4 ms·

The phrase has been co-opted; its meaning has changed. As happens with all languages, a phrase is not defined once and never changes, much to my chagrin.

anonymousiam 3y ago
Citations please? I was not aware of this. Who or which group has co-opted it, and for what purpose?
- krapp 3y ago
  Here are several articles explaining[0,2] how that one phrase has been co-opted and misinterpreted to mean exactly the opposite of what MLK intended. If you're curious, Google can reveal many other discussions on this topic. [0]https://policyoptions.irpp.org/magazines/march-2018/martin-luther-king-jr-didnt-push-colour-blind-politics/ https://policyoptions.irpp.org/magazines/march-2018/martin-l... [1]https://web.archive.org/web/20230410193113/https://academic.udayton.edu/race/03justice/justice06.htm https://web.archive.org/web/20230410193113/https://academic.... [2]https://theconversation.com/ketanji-brown-jackson-and-the-color-blind-society-of-martin-luther-king-jr-180490 https://theconversation.com/ketanji-brown-jackson-and-the-co...
  - anonymousiam 3y ago
    Okay, first citation [0] Joanne St. Lewis is a law professor at the University of Ottawa. Her teaching, research and legal work focus on social justice issues. She cites no references to support her opinions. Second citation [1] Assistant Professor of Law, University of Alabama School of Law. B.A. 1980, Wilberforce University; J.D. 1984, University of Pennsylvania Law School. Again, it's all his opinion with some supporting examples, but no citations. Third citation [2] Bev-Freda Jackson Adjunct Professorial Lecturer, American University School of Public Affairs Jackson's article is better, but still includes logical fallacies. "By recasting anti-racism as the new racism, conservative GOP leaders such as Grassley and U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz, a Republican from Texas, use King’s words that advocated for a colorblind society as a critical part of their national messaging to advance legislation that bans the teachings of so-called divisive concepts." She doesn't explain what the problem is here, why what they're doing is wrong, or how and why anti-racism is not actually racism. Citing Dr. King's children opens the door to analysis of their character, and their politics. Thank you though, I now understand that recent academic activists have attempted to diminish Dr. King's message using double-speak to push their racist agenda. They should be ashamed of themselves. None of the above applies in any way to the TED video (which I watched and enjoyed). Coleman Hughes does not disparage Dr. King or his message, and probably doesn't care much for anti-racist rhetoric.
friend_and_foe 3y ago
The phrase as used then, and still used now, very much means "not giving a shit one way or another what race someone is". It has not been co-opted or changed.

anonymousiam 3y ago

Citations please? I was not aware of this. Who or which group has co-opted it, and for what purpose?

krapp 3y ago
Here are several articles explaining[0,2] how that one phrase has been co-opted and misinterpreted to mean exactly the opposite of what MLK intended. If you're curious, Google can reveal many other discussions on this topic. [0]https://policyoptions.irpp.org/magazines/march-2018/martin-luther-king-jr-didnt-push-colour-blind-politics/ https://policyoptions.irpp.org/magazines/march-2018/martin-l... [1]https://web.archive.org/web/20230410193113/https://academic.udayton.edu/race/03justice/justice06.htm https://web.archive.org/web/20230410193113/https://academic.... [2]https://theconversation.com/ketanji-brown-jackson-and-the-color-blind-society-of-martin-luther-king-jr-180490 https://theconversation.com/ketanji-brown-jackson-and-the-co...
- anonymousiam 3y ago
  Okay, first citation [0] Joanne St. Lewis is a law professor at the University of Ottawa. Her teaching, research and legal work focus on social justice issues. She cites no references to support her opinions. Second citation [1] Assistant Professor of Law, University of Alabama School of Law. B.A. 1980, Wilberforce University; J.D. 1984, University of Pennsylvania Law School. Again, it's all his opinion with some supporting examples, but no citations. Third citation [2] Bev-Freda Jackson Adjunct Professorial Lecturer, American University School of Public Affairs Jackson's article is better, but still includes logical fallacies. "By recasting anti-racism as the new racism, conservative GOP leaders such as Grassley and U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz, a Republican from Texas, use King’s words that advocated for a colorblind society as a critical part of their national messaging to advance legislation that bans the teachings of so-called divisive concepts." She doesn't explain what the problem is here, why what they're doing is wrong, or how and why anti-racism is not actually racism. Citing Dr. King's children opens the door to analysis of their character, and their politics. Thank you though, I now understand that recent academic activists have attempted to diminish Dr. King's message using double-speak to push their racist agenda. They should be ashamed of themselves. None of the above applies in any way to the TED video (which I watched and enjoyed). Coleman Hughes does not disparage Dr. King or his message, and probably doesn't care much for anti-racist rhetoric.

friend_and_foe 3y ago

The phrase as used then, and still used now, very much means "not giving a shit one way or another what race someone is". It has not been co-opted or changed.