Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2011 12:07:05 -0400
From: CrYpTiK
Subject: Re: that sounds iffy
I’m not claiming to be CORRECT about any of the things I’m saying; my posts are meant to provoke thought and possibly some investigation by anyone who has an interest in the matter. That’s very important to consider while discussing this matter.
On the topic of racism, you’re correct to some extent, and incorrect in another. I am insinuating that a possible reason why Fast Pass wasn’t forced to shut off their blinking sign while many other businesses were is out of racism (or perhaps a more accurate term would be “racial solidarity.”) It could also be that the businesses I am aware of having been un-blink-ified are primarily on US 64 and not tucked down in a less-trafficked corner of town as Fast Pass is, though it is my understanding that the laws and codes apply to
everyone, not just people on US 64.
Why not mention the “whiteness” of Piedmont Biofuels? Mainly, because I don’t know the guy and his race (in fact, I didn’t know the name nor gender either), so I didn’t make any such assumption; second, because
Piedmont Biofuels’ financial ties are drastically more likely to have something to do with their sign rule-breaking being ignored than their race, particularly since I know of many more white business owners from
Pittsboro who have not been granted the same flexibility. Is the Meeks family white? I’ll hazard a guess that they are. If the race was a consideration for Piedmont Biofuels’ flex, it would stand to reason that
all the white people in Pittsboro would have been granted a similar amount of flexibility, but as we can see, that’s not the case, so it’s not worthy of mention.
However, in the case of Fast Pass, the race of the business owners and the enforcement officer are the same, whereas with all of the other businesses I’ve spoken to that were ordered to shut off their blinkers seem to be run by non-Hispanic people. Therefore, I suggest that a racial link may exist that brought about that clear lack of enforcement. That doesn’t mean I’m right, but it doesn’t mean I’m wrong either, and it’s enough evidence to warrant at least some degree of investigation into how Sergio’s enforcement of these laws might have been intentionally lax, whether or not racial solidarity is a motivator.
No hard feelings here either; it’s a point I considered after I sent my post, and thank you for bringing it up so I could spell it out in more depth. As for any notion that I’m somehow racist (which may be vaguely implied somehow by me even touching on race in the first place) I can only assure everyone that I’m not. I’m demanding equal treatment under the law, regardless of financial status, race, gender, age, etc. and the truth is that most people who use equality to argue for themselves when they want something will implicitly argue against it when it doesn’t operate in their favor. So please, dear Chatlisters, don’t take any statement I make as being any form of -ism. I’m simply demanding universally what most people demand only when it benefits them.
One of my favorite sayings, and probably soon to become one of yours as well, is this:
“To find out if someone really supports equality, give it to them.”
—quote—
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 07:42:39 -0400
From: Stevie Schlessman
Subject: that sounds iffy
Hey there mysterious poster. I think your right, our society values
people with money over others. However, I also think part of what you
said is racist. Why point out that the Hispanic sounding man and
business as some sort of racial privilege? Why is anything you were
talking about about race?
Also, why is his race assumed to be the culprit, but in your example of
Piedmont Biofuels Lyle’s whiteness is not addressed?
No hard feelings, really! But things like this are important to pay attention to.
Stevie