In a recent article, I mentioned the ridiculous and intellectually offensive item in the news regarding a certain political cartoon. I know you’re all sick of seeing it, but here it is:
This Chimp represents nothing more than a Chimp. (Not Pictured: Al Sharpton representing a Horse's Ass.)
I don’t know why, but I am extremely frightened by the outrage that this cartoon has caused. Actually, that’s a lie. I know exactly why I’m frightened. I’m terrified because the attacks that this cartoon has prevoked could potentially serve to take away the essential freedom in this country to criticize our government.
These attacks are reminiscent of those made by Muslims over the cartoons, in the Netherlands, featuring various depictions of Muhammad in various situations. In the Netherlands, however, these violent protests and threats of murder served to reduce the government to something close to the consistancy of a bowl of pudding. This has also happened in Great Britain.
Our story thus far is a bit different. People are outraged, but they are not violent. People are fed up, but they’re not threatening the lives of the cartoonist or the fine people at The New York Post. That’s a very good thing.
But do these blind dogs even know what they’re barking at? Those who were offended by the cartoon (which mostly included African Americans) called for a formal apology as well as the tarring and feathering of those involved in the cartoon’s production.
They fished their wish, so far. The paper apologized, but they apologized conditionally. They apologized in such a way to suggest that they did nothing wrong. Now The New York Post has never been a very decent paper, but I must say: Good For Them!
They have nothing to apologize for; but if they had to give an apology, I’m glad they basically said: “Sorry if you were offended, but we didn’t do anything wrong.”
If the cartoon had depicted a black man (or President Obama) being shot in some kind of racist spirit, a Newspaper who wants to claim that it is staffed by responsible journalists must (and I repeat must) apologize for that disgrace. But The New York Post, nor the Cartoonist, nor the Editor-in-Chief did anything wrong. They should not have to bow down and bend over backwards for a bunch of whiny cunts who choose to see teenage tits in a Magic Eye painting.
1. The Chimpanzee does not represent any human.
2. There was a Chimpanzee that was shot and killed, so the cartoon is within the context of that news story.
3. The cartoon is not a call to assassinate the president, Mr. NAACP.
4. Barack Obama didn’t write the Stimulus Bill, and even if he had, the cartoon is only making a comment that the Bill in question is so poorly conceived and written, that it might as well have been written by a Chimpanzee.
5. Next time a child draws, colors, or pretends to be a Monkey; I want the NAACP to break down that child’s door and call them out for the despicable, unrepentant racist that he is. That’ll show him how we do things in America.
I’ve said this before, and I will say it again…If we allow this kind of random, staggering, infantile bullshit to continue, we will no longer live in a free country. We will live in a country of babysitters, cry-babies, and fools.
Please make this disgraceful protest end. Soon.
We’ll all be better for it.
–alexG.
I completely disagree with you. Is it not also peoples right to protest the cartoon? That also falls under the jurisdiction of the 1st amendment does it not? While I don’t feel that the artist of this cartoon meant to cause harm, he completely messed up. African Americans have all the right to be upset at this article. In the 1920s and up until about the 60s, blacks were depicted as coons and you know what they were drawn as? Monkeys. With big lips, etc. To say that the paper, artist, etc were not wrong is ludicrous, for any logical person who would take a look at that would say, “Maybe this could be taken the wrong way”. There’s a difference between someone posting something like this on their little site, than on a national paper. While I would agree with you that people do get outraged about some stupid things, this is not one of them. I’m personally frightened that you don’t see how this cartoon can be taken as racist and that they have nothing to apologize for. Study some history.
Hey, David. Thank you for your response, but frankly, I think you’re fucking crazy.
1. I know my history. I’m no historian, but I know how black people were treated and how they were depicted in cartoons. That goes without saying.
2. The comic had NOTHING to do with OBAMA. It was a jab at the (what the writer felt was a) poorly written piece of legislature.
3. I can see HOW many people are offended by it, but that doesn’t mean they’re not all batshit crazy.
4. Of COURSE it’s the peoples’ right to protest. That’s the beauty of personal freedom. I’m not saying that they don’t have the right to protest, I’m saying that they’re protest is batshit crazy.
5. George W. Bush has been depicted as a Chimpanzee/Monkey for as long as he’s been president. And that was a DIRECT comparison. Nobody freaked out then. Nobody called it inappropriate. Granted, he wasn’t black…but isn’t it an insult to intelligent Chimpanzees?
6. If we can’t make fun of the president due to the fact that he’s half black, we lose a valuable part of our society.
7. There’s a difference between racially motivated humor and politically motivated humor. It’s a horrible and racist thing to say something like “Barack Obama is stupid and his plans are foolish because he’s black.”
It’s a VERY different thing to say: “A Chimp could write a better law.”
…and in THAT you MUST recognize the ridiculousness of this outrage. The cartoon has NOTHING to do with OBAMA. NOTHING.
Obama planned the Economic Recovery package…It was BASED on his ideas, but he did not WRITE it…and even if he HAD written it, the cartoon is in no way labeling him as a “coon” or “wild but domesticated chimpanzee who flipped out and bit a woman’s face off.”
So grow up. You don’t need to study history to understand this. Study PRESENT and use your fucking common sense.
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_7FA1DSyc31Y/SYyhNIq_32I/AAAAAAAAC6U/fxv8Z2zTKIw/s400/All+Coons+Look+Alike.jpg
It’s obvious that we don’t agree and that’s fine, but do you really need to curse and call me “fucking crazy”? That’s not a way to form a proper discussion and or argument. I understand what the artist was trying to say. I get that, but they should have not allowed the cartoon to print. I think that we should be allowed to make fun of our president but we need to be sensitive to people that were once persecuted. Is it okay then to make a holocaust joke because someone is only half Jewish? We can say what ever we want but we have to pay the consequences if we say something that is socially accepted to be wrong. It is not ridiculous for people to be outraged over this much like it’s not ridiculous for you to feel the opposite way. Of course, it would be wrong if someone said that Obama is stupid because he’s black but that’s just obvious. Just because the cartoonist has the right to say whatever he wants, doesn’t mean that people are obligated to support it. So please, do look at history and not only the present. I think YOU need to grow up Alex and if want to continue to curse and call me names that’s fine, but that is your right, but realize it doesn’t really give you or your site, a good name.
“History is a vast early warning system.”
You seem like a sane person, so I will admit that it was out-of-line to call you “fucking crazy.”
I will change my previous statement and merely say that your concerns over this cartoon “fucking frighten me.”
Your “let’s all be sensitive to everyone” mentality is (in theory) a call to abolish freedom of speech.
I’m not a racist. I’m not a White Supremacist.
I have no sense of Nationalistic Pride.
I’m not proud to be white.
I’m not proud to be German or Italian or American, or anything else.
I believe that being proud of something that just happens to be a circumstance of birth is stupid.
Just thought I’d throw that in there.
That being said…is it wrong to tell black jokes? jewish jokes? white jokes? polish jokes? blonde jokes?
It depends on your intention, mostly.
If a newspaper cartoonist draws a black character (like the ones you linked to above) in an effort to draw attention to racism in society, is that wrong? Is that evil?
Will people still be outraged?
The point is, there was NOTHING racist or outrageous about this drawing. It was NOT meant to provoke anger. It was meant to make people who think the stimulus package is stupid chuckle, and people who think it’s a good thing to scoff.
That’s all. In NO WAY does it serve to offend blacks, chimpanzees, police officers, or anyone else.
There is no reason anyone should be offended by this. The Media coverage along with Al Sharpton’s irritating ego are driving this over the precipice and it should’ve been forgotten. No one actually READS the New York Post.
This cartoon would’ve just been thrown in a landfill somewhere with all the rest.
Our freedom of speech is not just the freedom to criticize or disagree. It’s the freedom to offend; and unfortunately for some people, but fortunately for the sake of a FREE society, that includes terrible and unwarranted hate speech.
The cartoon in question, however, is NO representation of that. AT ALL.
It has NOTHING to do with History. Just because black people were/are compared by bigots to monkeys and chimps doesn’t mean that every representation of a monkey automatically implies racism or the degradation of blacks.
(SUPER DUDE DAVE, HERE) Also, things that need to be considered are:
A) we take pride in being internet trolls
B) it’s the fucking NEW YORK POST. you really can’t get offended by or take anything they print seriously.
people have the right to be offended, it doesnt mean they SHOULD be. just like many things in the US….
I think people NEED to be offended. If people were never offended by anything, we’d live in a very safe, boring, and intellectually terrifying place.
For example, I’m offended by racists, bigots, and terrorists (violent and intellectual).
I understand that insulting certain things, or speaking unfavorably about certain topics cause offense. People are offended by atheists, by being pro-choice, and by foul language. That doesn’t mean that these things should not be used or spoken about.
David made the statement that the editors of the paper should have looked at the cartoon and said “People may be offended by this…” and thought twice about including it.
The problem with that statement is: THERE IS NOTHING OFFENSIVE ABOUT IT!!! No reasonable person would look at that cartoon and think it’s offensive! It’s ridiculous!
The editors looked at it and said:
“Heh…it’s saying the bill is so poorly written that a chimp might as well have written it. Anyone who interprets that as something racist would have to be one nutty cunt!”