Quote:
Originally Posted by Shawnski
Let's take a look at this for you....
First of all, I (and all of us) are looking at this from a 20-20 hindsight perspective. In doing so, we are not only enabled, but in my opinion, allowed to look at the past actions of the characters involved to see how they interact with society.
I find it interesting that previously posted information indicates Crowley was the person trying to save a black basketball star by giving him mouth to mouth recessitation a couple decades ago (but is being accused of rasicm) yet a Harvard professor showed he is willing to play a race card ON A FREAKIN' YALE APPLICATION. There is in my mind, NO excuse for that one. If anything, it shows that this very brilliant individual is capable of using a race card to put people in a "Damned if I do, Damned if I don't" scenario. Not cool in my books.
How could you not be interested in that item of his past? He may not be proud of it now, but it is there for all to see. Are there other instances? From what I am seeing of this one he appears to have tried to put Crowley in the same damned if I do/don't boat.
|
First, I never suggested I wasn’t interested in the comment. I think, though, that when someone wants to adduce past character evidence to confirm (in this case) or refute (as in Crowley past article) allegations about someone, they should at least explain why they’re bringing that evidence in and what relevance they think it may have. To just throw it in and say ‘discuss’ strikes me as poor form, especially in a heated thread like this, but justly you probably don’t care what I think.
Second, I’m still suspicious of what that quote would prove. Is it evidence of Gates as some Machiavellian race baiter? Hardly. At most it’s evidence of someone who has had an axe to grind, but even then...
Let’s not forget we haven’t seen the application in its entirety. Further, it’s an application that he wrote when he was, what, a 17-year old kid? And, as the AP article notes, he went through an educational system that was in the immediate shadow of segregation. Was his point in the essay that the American educational system has precluded blacks from being successful? That is hardly a contentious statement considering the Supreme Court effectively said the exact same thing in 1954, just before he started school. Could his words have been chosen better? Almost certainly.
But moreover, so what? He guilted Yale into letting him in? Give me a break. What about his time at Harvard and his professional success? They’re just going to give him a job or throw millions of dollars and effort into his DuBois’ institute because they’re scared of the race card? He’s gotten everywhere in life because people are afraid of him labelling them racist? Or, what if, as the article alludes, he’s an actively engaged individual who cares deeply for his country and wants to make it better? Or what about the notion that he’s probably an excellent prof, whom the students and colleagues (who are, numerically, primarily white) appreciate and value? It seems to me, if you want to bring in that character evidence, you should look at more of his life than just a line on something written years ago.
And, fundamentally, even if Gates does is playing race cards like Mats Sundin on that commercial, it doesn't prove or disprove whether or not Crowley racially profiled him in that exchange.
The idea that he is some kind of diabolical genius who pulls out the race card to advance his own racist aims is doubtful imo. That’s not to say he hasn’t done it or that it’s even impossible. But I have a very hard time seeing how that one quote you provided proves that it’s his default M.O. as he moves through life.
And, for the record, as I have said in this thread, I do NOT think this was a case of racial profiling, and I think Crowley probably was just doing his job, though it seems like they both made some behavioural mistakes throughout the exchange.