'Civil rights' activists seem to take their stand for lynching
When I was growing up, my dad was emphatic on the point that schoolyard fights were inevitable, and that I should have enough courage and self-respect never to back down for a fair fight even if the guy was bigger than I was.
The key word is fair.
The story of the 'Jena Six' has been so politicized and racialized that reasonable conversation about the incident itself is hard to come by. So let's review the facts.
There was an oak tree on school grounds which some claim was known as 'the white tree,' and a segregated area where only white students were allowed to gather. Others- including school officials- deny this, claiming that it was a common gathering place for groups of both races, and for racially mixed groups as well.
Two nooses (not, as reported, three- three nooses being a hallmark of the Ku Klux Klan) were hung from the tree. Whatever the tree's history, it was a clear case of attempted racial intimidation, and the students responsible were suspended and forced to attend an alternative school for a month, and to face two weeks' "in-school suspension" (whatever that oxymoron might involve)as a consequence.
In my view, the punishment should have been much more severe, but that's another issue. Suffice it to say that stories that they were suspended for only three days is untrue.
Two months later, a wing of the high school was burned, a case of arson which remains unsolved. That weekend two fights between African American and white students broke out. The crises culminated in a brawl on Dec. 4 in which a single white student- not, to my knowledge, in any way implicated in the noose incident- was stomped by six black students. Federal investigators, in fact, concluded that the stomping was in no way connected to the noose incident!
This was not a fight. It was an assault- a concerted attempt to inflict serious bodily harm on the kid. This was not a school yard fight. In its own way, it was nothing more or less than itself an attempted lynching, and apparently a racial lynching at that. The District Attorney quite properly filed criminal charges attempted against the six. A reasonable argument can be made that the charge- attempted murder- was excessive.
One of the black students- seventeen year old Mychal Ball- was tried on those charges and convicted by an all-white jury (none of the African American residents summoned for jury duty in the case showed up) on reduced (and surely appropriate) charges of aggravated battery and conspiracy to commit aggravated battery. Contrary to reports, Ball- who did have a high grade point average- was not an honor student with no previous criminal record. In fact, at the time he was on probation for at least two previous counts of battery and for criminal damage to property. His conviction on the conspiracy charge was later reversed- not on the merits, but on the ground that he should not have been tried as an adult. Contrary to widespread media reports, the battery conviction was in fact upheld.
Was the prosecution of this case excessively zealous? That argument can be reasonably made. That prosecution per se was not appropriate, on the other hand, is simply not a reasonable position.
Five other black students still face criminal charges for acting like such bullies as to leave a single fellow student bleeding and unconscious on the ground. Again, an argument can be made that attempted murder charges are excessive. But the charges on which Ball was in fact convicted seem to me not only to be completely reasonable, but to be so reasonable that no reasonable person could disagree with that assessment.
Yet this prosecution was the cause for the sizable rally at Jena the other day reported by the world-wide media (note the fascinating bias of the article linked to).
Ben Reid, an African-American resident of Jena, says that "this whole thing ain't no downright, racial affair." That seems to be a reasonable conclusion. The citizens of Jena- both black and white- seem to take a view of the affair remarkably lacking in racial overtones. They seem determined that the affair be disposed of in exactly the way it would have been had six white kids stomped a black kid and left him unconscious.
Which prospect, it seems, inspires what seems to me to be wholly inappropriate outrage throughout the nation, and even the world.
Sure, the Jena area has an unsavory racial past, and sure, the area has seen outrageous behavior on the part of white students, too. Perhaps white students on other (unspecified) occasions were treated with inappropriate leniency; certainly the initial charges against the 'Jena 6,' were excessive, even though prosecution remains not only entirely appropriate, but mandatory.
Neither the town's history nor the behavior of other students nor the severity or leniency of the punishment of others is the issue. The issue is whether or not criminal activity perpetrated by a racially-motivated lynch mob should, in this particular case, be punished.
The issue is that one particular kid- from all appearances, uninvolved in any of the other stuff- was severely stomped and left unconscious on a playground in what was apparently a racially motivated incident by six bullies who were not, in any sense, engaging in a fair schoolyard fight.
Which is why the position of those who present themselves as civil rights activists minimizing the behavior of the 'Jena Six' is so unconscionable. At least at the present, it certainly appears that they taken sides with the lynch mobs of both races who throughout history have victimized innocents for no reason other than the color of their skin.
If white kids have gotten off lightly in the past for violence against African-American students, that is unconscionable- and has to stop. But the solution to the problem is not to declare open season on white students in return. It's to hold students to precisely the same standard regardless of their race, and to appropriately punish racial violence no matter who perpetrates it.
The key word is fair.
The story of the 'Jena Six' has been so politicized and racialized that reasonable conversation about the incident itself is hard to come by. So let's review the facts.
There was an oak tree on school grounds which some claim was known as 'the white tree,' and a segregated area where only white students were allowed to gather. Others- including school officials- deny this, claiming that it was a common gathering place for groups of both races, and for racially mixed groups as well.
Two nooses (not, as reported, three- three nooses being a hallmark of the Ku Klux Klan) were hung from the tree. Whatever the tree's history, it was a clear case of attempted racial intimidation, and the students responsible were suspended and forced to attend an alternative school for a month, and to face two weeks' "in-school suspension" (whatever that oxymoron might involve)as a consequence.
In my view, the punishment should have been much more severe, but that's another issue. Suffice it to say that stories that they were suspended for only three days is untrue.
Two months later, a wing of the high school was burned, a case of arson which remains unsolved. That weekend two fights between African American and white students broke out. The crises culminated in a brawl on Dec. 4 in which a single white student- not, to my knowledge, in any way implicated in the noose incident- was stomped by six black students. Federal investigators, in fact, concluded that the stomping was in no way connected to the noose incident!
This was not a fight. It was an assault- a concerted attempt to inflict serious bodily harm on the kid. This was not a school yard fight. In its own way, it was nothing more or less than itself an attempted lynching, and apparently a racial lynching at that. The District Attorney quite properly filed criminal charges attempted against the six. A reasonable argument can be made that the charge- attempted murder- was excessive.
One of the black students- seventeen year old Mychal Ball- was tried on those charges and convicted by an all-white jury (none of the African American residents summoned for jury duty in the case showed up) on reduced (and surely appropriate) charges of aggravated battery and conspiracy to commit aggravated battery. Contrary to reports, Ball- who did have a high grade point average- was not an honor student with no previous criminal record. In fact, at the time he was on probation for at least two previous counts of battery and for criminal damage to property. His conviction on the conspiracy charge was later reversed- not on the merits, but on the ground that he should not have been tried as an adult. Contrary to widespread media reports, the battery conviction was in fact upheld.
Was the prosecution of this case excessively zealous? That argument can be reasonably made. That prosecution per se was not appropriate, on the other hand, is simply not a reasonable position.
Five other black students still face criminal charges for acting like such bullies as to leave a single fellow student bleeding and unconscious on the ground. Again, an argument can be made that attempted murder charges are excessive. But the charges on which Ball was in fact convicted seem to me not only to be completely reasonable, but to be so reasonable that no reasonable person could disagree with that assessment.
Yet this prosecution was the cause for the sizable rally at Jena the other day reported by the world-wide media (note the fascinating bias of the article linked to).
Ben Reid, an African-American resident of Jena, says that "this whole thing ain't no downright, racial affair." That seems to be a reasonable conclusion. The citizens of Jena- both black and white- seem to take a view of the affair remarkably lacking in racial overtones. They seem determined that the affair be disposed of in exactly the way it would have been had six white kids stomped a black kid and left him unconscious.
Which prospect, it seems, inspires what seems to me to be wholly inappropriate outrage throughout the nation, and even the world.
Sure, the Jena area has an unsavory racial past, and sure, the area has seen outrageous behavior on the part of white students, too. Perhaps white students on other (unspecified) occasions were treated with inappropriate leniency; certainly the initial charges against the 'Jena 6,' were excessive, even though prosecution remains not only entirely appropriate, but mandatory.
Neither the town's history nor the behavior of other students nor the severity or leniency of the punishment of others is the issue. The issue is whether or not criminal activity perpetrated by a racially-motivated lynch mob should, in this particular case, be punished.
The issue is that one particular kid- from all appearances, uninvolved in any of the other stuff- was severely stomped and left unconscious on a playground in what was apparently a racially motivated incident by six bullies who were not, in any sense, engaging in a fair schoolyard fight.
Which is why the position of those who present themselves as civil rights activists minimizing the behavior of the 'Jena Six' is so unconscionable. At least at the present, it certainly appears that they taken sides with the lynch mobs of both races who throughout history have victimized innocents for no reason other than the color of their skin.
If white kids have gotten off lightly in the past for violence against African-American students, that is unconscionable- and has to stop. But the solution to the problem is not to declare open season on white students in return. It's to hold students to precisely the same standard regardless of their race, and to appropriately punish racial violence no matter who perpetrates it.
Comments