At The Intersection of Farrakhan and Reality (Update)

Louis Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam have been an important positive and stabilizing force in the black community. He says some pretty awful things about Jews, women, gays and transgender people, but that doesn’t mean he hasn’t made a significant contribution as well. And therein lies the dilemma, or to be more precise, reveals the fallacy of the social justice movement’s effort to reconcile the zero sum game of self-interest.*

The national co-chair of the Women’s March, Tamika Mallory, was present at the Nation of Islam’s annual Saviour’s Day event in late February, where Farrakhan railed against Jews for being “the mother and father of apartheid,” declared that “the Jews have control over those agencies of government,” and surmised that Jews have chemically induced homosexuality in black men through marijuana.

Mallory, Shaun King, and others find themselves caught in the middle of their claim to prominence by supporting Farrakhan while denying Farrakhan’s very clear, very explicit, very discriminatory words. You can be for equality or you can be for Farrakhan. You can’t be for both.

The incident is the latest episode in a pattern that has repeated itself ever since Farrakhan’s entry on the national stage. The Nation of Islam leader first rose to national prominence defending Jesse Jackson from accusations of anti-Semitism, after Jackson referred to New York as “Hymietown” during the 1984 Democratic presidential primary. Farrakhan called Judaism a “dirty religion,” and warned Jews against attacking Jackson: “If you harm this brother, it will be the last one you harm.” Farrakhan’s defense of Jackson, who many black voters felt was unfairly maligned and taken out of context, helped establish his reputation as someone who, right or wrong, would not cave to the white establishment.

One might suspect that I, as a Jew, would be outraged by Farrakhan. Sorry, but I just can’t get too hot and bothered by it. One group blaming another for being awful is pretty much the sum of human history. In the grand scheme of things, Farrakhan’s anti-Semiticism is banal, as far as I’m concerned. He can call my religion whatever names he wants. It doesn’t have much to do with me, and I’m not telling him where we hid the gold anyway.

But within the black community, the Nation of Islam has done a lot of good, and that’s what Farrakhan is all about, helping black people, being their champion. And they are entitled to have someone champion their cause, even if it means he says mean things about Jews.

Most people outside the black community come into contact with the Nation of Islam this way—Farrakhan makes anti-Semitic remarks, which generate press coverage, and then demands for condemnation. But many black people come into contact with the Nation of Islam as a force in impoverished black communities—not simply as a champion of the black poor or working class, but of the black underclass: black people, especially men, who have been written off or abandoned by white society. They’ve seen the Fruit of Islam patrol rough neighborhoods and run off drug dealers, or they have a family member who went to prison and came out reformed, preaching a kind of pride, self-sufficiency, and entrepreneurship that, with a few adjustments, wouldn’t sound out of place coming from a conservative Republican. The self-respect, inner strength, and self-reliance reflected in the polished image of the men in suits and bow ties can be a powerful sight.

And if Mallory and others want to support Farrakhan’s good works on behalf of the black community, that’s totally fine. But then they can’t simultaneously claim the mantle of social justice righteousness. They can’t lead a Women’s March if they support a guy who blames women for being too lazy to cook. They can’t be champions of equality for all and support a guy who blames Jews for turning their youth into transgender people.

I get it. You want the good that someone like Farrakhan brings without the ugliness of his express denigration of women, gays, transgender people and, well, Jews. Unfortunately, it comes as a package, and without that package, you don’t get the good he provides the black community.

But with the Women’s March, Mallory is no longer just doing anti-violence work. She’s become a leader of a diverse, national political movement, of which Farrakhan’s most frequent targets—Jews, women, LGBT people—are irreplaceable members.

As Rodney King asked rhetorically, can’t we all just get along? Thus far, there’s been no evidence to support that possibility.

“I don’t agree with everything that Minister Farrakhan said about Jews or women or gay people,” said Mallory.

So which things that Minister Farrakkan said about Jews or women or gay people does Mallory agree with? There’s no good answer to this question. And there’s no answer Mallory could give that wouldn’t burn her one way or the other.

No matter how hard, how desperately, you want to believe that unicorns prance on rainbows, Louis Farrakhan is going to make you cry. It’s completely understandable that some advocates want to support him, but then you’ve made your choice. It’s a fair choice, and one you’re entitled to make, but own it. There is no way to weasel out of Farrakhan’s message, which is just fine provided you recognize the limitations of your ideology.

Update: On the twitters, Aaron X raised this point:

He’s got a point. Everything is on the table, whether you agree with it or not. And sometimes, what’s on the table will be politically incorrect. If you believe the problem is White-Jewish supremacy, then it shouldn’t be beyond critical analysis. That, of course, doesn’t mean I have to take it seriously or deny its accuracy, but all ideas are fair game, even anti-Semitic ones.

*The old-school notion of equality, premised on blindness toward characteristics, is now deemed racist and sexist because it fails to produce the demanded outcomes, which must necessarily be due to racism or sexism because it’s a dogmatic impossibility.

To Farrakhan’s credit, he appreciates that success for the black community comes at the expense of others. There are only so many chairs at Harvard, and only so many butts can fill them. He wants them filled with black tushies. That’s his goal, and at least he understands it.

19 comments on “At The Intersection of Farrakhan and Reality (Update)

  1. Miles

    The good thing about Aaron X’s twit is that he lays it out there so we know exactly what he’s trying to say. No BS. No concealment. Just the White-Jewish supremacy mindset in action against blacks. It may be batshit crazy, but at least it’s honest.

      1. MonitorsMost

        Now, if you would just reciprocate and admit that the Jews have been feeding blacks the wacky weed to homofy them, we’d all be on the same page and ready for an open & constructive dialogue.

        1. SHG Post author

          We sold them the wacky weed because we’re greedy moneychangers. But I’m not telling where we buried the gold. The homofy thing’s on them.

  2. Weebs

    He says some pretty awful things about Jews, women, gays and transgender people, but that doesn’t mean he hasn’t made a significant contribution as well.

    And Hitler loved dogs.

      1. jyjon

        All those dogs he sent to the relocation camps for the people who were taken from those miserable ghetto’s to a better life. All the SJW schools are imitating his endeavors with their own puppy rooms. He had to have been a dog advocate and the original SJW, fascism is where it’s at on campus now.

          1. jyjon

            Since you ask, this would be a good time to suggest something I’ve given very little thought to, A virtual Puppy/Kitten room. A link to a virtual room for the snowflakes when the discussions get to intense. A big long list of cute puppy and kitten and fennec fox and baby gorilla n baby tiger n baby racoon n baby sasquatch n baby killer whale n even human babies doing cute adroable things. Have them all autoload and auto play at once. You’d be a legend for helping the world destress.

  3. Keith

    Is it “inaccurate” that Jews are the great Satan?

    Well, don’t keep us in suspense. The deafening silence of Taylor Swift & Scott Greenfield is almost too much to take.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

All comments are subject to editing or deletion if I deem them inappropriate for any reason or no reason. Hyperlinks are not permitted in comments and will be deleted. References to Nazis/Hitler will not be tolerated. I allow anonymous comments, but will not tolerate attacks unless you use your real name. Anyone using the phrase "ad hominem" incorrectly will be ridiculed. If you use ALL CAPS for emphasis, I will assume you wear a tin foil hat and treat you accordingly. I expect civility from you, but that does not mean I will respond in kind. This is my home and I make the rules. If you don't like my rules, then don't comment. Spam is absolutely prohibited, and you will be permanently banned.