Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Racist is believe ing one race is superior over another.
Neeson isn't racist. Racist is scapegoating a particular race .
If an Asian , Caucasian, Muslim, or Republican man had committed this crime..that is who Neeson would have directed his rage. It was An eye for an eye feeling...as someone here commented on the period of time in Ireland known as the Troubles...of which Neeson was a byproduct.
You are right on the money with the eye for an eye comment. I don't know how much Americans truly know about Northern Ireland, and the so called 'troubles.' Neeson is a product of that time, and his mentality, especially decades ago, would be twisted by what he saw while growing up.
His mistake was speaking honestly in answer to a question from a journalist. He is not that man anymore, and regrets his actions so many years ago. He was trying to explain how a person can be consumed by a desire for revenge, and lose control.
People have to listen to the full interview, and not take a part of it out of context.
What he said is completely irrelevant to whether Liam's thoughts were racist or not. What Liam Neeson was fantasizing about was racial violence. What Ralph Kirk described was religious violence. Perhaps somewhere in the brain, these two sources of vengeance have the same source, it doesn't change that in this case Neeson's thoughts were racist.
The thought was: "One of them hurt me; I'm going to hurt one of them in retaliation."
The direction of hatred at them is bigotry. The mindset of an inviolable us and them is bigotry. It's the same thing at its base, whether it's religious or racial, and, indeed, a man bigoted at heart can swing very easily between any kind of bigot.
That's why we don't trust right-wing Americans who try to pitch blacks against Latinos or "legal immigrants" against "illegal immigrants" because we recognize that at base their bigots, and swing from one kind of bigotry to another kind of bigotry as they walk from room to room.
So, yes, young Liam Neeson was the bigot that surrounded him, that he was raised with.
And apparently he repented of that and changed.
But in all this, the point he was actually trying to make has been overlooked. What he explicitly said was, "The way I was then is the same today, if you scratch the surface."
You are right on the money with the eye for an eye comment. I don't know how much Americans truly know about Northern Ireland, and the so called 'troubles.' Neeson is a product of that time, and his mentality, especially decades ago, would be twisted by what he saw while growing up.
His mistake was speaking honestly in answer to a question from a journalist. He is not that man anymore, and regrets his actions so many years ago. He was trying to explain how a person can be consumed by a desire for revenge, and lose control.
People have to listen to the full interview, and not take a part of it out of context.
But in all this, the point he was actually trying to make has been overlooked. What he explicitly said was, "The way I was then is the same today, if you scratch the surface."
Racist is believe ing one race is superior over another.
Neeson isn't racist. Racist is scapegoating a particular race .
If an Asian , Caucasian, Muslim, or Republican man had committed this crime..that is who Neeson would have directed his rage. It was An eye for an eye feeling...as someone here commented on the period of time in Ireland known as the Troubles...of which Neeson was a byproduct.
No racist is not believing one race is superior, that's just one subset of racism. Racism is also holding people responsible for the actions of members of their race.
It's racist to treat a random Black man as a criminal or potential criminal because you feel there are a lot of Black criminals. Neeson went one step above this, and wanted to harm a random Black man for the crimes of another. This cannot be described as anything other than a racist impulse. The only common denominator was race between the individuals.
You bringing up the Troubles as it changes if his thoughts were racist or not. It doesn't. It might explain why he fell into the trap of racist thinking but it doesn't change if they were racist or not. I also don't view the Troubles as much of an excuse. Sorry, but even during the height of the Troubles, Northern Ireland was still a much better place to live than the vast majority of the planet. Maybe not Western Europe, or N. America or Australia but pretty much everywhere else.
I want to say this is an example of White privilege going on in this thread. I hate to use that word, but that's what's going on here.
To be clear, I don't want Neeson to be tarred and feathered - that's equally wrong. But people trying to excuse his thoughts, by looking to the Troubles as a source, is just kind of a cop-out. Sorry.
Are you going to do the same gymnastics for Pakistanis or Afghanis who are caught doing sexual crimes in the UK? They grew up in a society that didn't equip them to deal with sexually liberated women. Not to mention a society far more chaotic and violent than anytime during the Troubles. If an Afghani murders his girlfriend (like he did in Germany) will you go yeah well he grew up in Afghanistan, he's a product of his environment. Or will you want to throw the book at him?
But in all this, the point he was actually trying to make has been overlooked. What he explicitly said was, "The way I was then is the same today, if you scratch the surface."
No, those aren't his words Ralph. He says, "We all pretend we're all politically correct. In this country, the same in my own country too, sometimes you just scratch the surface, and you discover this racism, and bigotry, and it's there.
Similar, but not the same. He is referring to racism in society, not in himself.
I want to say this is an example of White privilege going on in this thread. I hate to use that word, but that's what's going on here.
To be clear, I don't want Neeson to be tarred and feathered - that's equally wrong. But people trying to excuse his thoughts, by looking to the Troubles as a source, is just kind of a cop-out. Sorry.
Are you going to do the same gymnastics for Pakistanis or Afghanis who are caught doing sexual crimes in the UK? They grew up in a society that didn't equip them to deal with sexually liberated women. Not to mention a society far more chaotic and violent than anytime during the Troubles. If an Afghani murders his girlfriend (like he did in Germany) will you go yeah well he grew up in Afghanistan, he's a product of his environment. Or will you want to throw the book at him?
You are comparing a real crime with a thought. Oh boy, you must be sore from that stretch!!!
You are comparing a real crime with a thought. Oh boy, you must be sore from that stretch!!!
Obviously thoughts are not crimes. But you shouldn't justify thoughts as easily as this. People have free will and agency. Just because he went through the Troubles doesn't mean he should randomly want to kill Black man for crimes of another Black man. In my mind, nothing really justifies that.
Since he wants to talk about, I say let's talk about it. But there are a lot of people who want to paint these thoughts as "no big deal" when these thoughts if left unchecked, and maybe in the domain of a more impulsive person can lead to monstrous crimes.
Oh but he did act on his thoughts. He actively sought out conflict with "any" black male for multiple days, during which a minor altercation would have resulted in violence and possible murder. That it did not happen during that period was merely the result of chance not his own refrain.
With that said, it was 40 yrs ago and nothing happened. Cant justify railroading the guy out of town while someone like Mark Wahlberg still has a career.
Wow, you didn't get the 'can't you read' speech from NomadicDrifter?
He wasn't looking for any black man. He was waiting to see if a black man did something to him so he could respond in a way he wishes his friend could have responded. This fantasy is part of being traumatized. If the attacker had been a blonde Swede, he would have been just waiting for some blonde Swede to act hostile toward him.
And again, if he wanted to find a black guy to beat up, he could have and would have.
Nothing he said or did was racist and if you think it was, you have a poor understanding of what the word racist means.
Quote:
Originally Posted by chiociolliscalves
They're completely oblivious to this concept. Forget about the fact that we don't act on explicit thoughts and beliefs we have everyday, these folks believe, absent any evidence, that we act upon implicit thoughts and beliefs. A whole, profitable racket has developed around this woo-woo.
This is the world of loons on the left that we live in. No reasoning or rational approaches to things - just revenge when they don't like what someone is saying.
Given some of the *arguments* here, we're seeing the pitbulls wanting to punish someone for what they said.....about what they were thinking.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
