It's almost like people can change along with society over a period of 40 years. Unfortunately, a lot of liberalism is a show of moral purity, rather than giving a damn about making progress. Kill...
It's almost like people can change along with society over a period of 40 years.
Unfortunately, a lot of liberalism is a show of moral purity, rather than giving a damn about making progress. Kill people who are 99% of the way there because they aren't sure about that last 1% and see how big of a movement that builds you. This is exactly the thinking that caused Trump.
Medical racism is a thing, and it significantly impacts black folks when they try to access medical care. Disparities in areas such as pain management and maternal mortality rates are pretty clear...
So why exactly are we trying to remove him? Because history is painful and feelings got hurt? Sure, it's fair to be upset, it isn't fair to destroy those who have made any mistakes at all in their past.
[...]
Has Northam hampered or impaired the efforts of minorities during his time in office? No? Has he done a "good job" at being a Democrat and pushing for Liberal and Progressive legislation? Yes? Then why do we want to remove him? Because some photo from 1984 makes people feel upset?
Medical racism is a thing, and it significantly impacts black folks when they try to access medical care. Disparities in areas such as pain management and maternal mortality rates are pretty clear indicators that this is an ongoing issue in our country.
It's not a stretch to consider that someone who dressed in a way that dehumanizes black people (whether that costume was blackface or a KKK hood) may have harmed black people while practicing medicine, even if only in subconscious, negligent ways such as by dismissing their concerns or pain. This isn't just about feelings. It's about the direct harm that POC face from stereotypes and dehumanization, particularly from people in power (such as doctors and politicians).
I haven't seen any proof that his medical practice was marred by racism, but considering it's a systemic problem and often rooted in subconscious bias he wouldn't be the first.
Seriously, every time I see the picture from Ralph Northram’s medical school yearbook I cringe and almost scream. These are future doctors who could be in charge of taking care of black mothers delivering black babies or black men dealing with medical conditions. It’s terrifying.
-Yamiche Alcindor, @Yamiche
Plus, as @no_exit points out, he apparently doesn't have a squeaky clean record when it comes to racial/environmental justice, which also relates to medical racism (putting the health of certain communities at higher risk).
this story more or less just broke in mainstream outlets, but local news picked it up first. somehow, i suspect that ralph northam, virginia's current governor, may not be long for his...
this story more or less just broke in mainstream outlets, but local news picked it up first. somehow, i suspect that ralph northam, virginia's current governor, may not be long for his gubernatorial term. given that his LG is black and if he resigns would inherit the governorship, this story is also one part awkward and one part interesting.
(also, another reminder that really obvious racism in the south did not end with the civil rights movement, in case people somehow still thought that.)
(also also, we're off to a fucking wonderful start to black history month)
This is going to be unpopular, I'm sure, but I'll say it: Cancel culture has gone too far. There was an era not too long ago when people would have laughed at a couple's costume of a black person...
This is going to be unpopular, I'm sure, but I'll say it:
Cancel culture has gone too far. There was an era not too long ago when people would have laughed at a couple's costume of a black person (yes even in black face), and a klansman. It's an ironic coupling, and the two were probably friends.
I'm not saying we should be proud of times as they were then (and let's be real: "Then" is honestly as recently as the early to mid 90s). No, we should be ashamed. But we should accept them for what they were, learn from them, and endeavor to be better.
We cannot take back our actions during those times. All the polock jokes and blonde jokes and blonde jokes and everything else. Most of us who lived through it wish we could, but at the time it just simply wasn't seen as wrong, despite how very wrong we now see it to be.
Times have changed, and they have changed for the better, but if someone is a good actor and a decent person now, then why should we judge them for behavior that was perfectly acceptable in the times in which they happened?
Times were different then, and we need to acknowledge that fact. And, no, this is not a slippery slope. There are definite lines of behavior that even then were not acceptable. Progress is slow, and we need to stop letting the perfect be the enemy of the good.
i made the point upthread that really obvious racism in the south didn't end with civil rights but i feel pretty confident saying the overwhelming majority of americans knew in 1984 (the same year...
but at the time it just simply wasn't seen as wrong.
...
Times have changed, and they have changed for the better, but if someone is a good actor and a decent person now, then why should we judge them for behavior that was perfectly acceptable in the times in which they happened?
Times were different then,
i made the point upthread that really obvious racism in the south didn't end with civil rights but i feel pretty confident saying the overwhelming majority of americans knew in 1984 (the same year that jesse jackson ran for president and managed to make a significant name for himself despite being decried as a 'fringe' candidate) that blackface was racist and that dressing up as a KKK member as a joke is gross and wrong so, i don't think that argument exactly flies here.
I genuinely disagree. The majority of (white) americans definitely thought that it was ok to make fun of stereotypes on account of no white stereotype has ever been harmful and so if it didn't...
I genuinely disagree. The majority of (white) americans definitely thought that it was ok to make fun of stereotypes on account of no white stereotype has ever been harmful and so if it didn't hurt them why should it hurt anyone else?.
In 1986 a movie called Soul Man saw a major theatrical release, and it starred a man who donned black face to get a black-only scholarship to Harvard.
The movie was a flop, and it was derided, but that doesn't change the fact that a major motion picture company decided it was safe enough to produce and release in theaters. Lets not forget that the outrageous stereotypes of blaxpoitation films for entertainment weren't too far removed, having been huge in the 1970s.
what you just said literally provides evidence to my claim that people recognized that blackface is racist as shit even then in direct contradiction of this idea that it "wasn't wrong" then, but okay
The movie was a flop, and it was derided, but that doesn't change the fact that a major motion picture company decided it was safe enough to produce and release in theaters.
what you just said literally provides evidence to my claim that people recognized that blackface is racist as shit even then in direct contradiction of this idea that it "wasn't wrong" then, but okay
Don't you dare put quotes around "wasn't wrong" because I never said that. I would love to know how you come to the conclusion that a major motion picture company placing a 4.5 million dollar bet...
Don't you dare put quotes around "wasn't wrong" because I never said that.
I would love to know how you come to the conclusion that a major motion picture company placing a 4.5 million dollar bet on blackface is anything OTHER than a confirmation that it was reasonable to believe a person in blackface could make money. But ok.
ah, my mistake: you only said or, perhaps merely implied that in 1984 blackface was "behavior that was perfectly acceptable", which is of course a very distinct position from saying it wasn't...
ah, my mistake: you only said or, perhaps merely implied that in 1984 blackface was "behavior that was perfectly acceptable", which is of course a very distinct position from saying it wasn't wrong.
I would love to know how you come to the conclusion that a major motion picture company placing a 4.5 million dollar bet on blackface is anything OTHER than a confirmation that it was reasonable to believe a person in blackface could make money. But ok.
if it bombed despite the fact that it actually was produced, that maybe suggests something about the viability of that view, i.e. that it was and is patently incorrect and absolutely ridiculous.
It is. Acceptable means it was accepted. It doesn't mean a thing about the morality or ethics, and I said myself we should be ashamed, but you've conveniently glossed over that point. The fact is...
It is. Acceptable means it was accepted. It doesn't mean a thing about the morality or ethics, and I said myself we should be ashamed, but you've conveniently glossed over that point.
The fact is times have changed. What was acceptable then is not acceptable now, and if someone did something offensive in the past then that is only one of many things to take in to account. I'm much more worried about what someone has done for equality in the past 10 years, than what they did 30 years ago, and it's frankly sad to see people raked over the coals for past sins instead of being given a chance to show that they have evolved along with the times.
it wasn't, and if you ask literally anybody from the timeframe--even someone who acknowledges how racist the southern US historically has been and in some respects still is--they would concur with...
It is. Acceptable means it was accepted. It doesn't mean a thing about the morality or ethics, and I said myself we should be ashamed, but you've conveniently glossed over that point.
it wasn't, and if you ask literally anybody from the timeframe--even someone who acknowledges how racist the southern US historically has been and in some respects still is--they would concur with the assessment that blackface was not acceptable in 1984, but i dunno, i guess it's too much to ask in 2019 for people to actually just cut off the dude who either wore blackface or dressed up in a klan outfit for a joke instead of trying to die on the hill of defending him, especially given the person after him is literally a black, progressive man and is better on like, every policy issue and also does not have the extremely racist baggage previously mentioned.
If a person did it today, then yes I would absolutely not be defending him. If a person did it nearly 40 years ago and has since evolved as a human being, I think that would be an important lesson...
If a person did it today, then yes I would absolutely not be defending him.
If a person did it nearly 40 years ago and has since evolved as a human being, I think that would be an important lesson in forgiveness, which is clearly a value that is lost in today's outrage based culture.
Good luck being mad at everything, though. I hope it works out for you. Definitely keep dismissing people who 99% agree with you for not being all the way there. That's definitely the way to build a movement and not at all the reason we're suffering Trump.
(Addressed to both you and @alyaza, this just happens to be the last comment in the chain right now) Please try to refrain from making this argument personal. You obviously disagree, and if you...
(Addressed to both you and @alyaza, this just happens to be the last comment in the chain right now)
Please try to refrain from making this argument personal. You obviously disagree, and if you can't continue discussing it without drifting into attacks on each other, just move on. Neither of you is going to convince the other one anyway.
i feel like it is entirely valid to be angry at northam either wearing blackface or dressing as a klan member in 1984 and then becoming a state governor and a major representative of a party which...
Good luck being mad at everything, though. I hope it works out for you. Definitely keep dismissing people who 99% agree with you for not being all the way there. That's definitely the way to build a movement and not at all the reason we're suffering Trump.
i feel like it is entirely valid to be angry at northam either wearing blackface or dressing as a klan member in 1984 and then becoming a state governor and a major representative of a party which prides itself on shedding its legacy of white supremacy and racism and turning into a party which promotes racial tolerance and policies which benefit the minorities it as a party it historically oppressed, and also to categorically reject this idea that what northam did is excusable just because "it was socially acceptable for southerners to be racist 40 years ago!", but yeah i guess that's just be me being an angry SJW demanding far too much of people and making us all suffer under trump.
That's clearly a rebuke of blackface. I.E., the beginning of the end. A demand that it no longer be accepted. I.E. it was but people rightfully demand we stop.
That's clearly a rebuke of blackface. I.E., the beginning of the end. A demand that it no longer be accepted. I.E. it was but people rightfully demand we stop.
update as of 2/2: oh no baby what is you doing, now northam is trying to stay on because he doesn't know if he's the person in the photo even though his statement admitted he was in the photo he...
update as of 2/2: oh no baby what is you doing, now northam is trying to stay on because he doesn't know if he's the person in the photo even though his statement admitted he was in the photo
he also has no party now, since the democrats have denounced him
What Deimos said, but also you're right. Democrats are already calling for Northam's resignation, because it is unacceptable. But the Republican Party cannot pretend to be outraged over Northam...
What Deimos said, but also you're right. Democrats are already calling for Northam's resignation, because it is unacceptable. But the Republican Party cannot pretend to be outraged over Northam when they have King. In a more ideal world, both parties would be calling for the resignations of problematic persons.
I mean, he did something problematic in the mid-80s but I don’t really see how that makes him problematic now. He’s apologized for it and said it doesn’t reflect who he is today. Offensive...
I mean, he did something problematic in the mid-80s but I don’t really see how that makes him problematic now. He’s apologized for it and said it doesn’t reflect who he is today. Offensive costumes weren’t even that socially taboo at the time.
I don't necessarily disagree. But consider how the Democrats handled the Al Franken deal, which I didn't find nearly as bad or much of a scandal at all. The Democratic Party is going through a...
I don't necessarily disagree. But consider how the Democrats handled the Al Franken deal, which I didn't find nearly as bad or much of a scandal at all. The Democratic Party is going through a shift, and we're having a national conversation about racism right now. It makes sense that if the moral bar is set at Franken, then this does not represent the values the Democratic Party wants to embrace. Yes it was 30-years ago, and I'm a big believer in personal growth, but optics do matter in politics. It's a part of this fucked up game.
If he does not resign, then the Republican Party can point to this and tell the nation that the Democrats supports racism. In much the same way they criticized Franken when they had Moore or Trump. This hurts the Democratic Party in the court of public opinion and jeopardizes future elections, regardless of the kind of person Northam is in his heart.
In the greater conversation on racism and white privilege, it does not make sense to support Northam (in a strategic way). Not with a black Lt. Governor, and not when the left is trying to address the disenfranchisement of People-of-Color and the still-present racism in this country.
I don't know enough about Northam to call him a racist or a saint, but it's a very bad look that could be damaging nationally or in the long-run for the Democrats if he sticks around.
TBH I think Franklin kind of got railroaded too, but I just can’t bring myself to care enough to make excuses for rich, old White dudes. I think we’re just in a generational shift where the bar...
TBH I think Franklin kind of got railroaded too, but I just can’t bring myself to care enough to make excuses for rich, old White dudes. I think we’re just in a generational shift where the bar for acceptable behavior has been raised in our lifetimes and a lot of dudes don’t feel like they can clear it.
Like I mentioned to someone else here, this is basically just the same unforgiving standard that has been applied to women and people of color all along. Traditionally privileged guys are just going to have to figure out how to deal with it.
I feel like we're in this unfortunate place where people cleared a lower bar, and now that the bar has been raised, they also clear the new bar. They didn't clear the new bar when they cleared the...
I think we’re just in a generational shift where the bar for acceptable behavior has been raised in our lifetimes and a lot of dudes don’t feel like they can clear it.
I feel like we're in this unfortunate place where people cleared a lower bar, and now that the bar has been raised, they also clear the new bar. They didn't clear the new bar when they cleared the old bar, but they've evolved. Unfortunately, cancel culture doesn't know how to forgive people for being a product of the times.
I don’t like the “product of the times” argument much because it can be used to excuse a lot, and mostly just leads to unproductive arguments about what was and wasn’t acceptable in those times. I...
Unfortunately, cancel culture doesn't know how to forgive people for being a product of the times.
I don’t like the “product of the times” argument much because it can be used to excuse a lot, and mostly just leads to unproductive arguments about what was and wasn’t acceptable in those times.
I think it’s more important to just leave room for people to reform themselves and be forgiven instead of looking for excuses to go headhunting. Robert Byrd was a literal klansman in his early career and he later recanted, voted for the civil rights act, and proudly came out ahead to endorse Barack Obama when the time came saying:
I know now I was wrong. Intolerance had no place in America. I apologized a thousand times ... and I don't mind apologizing over and over again. I can't erase what happened.
I don’t see a problem keeping people around if they can convincingly assert that this isn’t who they are anymore.
If he was just wearing it around town that would have been one thing, but it seems to have been a Halloween party. I wouldn’t read that as an endorsement of the Klan any more than dressing as...
If he was just wearing it around town that would have been one thing, but it seems to have been a Halloween party. I wouldn’t read that as an endorsement of the Klan any more than dressing as Darth Vader would be an endorsement of the Dark Side. Ironically racist Halloween costumes have been a thing for a while.
That said, I don’t feel the need to make excuses for the guy. It was definitely a dumb thing to do. What is see this being is a White guy being held to the kind of standards that POC have been held to all along. Folks are going to need to figure out how to navigate it without letting themselves become easy marks for mendacious false equivalences like the Right Wingers attempting to liken this to Brett Kavanaugh.
It was a dumb thing to do, but people also understood irony then better than they do today. Probably because being ironic was clearly ironic then, whereas today ironic viewpoints come far to close...
It was a dumb thing to do, but people also understood irony then better than they do today. Probably because being ironic was clearly ironic then, whereas today ironic viewpoints come far to close to actual insane people view points.
It's almost like people can change along with society over a period of 40 years.
Unfortunately, a lot of liberalism is a show of moral purity, rather than giving a damn about making progress. Kill people who are 99% of the way there because they aren't sure about that last 1% and see how big of a movement that builds you. This is exactly the thinking that caused Trump.
Medical racism is a thing, and it significantly impacts black folks when they try to access medical care. Disparities in areas such as pain management and maternal mortality rates are pretty clear indicators that this is an ongoing issue in our country.
It's not a stretch to consider that someone who dressed in a way that dehumanizes black people (whether that costume was blackface or a KKK hood) may have harmed black people while practicing medicine, even if only in subconscious, negligent ways such as by dismissing their concerns or pain. This isn't just about feelings. It's about the direct harm that POC face from stereotypes and dehumanization, particularly from people in power (such as doctors and politicians).
I haven't seen any proof that his medical practice was marred by racism, but considering it's a systemic problem and often rooted in subconscious bias he wouldn't be the first.
Plus, as @no_exit points out, he apparently doesn't have a squeaky clean record when it comes to racial/environmental justice, which also relates to medical racism (putting the health of certain communities at higher risk).
this story more or less just broke in mainstream outlets, but local news picked it up first. somehow, i suspect that ralph northam, virginia's current governor, may not be long for his gubernatorial term. given that his LG is black and if he resigns would inherit the governorship, this story is also one part awkward and one part interesting.
(also, another reminder that really obvious racism in the south did not end with the civil rights movement, in case people somehow still thought that.)
(also also, we're off to a fucking wonderful start to black history month)
EDIT: as of 6:15 EST, northam has put out a statement and is not resigning.
This is going to be unpopular, I'm sure, but I'll say it:
Cancel culture has gone too far. There was an era not too long ago when people would have laughed at a couple's costume of a black person (yes even in black face), and a klansman. It's an ironic coupling, and the two were probably friends.
I'm not saying we should be proud of times as they were then (and let's be real: "Then" is honestly as recently as the early to mid 90s). No, we should be ashamed. But we should accept them for what they were, learn from them, and endeavor to be better.
We cannot take back our actions during those times. All the polock jokes and blonde jokes and blonde jokes and everything else. Most of us who lived through it wish we could, but at the time it just simply wasn't seen as wrong, despite how very wrong we now see it to be.
Times have changed, and they have changed for the better, but if someone is a good actor and a decent person now, then why should we judge them for behavior that was perfectly acceptable in the times in which they happened?
Times were different then, and we need to acknowledge that fact. And, no, this is not a slippery slope. There are definite lines of behavior that even then were not acceptable. Progress is slow, and we need to stop letting the perfect be the enemy of the good.
i made the point upthread that really obvious racism in the south didn't end with civil rights but i feel pretty confident saying the overwhelming majority of americans knew in 1984 (the same year that jesse jackson ran for president and managed to make a significant name for himself despite being decried as a 'fringe' candidate) that blackface was racist and that dressing up as a KKK member as a joke is gross and wrong so, i don't think that argument exactly flies here.
I genuinely disagree. The majority of (white) americans definitely thought that it was ok to make fun of stereotypes on account of no white stereotype has ever been harmful and so if it didn't hurt them why should it hurt anyone else?.
In 1986 a movie called Soul Man saw a major theatrical release, and it starred a man who donned black face to get a black-only scholarship to Harvard.
The movie was a flop, and it was derided, but that doesn't change the fact that a major motion picture company decided it was safe enough to produce and release in theaters. Lets not forget that the outrageous stereotypes of blaxpoitation films for entertainment weren't too far removed, having been huge in the 1970s.
what you just said literally provides evidence to my claim that people recognized that blackface is racist as shit even then in direct contradiction of this idea that it "wasn't wrong" then, but okay
Don't you dare put quotes around "wasn't wrong" because I never said that.
I would love to know how you come to the conclusion that a major motion picture company placing a 4.5 million dollar bet on blackface is anything OTHER than a confirmation that it was reasonable to believe a person in blackface could make money. But ok.
ah, my mistake: you only said or, perhaps merely implied that in 1984 blackface was "behavior that was perfectly acceptable", which is of course a very distinct position from saying it wasn't wrong.
if it bombed despite the fact that it actually was produced, that maybe suggests something about the viability of that view, i.e. that it was and is patently incorrect and absolutely ridiculous.
It is. Acceptable means it was accepted. It doesn't mean a thing about the morality or ethics, and I said myself we should be ashamed, but you've conveniently glossed over that point.
The fact is times have changed. What was acceptable then is not acceptable now, and if someone did something offensive in the past then that is only one of many things to take in to account. I'm much more worried about what someone has done for equality in the past 10 years, than what they did 30 years ago, and it's frankly sad to see people raked over the coals for past sins instead of being given a chance to show that they have evolved along with the times.
it wasn't, and if you ask literally anybody from the timeframe--even someone who acknowledges how racist the southern US historically has been and in some respects still is--they would concur with the assessment that blackface was not acceptable in 1984, but i dunno, i guess it's too much to ask in 2019 for people to actually just cut off the dude who either wore blackface or dressed up in a klan outfit for a joke instead of trying to die on the hill of defending him, especially given the person after him is literally a black, progressive man and is better on like, every policy issue and also does not have the extremely racist baggage previously mentioned.
If a person did it today, then yes I would absolutely not be defending him.
If a person did it nearly 40 years ago and has since evolved as a human being, I think that would be an important lesson in forgiveness, which is clearly a value that is lost in today's outrage based culture.
Good luck being mad at everything, though. I hope it works out for you. Definitely keep dismissing people who 99% agree with you for not being all the way there. That's definitely the way to build a movement and not at all the reason we're suffering Trump.
(Addressed to both you and @alyaza, this just happens to be the last comment in the chain right now)
Please try to refrain from making this argument personal. You obviously disagree, and if you can't continue discussing it without drifting into attacks on each other, just move on. Neither of you is going to convince the other one anyway.
I appreciate you.
i feel like it is entirely valid to be angry at northam either wearing blackface or dressing as a klan member in 1984 and then becoming a state governor and a major representative of a party which prides itself on shedding its legacy of white supremacy and racism and turning into a party which promotes racial tolerance and policies which benefit the minorities it as a party it historically oppressed, and also to categorically reject this idea that what northam did is excusable just because "it was socially acceptable for southerners to be racist 40 years ago!", but yeah i guess that's just be me being an angry SJW demanding far too much of people and making us all suffer under trump.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
And I feel like it's entirely valid to forgive someone for a mistake made 40 years ago.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
That's clearly a rebuke of blackface. I.E., the beginning of the end. A demand that it no longer be accepted. I.E. it was but people rightfully demand we stop.
northam has put out a statement and is not resigning as of now
i think it's pretty safe to say he's out by the end of the week. more calls to resign are presumably coming.
Let's hope! I never bought into his kindly doctor schtick, and he's been deep in the pockets of Dominion since day one.
update as of 2/2: oh no baby what is you doing, now northam is trying to stay on because he doesn't know if he's the person in the photo even though his statement admitted he was in the photo
he also has no party now, since the democrats have denounced him
as near as i can tell that's not actually what they think, or else they wouldn't have put out the second part of their statement here.
This is unacceptable, and if the Republicans want a future measured in decades instead of years they should clean house.
Ralph Northam is a Democrat.
Thanks. I've gotten used to conflating GOP with KKK over the last decade or so.
What Deimos said, but also you're right. Democrats are already calling for Northam's resignation, because it is unacceptable. But the Republican Party cannot pretend to be outraged over Northam when they have King. In a more ideal world, both parties would be calling for the resignations of problematic persons.
I mean, he did something problematic in the mid-80s but I don’t really see how that makes him problematic now. He’s apologized for it and said it doesn’t reflect who he is today. Offensive costumes weren’t even that socially taboo at the time.
I don't necessarily disagree. But consider how the Democrats handled the Al Franken deal, which I didn't find nearly as bad or much of a scandal at all. The Democratic Party is going through a shift, and we're having a national conversation about racism right now. It makes sense that if the moral bar is set at Franken, then this does not represent the values the Democratic Party wants to embrace. Yes it was 30-years ago, and I'm a big believer in personal growth, but optics do matter in politics. It's a part of this fucked up game.
If he does not resign, then the Republican Party can point to this and tell the nation that the Democrats supports racism. In much the same way they criticized Franken when they had Moore or Trump. This hurts the Democratic Party in the court of public opinion and jeopardizes future elections, regardless of the kind of person Northam is in his heart.
In the greater conversation on racism and white privilege, it does not make sense to support Northam (in a strategic way). Not with a black Lt. Governor, and not when the left is trying to address the disenfranchisement of People-of-Color and the still-present racism in this country.
I don't know enough about Northam to call him a racist or a saint, but it's a very bad look that could be damaging nationally or in the long-run for the Democrats if he sticks around.
TBH I think Franklin kind of got railroaded too, but I just can’t bring myself to care enough to make excuses for rich, old White dudes. I think we’re just in a generational shift where the bar for acceptable behavior has been raised in our lifetimes and a lot of dudes don’t feel like they can clear it.
Like I mentioned to someone else here, this is basically just the same unforgiving standard that has been applied to women and people of color all along. Traditionally privileged guys are just going to have to figure out how to deal with it.
I feel like we're in this unfortunate place where people cleared a lower bar, and now that the bar has been raised, they also clear the new bar. They didn't clear the new bar when they cleared the old bar, but they've evolved. Unfortunately, cancel culture doesn't know how to forgive people for being a product of the times.
I don’t like the “product of the times” argument much because it can be used to excuse a lot, and mostly just leads to unproductive arguments about what was and wasn’t acceptable in those times.
I think it’s more important to just leave room for people to reform themselves and be forgiven instead of looking for excuses to go headhunting. Robert Byrd was a literal klansman in his early career and he later recanted, voted for the civil rights act, and proudly came out ahead to endorse Barack Obama when the time came saying:
I don’t see a problem keeping people around if they can convincingly assert that this isn’t who they are anymore.
If he was just wearing it around town that would have been one thing, but it seems to have been a Halloween party. I wouldn’t read that as an endorsement of the Klan any more than dressing as Darth Vader would be an endorsement of the Dark Side. Ironically racist Halloween costumes have been a thing for a while.
That said, I don’t feel the need to make excuses for the guy. It was definitely a dumb thing to do. What is see this being is a White guy being held to the kind of standards that POC have been held to all along. Folks are going to need to figure out how to navigate it without letting themselves become easy marks for mendacious false equivalences like the Right Wingers attempting to liken this to Brett Kavanaugh.
It was a dumb thing to do, but people also understood irony then better than they do today. Probably because being ironic was clearly ironic then, whereas today ironic viewpoints come far to close to actual insane people view points.