Quote:

Quote:

William Hyde adds his two cents. Heidi e-mails Luke:

Quote:

...the solution to that problem is not to try to censor any expression of racism, but rather to more vigorously uphold the rights ordained in our constitution… by combating real instances of discrimination -in employment, wages, housing, education, etc- and ensuring an equal opportunity for each to rise according to their own merits and the strength of their character.






Sorry Heidi, I ain't buying what you're selling. iMus made his career on racist jokes and was a national public figure that revelled in his ability to mock minorities. His status 'normalizes' racism as a 'vaild philosophy' (it's not a philosophy, just narcissism) and makes it easier for 'normal' people to refuse to hire blacks or rent apartments to East Indians.

Secondly, there are laws on the books in most western countries that protect people from discrimination in cases of "employment, wages, housing, education, etc" (although they are selectively enforced). As we discussed elsewhere, the iMus situation is not criminal, it is not constitutional it is the marketplace at work. The networks hired iMus (ostensibly) because his outrageous behaviour draws a crowd, which drives ratings which attracts sponsors. Individuals can't do much about it, but by pooling resources, the marketplace can create a liability for the sponsors/networks (bad PR, boycotts, shame) that levels the playing field. Ultimately the networks (and their sponsors that pay them) get to make a judgment call based on their own criteria balancing whether the profits the man generates outweigh the headaches.

Finally, The so-called scourge of political correctness is just a bogeyman to allow people who know they're wrong misdirect attention from the fact that they've said something indefensible. Rush Limbaugh can whine about "PC" because it gives him cover, as well as an opening to make further racist comments.



I'm not trying to "sell" anything. I just don't think that any of the fallout from Imus' remarks, or the subsequent debate over rap lyrics, amounts to anything substantial. Yes, Imus' dismissal was
justified, and the smart thing for the network to do from a PR standpoint. And perhaps his status "normalizes" racism ( although I'd argue that Imus' views are more of a reflection of existing attitudes than the inspiration for them ). But as far as his remarks being "indefensible" goes: they're completely defensible. The 1st amendment defends them. So unless you're proposing some form of censorship... I fail to see the point of even debating this?? He's a racist... so what? The KKK can march in Skokie, Illinoise and publish their ideas in a newsleter. Rap lyrics demean women... so what? So does most pornography. That's just one of the many things I love about it.
And political correctness IS a scourge. It tethers free thought and open debate by outlawing ideas as "inappropriate" or "insensitive". It's the worst kind of covert thought-policing. You don't like what the guy on the radio is saying? Turn the fucking thing off, and go stick your head in the sand for all I care. I'm sick of listening to hothouse flowers piss and moan about the ideas that "offend" them. You live in the United States of America. You have the right to cover your ears. You have a right to express your own ideas. But you don't have a right to not be "offended". Hearing ideas you don't agree with is just the price you pay for living in a free country. Too goddamn fucking bad.
_________________________
"We had part of a Slinky - but I straightened it."