- The American Conservative - http://www.theamericanconservative.com -

When Is It OK To Kill Whites?

Tommy Curry is an associate professor at Texas A&M [1]. He is black, and specializes in Critical Race Theory [2]. Prof. Curry does not limit his teaching to the classroom. He has a strong presence on YouTube.

In this brief interview, he discusses when it is appropriate to kill white people:

“In order to be equal, in order to be liberated, some white people might have to die,” he says.

In this interview with a blogcast called Context Of White Supremacy [3](slogan: “White People Are The Problem”), Curry argues that whites cannot be ignorant of racism (their own or anyone else’s) and that black people who assume that whites are educable on racism are fools. He puts down different black theorists, including Martin Luther King, for actually thinking that white people can be regarded as reasonable. It’s a remarkable thing: a philosophy professor who denies that a people are capable of rational thought because of their race.

In this talk [4], Curry denounces the “integrationist” model of race relations, and describes the black-white relationship as one of power. “White people don’t want to question their physical life and certainly not their own racial existence,” he says. “Because that means they would have to accept that death could come for them at any moment, the same way non-white people have to accept that. And they don’t want to question their existence, they’re not willing to give up their existence. They’ll hold on to their white life just as much as a [unclear] will hold on to a crack pipe. They are fundamentally addicted to the purity of what they see whiteness to be.”

What does any of this racist bilge mean? To prove his own human worth to Tommy Curry, a white person has to despise himself? Good luck with that, Tommy Curry.

The white nationalist spokesman Richard Spencer came to Texas A&M and gave a speech. You can watch it here. [5] I did, but didn’t stick around for Q&A. It was far, far milder than anything Tommy Curry has said on his internet recordings. TAMU changed the rules for campus speakers in response to Spencer’s appearance there. But Tommy Curry can say anything he likes about the manifold wickedness of white people? Is that it?

I wonder what it is like to be a white student studying under Dr. Curry in his classroom?

 

145 Comments (Open | Close)

145 Comments To "When Is It OK To Kill Whites?"

#1 Comment By Dux Bellorum, Austinopole On May 9, 2017 @ 12:23 am

You know, Islam teaches Muslims that Hindus like me are “untermenschen” – sub-humans – who must be subjugated under Islam and made to live in apartheid conditions. Under sharia law, Muslims are top dogs, Christians and Jews are below them, and Hindus, Buddhists and other scum like me are at the bottom. That’s why the death compensation for Hindus in Saudi Arabia is 1/16 th that for Muslims (for Christians and Jews, the ratio is 1/2).

During the one thousand years of Islamic rule in India, millions of my fellow Hindus, Buddhists, Jains and Sikhs were enslaved and taken to the slave markets of Central Asia and the Middle East – the Gypsies are descendants of those unfortunate people.

How do you think I feel when I walk past a mosque or when I hear multikultis like you caterwaul about the many-splendored joys of Islam? Do I have a right to demand that mosques be torn down because of sharia apartheid and the enslavement of my people by Muslims?

I have no idea where you got the idea that I am, as you say, a “multikulti”. Also, the bit about the Roma is a lie. It was not the Muslims who expelled them, it was high caste Hindus, during the times of Muslim occupation. [6] Hi, nice to meet you, high caste Hindu here. Ram ram, homey.

When the researchers overlaid the closest matches onto a genetic map of India, the highest density was in areas dominated by India’s “doma”, “scheduled tribes and castes” – the low caste dalits or untouchables who suffer widespread and generational discrimination and usually do society’s dirtiest jobs.
The researchers believe the descendants of today’s Roma gypsies in Europe began their westward exodus first to fight in wars in what is today Punjab between 1001 and 1026 on the promise of a promotion in caste status.

If you knew me at all, you’d know that one of my frequent points is that Muslims in India like to pretend that they’re like black people in America, when, really, they’re something more like white South Africans or Rhodesians.

Anyway, if you lived in India and were agitating for the rebuilding of temples were masjids were built over them, I would not care one bit. Nor would I care if you took Sonu Nigam’s side in his recent bit of trolling, because, hey, nobody likes dealing with anyone else’s religion.

What conflicts from the desh have to do with whether or not white conservatives venerate Confederates and white supremacists and then go into fainting spells when non-whites hint that violence works is beyond me.

$0.02,

DBA

#2 Comment By Lee On May 9, 2017 @ 4:00 am

The story points to a concept of institutionalized racism, and the new protected class.

#3 Comment By Ken’ichi On May 9, 2017 @ 5:08 am

>>dominic1955

If the State sides with the radicals, then it needs to be overthrown like Nazi Germany or Soviet Russia.

But Nazi Germany was not overthrown from within; it was defeated by external enemies. Nor did Soviet Russia end without significant outside “pressure.” So, if the State sides with the radicals, who are the external enemies who will overthrow it? And as for your government not taking sides against “self defense”, have you not followed news from Berkeley?

#4 Comment By Elijah On May 9, 2017 @ 7:07 am

“But, if some radical thinks whites need to die to end “oppression” that means it might be my kids, my family, my friends and coworkers etc. I (and I’m sure lots of others) have no compunctions about putting such radicals in the ground if they ever attempt to act on such threats. I don’t care if they are black or white or whatever.”

Exactly – no matter where the State “comes down”. This is exactly why Rod and I and others fear such a course of action – it is bound to touch off large incidents of mob violence. And I strongly suspect under those circumstances there would be no such thing as a unified response by the State – because at that point does “the State” mean local, state-level, or federal?

“That must be why so many non-white native-born Americans are fleeing America and why people of color do not want to immigrate to the US.”

No part of this is true unless by “so many” you mean “less than ten”.

What people here rightly worry about is not the “tepid philosophizing” of a black man, but the call for more deaths of white people – because they are white – by a tenured professor at a prestigious American university. We wouldn’t tolerate that type of “philosophizing” (race-baiting would be more accurate) about blacks or Jews – why do we have to tolerate it about whites?

I begin to think the real danger to this nation is not whites or blacks or radicals or conservatives but PhD academics.

#5 Comment By Raskolnik On May 9, 2017 @ 7:17 am

I want to thank Ludo and DBA, for their invaluable service as such incredibly effective recruiting tools for the Reaction. Truly, you are doing God’s work. Keep it up.

#6 Comment By Erdrick On May 9, 2017 @ 8:01 am

ludo says:
May 8, 2017 at 10:27 pm
Btw, as others have pointed out, this post we are all responding to replicates, in effect, the phenomenon of the black bogeyman, by making out of the black professor´s words a specter of fear based on the distortion or miscontrual of, ironically the very opposite sort of effort, an attempt at reasoned discourse and analysis: even the tepid philosophizing of a black man seems to become readily cause enough in an important American conservative publication for the sowing of fear through the continued stereotyping of the black male as the white family´s most fearsome bogeyman.

Ludo, you can justify and excuse this Cgarbage all you want, but don’t pretend that there aren’t groups of black people calling for the indiscriminate slaughter of whites. Within the past year I have run into these pyschopaths twice in the central business districts of major US cities thousands of miles apart: [7]

Groups of 15 – 20 black men calling for enslavement or genocide of white people in the middle of the day. But whereas a neo-Nazi rally of similar size would receive national news coverage and horrified denunciation (as well it should), these people are given a pass because of people like you who make any and every excuse for them. Hateful black racist groups are growing, and people like Curry are creating the philosophical framework to justify violence on their behalf. Your attempts to shame people here for objecting to that process are misguided and wrong.

I respect people enough to think they mean it when they talk about how they want to kill me. Progressive SJWs who consider minorities some sort of harmless infant Noble Savage do not, I guess.

#7 Comment By Noah172 On May 9, 2017 @ 8:56 am

Robert T Ernst wrote:

What other country passed laws proclaiming only white people could become citizens?

Lots of countries have had and still have racial, ethnic, or religious restrictions on citizenship.

What other country systematically enslaved blacks while worshipping the Declaration of Independence that trumpets all men are created equal?

I bet the Koran has some verses declaring people to be equal, and yet Muslims practiced, and in some places still practice, slavery.

BTW, not all negroes in antebellum America were slaves. Free negroes had some rights and privileges, varying by location.

What other country refused by law to allow Asians to become citizens? What other country excluded Chinese from becoming citizens by law?

Racial, ethnic, and religious restrictions on immigration are common, especially in the very Oriental countries from which the US banned immigration. Go ahead, Mr. Ernst, try to emigrate to China and become a citizen. Report back to us with your progress.

What other country forced blacks to live in ghettos by law and federal government regulations?

I see we have a reader of Ta-Nehisi Coates here.

The word “ghetto” originated in medieval Venice, Italy, and meant the part of town where Jews were required to live. Enforced separation of peoples is a commonplace in world history.

The answer of history is no other country but the U.S. did. Period.

You are ignorant. Period.

#8 Comment By connecticut farmer On May 9, 2017 @ 9:02 am

Progressives would do well to shut down people like this Curry person as he does their movement nothing but harm. But they won’t…because they are fearful of being labeled “racist” by their fellow-travelers. In short–they are intellectual cowards.

#9 Comment By Erdrick On May 9, 2017 @ 9:07 am

VikingLS says:
May 8, 2017 at 11:17 pm
“I believe you mean that your daughter believes that she is white, in the phrasing of James Baldwin and Ta-Nehisi Coates.”

My daughter believes she is a pirate, a doctor, a dog, or a tiger, depending on her mood. She’s 4. She’s also somehow irredeemably racist by virtue of her race according to Dr. Curry, and presumably one of those whites that might have to die.

That’s the reality of this kind of rhetoric, though I doubt Curry reasoned it that far.

He’s definitely reasoned it that far. Click on the Context Of White Supremacy link in the article. The poster of the evil white people includes a little girl and a baby. Make no mistake, radical Black racists consider our children- no matter how young- to be The Enemy.

#10 Comment By Raskolnik On May 9, 2017 @ 9:27 am

What conflicts from the desh have to do with whether or not white conservatives venerate Confederates and white supremacists and then go into fainting spells when non-whites hint that violence works is beyond me.

Really? You don’t get that (more or less) peaceful Partition is the absolute best case scenario here?

#11 Comment By Raskolnik On May 9, 2017 @ 9:29 am

Lots of countries have had and still have racial, ethnic, or religious restrictions on citizenship.

I mean coming from DBA this is just way too rich. India makes you jump through insane hoops for a TOURIST VISA if you have a single Pakistani grandparent, but oooooooo the big bad American bogeyman is “white supremacist” all the way down

#12 Comment By VikingLS On May 9, 2017 @ 10:40 am

“Honestly, I find it really, really telling that white Southern conservatives expect us all to understand their not so nuanced relationship to horrific ancestors but are the first to call for the rest of us to throw people like Malcolm under the bus. Apparently, it’s easier for them to understand John Calhoun than someone who’d want to kill John Calhoun.”

Okay, who are these southerners calling for people to denounce Malcolm X and praise John Calhoun?

Give us names. Remember, you are calling out southerners, so you can’t cite northerners. Remember as well they have to be prominent, not some blogger you found.

#13 Comment By Janwaar Bibi On May 9, 2017 @ 10:57 am

What conflicts from the desh have to do with whether or not white conservatives venerate Confederates and white supremacists and then go into fainting spells when non-whites hint that violence works is beyond me.

Let me spell it out for you.

If Robert E. Lee and other confederate leaders should be reviled because they were slave-owners, white supremacists and violent people, shouldn’t Moses and Muhammad also be reviled because they were slave-owners, Jewish/Muslim supremacists, and violent people?

This question has nothing to do with “desh” and can be answered with a simple “yes” or “no.”

If your answer is “no,” it can only be because you believe the sins of dead white Christians are more reprehensible than the sins of Jews and Muslims, which is the multikulti position. Telling me that Mo I and Mo II were thugs but also gave money to widows and orphans or whatever is not an adequate answer since Robert E. Lee apparently had many fine qualities as well.

#14 Comment By Bernie Bridges On May 9, 2017 @ 10:59 am

Pressured speech. Extreme emotionalism. This guy clearly has Bipolar I disorder. He should be on Lithium or some other mood stabilizer.

#15 Comment By just a prof On May 9, 2017 @ 1:51 pm

Dark and lonely on the summer night.
Kill my landlord, kill my landlord.
Watchdog barking – Do he bite?
Kill my landlord, kill my landlord.
Slip in his window, Break his neck!
Then his house I start to wreck!
Got no reason — What the heck!
Kill my landlord, kill my landlord.
C-I-L-L my landlord.

—Tyrone Greene

Well, if Herr Prof. Dr. Curry agrees with one of America’s great comedians, he can’t be all humorless.

#16 Comment By Dux Bellorum, Austinopole On May 9, 2017 @ 2:27 pm

If Robert E. Lee and other confederate leaders should be reviled because they were slave-owners, white supremacists and violent people, shouldn’t Moses and Muhammad also be reviled because they were slave-owners, Jewish/Muslim supremacists, and violent people?

This question has nothing to do with “desh” and can be answered with a simple “yes” or “no.”

If your answer is “no,” it can only be because you believe the sins of dead white Christians are more reprehensible than the sins of Jews and Muslims, which is the multikulti position. Telling me that Mo I and Mo II were thugs but also gave money to widows and orphans or whatever is not an adequate answer since Robert E. Lee apparently had many fine qualities as well.

Or it could be that I am somewhat of a historicist, say that Moses, Mohammed, Manu, etc. had little access to any other possible belief set and are things from the past to not be emulated, while Robert E. Lee, Jesse Helms, etc. live in an era in which they have access to information and moral views that allow them to be better.

I believe that Catholics make a distinction between people who have access to salvation and choose to reject it vs. those who don’t, like infants in the Amazon.

I have no idea who you think that you’re arguing against, as I am very clearly not a hippie dippie postmodernist lunatic. My position, if it helps, is somewhat closer to Nehru’s idea of a multinational, socialist democracy.

$0.02,

DBA

#17 Comment By SlothB77 On May 9, 2017 @ 2:39 pm

This video is from 2012. So old news. But a good find.

If I had a kid going to Texas A & M, I would remove the kid from the school until the professor is fired.

[NFR: I would not. Every big college has at least one nutty professor. But I would tell my kid to steer clear of that man’s class. — RD]

#18 Comment By M_Young On May 9, 2017 @ 5:46 pm

“while Robert E. Lee, Jesse Helms, etc. live in an era in which they have access to information and moral views that allow them to be better.”

That present tense is more than a little weird.

#19 Comment By M_Young On May 9, 2017 @ 5:46 pm

So, what I’m getting is “Curry doesn’t say whites should be killed, but even if he did say that, they would deserve it”.

#20 Comment By Hector_St_Clare On May 9, 2017 @ 6:11 pm

If you knew me at all, you’d know that one of my frequent points is that Muslims in India like to pretend that they’re like black people in America, when, really, they’re something more like white South Africans or Rhodesians

Um no, Muslims in India are not really analogous either to Blacks in America or to Afrikaners in South Africa. This is one reason why facile historical analogies rarely are illuminative.

Most Muslims in South Asia are the genetic descendants of converts rather than conquerors, and they were neither uniformly an economic/political elite nor were they uniformly poor and oppressed. They were an elite class in, say, Hyderabad, but certainly not in the Punjab.

Anyway, as far as Nehru’s multinational socialist democracy goes, he wouldn’t have agreed with you that Muslims were the equivalent of Afrikaners, and he certainly wouldn’t have agreed with rebuilding temples where they had been torn down to build mosques.

Racial, ethnic, and religious restrictions on immigration are common, especially in the very Oriental countries from which the US banned immigration. Go ahead, Mr. Ernst, try to emigrate to China and become a citizen. Report back to us with your progress.

Mr Ernst’s comment is pretty dumb, but look your response to him is disingenuous too. Unlike the many other ‘ethnic homelands’ that are out there, America forcibly brought Black people over in chains, and then we deliberately reneged on treaties that had allowed Native Americans separate ethnic homelands of their own. This is one thing that makes us very different from a country like Poland or the Czech Republic, or for that matter a country like Japan or Pakistan.

#21 Comment By Hector_St_Clare On May 9, 2017 @ 6:13 pm

Or it could be that I am somewhat of a historicist, say that Moses, Mohammed, Manu, etc. had little access to any other possible belief set and are things from the past to not be emulated,

There were probably people in Moses’ time, and there were certainly people in Muhammed’s who disapproved of slavery and called for its abolition.

#22 Comment By Mia On May 9, 2017 @ 6:30 pm

“He puts down different black theorists, including Martin Luther King, for actually thinking that white people can be regarded as reasonable.”

I think it’s high time to start reading circles of Martin Luther King and other colorblind thinkers of the civil rights era as a response to this, and to have more open discussions of scientific racism of the late 19th and early 20th century and why it didn’t work. Sure, I can’t stand some of the people in my own (white) community either, but that’s because they are truly bas***ds, not because they are white. We just need to get those creeps out of power and get the reasonable people in. Better to see that jerks are in all groups and disproportionately grab positions of status and power so they can do outsize amounts of damage that the rest of us wouldn’t condone at all.

#23 Comment By Janwaar Bibi On May 9, 2017 @ 10:39 pm

Or it could be that I am somewhat of a historicist, say that Moses, Mohammed, Manu, etc. had little access to any other possible belief set and are things from the past to not be emulated

Access to other possible belief sets??? Moses is called the “law-giver” by Jews and Muhammad is considered by Muslims to be “al-insaan al-kamil” (the Perfect Human Being) who must be emulated in every way by all Muslims. They explicitly rejected all other “belief sets” they came across and went around murdering everyone who had other “belief sets.”

Any logically consistent belief system that requires someone to whine about statues of Confederate leaders in the South requires one also to condemn Moses, Muhammad, the Torah and the Koran for their shameless practice and promotion of slavery.

Moreover, no one in the American South is promoting slavery today, but many Muslims, including ISIS and the imams of Saudi Arabia, promote slavery of infidels *today* (I have posted recent fatwas from the Saudi chief imam on this matter, and I will be happy to do so again).

You may not consider yourself to be multikulti but in what way are your views on this matter different from that of multikultis?

#24 Comment By Omar T Podunk On May 9, 2017 @ 11:38 pm

Mr. Curry needs to be unemployed. Texas A&M should be embarrassed to have him on staff. Watch his YouTube Videos. Do you Alumni think this person should be on staff ?? You should not donate to Texas A&M.

#25 Comment By Siarlys Jenkins On May 10, 2017 @ 1:11 am

Better to see that jerks are in all groups and disproportionately grab positions of status and power so they can do outsize amounts of damage that the rest of us wouldn’t condone at all.

Hear! Hear!

They explicitly rejected all other “belief sets” they came across and went around murdering everyone who had other “belief sets.”

This is simply not historically accurate. The Rashidun and Umayyad Caliphs treated Islam as the religion of the Arabs, and never really considered allowing, much less requiring, the subjects of their new empire to convert. The Abassids, once they finished slaughtering all the Umayyads they could get their hands on, were quite friendly to Jews (who had been of great assistance in the conquest of western Asia, and were allowed back into Jerusalem for the first time since the Christians excluded them), and tolerant of Christians. It was some of the Turkish and Berber converts who first began persecuting those with different belief systems.

Islam has always persecuted what they considered to be idolatrous faiths, which grows out of the experience of suppressing idolatry in Mecca, and of course draws on Jewish and Christian traditions. It is true that Buddhism and Hinduism were often treated as idolatrous, for rather obvious reasons, but they survived in a fashion that the Greek pantheons and the Babylonian and Egyptian worship did not, for equally obvious reasons. And somehow, in parts of India ruled for some time by Muslims, there remains a Hindu majority, still alive and reproducing.

Any logically consistent belief system that requires someone to whine about statues of Confederate leaders in the South requires one also to condemn Moses, Muhammad, the Torah and the Koran for their shameless practice and promotion of slavery.

Perhaps a citizen of the USA feels a responsibility to come to terms with our own history as a nation, but not to parse every detail of every culture anywhere in the world from the dawn of human history? Slavery in North America actually began with British subjects convicted of capital crimes shipped over in chains and auctioned on arrival in the colonies. True, that was for a term of seven years, not for life, but in some colonies, Africans were also auctioned for seven years, which is a substantial reason for men of African descent standing in the militia at Lexington and Concord.

The specific forms of slavery as they came to exist in North America are only a few centuries old, and can be easily distinguished from other forms in other centuries and continents. As Hector said, “facile historical analogies rarely are illuminative.”

#26 Comment By Hector_St_Clare On May 10, 2017 @ 9:58 am

Really? You don’t get that (more or less) peaceful Partition is the absolute best case scenario here?

I don’t see what the evidence is that Partition would be a good or workable solution in America.

Partition in India happened because Muslims in India overwhelmingly wanted a country of their own. This is not the case in America. Black people overwhelmingly rejected Malcolm X’s suggestion that they form an independent political party of their own (as a prelude to forming an independent country), and joined ‘mainstream’ Democratic politics en masse.

I think partition makes sense for a lot of places around the world, but it doesn’t make sense for America.

It is true that Buddhism and Hinduism were often treated as idolatrous, for rather obvious reasons, but they survived in a fashion that the Greek pantheons and the Babylonian and Egyptian worship did not, for equally obvious reasons. And somehow, in parts of India ruled for some time by Muslims, there remains a Hindu majority, still alive and reproducing

Not sure the extent to which this is true, but Turmarion has stated here in the past that Muslim rulers generally saw Buddhism as more idolatrous than Hinduism, which is why Buddhism mostly disappeared from india until the twentieth century (outside the most remote mountain and rainforest regions) while Hinduism obviously did not.

#27 Comment By Jay On May 10, 2017 @ 10:10 am

When is it ok to track down Tom Curry and break his ribs? Don’t worry Tom…I’m just musing and exercising my first amendment rights.

#28 Comment By Wayne On May 10, 2017 @ 10:40 am

The question itself, “When Is It OK To Kill Whites?” is racist. The only valid question is “when is it OK to kill another human?” It’s never OK, but there are times it’s necessary and correct to do so. These times are war and defense. Neither of these are applicable here. Are there some whites that are racist and won’t give a colored person a chance? Absolutely. Is that the norm? No. Most whites (and other races also) are more than willing to give a chance to someone who’s hard working and not a whiner, regardless of what race that person is.

#29 Comment By JoeThePimpernel On May 10, 2017 @ 10:54 am

About that same time it will become OK to kill black affirmative action perfessers.

#30 Comment By Janwaar Bibi On May 10, 2017 @ 10:55 am

Perhaps a citizen of the USA feels a responsibility to come to terms with our own history as a nation, but not to parse every detail of every culture anywhere in the world from the dawn of human history?

I don’t accept that argument. The religious justifications for slavery made by slave-owners and leaders of the Confederacy drew explicitly from the Old Testament and cited the example set by the “prophets” of the Old Testament.

Here for example is Rabbi Morris Raphall, an abolitionist who nevertheless acknowledged the sanction given to slavery in the Old Testament:

[8]

“..slave-holding is not only recognized and sanctioned as in integral part of the social structure…[but] the property in slaves is placed under the same protection as any other species of lawful property”

The connection between slavery in America and the Old Testament/Moses/etc. is explicitly there in the historical record, and cannot be whitewashed away by claiming that since Moses was not an American citizen, he is beyond the jurisdiction of Austinopole and Siarlys.

Islam has always persecuted what they considered to be idolatrous faiths..It is true that Buddhism and Hinduism were often treated as idolatrous,…[but] in parts of India ruled for some time by Muslims, there remains a Hindu majority, still alive and reproducing.

There remain millions of African-Americans, still alive and reproducing. Your point?

As Hector said, “facile historical analogies rarely are illuminative.”

That statement is devoid of any content other than “if I don’t like your analogy, I’ll call it facile.”

#31 Comment By Robin On May 10, 2017 @ 11:36 am

I really don’t understand all this hate. Where is the victory for a race that is killing itself, a murdering its own community faster that it can grow.

#32 Comment By oldshooter On May 10, 2017 @ 2:34 pm

WOW! I didn’t realize they actually had idiots teaching at A&M. Do you suppose that maybe all those old “Aggie Jokes” are actually TRUE?!!

#33 Comment By oldshooter On May 10, 2017 @ 2:41 pm

Prof. Curry sounds a tad stupid for a philosophy prof. By his reasoning, if it is all just a matter of power, then it would make perfectly good sense for us to return to the days of segregation and the KKK’s depredations on Blacks. After all, by his reasoning, it was really foolish and misguided of all those white folks to stand up for equal rights for black people back in the 1950s and ’60s, thereby giving up their position of power. And by extension, he is calling for a return to the old Jim Crow era, when Whites actually held and KEPT their power.
Given that there are a LOT more Whites than Blacks, and a lot more ARMED Whites than Blacks, advocating such a racial conflict between the two seems like a very foolish thing for an intelligent black man to do.

#34 Comment By John Gibson ’83 On May 10, 2017 @ 3:32 pm

I graduated from Texas A&M, thanks to a bunch of other people including my wife, parents, teachers, professors, and other Aggies. My loyalty to my fellow Ags rivals my loyalty to my fellow Rangers and Green Berets. That loyalty ends when the member espouses evil. Evidently, Dr Tommy Curry has ignored, or rejected the Aggie Spirit (google it). Through A&M, the Church, and the military I have been introduced to men of many ethnicities. These are men that I respect, trust, and, if John 15:13 is the standard, loved. “Greater love has no one than this, that one lay down his life for his friends.” I suggest that TAMU Chancellor John Sharp introduce Dr Curry to the Aggie Spirit, and Brotherly Love.

Highway 6 runs both ways.

#35 Comment By p3cop On May 10, 2017 @ 3:38 pm

Here’s a point all of these SJW professors miss. You ain’t black and I ain’t white. There are no pure races anymore. We are all mixed. Everybody has at least some blood in them from a mother of another color. Or at least another shade. So now it comes down to percentages. How much of that “tainted” blood do you have in you?

Black Nazis. How ridiculous. How sad.

#36 Comment By rhennigantx On May 10, 2017 @ 5:54 pm

My guess is that which whites must die is a moving target. Today it is KKK members and some of the alt-right (whatever the f that is). Tomorrow people that have not read all B Hussein Obama books. Day after that old white lady that cuts you off in traffic.

#37 Comment By Siarlys Jenkins On May 10, 2017 @ 8:11 pm

Here’s a point all of these SJW professors miss. You ain’t black and I ain’t white. There are no pure races anymore. We are all mixed. Everybody has at least some blood in them from a mother of another color.

So true. I was just talking about that with a man in rural Mississippi who claims European, African and Native American ancestors, as do I, although I look “white” and he looks “black.” Or, as a man I briefly met at the Leo Beck foundation observed, “There are no pure bloodlines.”

I really don’t understand all this hate. Where is the victory for a race that is killing itself, a murdering its own community faster that it can grow.

No “race” is “killing itself” faster than “it” can grow. Individuals kill other individuals. Couples (however enduring or brief their mutual commitment) have babies, actually in rather larger numbers than the murders happening around them. I know quite a few of those babies.

#38 Comment By Russell Arben Fox On May 11, 2017 @ 9:27 am

The conversation has already moved on, but upon the urging of a FB friend of mine (and of Dr. Curry, who has–of course!–been flooded with racist and threatening messages since this piece of Rod’s hit the internet), I listened to the full broadcast. My conclusion? This, among many other reasons, is why I don’t do podcasts. They’re an invitation to go deep–as Dr. Curry does here, artfully mixing media representations of white-on-black and black-on-white violence with popular culture, black nationalism, and the 2nd amendment–but they still get packaged through social media channels that simply beg for lines to be taken out of context.

Did he call for black people to start killing white people? No. Did he riff on the notion that the only way to address the tight, unspoken, historical assumption that white people availing themselves of 2nd amendment protections and arming themselves is race-neutral, while black people doing so is not, would be to enter into a state of open and frequent violence between the races? Sure, in the same way that Rod, when he gets going (in the same way Dr. Curry was obviously up and going in this recording) will start to riff on how same-sex marriage and transgenderism, because they civically validate a view towards sexuality that goes against the binary complementarianism that he believes the Bible and Christian tradition lays down as the natural law of the universe, will lead to the complete destruction of Western civilization. When he calms down, he makes it clear he doesn’t literally believe that–and no doubt, in a different setting, Dr. Curry would have made his point with a different set of nuances. So, again: don’t do podcasts.

#39 Comment By Denis Martin On May 11, 2017 @ 12:10 pm

The editing and hack job you did on Dr. Curry’s original interview is unconsciousable. If anything happens to his family or him, you should be held responsible. Real journalism doesn’t do this. You completely decontextualized his words and now he’s in danger because of it. You should feel deep shame, issue a retraction, and set things rights.

This article explains what you did.

[9]

[NFR: I reject your interpretation. It is abhorrent that anybody threatens Dr. Curry (I say that as someone who once had to go into hiding because multiple black people in New York threatened my life because of a column I wrote). But Dr. Curry’s words were public, and I linked to them. I stand by my interpretation. You seem to believe that radical professors can say whatever they want in public, but if people publicize their words or draw criticism to them, that is out of bounds. — RD]

#40 Comment By red On May 11, 2017 @ 2:05 pm

Rod,

You’ve dangerously quoted this person out of context, in the process subjecting him to a tribalistic shaming and harassment. Not only is this not what Benedict would do, it’s not what any honest interlocutor would do. This hits the reflexive anger button in ways that make me deeply uncomfortable, and is, ironically, why I turned to this blog in the first place — for reasoned thought that did not ask us to act nor react based upon our baser emotions.

[NFR: I did not do that. — RD]

#41 Comment By Jay On May 11, 2017 @ 2:05 pm

well said RD

#42 Comment By Strelnikov On May 12, 2017 @ 12:00 pm

This moron apparently doesn’t understand that if the killing begins along racial lines, that will cut both ways. He seems to think that white people will merely submit to his racial justice. Good luck with that, lardass.

Funny how the oppressed always seem to be fat feeders at the public trough.

#43 Comment By Semiotexting On May 12, 2017 @ 2:29 pm

It’s very clear that neither Dreher nor many of the commentators here actually listened or understood what Dr. Curry was saying.
His point:
Our nation validates and supports whites right to protect and defend their rights and freedom through violence yet invalidates and denounces blacks rights to protect and defend their rights and freedom through violence.

#44 Comment By Siarlys Jenkins On May 12, 2017 @ 7:11 pm

Semiotexting… if that is what Dr. Curry meant to say, he should have said it, rather than saying what he did say. And he should have provided factual examples, rather than just ranting as if what he meant to say is self-evident. (I could offer several).

red, I think Rod quoted the man at some length. I’m sure Dr. Curry would be a nice man to have lunch with, and it would be fun to arrange for him and Rod to have a beer together sometime. But his writing is not well thought out or presented, and as I said, Rod quoted him at some length.

Russell Arben Fox has a coherent and thoughtful critique. He may be right. But Dr. Curry needs to try writing second and third drafts before he posts.

#45 Comment By captrs On June 3, 2017 @ 11:48 am

This guy needs to be fired, as does any professor that advocates the killing of anybody!