Now that we are enmeshed in a federal government run by so-called evangelicals, it seems appropriate to hear another interpretation of the phrase “What would Jesus do?”
Here it is in the Guardian, by Stephen W. Thrasher. This is not a time to “be nice,” he writes.
He begins like this:
As a social justice minded Christian, my favorite depictions of Jesus are from Matthew 21:12, when he is seen with a whip in his hand, flipping over tables in a rage and driving merchants from the temple. This is the Christ who speaks to me when I look at the mess that is contemporary America and ask myself “What would Jesus Do?”. He was a righteously furious Middle Eastern Jew, who’d been born while his mother was migrating and grew up to put the fear of God into capitalists, putting them on the run with a whip.
This Jesus is angry, and he’s a great role model for the American left, which has been cowed into thinking it must be passive and “nice” in the face of oppression.
Forgoing anger will not save us. Indeed, perhaps the only good thing about Donald Trump is that he’s allowed some wider consideration of what Audre Lorde called the “uses of anger” in mainstream left American discourse….
But for too long, a misinterpretation of Martin Luther King as never angry (when his speeches, marches and actions against poverty, racist labor exploitation and war were full of fury) , and the too-polite Barack Obama, have lulled the left into avoiding anger and its useful productiveness in demanding change.
No more. Trump – an angry, intemperate manchild who bullies whomever he can – has unleashed the left’s anger. And it’s high time we let it out.

Uh, that verse says nothing about a whip.
I also think we need to be really careful about encouraging violence. Righteous anger might seem fine and dandy and all, but an awful lot of death and destruction has been caused in the name of “righteous” anger. It’s very difficult to tell when the righteousness ends and then it’s just anger. Jesus, being the Son of God and all, might have been able to handle that. We ordinary mortals, not so much.
Let’s look to MLK’s interpretation of what Jesus would do. Start with “agape”.
LikeLike
Jesus already said what to do,
“Render to Ceasar the things that are Ceasar’s, and to God the things that are God’s”
Government policy belongs to “Caesar”.
Jesus was also opposed to the zealots, including some apostles who used him,
for their own political ambitions, ultimately to be denied by them.
LikeLike
Joseph,
I interpret that phrase to mean that church and state should be separate, not merged, as Trump and DeVos propose to do.
LikeLike
And AMEN! Dump the DUMP. I am disgusted. We have a PREDATOR in chief.
LikeLike
See this:
As a Christian, I defended Obamacare. But I really support single-payer.
Jesus doesn’t just love the poor. He loves them more.
By Jessi Bohon February 15, 2017
Jessi Bohon is a French teacher who lives in Cookeville, Tennessee.
A video of me questioning Rep. Diane Black (R-Tenn.) about how her party will replace the Affordable Care Act went viral last Friday. I had gone to her town hall meeting on Thursday near my home to ask what the poor and sick would do once they’re left without the law’s protections. The next night, I had the really weird experience of seeing myself on national television, and the even weirder experience of hearing and reading other people’s interpretation of my own words. My town hall question has been described as a “Christian defense of Obamacare” and “an impassioned case for the ACA’s individual mandate.”
But the truth is that I do not actually believe that the ACA is the best way to insure people. In fact, I am ashamed and afraid that this video might have done more harm than good. In my view, Christians shouldn’t be satisfied with health-care policy that leaves anyone out, especially those who need care most but can afford it least. Christians should support a universal, single-payer system.
I know what it’s like to need a hand. I grew up on an Appalachian hillside in a run-down trailer home with my mom and my two siblings. My mom was orphaned at a very young age, and we had no other family to help us, so we relied almost exclusively on government assistance to survive. Our little church had a van that would pick us up on Sunday, but that’s about all the charity that it could afford. We collected aluminum cans to exchange, walked for hours to and from the grocery store and wrapped up household items in old coupon ads to give to each other as Christmas presents. At age 12, I helped my grandfather, who had suffered a stroke, to walk to and from the bathroom because he and my grandmother couldn’t afford home health care. We were industrious and thrifty like the majority of people receiving government assistance who are working to barely get by. Growing up, I was surrounded by Christians whose politics informed their faith, not the other way around — conservatives who expect poor churches and charities to look after their poor congregations while wealthy people live in luxury.
But my mom cared about politics, especially issues affecting the working class: She used to tell us that Jesus didn’t just love the poor — he loved them more. I’ve always carried that message with me, and I’ve paid attention to politics on and off over the years. I was unhappy with the Bush administration, but when Barack Obama won the election in 2008, I assumed things would look up, and I stopped paying attention. I worked hard, went to school and did my best to give back to my community as a high school teacher — something I felt I had to do as a Christian. But this election startled me out of my complacency. I followed the Democratic primary closely and cast my vote for Hillary Clinton in the general, but I was horrified by the outcome. I realized that if people of faith want a moral government, we can’t rely on people who call themselves Christians to build one for us. We’ll have to do it ourselves.
That’s why I went to speak to my representative directly. When I got up to speak to Black, I was nervous. My question came out a little jumbled, and I did end up making a faith-based argument for the individual mandate portion of the ACA. I was simply trying to point out the hypocrisy of Republican politicians who claim to be Christians and yet, time and time again, advocate for policies that hurt people.
This wouldn’t be the first time Republicans, who so often campaign under the banner of Christianity, have hurt needy people. Republicans’ refusal to expand the Medicaid component of the ACA in various states solely in the name of politics punished some of our nation’s poorest and likely led to thousands of untimely deaths. This indefensible decision to withhold insurance to millions of people also likely led to an increase in premiums for many people who were insured not only through the public exchanges but also privately.
These were grave injustices, and rolling back the ACA will be another. But refusing to expand Medicaid and threatening to place vulnerable people into high-risk insurance pools are wrong in my view because Christianity calls on us to look after the weakest and neediest people, including the poor and sick. If I had a chance to address our leaders directly again, I would say this: Christianity demands that we make sure all people have health coverage. In other words, I would have focused instead on the Christian case for universal, single-payer health insurance, which would protect all Americans. And if Republicans want to campaign as Christians, they should lead the way.
In my view, it is immoral for health care to be a for-profit enterprise. Insurance companies are making enormous sums of money off the sick while people are struggling to pay their medical bills. Patients even die sooner when nonprofit hospitals switch to making money.
Switching to single-payer wouldn’t necessarily be easy: Perhaps the hardest part of the reorganization of our health-care system to single-payer would be asking physicians to make much less money than they do now. But the directive in Luke 12:48 states that “everyone to whom much was given, of him much will be required, and from him to whom they entrusted much, they will demand the more.” America is one of the richest countries in the world. We have been given more than enough, and we need to share it with our most vulnerable. With what is left of the minute of fame that I have been given, I feel compelled to ask for forgiveness for not using my belief system to advocate more clearly for what I think is the best thing to do.
LikeLike
Thank you for posting this.
😎
LikeLike
Moses was pretty sure that he couldn’t speak to pharoah being a simple man not given to speeches. You did just fine.
LikeLike
To your point
http://inthesetimes.com/working/entry/19634/stop_blaming_immigrants_and_start_punishing_the_employers_who_exploit_them
LikeLike
That was an earlier link this is the proper post sorry
http://www.truthdig.com/avbooth/item/chris_hedges_and_dr_margaret_flowers_discuss_fix_health_care_20170221
LikeLike
Joel, you want to listen to this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V-9DdzBwo_w
LikeLike
What an imagination the author has! Comparing a purely religious situation with politics. Being somewhat familiar with the story, allow me to point to the times that Jesus actually DOES speak to politics:
1. Should we pay taxes? Yep
2. Should we rebel against the Romans? Nope. When one of the soldiers forces you to carry his pack for a mile, make it 2 miles, instead, He submitted to the rulers of the day (Be they Romans, Jews or Idumean). He helped a commander when the man’s slave died – did not rage against slavery, or occupation.
3. “My Father’s house is not a money making business. Money changers and sellers of animals to be sacrificed (Those who profiteer from the fact that too many folks came from longs distances away, and did not have the right currency to pay the temple tax; too many city dwellers who did not raise the animals required for the sacrifices) had no place in the temple.
So to use the story to support the very unchristian way in which people talk about each other – not quite the intent of the story.
Jesus’ issues were NOT with the political leaders, but with the spiritual leaders of the nation.
LikeLike
First off the Political leaders were the Religious leaders or as Jefferson put it
in every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. he is always in alliance with the Despot abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own. it is easier to acquire wealth and power by this combination than by deserving them: and to effect this they have perverted the purest religion ever preached to man, into mystery & jargon unintelligible to all mankind & therefore the safer engine for their purposes.
This till now we have been able to avoid. The Republicans will take care of this matter ,I am sure.
But as of right now I am free of your religion what ever that is and perhaps that is why I think the author is spot on
TIME TO GET ANGRY
I wasn’t this angry when Nixon colluded with the South Vietnamese
which eventfully cost the lives of additional thousands of American soldiers and 100s of thousands of Vietnamese.
I wasn’t this angry when Nixon attempted a break at his opponents head quarters. Using former black ops operatives. A move reminiscent of a banana Republic.
No I wasn’t this angry when Ronald Reagan conspired with the Iranians to hold the hostages till after the election in exchange for weapons .
I wasn’t this angry when W made up his story about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq sending another 5 thousand boys to their early death. A number that would be far,far higher if not for the wonders of modern medicine instead we have tens of thousands crippled for life.
All the while they pursued policy that devastated the American worker and crushed the poor while transferring wealth to the oligarchy.
Well guess what I am angry now and it is not going to go away until this illegitimate traitor F—facevonclownstick and all that surround him are sitting in jail cells.
I will remain angry until this illegitimate party built on 45 years of hate and bigotry right back to Nixon, is relegated to the dust bin of history. By Guillotine if necessary,that angry enough.
I haven’t begun to vent about the other party yet, many of whom also belong in the garbage dump.
.
LikeLike
Nope, they were not… Pharisees stayed as far away from politics as they could – after all, it does not look good to be seen with the heathens… Sadducees, different story. But then, they were not accepted as religious – unless, they, too, were needed by the Pharisees.
“I will remain angry until this illegitimate party built on 45 years of hate and bigotry right back to Nixon, is relegated to the dust bin of history. By Guillotine if necessary,that angry enough”
As an immigrant, I guess I know a bot more about the history of politics in this country. Like the fact that a number of anti-discrimination laws through the decades were introduced by the Republican party, but stopped by the Democrats.
So if you want to be angry, be angry at ALL politicians. Democrats did not do a lot for the poor when they were in charge, either. As a matter of fact, Representative Bustos from Illinois (Yep, a Democrat) decided not to run for state Governor in 2018, because she feels she is of more value now – speaking for those who “were ignored and unheard…” Unheard by whom? Wait, it was a Democrat who was president over the last 8 years, and a Democrat who wanted to follow him… Could it be that these people were the ones not listening?
So if you want to “hate and be angry” spread it to where it belongs – which ever party is in power, and leaves people unheard, be they Democrat OR Republican.
LikeLike
Rudy Schellekens
As an immigrant you did not study the history well or you do not understand the intricacies of the the argument you are making.
The traditional democratic party was an uneasy marriage between Northern big city democrats representing immigrant communities and
organized labor since the thirties and Southern Dixiecrats representing the anti Lincoln party a Republican could not get elected in the South since reconstruction.
Lyndon Johnson freed the slaves in 1965 with the voting rights act ,which followed the civil rights act . He signed that law and turned to an aide and said “we have lost the South for a generation “.
Richard Nixon had a particular nefarious role with the assistance of his political aide Keven Philips who has since apologized for his role in designing the Southern Strategy to capitalize on the racism that turned Dixiecrats into the REPUBLICANS of today. Ronald Reagan invented the welfare Queen playing on white racism
As for the hate . I hate Treason and that is what these Republicans are guilty of . Numerous times from Nixon on up.
Further you can not lecture me about neo liberal Democrats who are what we used to call Republicans before the Republican party went completely off the rails as Mike Lofgren would say.
But I will take a bad Democrat over a Republican wingnut traitor any day. The difference is night and day.whether we are talking about schools or the social safety net, voting and civil rights , Worker safety and unions,or even trade and jobs.
Bernie Sanders summed that up pretty ,pretty well whe he compared his differences with Clinton to his differences with any Republican.
As for your New Testament assessment of power dynamics in ancient Israel Jefferson’s dynamic still holds
” During the time of Christ and the New Testament era, the Sadducees were aristocrats. They tended to be wealthy and held powerful positions, including that of chief priests and high priest, and they held the majority of the 70 seats of the ruling council called the Sanhedrin. They worked hard to keep the peace by agreeing with the decisions of Rome”
Another historical political intricacy you seem to misinterpret.
LikeLike
Jesus would have had much more in common with the left than the right. He would have been an extreme democratic socialist. Jesus always championed the weak, poor, children and sinners. He believed in kindness, acceptance and love for all human beings and with sharing one’s good fortune with the less fortunate.
In Matthew 19:24 Jesus understood that wealth corrupts when he said, “Again I say to you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.”
I wonder what Trump and DeVos would think of this?
LikeLike
What should WE do?
We should not intellectually dilute or narrow the institutions that grow our future intellects.
DUH!
LikeLike
Anger, frustration and ire at what is probably the worst administration in US history is certainly justified. M L King may have exhibited anger and fury but he was opposed to violence. I am also opposed to violence though I am not a pacifist; if someone is trying to beat you to a pulp, you do have a right to defend yourself. The GOP’s use of Christianity as a ploy and talking point is vile and hypocritical. One of the most odious phony baloney faux Christians was Tom Delay. His fake Christianity was used to get reelected as he championed the most unChristian programs and policies. Delay said that the most important thing during a time of war (Iraq war) was to lower taxes (on the rich and corporations). I thought the most important thing was to not wage unnecessary wars in the first place and to value the lives of the Americans who fight these wars of choice .
LikeLike
Delay is still alive but Jesus should cast him into an eternity of working in a non-union sweat shop for poverty wages and with no bathroom breaks.
LikeLike
Some of the pro-life Christians are fakes as well. Many of these good Christians are really pro-birth as they want to do nothing to help the children of the poor once they are born. Some want to force women to bear children against their will or support the death penalty, even though they are “pro-life.” Some years ago a doctor in a Pensacola clinic was murdered by a “pro-life” zealot. This is hypocritical pro-life.
LikeLike
Some commentary on people you do not know. There are millions of pro-life supporters. You know how many of those that match the description you gave?
It’s like someone saying that all Democrats are pro-abortion. Is that really the case?
I happen to know that millions of democrats are NOT pro abortion. So for me to make such a general statement is ignorant and judgmental. I guess I have just described what I think of your statement… Ignorant and judgmental
LikeLike
Rudy, don’t be obsessed with controlling women’s bodies. Should a woman bear the child of her rapist? What if the rapist is her father?
LikeLike
You really don’t read everything. How many more should I emphasize that I exclude rape, health of the mother or incest?
And again the context escapes you. A judgment was made about an entire group of people – “…are all hypocrites…”
I find that ignorance has taken over. Your list hates republicans with a passion. Your list does not seem to be able to comprehend that not all republicans, like not all democrats are the same.
You keep talking about critical thinking skills. But many if your contributors show a total lack in that particular skill
LikeLike
Darn, Rudy, you are so much smarter than I am! You know more about everything than I do. You know more about U.S. history, more about education, even though I have a Ph.D. from Columbia. You know what I should be allowed by law to do with my body. You can read, and you say I can’t. I am humbled to learn from you, 20 times a day. You should start your own blog, where you can educate the world.
LikeLike
Rudy J Schellekens
So Rudy who are they voting for. If they vote for people who would destroy the social safety net. Medicaid, SNAP, Housing assistance for the poor. I would say Joe and retired teacher have a good point.
Don’t tell me what the put in the collection plate or the clothing recycling bin. I am sure it is quite a bit less than they claim in taxes
deductions.
As I discussed with a very religious couple I know ,very active in their protestant denomination. Abortion was not on the Christian rights hit list. till after the desegregation wars down South. But then again these are true Christians right down to their college age daughter spending school breaks down in Honduras with her church group to assist the poor. They would not dream of telling another women what to do with her body. For very personal reasons as Diane mentioned .
LikeLike
Rudy: Take note of the word, some. I also believe that many religious groups do a great deal of good work for vulnerable people. I belonged to a church that provided an amazing amount of support for people in Paterson, NJ, including running a holiday toy sale, food pantry and a summer day camp at our church. I also believe that some people twist their idea of religion around to suit them so they can justify their behavior. I believe in the freedom of religion and the separation of church and state. Without it we wind up with someone like DeVos who wants to create policy from a religious perspective and impose it on others.
LikeLike
I KNOW a lot of good is done by people because of their faith. I have seen a lot of good done by people, in Romanian orphanages – still the stuff nightmares are mad from.
In Yugoslavia after all the wars. I know a lot of good was done by religious people both during and after wars.
Which is why I took exception to the condemnation of Christians as “Hypocrites etc.”
LikeLike
I respect people of faith. I do not respect people who try to shove their faith on me or tell me that their faith is superior to mine.
LikeLike
“I respect people of faith. I do not respect people who try to shove their faith on me or tell me that their faith is superior to mine.”
Interesting that you do not feel that way about your politics… You make everybody aware that your political views are superior than those who disagree with you. By referring to them as stupid. Dumb. Deplorable. Ignorant.
Rather than trying to understand WHY people make the political decisions they make, you color all those who disagree with you with the same brush.
interesting, indeed…
LikeLike
Rudy,
Start your own blog. This is mine. It is not a newspaper. It is a space where I express my views. I don’t express your views. I don’t impose my views on you. You are free not to read the blog.
LikeLike
If only that were true… By using the terms you do, you impose… I think that was one of the first definitions of bullying …
LikeLike
Rudy, if you feel I am imposing my views on you, please stop reading the blog.
Let me say this again: The name of the blog is “Diane Ravitch’s Blog.” I am not CNN, FOX, The New York Times, or anything else. What I write represents my views. What I choose to post or repost is my choice. If you don’t like it, no one has a gun to your head. You are free to stop reading.
LikeLike
Rudy: My comments were aimed at GOP politicians, not ordinary citizens. Again, there is no equivalency between the Democrats and the Republicans. The GOP is off the rails, radicalized and rabidly far right/libertarian. The Democrats are very disappointing, there are too many DINOs and not enough true progressive Democrats.
LikeLike
Fascinating line of thinking… that someone feels that the mere existence of a blog with expressed opinions, combined with the reading of said blog by said person, adds up to a forced imposition of views on the person in question.
As the Maximum Leader would say in support of this line of (moment of truth in labeling coming up) “thinking”: Sad. Very Sad. BIGLY SAD.
🙄
Solutions to this dire situation have already been mentioned, including starting one’s own blog or not visiting this one. I include something I learned very young: if you seek out opinions very different from your own, grow a backbone and learn to listen. Of course, if you go another route by Poking and Prodding and Provoking (e.g., by asserting certain words and tones that are manufactured out of whole cloth) in order to get a reaction then perhaps the PPPer’s tender sensibilities will be offended.
On the other hand, there’s the old “give respect to get respect.”
But then, what do I know? As one dissatisfied visitor to this blog wrote in evident exasperation, my moniker is quite appropriate.
KrazyTA. I plead guilty.
😎
LikeLike
It’s not the difference of opinions that bother me it is the way those with a different opinion are denegraded and are described.
I make my living with dealing with different opinions. But never have I seen such total lack of respect for EVERYBODY who does not toe the party line.
It seems that the acts of ONE republican is used to condemn ALL republicans. That does not foster respect for those who write.
I am an ashamed republican. But I’m still a republican. I did not vote for trump. I have actively written against him in public places. Then to be put into the same mold is insulting.
I don’t treat all democrats the same. They are not all cheaters like Kennedy, or thieves like Jefferson.
I have good friends who are democrats. We have our disagreement on some things. But NEVER will I use the kind of language I see used here for republicans. Not SOME. Republicans. Not A LOT of republicans. Just Republicans.
“How to win friends and influence people…” would be a good book for some.
I am arguing against school choice in my state. Loudly. Obviously. I use some of the things learned in this list. But I will not insult those who disagree with me.
LikeLike
Rudy,
You are akin to a Democrat who insists on attending a Republican Party meeting. You can’t understand why people don’t agree with you. You make cogent arguments and no one agrees. Why? Figure it out, Rudy.
LikeLike
Obviously you missed the point again. I am not in the least worried or upset when someone disagrees with me.
I appreciate it when some has good arguments to support their case rather than make belief stuff.
Let me restate: my problem is the fact that those who disagree are denegrated to no end.
Make your argument for once without using derogatory references. Deal with the facts and leave the personalities out of it.
Now did it come across? Make the argument. Leave out the insults. Simpler I cannot make it.
LikeLike
Rudy,
Did it ever occur to you that most people on this blog don’t agree with your views about teachers, unions, education, schools, abortion rights, and gays?
LikeLike
Rudy’s arguments are not cogent.
LikeLike
Threatened Out West: you wrote—
“Rudy’s arguments are not cogent.”
Cogent: “(of an argument or case) clear, logical, and convincing.”
I agree. IMHO, and I am not being sarcastic or poking fun, they only make sense if you assume that he is having an argument with people other than those he has encountered on this website.
Let me, if I may, remind longtime readers of this blog of a commentator on its threads that has not made an appearance for a while, Mr. Harlan Underhill. While I, more often than not, disagreed with his statements he was—following his own lights, as we all must—“clear, logical, and convincing” given his life experience, philosophical stance, and values.
I simply think that he often missed the mark. But overall he actually engaged in discussion and back-and-forth (vigorously but without recourse to the sneer, jeer and smear) with those with whom he disagreed. More importantly, he was not adverse to reframing his arguments because he had not stated them in quite the best fashion. So while I cannot in all honesty state that he convinced me too many times, I will say that over time I came to respect him for making a genuine effort to put forward a POV at odds with many of those that frequent this blog.
I don’t have to agree with someone to respect her/him, and whatever else happens I wish him and those close to him good health and happiness.
I repeat: give respect to get respect.
That’s the way I see it…
😎
LikeLike
Here is what I think Jesus would say:
We need to think about the poor, not just the wealthy. It is the poor who are hungry and starving, who do not have a decent place to live. Their water supplies are tainted and it could be fixed. Who in the Trump administration cares? I see wealthy people falling all over each other to get more. it is a shame. They have lost their Christian beliefs. They will never make it through the eye of a needle.
My heart is hurting for the poor. They shall inherit the earth but they need help now.
LikeLike
“What would we do to Jesus?”
If Jesus came today
Whoever held the sway
Would find a reason
To charge with treason
And lock him right away
Maybe this has already happened. How would we know?
LikeLike
If you know the rest of the story, you will know… 😉
LikeLike
Something I wrote for our local newspaper which I seriously doubt will NEVER see the light of day there.
George Washington: “Observe good faith and justice towards all nations; cultivate peace and harmony with all. Religion and morality enjoin this conduct.” Is Washington’s advice pertinent today?
Who are we as a nation? What do we really stand for and believe? Are all men really created equal? Are there in all ethnic and religious groups both saints and scoundrels or does any one group have a monopoly on truth, goodness and beauty? Should we treat others as we wish to be treated? Is love stronger than hate? Should we return good for evil? Is the despised “Samaritan” [Muslim] our neighbor? Are we our brother’s keeper? What do we really worship: good, beauty, humanitarian qualities or monetary accumulation? Depending upon how these questions are answered depends our nation’s, our children’s future.
Should we live in fear or in love? When you radiate out either what is USUALLY returned? Are we made safer by waging war or by waging peace; utilizing diplomacy or promoting fear; by winning hearts and minds or by bullying?
How best to feed the hungry, clothe the naked, provide for the homeless? Should government provide for the common good or is it only capitalistic entities which should provide these?
On what or whom do we put our trust? What qualities of character should our governing leaders possess? In the age of alternative, post-truth where is “truth” to be found; in a single person or in in depth, critical, unbiased scholarly research?
Anti-Muslim hate groups tripled from 34 in 2015 to 101 in 2016. so at least a partial answer has been given.
Below is a sign posted in the U. S. Holocaust Museum obviously compiled by Jews who experienced life under totalitarianism.
It has been shared more than 145,000 times less than one day after posting. Are these symptoms of something about which we must be cognizant, concerned?
Early Warning signs of Fascism
Powerful and continuing nationalism
Disdain for human rights
Identification of enemies as a unifying cause
Supremacy of the military
Rampant sexism
Controlled mass media
Obsession with national security
Religion and government intertwined
Corporate power protected
Labor power suppressed
Disdain for intellectuals and the arts
Obsession with crime and punishment
Rampant cronyism and corruption
Fraudulent elections.
Where do we go from here? Not to decide is to have decided. I cannot tell you what to believe but the above questions will be answered one way or the other. A nation divided against itself cannot stand.
LikeLike
“Uses of anger”
Lorde’s speech hasn’t lost its relevance in 35 years (not down here in the South), especially her examples on her interactions with pale women
• A white academic welcomes the appearance of a collection by non-Black women of Color. “It allows me to deal with racism without dealing with the harshness of Black women,” she says to me.
• I speak out of direct and particular anger at an academic conference, and a white woman says, “Tell me how you feel but don’t say it too harshly or I cannot hear you.” But is it my manner that keeps her from hearing, or the threat of a message that her life may change?
LikeLike
And, by the way, this why the time for harsher words like “bullshit” has come.
LikeLike
WWJD?
To put it mildly. . . I don’t give a damn!
LikeLike