Mike S. Adams: If liberals believe in a theory that labeled me a mentally deficient social reprobate, then fuck them and fuck them calling people racists to keep their stupid fuck cock shit balls ass fuck bitch damn!!!
Frank Tannenbaum had a number of valid points when, in the 1930s, he established some basic premises of labeling theory. He argued that, as a juvenile, everyone engages in some form of delinquent behavior. And he correctly pointed out that not everyone who engages in delinquency is caught and, therefore, labeled “delinquent.”
Tannenbaum was also correct in saying that parents, teachers, and peers sometimes over-react to juveniles caught in an act of delinquency. He was again on firm ground in asserting that these occasional over-reactions could actually produce more delinquency.
After a stream of Wikipedia’d facts details Adams’s deep familiarity with all of liberalism that ever existed, he then tells us the sordid secret that makes his hating liberals totally cool. He, combined readers of Pandagon, was a yellowbird.
Notions such as “secondary deviance” and “self-fulfilling prophecy” have done much to undermine the integrity of public education in this country. If you learned to read in first grade in the 1970s, you remember the “yellowbirds,” “redbirds,” and “bluebirds” reading groups. Labeling theorists thought it would be better to call a child a “yellowbird” than to call him “slow.”
(Author’s Note: I was a “yellowbird” in first grade and we all knew we were slow. We just contented ourselves with beating up the “bluebirds” during recess. Fortunately, due to the kindness of my favorite teacher Elsie Stephenson, I eventually became a “redbird.”).
So, what’s Goldfinch’s real game? Nothing less than the total salvation of the white race from the slings and arrows of liberalism, people. Nothing less.
Liberal progressives have spent years taking a theory from sociology and applying it increasingly to the field of education. These progressives have shown a clear interest in the question of whether negative labels (e.g., “criminal,” “dumb”) are more frequently applied to blacks and other historically victimized groups.
I think it’s less about whether the label is applied than it is about the social structures that…
…Who am I kidding? Even if I lay out the exact rationale behind the thing he’s describing, all he’s going to hear is a club beat in his head as a half-naked Sarah Palin serenades him with a musical explanation of how his intellect and looks intimidate otherwise interested black women. Oh, Goldie.
But, curiously, one area of research remains unexplored: What impact does labeling someone a “racist” have on his self-image – and his propensity for future acts of racism?
Oh, yes, the real victims in society – the people who constantly complain of smelling Taco Bell when their Latino neighbors walk by. If only there were some organization set up to protect and shelter people who’d been accused of racism and had that terrible stigma trailing their Confederate-flagged souls. Alas, they are instead the lost generations of Americans.
Frank Tannenbaum, if he were alive today, might argue that everyone engages in some form of racist behavior. And he might point out that not everyone who engages in racism is caught and labeled “racist.”
Tannenbaum might also say that parents, teachers, and peers sometimes over-react to juveniles caught in an act of racial insensitivity. He would be on firm ground in asserting that these occasional over-reactions could actually produce more racial insensitivity.
See, here’s the funny thing – Adams only argued that Tannenbaum was valid because he needed to set up both his personal anecdote of the terrible things that liberals have done to him and the terrible things they have done to others. There’s no credible belief that Tannenbaum is saying anything true unless he’s just doing it to charge liberals with hypocrisy and shut them up.
Surely, those who are labeled “racist” are less likely to be invited to associate with those who haven’t. And ostracism from non-racists can lead to racist associations where the strengthening of racist tendencies can occur.
Lemert might agree that people can engage in racism for any number of biological, sociological, or psychological reasons. Racism produced by any of these broad (categories of) factors could be called “primary racism.”
I can’t argue with this ironclad logic. I mean, yes, you could theoretically argue that the broad categorization of “delinquency” is a different phenomenon altogether than a discrete act of racism, and that the social stigma of branding someone universally inferior by calling them a delinquent is different from telling someone that they can’t brand someone else universally inferior by calling them a racist name. You could. But it would be like arguing against the theory of relativity because Einstein had food in his teeth.
At some point, of course, the child might internalize the notion that he is a “racist” or just generally “bigoted.” This could lead to higher rates of bigotry. When it does, one might say that “secondary racism” has occurred. Many of us might call this a “self-fulfilling prophecy.”
See, at this point, we might as well argue that the child might grow a shitty mustache and lead a cafeteria putsch against the inferior races unless we let him paint big white clown lips on his sleeping dark-skinned classmates.
We all know that liberals often manufacture cases of racism in order to keep liberalism alive.
For instance, the great Liberalism Needs A Cracker rallies of 1987. Those were legendary. And thanks, Oscar Humphries of Portland, Maine, for letting us call you “the biggest advocate of discrimination since Bull Connor sent out the hoses” because you said Storm of the X-Men, and I quote, “sucked donkey dong”. Little did you know that your 12-year-old rantings would save the political ideology that would elect our first black president.
But we need more research in the pseudo-science of sociology in order to determine how reckless accusations of racism are actually creating more real racism in America. The research can be used to test whether liberals really believe in labeling theory and whether they are willing to apply it to their own conduct.
If liberals really do believe in labeling theory, they should reconsider their own careless accusations of racism. If not, they should fess up, assign grades, and let children keep score during recess.
That’s it. Liberalism is over. As for Aryans! Points for the Posse Comitatus! We cannot have fairness unless the racists win…at kickball.