The tale of the racist string, and the college administrators who responded
Somehow I’d missed this story when it first came out in September. But it certainly fits in quite nicely with recent events. It involves an incident that occurred at the University of Delaware:
When the black studies student saw a piece of string in a tree, she did what any self-respecting black studies student would do: shriek racism.
The string looked like rope. And rope means lynching. And that meant within a few minutes of this Tuesday night discovery on the campus of the University of Delaware, the entire university community from the acting president on down was in a full hate-crime panic.
The campus cops started posting on Facebook and Twitter about “racist displays.”
Ditto the acting president, who condemned the “despicable” act.
Ditto the black students and their campus allies…
The acting president called for a rally to condemn the atrocity.
Then students started to wake up. And many knew the rope was not a rope, but a string. And the noose was not a noose.
And the act was not a hate crime. Or even a fake hate crime.
It was just string that held up a paper lantern — left over from an alumni party in June.
But none of that mattered. The anti-string, anti-hate crime rally went on, as scheduled.
Now let’s step back for a moment. I did a little more research, and found a photo of the string in question, and it’s actually a bit easier to understand the furor. It did look like it might have been a noose reference:
What’s more, there had been a previous noose incident at Duke, in which a student later confessed, was no longer at the school, and was facing disciplinary action. That seems to be the proper course of events. Later, the news came out that there was no racist motive—at the link, you can read the Duke student’s letter of abject apology explaining what actually had happened, which appears to have been a rather elaborate but innocent pun—and the still-unnamed student was allowed to return to school.
At the U. of Delaware, once the paper lantern origin of the “noose” was revealed, some students still doubted it and were convinced it had been a hate crime; it was hard to let go. The administration decided to go ahead with plans for the rally and discussion:
In a statement after the discovery but before the police investigation’s conclusion, university acting President Nancy M. Targett called the ropes “hateful acts.”
“Such cowardly and reprehensible acts are clearly designed to intimidate and frighten, and they are unacceptable on our campus,” Targett wrote.
The university president followed up hours later with a second statement, sharing the police findings.
“At the same time, the sensitivity of our campus to this potential issue clearly indicates a need for continuing dialog within our community,” Targett said.
One can almost sympathize with administrators. Almost. Faced with angry and near-hysterical mobs whipped up by activists and reacting to everything they see with the eye of the racially hyper-sensitive who cannot tolerate a single act that’s even potentially or possibly racist in origin, even if that act is only symbolic and the act of a single individual, administrators fall back on meetings and dialogue to address the issue and soothe the mobs. Who knows, you may end up having to resign, if you don’t do the same.
Here’s a video that describes some of this, with visuals:
What if the administrators had initially issued a statement saying they were investigating the incident and were trying ascertain its origins and the intent behind it? That there may or may not have been a racist motive, and it had to be determined first? They could still have some sort of dialogue and discussion—but some of that discussion could actually be about how to determine the facts when you see something, and what happens when you react without knowing those facts. One would have thought this was part of the function of a college.
No more. And does anyone doubt that, in the current climate, such administrators would ultimately be forced to resign, even if it turned out that there had been no racial incident at all?
i sent that one to you in the mail, with lots of other hoax stuff… ALSO, the noose has killed more whites than it ever killed blacks (though more records exist of blacks being lynched).
its not at all a symbol of only action against blacks (and in the south, the dems did the hanging, just as its their rebel flag and their idea to divide the nation to avoid the radical republicans)
Of the lynching that did not take place in the South, mainly in the West, were normally lynchings of whites, not blacks. Most of the lynching in the West came from the lynching of either murders or cattle thief’s. There really was no political link to the lynching of blacks in the South, and whites in the West.
the causes for which someone would be lynched were as followed
Causes Of Lynchings, 1882-1968
Tuskegee Institute, Febuary 1979
Homicides – 1,937
Felonious Assault — 205
Rape — 912
Attempted Rape — 288
Robbery and Theft — 232
Insult to White Person — 85 (1.09%)
All Other Causes 1,084
Total – 4,743
[about a quarter were white, and its not a complete record as out west, a lot of towns did such to white and mexican criminals]
and actually the stats claim the practice ended in the late 1960s… really?
but maybe the real problem is stuff like this:
Oprah Winfrey Falsely Claims ‘Millions’ of Black Americans Were Lynched
That was apparently the case when Oprah Winfrey claimed that the “n-word” was the last thing heard by “millions” who were lynched. The implication is clear – millions of blacks have been lynched because of their race. Worse yet, Parade Magazine let Winfrey get away with her “fact” unchallenged.
[edited for length by n-n]
Great post. Details are such bothersome things — and require levels of patience and integrity not fostered on campus today. While I love the Allan Bloom references in prior posts, I think the more poignant and succinct one is Michael Crichton from 2003:
That incident in Delaware can in large part be put down to that acting president’s incompetence, I think. For one thing, she shot off her first email which assumed those were nooses at 1:00 a.m., just after she was told of the incident. That indicates not a moment’s reflection.
The really sad thing is that the black students there make up only 5 percent of the student body, and this kind of incitement can only make things more difficult for them in their relations with the other students.
The mortarboard sits heavy on academician’s heads and it’s no longer on the square. Break with the evil past. Every one in motley coats and ass’s ears with bells – juggling, clowning, riddles, and fancies a specialty.
We are past the threshold. This is theater of the absurd, it no longer deserves any consideration. Blackface! Noose! “Nigger”! Negro. White hoods on the quad? You say you’ve seen an Imperial Wizard or Grand Dragon. Cotton balls, chicken buckets, watermelon fill you with angst? Frankly, I don’t give a damn anymore.
but George Pal, the past jesters were very smart… i brought up some of the most famous, including Tom Le Fol, where we get tom foolery from..
see: The Grand Inquisitor redux
http://neoneocon.com/2015/07/01/the-grand-inquisitor-redux/
But ArtfldgrsGhost,
Everything’s been dumbed down… but everything.
We should send letters to Obama thanking him for improving race relations in the country. And Blacks should thank him for setting a fine example for their kids of thinking and getting the facts before they act.
Sarcasm is no way to combat social rot, expat.
I am waiting for a fake campus rape of a lesbian eskimo by an amish gang of white privilege. We are down the rabbit hole.
Yep. The game is the game.
Again, the key for the Right is to appreciate that while the Left engineered and developed the campus activist game, it’s not an exclusive domain of the Left.
The Right can play the game to win, too.
The Left only seems dominant because they’re the only competitors on the field due to the negligence of the Right.
Most of the victories against the Left are conducted in independent businesses, free of the influence of big money, big corps, or Soros.
Meaning, the institutions that the Left has taken over, can no longer be occupied by patriots or free thinkers. They are purging their system, not because they want to, but because the higher ups have decided that the time is right and that they have enough power.
One should burn down these occupied institutions rather than waste manpower trying to take them power, and instead fortify the communities and factions which are still fighting against the Leftist alliance.
http://www.dangerandplay.com/2015/11/08/zoe-quinn-crash-override-how-to-save-the-internet-from-itself/
That’s an example of the forward front suffering a Leftist invasion. Because once the Left takes over the internet, there will be nowhere for people to find sanctuary, as the patriot enclaves are either off grid or surrounded by the Left’s thugs, in order to blockade or isolate populations (for replacement camps).