The Reverse Racism of Black Lightning

[Ouroboros]

Neither do I. Seems like a comprehension problem, to me. Don't rely upon your personal interpretive skills next time. If you want to know what I've said, ask and I'll clarify....or just quote me. I don't think my initial remarks were all that complicated, really. But apparently they were complex enough that you needed a Strawman to rebut them, huh?


No, Strawman is about right. I wasn't mistaken.


You're dissembling now. And again, it really doesn't matter what you think. Your opinions are worthless in this discussion. The simple FACT of the matter is that this is a fairly well studied issue. It's a FACT that most whites today feel that whites are victims of racism more than minorities in this country. That documented phenonenon (as pathetic as it may be) is simply not arguable, so I'm not sure what you thought you were going to debate with me.



:lamo
As I said, and as you just confirmed, "we" meant people like you. Got it. But, then again, we already knew that. And the very fact that you think there is considerable "racism" on the show simple illustrates how little you understand about the issue.



The story line in season 2 is not as interesting. That's why ratings are down...not because a bunch of conservative snowflakes got their panties in a bunch over "reverse racism" in the show. Geez, man...:roll:



Awh...does the term "White Victimhood" irk you? Well, sorry, but that's what it is. You're on an anonymous message board whining about how "we" (i.e. angry white guys with "reverse racism" issues) are tired of being made into "the bad guys" simply because you are all "bored" of the "racism" of others........so, YEAH, you have some serious white victimhood issues. Sorry if that bothers you, but I thought you right wingers appreciated "politically incorrect" dialogue.

What's your source for these alleged FACTS?

 

[Ouroboros]

LOL, well...no offense to you, but your assessment of my intellect doesn't really matter.

Remember what I had to say about conservative snowflakes?

Well, you're acting like one, again.

Look, I get it. You're a conservative white guy/gal who feels resentful and victimized by poltical correctness in society....and just for being white. Right? And you think that the Black Panther t.v. show is "racist", right?

:lamo

What "Black Panther T.V. show" is that? (Maybe you see now, how it could be justified to ask if a fellow debater has actually seen the thing he's debating about.)

I haven't seen any snowflake behavior on this thread as yet. You stated your belief, Keridan stated his, and then he disengaged for the time being. Snowflake-ism is not simple disagreement, nor is it disengagement.

 

[ultmd]

Do you care to offer an example of a justified white grievance as a fair contrast to the one I've put forth?

No. Rather, would you care to offer an more cogent justification for your own arguments in your OP? Your OP only revealed the extreme biased your perspective. For example, we knew Looker was a white supremacist because of the way she presumed that BL was her mirror image......and because of the Confederate flag....and because
she said so. Your rationale (to whatever extent it can be termed as such) was that she "refused to validate his minority entitlement". And I'm sorry, but that's just pathetic....and it's also a dead giveaway that you are someone who harbors a lot of racial resentment.

Just be honest. Stop tap dancing around my remarks.

Do you deny that you have resentment toward minorities?

Do you feel that whites are often victims of "racism" in America?

Your answer, whether or not I agree with it, will define your ability to even think such a grievance possible.

Bless your heart. You don't honestly believe that you get to make that determination, do you?

"Justified White Grievance"? Are you asking me if white people can be victims of racism, and not just perpetrators? Is that your real question?

 

[Keridan]

What "Black Panther T.V. show" is that? (Maybe you see now, how it could be justified to ask if a fellow debater has actually seen the thing he's debating about.)

I haven't seen any snowflake behavior on this thread as yet. You stated your belief, Keridan stated his, and then he disengaged for the time being. Snowflake-ism is not simple disagreement, nor is it disengagement.

Not gonna lie. I kinda wish we disagreed a bit on this. You are the person paying attention that I would rather debate. You've been polite, honest, and keeping to point when something is brought up.

 

[ultmd]

What "Black Panther T.V. show" is that? (Maybe you see now, how it could be justified to ask if a fellow debater has actually seen the thing he's debating about.)

A typo?

Seriously?

:lamo

You could have just check my previous posts, but then you would have been rendered mute. Now, instead, you're just moot.

I haven't seen any snowflake behavior on this thread as yet. You stated your belief, Keridan stated his, and then he disengaged for the time being. Snowflake-ism is not simple disagreement, nor is it disengagement.

???Not sure where you got the impression that I had an issue with him "disengaging for a time". He's free to engage, or disengage at his leisure, without any judgment or condemnation from me about it. I think you might want to think about what "snowflake" means, or even just reread my previous remarks on it.

 

[Ouroboros]

No. Rather, would you care to offer an more cogent justification for your own arguments in your OP? Your OP only revealed the extreme biased your perspective. For example, we knew Looker was a white supremacist because of the way she presumed that BL was her mirror image......and because of the Confederate flag....and because
she said so. Your rationale (to whatever extent it can be termed as such) was that she "refused to validate his minority entitlement". And I'm sorry, but that's just pathetic....and it's also a dead giveaway that you are someone who harbors a lot of racial resentment.

Just be honest. Stop tap dancing around my remarks.

Do you deny that you have resentment toward minorities?

Do you feel that whites are often victims of "racism" in America?



Bless your heart. You don't honestly believe that you get to make that determination, do you?

"Justified White Grievance"? Are you asking me if white people can be victims of racism, and not just perpetrators? Is that your real question?

The only determination anyone here can make is that if a poster doesn't answer a question, then it usually reflects bad faith on the part of that poster. Since you're unable to answer the question as posed, you're guilty of bad faith in my eyes. I don't care about your opinion of that determination, any more than you care about my opinion.

It also indicates that since you can't differentiate between the supposed injustice of my "grievance" (your word), and any other possible grievances, then your position-- only suggested by your initial post-- is that such grievances do not really exist. Enjoy living in your world.

If you change your mind and decide to show good faith and answer my original question as I phrased it, I'll be happy to answer your counter-queries.

 

[Ouroboros]

A typo?

Seriously?

:lamo

You could have just check my previous posts, but then you would have been rendered mute. Now, instead, you're just moot.



???Not sure where you got the impression that I had an issue with him "disengaging for a time". He's free to engage, or disengage at his leisure, without any judgment or condemnation from me about it. I think you might want to think about what "snowflake" means, or even just reread my previous remarks on it.

Sure, I saw your post asserting that you'd seen the show, but when you made it, you acted as if it was no one's business what you watched. On the contrary, if you're engaging in any sort of real debate, it's perfectly legitimate for Person A to ask Person B if B has any direct experience of the matter under discussion.

If you weren't applying "snowflake" to the poster because he disengaged, then I'll have to assume you had no reason beyond virtue signaling.

 

[Xelor]

BLACK LIGHTNING is a thoroughly mediocre superhero TV show, so I wasn't surprised that when it bumbled its way toward making a "statement" on white supremacy.

In the 11-27-18 episode, the hero is captured by supposed white supremacist villain Looker. How do we know she's a white supremacist? ... she refuses to validate Lightning's sense of minority entitlement. ... She goes on to ask him why he's allowed to say that he's "black and proud" (approximate quote), but she's a racist if she says she's "white and proud."

What is the hero's response to this line of logic? Well, Looker [in her layer displays a] Confederate flag on her wall-- though her story has nothing to do with the South as such-- and hero Jefferson makes that significant look his "reply:" that anyone who speaks of white pride must be a white supremacist, and the display of the Confederate flag "proves" this.

What a cheesy, contrived excuse for rational discourse.

Red:
Let me expound upon my earlier remarks for I cannot concur with your representation of them. I shall do so in outline form:

[Deleted due to character limit: detailed explication of the nature and extent of valid inferences one may make re: displays of the Confederate Flag.]​

Accordingly, "Looker's" display of the Confederate flag is correlated with white supremacy, but her merely displaying one doesn't probatively show her to be a WS.



...I "on demand'd" and watched the two episodes prior to the one you've expressly noted in your earlier post. Some preliminary thoughts about the "Looker" storyline:

• I am as yet unsure whether I concur with your assessment the "Looker" subplot as allegorical to racists, racism and its effects. I'm unsure because having read your earlier post about it, it's not clear to me whether I'm watching the storyline with a jaundiced eye whereby it becomes "Xelor's Cat," as it were.
• Be that as it may, insofar as I've watched the show though that prism, I see a host of metaphorical correlates that suggest the storyline is about racism's nature, its traits and effects.
  • Silver fluid --> Racism itself
  • Silver fluid's qualities --> Racism's qualities
  • Deacon's relationship with that girl --> Racism can be overcome
  • Deacon's death --> Racism ruins those who harbor it (not sure on this...as I said, preliminary...)
  • The babies having "silver" eyes --> Racism passes from parents to children and instilled at an early age, "subconsciously" even
  • The tenure of the relationship between Sanges and Perdis --> Allusion to racism's and its effects' longevity

At some point, I'll get a "round tuit" and see episodes 7-9 (will the show run that long?) and form more solid conclusions that, based on what I've seen in the five episodes I will have watches, I'll be willing and prepared to defend.

Red:

• The "Looker" storyline is indeed one wherein the themes are racism/white supremacy, its propagation, and overcoming it.
• We know viewers are meant to construe the "Looker" character as a racist/white supremacist because the protagonist -- the character, as in any superhero story, whose views, behaviors and observations viewers are bid to sympathize -- explicitly calls her a racist.

Blue:
I'm sticking with the allegorical interpretation I previously presented. I'll add that the "Looker" character is a presented as the manifestation of the harborers and spreaders of racism, but not racism itself.

 

[Ouroboros]

Wow, lightning really does strike twice in the same place, and in the same way (i.e. reverse racism).

Here's my long opinion on the 2-5-19 episode.
_______________

Nothing signals this unrelenting depiction of constant victimization more than what I’ll term “the Khalil plotline.” Khalil, a fellow student with Jennifer and Anissa at Freeland’s fairly upscale high school, is an up-and-coming track star with a bright future ahead of him, the more so when he and Jennifer fall in love. But Khalil's dreams come to an end when one of Tobias Whale's minions tries to kill a local organizer, resulting in Khalil being crippled by a stray bullet.

(Abbreviated account of how Khalil fares, which includes endangering his fellow students, before he's killed by Whale, who becomes his boss in exchange for the power to walk again.)

As “Just and Unjust” begins, the mourning Jennifer returns to her school, where incidentally, Jefferson Pierce has been demoted to vice-principal due to his mysterious absences (caused by his superhero sideline), and an unfeeling white guy takes Pierce’s former job. This of course is one of the nightmares of Afro-American culture: the fear that at any moment even those with rewarding, respectable community positions will simply have their advancements ripped away by the white hierarchy. Since Unfeeling White Guy is not a developed character, I’ll just call him UWG for short.



On Jennifer’s first day back at school, she’s pleased that many of the students have evidently forgiven (or forgotten) Khalil’s rampage, for they’ve created memorials for the former track star. However, UWG has the memorials taken down.



Jennifer doesn’t make any attempt to meet with the principal or anyone else to contest this dictate. Instead, she assembles her own memorial in one of the school hallways. UWG quotes the school handbook, calling the display “inappropriate student art.” Though I don’t recall UWG having done or said anything racist in previous episodes, Jennifer immediately tasks him with bigotry.



“You can hide behind the handbook and all your rules. But the fact of the matter is, you just don’t like [Khalil]—or any of us, do you?” She also inducts Khalil into the ranks of “black lives that matter,” and outright calls UWG a racist. All of the student witnessing the exchange—not just some of them, but ALL of them—completely agree with Jennifer and apparently don’t care that Khalil’s rampage might’ve killed or injured some of them. Once a white guy’s in charge, he can be nothing but a representative of the white hierarchy, even though I believe most principals in a similar situation would have a lot of problems with honoring a gangster’s enforcer. Somehow, Khalil’s injury becomes the injury that all black people suffer at the hands of white people, for Jennifer, before being removed by security, preaches that “every person standing here is just one step away from becoming something they never meant to be.” And it’s totally the fault of the hierarchy: black people are “trapped by a system, that doesn’t give a damn about us-- run by people like you.”



UWG then has a student rebellion on his hands, and his vice-principal’s only concern is his daughter’s welfare. When Pierce is told that finds his daughter called UWG a racist in front of other students, Pierce re-interprets this direct insult into liberal-speak:



“Jennifer is just questioning whether you have the perspective or the sensitivity for this community.”



Uh, not quite. She wanted to have a memorial to her gangsta-boyfriend on school property, and thought she could get it by picturing him as a victim of institutionalized racism. The script, not willing to recognize Pierce’s bull****, then loads the dice further by having UWG express resentment for the fact that he believes he’s had a harder life than Jefferson Pierce. Pierce’s response is practically boilerplate Leftism:



“you get the benefit of the doubt that even a rich black man will not get. That’s what these kids are facing.”



If Khalil had been framed by the cops or the KKK, this “benefit of the doubt” argument might hold some relevance. But there is no “doubt” that Khalil committed criminal acts, and it would be a peculiar principal of any race who would think it a great idea to memorialize a gangsta in a high school. The idea that Khalil is instantly forgiven all of his sins because he’s had a hard row to hoe, being black in America, summarizes BLACK LIGHTNING’s total investment in victimization politics, and makes clear that the show endorses only the credo of “justice for the oppressed alone.”