and play (to use Freud's old descriptor's of mental health.)  In The Value of Conspiracy Theories I described a relatively harmless conspiracy theory that is ascribed to by perhaps 40% of our British friends.  JFK conspiracy theories have been a staple of the American zeitgeist for 45 years and have spawned a cottage industry and made many people quite wealthy.  In these cases, the conspiracy theories reinforce some people's existing anxiety about government and also reinforce the comforting idea that life is not completely random.  Even if the "they" who are in control are evil, it is a comfort to know someone is in control and knows what is going on.

Other conspiracy theories are extraordinarily damaging to the holder.  Those conspiracy theories are the ones that support the holder's view that he or she is the victim of circumstances, forces, and people that are much more powerful than they, are inimical to them, and are beyond their control.  Those beliefs lead to passivity and anger, and away from self reflection and responsibility.

Why should a young black man who is struggling in school put in the hard work required to learn when it is all for naught?  If the "white man" is only going to keep him down, what is the point?

My family spent 16 years in an integrated community.  The high school was close to 50% black.  We had many neighbors who were well to do, extremely well educated, blacks.  It was a distressing fact for them, one that was discussed within the community on a regular basis, that black boys from the North end (ie, the wealthy part of town) were at terrible risk once they entered the high school.   If they worked hard and excelled academically, they were assailed for "acting white."  It was the extremely rare youngster who was able to withstand such peer pressure; in fact, most black boys who were good students were pulled out of the school by 9th grade and sent to private schools by the parents who could afford to do so.  This experience is intimately related to the black empowerment/victimization that Barack Obama's church champions. 

Once a person has embraced victimhood, which includes the belief that their problems are essentially not of their own making, they are lost.  The typically short sighted and cynical empowerment movement is designed to reinforce victimhood and extort reparations of one kind or another from those who have the money and the disinclination to fight back.  The victim "wins" by getting what he deserves from the "man".  This leaves the victim forever at the mercy of others, unable to change in ways which could enable them to live more productive and successful lives, and basing their entire sense of self on their grievances.  A community that accepts such a designation can only be an abject failure.  Of course, that is not the conscious goal of the black power movement, whose heirs include Jeremiah Wright, and whose enablers include Barack Obama. 

If Barack Obama truly wanted to start a productive discussion about race in this country, he would talk to those black men who do not graduate from high school.  He would direct his brilliant intellect and his glittering oratorical skills toward identifying the dangerous and self-defeating meta-communication that contaminates the black value system that his church professes.  He would not tolerate the excuse that racism is somehow preventing them from learning.  He would not presume that more money to a system that is failing will somehow make it succeed without fundamental changes in approach.  He would not reaffirm to his black audience that their problems are not their responsibility. 

Black Americans have a long legacy of racism to overcome.  They will never overcome until they are willing to stop being victims.

Comments

[Ken Spiker]

I think what Kristof is saying here is that it's our (white people's) fault that blacks believe these conspiracy theories. Our racism is making them paranoid. This is the same as the people who blame 9/11 on American foreign policy. Look what we made them do! This is how the left is able to make common cause with the religious lunatics from the Middle East. Of course the left doesn't think that infidels deserve to be killed because Allah is the supreme ruler of the universe, but they do think that the oppressed Muslims throughout the world (oppressed by us of course) have found an outlet for their justifiable anti-imperialist rage through religious expression. Though these poor oppressed Muslims haven't learned the true Marxian analysis of their situation, they have identified the oppressor, which makes them comrades in the struggle against the white, capitalist hegemony.

In the same way Kristof is suggesting to his liberal readers that blacks have been driven to psychosis by white racism and neglect. Liberals pick up on this cue automatically, it doesn't have to be explained to them, in fact if explained in words it would look as silly and irrational as it is. But liberals have a deep understanding that everything that happens to blacks is our fault, their paranoia is our fault and blacks not graduating from high school is something we caused and we are responsible for fixing. All we have to do is give them more money as Obama proposes and the guilt of black failure can be erased from our souls.

[Judge Crater]

Why is it that Barack Obama has to answer for, or even be somehow associated with, every crackpot statement made by any black leader, whether it's his own preacher, or Louis Farrakhan, or Al Sharpton? Why is he held to be an "enabler" of blacks whose statements and views he has never endorsed or promulgated and may not even have been aware of?

Have we had a similar vetting of John McCain's preacher's political views? McCain has sought and gained the endorsement of John Hagee, the right-wing, Christian Zionist who believes, among other things, that the Roman Catholic church is a cult. There are probably prominent white supporters of McCain who believe any number of wacky things. Is McCain "enabling" such beliefs, whatever they may be? Of course not.

So why is Obama held to account, not just for the utterances of every notable black U.S. citizen, but also for the alleged predisposition of black Americans to see themselves as victims? And, even more ridiculously, why is Obama derelict for not condemning the "black value system" that you view as so corrupt. Should John McCain be issuing campaign statements on the cultural failings of white Americans?

The answer is obvious: if Obama is accountable for the sins of all black leaders and the sins of the black population as a whole, and John McCain is held accountable only for the words that come out of his mouth (and probably not even those - see his latest misstatements on Iran and Al Qaeda.), then Obama can be made to jump through an infinite series of rhetorical wickets which will reduce his electoral chances to zero. The GOP would love to focus on the rantings of obscure black American figures and ignore the economy, the war, healthcare, the environment and all the other significant issues that they have screwed up over the past seven plus years.

[Ken Spiker]

Judge, the reason Obama is being held to account for his pastor's ravings is that he was so close to him and his church for so long. I don't think any of us would stick around a church where the preacher who launches into hateful racist tirades, not for a New York minute. Black separatism is not Christianity. The question is, why did he stay so long? What attracted him to that church in the first place? To what extent did he agree with the racist views of the church and when did he stop agreeing with them?

[Adam Leonard]

Hi, SW,

Re: "We typically find ways to use our rational thinking to support our nonsense theories..."

May I be so bold as to remind that not only is the way we typically rationalize our beliefs fully known, it is fully described in "Man by Nature: The Hidden Programming Controlling Human Behavior."

Despite being the author, I nonetheless recommend it to any interested in understanding human behavior based upon modern neuroscience.

P.S. Thank you for your earlier, kind review of the book.

Respectfully, Adam Leonard

[artfldgr]

I posted this information at neo-neocon...
http://neoneocon.com/2008/03/19/the-tuskeegee-experiment-and-truth/#comments

the origin of the AIDS rumor is well known.. if you dont get your information from the leftist press.

It was even disavowed in 1987 by then Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev, who said, “No more lying. No more disinformation,” in an effort to promote a more open foreign policy.

from accuracy in media

http://www.aim.org/aim-report/aim-report-the-lie-that-wont-die/

AIM Report: The Lie that Won’t Die

In one of the most notorious examples of Communist disinformation appearing in the U.S. media, Dan Rather reported in a newscast on March 30, 1987, that a Soviet publication had charged that an American military laboratory had developed the virus that caused the AIDS epidemic. He did not accompany this charge with any comment from the Pentagon or the State Department. This story had been exposed as Soviet disinformation before Rather aired it. Rather had been snared in a Soviet “active measures” campaign that involved the use of Soviet front groups, forgeries and disinformation. Rather still hasn’t apologized for having been taken in by this Soviet fabrication.

===============

The production of a phony KKK flier was less important to the Soviet KGB than their success in getting Dan Rather to air a Soviet charge that the Pentagon had manufactured the AIDS virus. The Soviet Communist officials in charge of propaganda activities must have been ecstatic when Rather put this on the CBS Evening News. The Soviets had placed the charge in over 200 publications, as well as radio broadcasts, in 25 different languages. To get the charge aired on a major American television network was a real coup. It harmed our image around the world. One unfortunate result of the campaign was a proposed class action lawsuit by AIDS victims against the government, charging that the virus was created by the Pentagon and that the government should pay them damages. In citing alleged supporting evidence, an article about the suit noted that “Dan Rather reported the mounting AIDS bio-warfare accusations on the CBS Evening News…incurring the wrath of the Reagan administration, which simplistically labeled it ‘Soviet propaganda.’”
=======================

The Soviets themselves have now admitted the campaign was a lie. Yevgeni Primakov, former head of the KGB, admitted in 1992 that “the KGB planted stories in the late 1980s which alleged that the HIV virus was the result of a Pentagon experiment.” Two former officers of the East German intelligence service, the Stasi, published a book in which they told how they collaborated with the KGB to promote the AIDS disinformation, using a Russian-born East German professor, Dr. Jakob Segal. Former KGB officer Oleg Gordievsky, in his book, “KGB - The Inside Story,” said the charge was a fabrication. The leading Soviet AIDS expert, Viktor M. Zhdanov, also repudiated it. It was even disavowed in 1987 by then Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev, who said, “No more lying. No more disinformation,” in an effort to promote a more open foreign policy.

The Soviet campaign was designed to distract attention from its own biological weapons program. Ken Alibek, deputy chief of the main Soviet biological weapons laboratory, discloses in his book, “Biohazard,” that the Soviets had explored AIDS as a weapon but decided it was too unstable for use. But they did add smallpox to their arsenal. They tried to cover up a biological weapons disaster at their own Army biological research facility at Sverdlovsk, blaming the deaths on tainted meat.

the rest of the article is at the link.. its quite long.

[Ken]

"Rather had been snared in a Soviet “active measures” campaign that involved the use of Soviet front groups, forgeries and disinformation. Rather still hasn’t apologized for having been taken in by this Soviet fabrication."

Probably because he and his network WAS one of the Soviet front groups...

[Ken]

Wright is just the latest example of Blacktivist Grievance Culture.

A Grievance Culture is a culture whose only reason for existing is to Get Even with someone else for slights (real or imagined) in the past. 100% of their culture, energy, and time is dedicated to Revenge.

Grievance cultures always have the same basic mythology: "Once WE were Lords of All Creation; then THEY Took It All Away From Us. IT'S PAYBACK TIME!"

Examples:
* The Ku Klux Klan -- Once WE (The South and its "Peculiar Institution") was Paradise; then those Yankees came and took it all away from us (including our "animate property"). THE SOUTH SHALL RISE AGAIN! IT'S PAYBACK TIME!
* The Nazis -- Once WE (Deustchland) were a mighty nation; then THEY (The Allies, The Versailles Treaty, Das Juden) took it all away from us. IT'S PAYBACK TIME! SIEG! HEIL!
* Christian Theonomists/Reconstructionists -- Once WE (America in the 1950s) was a Pure Christian Nation, God's Pet; then THEY (Secular Humanists, Darwin, Freud, etc) took it all away from us. IT'S PAYBACK TIME!
* Islamic Jihadis -- Once WE (Islam) were Lords of the World (the Caliphate, set up by the Prophet himself); then THEY (The Crusaders/Franks/Infidels) took it all away from us. PAYBACK TIME! GOD WILLS IT!
* Afrocentrists -- Once WE (Black Africans) were Lords of The World, and Africa was a Perfect Paradise; then THEY (Whitey) came and took it all away from us. IT'S PAYBACK TIME!

[Dr. Dre]

Two questions that I wish I could ask Barack re: Trinity UCC: first, was he actually baptised there? or does the church do some sort of "commitment" ceremony, not a really Christian practice, by the way. The name Trinity would indicate to me (Anglican) that he was baptised in the Name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, but I wonder, again, if he is weaseling with words here. His website used to say he is a "committed" Christian, not baptised, and he uses the word baptised vis a vis Rev. Wright performing this ceremony on his daughters as a way of showing how close the family was to this church, not to mention his marriage to Michelle by the same pastor.

Next, did he attend Trinity UCC on Sunday, Sept 16, 2001, the first Sunday after the 9/11 attacks and the service at which Rev. Wright claimed that "the chickens were coming home to roost", i.e. the US finally got what it deserved. To me this is the deal-breaker for Obama becoming the President of the USA. If Barack Obama was in that church on that day when Rev. Wright made that repellent statement and he did not get up and leave, or register a verbal protest like he did in the Don Imus situation, he should not be our Commander in Chief. That person is sworn, in just a few words, with hand on Bible, to preserve, protect and defend the US against all enemies, foreign and domestic. It is appalling to imagine Obama, sitting in the pews, as he has described himself this past week, and not being outraged to hear such claptrap from his spiritual mentor. I wonder if tapes of this exist.

[Foolster41]

Saying "Catholisism is a cult" isn't so shocking to me at all, compared to a blatant rascism, this seems like a bad example for comparison, unless there is some implied aciton that should be taken in that beleif.

A cult is a sect in a religioin split off from the mainstream. Granted Cathlosism was the mainstream (So of course prostistants are considered a cult by catcholics!), but Luther beleived what he beleived was more in tune with the scruptures.

[Jimmy J.]

After all this country has gone through (Civil War, Jim Crow, the Equal Rights struggles, the struggles for INTEGRATION), this Black Liberation Church wants SEGREGATION. They hold themselves apart from the society that believed they wanted to be a part of it. But no, they seem to believe that joining the culture turns them into traitors to their race (or tribe, perhaps?). Thus their disdain for Colin Powell, Condi Rice, Thomas Sowell, Clarence Thomas, and others who have joined. This only widens the chasm, which people of good will on both sides hoped would eventually disappear.

As I see more blacks defend the Reverend Wright's positions, it fills me with sadness. I remember the fires in Baltimore, the riots in Los Angeles, the civil rights marches, the forced desegregation of schools in the South, bussing to integrate the schools, and much more; all in the struggle for integration and equal rights. Apparently it was all for nought if there are so many today who want to go back to segregation and victimization.

I'm glad this has come up. This has apparently been festering under the surface. Better to look it in the face. Try to find out why so many blacks will not listen to Bill Cosby when he tells them how to join this nation's society. Try to find out how we can all deal with our tribal instincts better. If not now, when?

[MaxedOutMama]

SW, this is truly great post. It accurately sums up my distress over Obama's speech. He appeared to be saying he would not reject this type of thinking, whereas from my POV the failure to reject this type of thinking inevitably places one in the position of always reacting and never controlling. It's letting yourself be whipsawed by nuttiness.

I also suspect that Obama's failure to reject this type of thinking is involved in his stated determination to negotiate with leaders like Ahmadinejad. It's not possible to negotiate with insanity. He probably does have a blind spot to craziness produced from ignoring the insane streak in a segment of black US culture.

The reason liberals do not see the problem is that they too are deeply involved in conspiracy theories. There is a large segment of our university culture which is just as bizarre and disconnected from reality as the ravings of Wright. This stuff is shocking, but it is CW among a large proportion of academics in the US.

European culture also has the same problem. Don't forget, a German government minister wrote a book claiming that the US government was behind 9/11, and a very large proportion of the German population found the position credible. It's an unpleasant reality that there are segments of old European culture which are far less sane than US black culture in aggregate.

I have a theory that living in a society or segment of society that is disconnected from economic realities, scientific realities fosters this sort of cultural demise. Over time, it's possible that any group which doesn't experience a real-world penalty for this type of thinking might tend to fall into it. Perhaps, as you note, the human ability to make the world "comfortable" would generate the same pattern in any culture group not consistently forced to deal with exigent outer circumstances.

University professors of non-reality tested disciplines, for example, do not pay a penalty for being wrong. Small businessmen do. Welfare recipients generally can be as dysfunctional as they like without it impairing their income. Climate scientists have been badly hurt because the money flow is dependent upon one set of conclusions.

The highly socialized populations of Europe may be similarly insulated from reality.

I wish there were a word other than "liberal" in common use to describe this type of non reality-tested worldview. I think "liberal" is a misnomer. You can have strongly liberal tendencies and not be subject to this habit of thinking. And people who hold views described as "conservative" can be as illogical and un-tested in their thinking as "liberals".

[Flash Gordon]

Human beings are prone to believe in nonsense.

Some human beings, whose great-great-great grand parents suffered being held as slaves until they were freed 140 years ago, are especially prone to believe in the worst and most harmful nonsense when it is packaged and sold to them by hucksters who know how to set their emotions on fire and give them an exculpating excuse for their own failures.

Some other human beings who might seem susceptible to such hucksters because of the terrible sufferings they themselves endured as recently as 35 years ago, such as escaping their homeland to avoid being thrown into a concentration camp, arriving in a new and foreign land with a foreign language after a death-defying voyage over a vast ocean, and owning little more than their underwear on arrival, nonetheless quickly got a job, saved their money, learned to speak English, got a better job, then bought the business or started their own, had children they raised to value hard work and education, and then sent them to Stanford.

[Flash Gordon]

P.S. Many if not the majority of the children of the "some other" humans did well at Stanford, or at a similar institution, and now have high-paid, high-tech jobs and are living the American dream. If they are mad about anything it is probably the high taxes they have to pay.

[RJ]

Read Epicetus. Winners and losers. The individual and the crowd. Man and God. Me and thee. This is a universal story that keeps repeating with every generation. The primary unit is the family; destroy this and you can expect more trouble down the road. Obama's life is just one more example. The road to wisdom is not supposed to be easy, and for many never attainable. Great teachers are hard to come by. Same with great leaders, or for that matter, great anything. Rev. Wright is just another crippled man who likes being surrounded by others who he thinks are crippled too.

[RJ]

Read Epicetus. Winners and losers. The individual and the crowd. Man and God. Me and thee. This is a universal story that keeps repeating with every generation. The primary unit is the family; destroy this and you can expect more trouble down the road. Obama's life is just one more example. The road to wisdom is not supposed to be easy, and for many never attainable. Great teachers are hard to come by. Same with great leaders, or for that matter, great anything. Rev. Wright is just another crippled man who likes being surrounded by others who he thinks are crippled too.

[Dr. Dre]

Just read an item from the NYTimes Feb 6 1990 "First Black Elected to Head Harvard's Law Review," referring to Barack Obama. He was "elected," according to the article, as a result of a new program beginning in the 1970s which replaced the one where "editors were chosen on the basis of grades and the president of the Law Review was the student with the highest academic rank. The system came under attack in the 1970s and was replaced by a program in which about half the editors are chosen for their grades and the other half are (sic)chosen by fellow students after a special writing competition. The new system, disputed when it began, was meant to help insure that minority students became editors of The Law Review." How pathetic. Truly the "dumbing down" of America started at the top. This fact explains an awful lot about Obama and his entitlement mentality. Editorship of the Law Review became a political event, rather than an objective award of merit; he mastered the technique and is taking it national. He's just a smoother jive-ass Al Sharpton/Jesse Jackson wanna-be race hustler.

[Mel]

21 March - International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination; also the day Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. led 3200 in the march from Selma to Montegomery -- so a good day to think, reflect, learn.

Roland Martin, a commentator for CNN, and contributor to its blog wrote a piece based on facts (and after viewing whole sermon) today.

SEE: "The full story behind Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s 9/11 sermon"
CNN.Com (21 March 2008)
http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2008/03/21/the-full-story-behind-rev-jeremiah-wrights-911-sermon/

Martin writes: "As this whole sordid episode regarding the sermons of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright has played out over the last week, I wanted to understand what he ACTUALLY said in this speech. I’ve been saying all week on CNN that context is important, and I just wanted to know what the heck is going on.

I have now actually listened to the sermon Rev. Wright gave after September 11 titled, “The Day of Jerusalem’s Fall.” It was delivered on Sept. 16, 2001."
----------------------
Has any one else bothered to do their homework or are people so busy getting their jollies from a few sensationalized comments from Rev. Wright that they are prepared to join the mass hysteria? Listen Up, folks (as Bill Cosby might say). Rather than defensiveness and denial try to lead. This fascination with denouncing, renouncing, rejecting and throwing to the wolves is so counter-productive. Why not a redemptive approach (it is also Good Friday) or reconciliation (a la Mandela and Tutu)? Grow up, folks, these are serious issues that require serious responses rather than reactionary ones which proves Barack Obama's point about "racial stalemate".

[George]

The Prof. Lacewell-Harris quoted the the Kristof piece rages like Rev. Wright.

Consider these remarks from one of her recent essays at theroot.com:

"Let's be clear. American democracy has always coexisted with vicious, state-sponsored racism."

And American government is "terrorist rule."

http://www.theroot.com/id/45301

[Ken Spiker]

Mel, these are serious issues that require serious responses...and Obama has failed to give a serious response. He has minimized the extent to which the remarks of his pastor were racist and paranoid and made absurd comparisons with some remarks his grandma made in the privacy of her home . I have no doubt the reverend built up to his racist rants against white people and his country with half and hour of benign homilies and pious boilerplate. So did HItler, he knew how to get the crowd going too. The fact of the matter is that he did say that white people invented the AIDS virus to kill people of color, (my God! how do you get around that?) that 9/11 was payback for Hiroshima and Roosevelt knew beforehand about Pearl Harbor. These statements and all the others are not out of context, they are provably lies, and their motive is destructive and mean spirited. These statements are declarative sentences, they stand alone; in the clips they are quoted in whole paragraphs and there is no way to explain them or excuse them. They are not asides or throwaways, he screams out these baseless accusations and paranoid conspiracy theories at the top of his voice waving his arms while his delirious audience stands up and hoots approval.

Actually seeing this in video has a profound impact on the viewer, much more so than reading a transcript in print. And it's not only Wright's hysterical sermons but the entire tenor of the church with its "black liberation theology," its racist and exclusionary list of "Black Values" having little to do with Christianity, its publication of a hateful anti-Israel declaration from Hamas in the church newsletter. If Barak Obama didn't know what was going on in his own church his is just too clueless to hold any office, let alone President of the United States. I am perfectly willing in the spirit of redemption to forgive Obama the man, if he ever gets around to being honest about his involvement in the church and its loony pastor, but he has yet to do that.

[Teri Pittman]

I've heard that Hagee/McCain comment before and it simply is not valid. We are not discussing some unknown pastor giving Obama his support. We are talking about a man Obama considers to be his mentor, a church he has attended for 20 years. It is a measure of how far some Obama supporters are removed from reality that they don't understand the difference.

To give you some idea of the viewpoint of "Black Liberation Theology," I offer the following two quotes from the writings of the Rev. James Cone, who was largely responsible for the creation of this "theology":

“Black theology refuses to accept a God who is not identified totally with the goals of the black community. If God is not for us and against white people, then he is a murderer, and we had better kill him. The task of black theology is to kill Gods who do not belong to the black community ... Black theology will accept only the love of God which participates in the destruction of the white enemy. What we need is the divine love as expressed in Black Power, which is the power of black people to destroy their oppressors here and now by any means at their disposal. Unless God is participating in this holy activity, we must reject his love.” [1]

“1. See William R Jones, “Divine Racism: The Unacknowledged Threshold Issue for Black Theology”, in African-American Religious Thought: An Anthology, ed Cornel West and Eddie Glaube (Westminster John Knox Press).” (Published in 2004)

And, here:

From James Cone’s "Black Theology and Black Power," 1997, Orbis, p.150:

“For white people, God’s reconciliation in Jesus Christ means that God has made black people a beautiful people; and if they are going to be in relationship with God, they must enter by means of their black brothers, who are a manifestation of God’s presence on earth. The assumption that one can know God without knowing blackness is the basic heresy of the white churches. They want God without blackness, Christ without obedience, love without death. What they fail to realize is that in America, God’s revelation on earth has always been black, red, or some other shocking shade, but never white. Whiteness, as revealed in the history of America, is the expression of what is wrong with man. It is a symbol of man’s depravity. God cannot be white even though white churches have portrayed him as white. When we look at what whiteness has done to the minds of men in this country, we can see clearly what the New Testament meant when it spoke of the principalities and powers. To speak of Satan and his powers becomes not just a way of speaking but a fact of reality. When we can see a people who are controlled by an ideology of whiteness, then we know what reconciliation must mean. The coming of Christ means a denial of what we thought we were. It means destroying the white devil in us. Reconciliation to God means that white people are prepared to deny themselves (whiteness), take up the cross (blackness) and follow Christ (black ghetto).”

The Rev. James H. Cone is today the the Charles A. Briggs Distinguished Professor of Systematic Theology at Union Theological Seminary in New York city

[GaryK]

The writings above at 1:18 are mine. The problem with dropped attributions seems to be that if you write some comment in the box in this comment system and then review and change it more than once, the comment system will drop its attribution of those comments to you.

[Ken Spiker]

Thanx Gary K for that information. I remember seeing Rev. Wright being interviewed by Sean Hannity, he started raving about Black Liberation Theology and kept yelling at Hannity: "Have you read Cone? Have you read Cone?" Wright's demeanor in that interview showed him as a bully and a thug, nothing like the kindly avuncular man of God that Obama portrays. Because of Wright's angry assertion that the words of Cone were the guiding light of Trinity United there can be no doubt that the church and its pastor are racists to the core and if Obama didn't know that he's a fool and an idiot.

[GaryK]

Ken,

Not to put too fine a point on it but, when the Rev.Cone was asked to point to the church that most fully preached his Black Liberation Theology, Cone said it was the Rev. Jeremiah Wright's Trinity United Church of Christ.

[MaxedOutMama]

Thanks GaryK for the info. I have realized that I was way too facile in dismissing the church rumors without even checking them out. Well, that's what blogs are for.

I still can't get over him bringing his children to such a church.