Quantcast
your £$ support needed

part of a small rebellion | by maryann johanson

Detroit movie review: racism 101 for white people

Detroit green light

MaryAnn’s quick take…
Tense, gripping, enraging, but only about things that black Americans already know. This is a primer about racism for white people, and we must pay attention.tweet
I’m “biast” (pro): nothing
I’m “biast” (con): nothing
(what is this about? see my critic’s minifesto)

Detroit is a movie about racism in America for white people. It mostly does not center black characters except as victims. Its villain — a murderously racist white cop — is also its protagonist. A movie about racism in America for white people isn’t the most terrible idea ever: Detroit wants to show us white people how the systematic weight of endless injustice weighs on black people, psychologically as well as physically, because of entrenched racism, not only of the actively vicious kind but also of the “I’m not getting involved, I’m just minding my own business” kind. (Black people don’t need to have this explained to them: they live it.) The film is very sympathetic to its black characters, though it engages the empathy of the audience mostly through physical violence done to them. Still: there are no white saviors here,tweet nor any kindly white people whose personal journeys are furthered by coming to a new appreciation of racism, and that’s a baby step of cinematic progress. A movie about racism in America for white people is maybe the best thing two white American storytellers — director Kathryn Bigelow, reteaming with her Zero Dark Thirty and Hurt Locker screenwriter Mark Boal — should attempt.

Your basic racist white cops.

Your basic racist white cops.tweet

But a movie like Detroit can only be a not-terrible thing as long as we start getting a lot more movies from black filmmakers telling their stories about racism from their perspectives. We cannot pretend that Detroit is the final cinematic word that can be said about the real-life event it depicts: the week-long riot, a near rebellion, in July 1967 in the Motor City that resulted in dozens of deaths, more than 1,000 injuries, and more than 7,000 arrests (although virtually no prosecutions). Detroit shouldn’t even be taken as the final cinematic word on the one narrow slice of horror it focuses on: the incident at the Algiers Motel on the night of July 25–6 in which 10 young black men (and two young white women) were psychologically and physically abused, and several killed, by white police officers. But it’s a start. Only a start.

It’s impossible not to be enraged by what we see here, and the film doesn’t even get into all the injustices at work.
tweet

The film is slow to get to what it is going to be about. The unrest began days before the Algiers Motel, when police raided an unlicensed social club and drinking establishment that catered to black people, and that’s where the film opens. Bigelow and Boal are, again, sympathetic to the people being raided: they’re not causing any trouble, just having a respectable good time; one is a soldier just back from Vietnam, Robert Greene (Anthony Mackie: Captain America: Civil War, Triple 9), a man who has put his life on the line for a nation that treats him like garbage. It’s impossible not to be enraged by this. But the film could have gone a step further and somehow let us know all the layers of injustice and harassment already at work here, such as, for instance, that a black person simply could not get a liquor license in Detroit in 1967, so it’s not like this is a matter of malicious criminality. It’s just people doing what they had to do to have the same sort of community white folks could have without any hassle.

The vacancies at the Algiers Motel: decency, humanity, kindness.

The vacancies at the Algiers Motel: decency, humanity, kindness.tweet

Anyway, the raid sparks some bottle- and rock-throwing at the police by the black onlookers, and everything explodes from there. Detroit gives a good impression of the city as a pile of tinder and every small act of oppression a spark: eventually, conflagration was inevitable. Really, someone could make a 20-hour miniseries about the Detroit riots — HBO, get on that — so perhaps it was a smart idea for Bigelow and Boal to wend their way toward the Algiers Motel a few nights later, where what happened was a microcosm for that tinder and that conflagration. In a city that feels like a war zone — damn near an apocalyptic one, with fires burning uncontrolled everywhere and armed soldiers patrolling, just total civic breakdown — the Algiers is an unexpected little oasis of normality, with a lot of friendly people, mostly black, just relaxing and hanging out and partying. Larry Reed (Algee Smith: Earth to Echo), a singer with a cool Motown group called The Dramatics, ends up here with his friend Fred Temple (Jacob Latimore: Collateral Beauty, The Maze Runner) as they try to find a safe haven amidst the violence; there they meet Juli Hysell (Hannah Murray: Game of Thrones, Dark Shadows) and Karen Malloy (Kaitlyn Dever: Men, Women & Children, Laggies), a couple of suburban white girls who like black boys, and some of their friends, including Carl Cooper (Jason Mitchell: Kong: Skull Island, Straight Outta Compton). Mackie’s Greene, the vet from the club raid, is here too.

Will Poulter is utterly horrifying as a murderously racist white cop, and also completely plausible and authentic.
tweet

Things go very bad when a prank with a starter pistol draws nearby cops and National Guardsmen, who are already on edge after days of rioting. Krauss*, a young city cop, takes it upon himself to lead an interrogation of everyone in the motel to find what he believes is a real gun, as well as who seemingly fired it at them. We have seen him behaving, in the earlier days of the riot, like a violent racist dirtbag, and he doubles down on this now. Will Poulter (The Revenant, Plastic) is utterly horrifying as Krauss revels in his power over others, particularly over people he considers inferior to his own proud self bloated by his authority; it gets very difficult to watch his Krauss torturing his prisoners, playing “games” in which he threatens to kill them if they don’t tell him what he wants to know. This should be difficult to watch, and if Krauss is so outrageously malevolent that he’s almost a caricature, Poulter’s performance is so rooted in straight-up bigoted rage that he remains completely plausible. His sidekicks — fellow cops Flynn (Ben O’Toole: The Water Diviner), sweaty and eager to hurt people, and Demens (Jack Reynor: Free Fire, A Royal Night Out), an earnest lackey who seems to want nothing else but to please Krauss — also keep him grounded in authenticity. These are very bad men who are all too real. (Not much better are the Guardsmen who refuse to get involved, who turn a blind eye even when they know that what is happening is an atrocity.)

It seems torture is easier if you don’t look your victims in the eye.

It seems torture is easier if you don’t look your victims in the eye.tweet

Perhaps the best, smartest aspect of Detroit is how it portrays the absolute impossibility of any black person successfully navigating the racist institutions and deep-rooted attitudes that pervade American society. Before everything goes to hell at the Algiers, Carl and a friend of his engage in a bit of playacting to demonstrate to the white women how a black man’s encounter with a police officer (the vast majority of whom were white in Detroit in 1967) would inevitably go: no amount of polite respect or deferring to authority would be enough. It’s even more insidious — and heartbreaking — in the character of Melvin Dismukes (John Boyega: Star Wars: The Force Awakens, Half of a Yellow Sun), a black security guard at a store nearby to the Algiers who had ingratiated himself with the white Guardsmen out of sheer self-protection: he doesn’t want to get shot because of the color of his skin. He follows them to the Algiers, and when he sees — and instantly understands — what is happening, he remains on the scene, ostensibly on the “side” of the cops and Guardsmen yet, we can see, clearly intending to try to diffuse the situation as much as he can with whatever bit of authority he can muster. His security-guard’s uniform isn’t much in the grand scheme, nor is his status as a “good negro,” but he does what he can. But taking up a position with the oppressor rarely works out well for the oppressed. (Boyega is excellent here. At one point I suddenly saw a physical resemblance, something in his eyes, that reminded me of Denzel Washington, which I’d never noticed in his previous screen outings, and then I realized it was because Boyega was bringing an even more robust potency his character than he has before, something akin to Washington’s gravitas. Boyega, already a really good actor, is going to be a truly great one someday soon.tweet)

The Detroit riots were 50 years ago — half a century! — and not much has changed for black Americans.
tweet

As a thriller, Detroit is tense and thoroughly gripping.tweet As a cultural exploration, it is completely infuriating. Everything we see here looks and sounds almost exactly like everything we’ve been seeing happening in America in recent years: the utter disdain for black bodies, black perspectives, and black lives. The Detroit riots were 50 years ago — half a century! — and really, nothing has changed in all that time? Of course, black people already knew this. It’s time — long past time — for white people to truly begin to understand this. Detroit is only a small piece of the beginning of such an understanding. But it’s a start. It’s a start.

*The names of the cops have been fictionalized and the cop characters are composites, because there is no irrefutable account of what happened at the Algiers — this is based on survivors’ stories, and no one has the complete tale — and also because the real cops were never convicted of any crime, thanks to — you guessed it — all-white juries. See The Hollywood Reporter for a detailed look at the legal niceties of this matter. All the other characters bear the names of the real people involved.


Click here for my ranking of this and 2017’s other theatrical releases.



green light 4.5 stars

Even just $1, just once, is a huge help. Thank you!
support my work at PayPal support my work at Patreon support my work at Ko-Fi support my work at Liberapay More details...

Detroit (2017) | directed by Kathryn Bigelow
US/Can release: Jul 28 2017
UK/Ire release: Aug 25 2017

MPAA: rated R for strong violence and pervasive language
BBFC: rated 15 (strong threat, violence, language)

viewed at a private screening with an audience of critics

official site | IMDb | trailer
more reviews: Movie Review Query Engine | Rotten Tomatoes

If you’re tempted to post a comment that resembles anything on the film review comment bingo card (now updated for 2017’s trolls!) you might want to reconsider.

  • goldrushapple

    >the utter disdain for black bodies, black perspectives, and black lives

    1. black on black crime in Chicago.
    2. last time I heard BLM weren’t protesting against #1

    >. It’s time — long past time — for white people to truly begin to understand this.

    Bah. Same old same old from your type. And I’m not even white,

    Facts don’t care about your feelings. The product of white people “understanding” has been embarrassing. Look at college campuses were “diversity and inclusion” have practically ruined the landscape. Have you heard of University of Missouri? Enrollment plummeted after the PC fiasco a couple of years ago where they had to close down two dorms because not enough students matriculated.

  • dee

    First, it should be noted — though already painfully obvious — that the USA still has a problem with overt racism, decades after the Civil Rights era. I’m Caucasian — “white” — by birth, so that’s up front, too. I grew up an Army brat, and for years all I knew were the integrated “neighborhoods” on military bases, before moving to a coincidentally integrated nieghborhood on the coast of Texas (right near Port Aransas). I had plenty of racism directed my way — from Latino boys, usually, looking to pick a fight; but also from the black boys (they weren’t men, hence boys is correct) who also picked on me (I was white AND small and skinny). But I saw plenty of racism directed toward chicanos and blacks, so I never formed a racist opinion or attitude.
    I’m certain I’m not THAT much of an anomaly. While there are plenty of whites who are racist, I don’t believe ALL whites are racist. Thus, the moronic slant of this article — especially the title — serves only to form yet another stereotype. And build yet another obstacle in the path of making the world LESS racist.
    If you wrote the article — you clearly wrote the article’s title with this intent — simply to draw attention and get lots of “clicks”, you’ve done yourself and black people a major disservice.
    By the way: I own a copy of “Get Out” — TERRIFIC, entertaining, and even thoughtful movie. Unlike this review.

  • Dale Snow

    Amazing that the first two comments are from non-racist people! What a coincidence, and what an advanced and enlightened bunch of people you have reading your site. That said, I still think the movie sounds like it would be of tremendous value to a lot of the white people I know. Thank you for the thoughtful and heartfelt review. We don’t know our history very well in this country, as you point out, and it would be of great use in negotiating our present.

  • amanohyo

    1. If you spend any amount of time with African Americans (or black people if you prefer non PC), you will quickly see that they often discuss and try to find solutions to the problem of violence in their communities. Typically these solutions are presented in a religious context, which I think hamstrings their attempts somewhat, but that’s another issue that affects people of all races.

    2. I won’t speak for BLM, but as far as I understand it, the movement began out of anger over several unarmed black men being shot by police officers with no repercussions. There is a difference between a young gang member killing an innocent bystander and a police officer killing an innocent bystander. In one case, a system put in place to uphold the law, protect the innocent (and the interests of the powerful for you cynics/realists), and serve the community appears to be above the law, acting unjustly, and actively hostile to the community.

    When it comes to the tangentially related issue of PC culture on college campuses, I’m right there with you dude. Legislating or censoring hate speech is a losing strategy, especially when the president regularly engages in what would be considered hate speech in many PC circles. Stupidity and anger are like mold. They don’t vanish when they’re gagged and kept in the dark. In a country with a decent educational system, bad ideas would wither and die when they’re brought into the light and placed beside better, more truthful ones. Sadly, this is not the case here. The logical focus should be on improving education not on increasing the censorship of ignorance.

  • Thank you for proving every damn point I made in my review.

  • Congrats! You went right to “Not all white people!” You win the comments section today.

    You also win for “I own a copy of GET OUT so I can’t be racist.” I think you’ve just invented the new “Some of my best friends are black people.”

    You might want to start looking into the difference between “somebody not white was mean to me, a white person” and racism. They aren’t the same thing.

  • IntrepidNormal

    I am not in a huge rush to see this one. As a black woman, I simply don’t need to watch another film about black suffering right now. But I am glad it exists, because there are many out there who probably do need to see it.

  • goldrushapple

    You know what MaryAnn, just because you say certain things doesn’t them true or even accurate. Try a cup of humbleness with a dash of true humility in the morning, and less of undeserved indignation. Thanks.

  • goldrushapple

    1. I’m aware of this. Throughout high school and college I’m been sensitive and knowledgeable of the efforts within black (logically if you have US citizenship you’re an American, not anything hyphenated … My passport doesn’t say “Asian-American” under nationality) communities. In fact I’m preparing to become a school social worker with hopes of working in the Chicago Public School system to focus with at-risk youths (who so happen to be black).

    To reiterate my focus group: I’m speaking of BLM.

    2. The case of George Zimmerman (death of Trayvon Martin) started the BLM movement. The media leads you believe that Martin was just some innocent kid just skipping home after buying Skittles.

    3. What counts as “hate speech”? What opposing views and ideologies count as “hate speech” that were brought unto campuses that resulted in meltdowns, public property damaged and actual physical assaults and threats towards those not protesting?

  • goldrushapple

    As you can tell from MaryAnn’s reply she isn’t much for sound reasoning and rationality.

    Lemme guess MaryAnn’s thoughts that went unwritten when she read your post. “Ugh. Another WHITE man who just doesn’t Get. It!” You see, when whites question condescending remarks from liberals (well, I’d categorize MaryAnn as a leftist), god forbid anyone shows a little grit in their remarks when questioning them, they just go berserk. But at the same time it’s a bit sad. The berkserk-ness that is. Oh well.

    “Ugh. White people. Ugh.” – the unwritten words of MaryAnn Johanson.

  • Dr. Rocketscience

    Did you know, the North Atlantic Ocean appears to be an ideal habitat for sea lions, but no species of sea lions live in the NAO, and no one knows why.

  • Ironic.

  • goldrushapple

    Great argument. Phi Beta Kappa stuff.

  • blacks and whites not the same….Conservative white, conservative black same….liberal black liberal white ..same..

    liberal is the same dam liberal…blacks are not the same…support
    conservative blacks…whites are not the same….conservative
    ‘whites”…not the same as liberal whites…the new “color” these days
    is THE STUFF THAT is inside your head…is the color of who you
    are…bleak or right….so to speak…

    but I hear you….”hey what am I black?” glad I’m happy to remain an Italian by blood line and an American by “is”

  • amanohyo

    Something was lost in translation. Are you saying that race doesn’t matter anymore and what really counts these days is your political ideology? Or are you saying that race does still matter, but it shouldn’t and instead we should focus only on political identity? Or are you saying that we shouldn’t focus on either one?

    Whatever the case, in reality people treat others differently due to perceived race and/or professed political affiliation. These differences are real, and simply ignoring them because in an ideal world the categories shouldn’t exist, only makes the differences grow. It’s a bit like economic inequality – without forced redistribution via taxes or social interaction between different socioeconomic classes, economic inequality grows and grows until revolution becomes inevitable.

    What you’re seeing now with the rise of nationalistic and racist political movements on the right and ultra PC, hyper sensitive censorship on the left is a release of all that pent up steam that built up during the times when people decided the way to move beyond racism was to not to talk about race and politics. This period will either end with some kind of watershed moment of increased understanding and equality or a revolution, and as this movie illustrates, revolutions are always unpredictable and dangerous.

  • the narrative of racism is a narrative built to divide….this is fact…

    Let me see if I can be clear….I would rather associate myself with a conservative of ANY color, and a liberal of any color..

    NOT about race….its’ about whether you believe up is up or up is down…

    Bigotry exists…Racism is no more than “each to their own”..its human nature…..

    This is why America is so great…We have our laws to counter any…bigotry or bias…unfortunately we have a largly corrupted political class…on the left…and on the rino’s right…they are same… https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/4893cc96f834001e1da36f4459e4a88eab97a88d8b236291f334c1bdafb804e5.jpg

  • amanohyo

    Ah, I understand now, you’re saying that only one’s ideas should matter, and that both parties have effectively lost their political identities and become nearly identical puppets of corporations, wealthy donors, and interest groups. These powerful entities promote and encourage stories about hot button social issues like racism in part to divide and distract us from far more important issues (like say, a hastily passed tax bill), and you would rather associate with someone with principles of any race on either side of the political spectrum than someone who merely parrots the talking points of their team without much understanding or conviction.

    I agree. A growing frustration with the sameness of the parties is what led many to the disastrous choice to go with a complete political outsider in 2016. At first, I didn’t understand how Tea Party Republicans backed a tax bill that drastically increases the debt – then I remembered that their long term plan is to put incompetent and/or libertarian-leaning leaders in charge of agencies and then intentionally starve the beast via tax cuts so they can claim that the only way to balance the budget down the line is to eliminate social programs and agencies that “just don’t work.” (their short term plan, as with most politicians, is to load the bill with pork for their donors and get reelected/get that sweet contractor gig).

    In their ideal world, the federal government’s only function will be to provide subsidies to large corporations and military contractors (some would argue that this is already its primary function). While I’m in favor of a smaller federal government (more efficient and transparent too, which this plan is not), I think most people agree that the priorities in this downsizing scenario are all fucked up.

  • Bluejay

    hot button social issues like racism in part to divide and distract us from far more important issues (like say, a hastily passed tax bill)

    This isn’t the first time you’ve said this, and I absolutely disagree. Try telling the families of unarmed black people killed by police that what happened to their loved ones was a distraction. Try telling transgender people and Muslim Americans facing down bigotry, and families broken up by ICE, that their problems are a distraction. Try telling women who desperately need abortions that their inability to get one is a distraction. The tax bill that you think is such an important separate issue is NOT separate at all — it’s part and parcel of the same sickness. It’s another symptom of the cruelty, callousness, and selfishness of the GOP — and its enablers and supporters — in its treatment of anyone with less privilege. We have to fight ALL of it, on all fronts. None of it is a distraction because, exhausting as it is, it ALL matters.

    A growing frustration with the sameness of the parties

    This claim grows more laughable with every passing minute. Anyone who thinks a Democratic Administration and a Democratic-led Congress would have instituted a Muslim travel ban, provoked North Korea, hollowed out the State Department, slashed public lands, withdrawn from the Paris climate accords, given cover to Nazis, dismantled Obamacare, gutted the EPA and the consumer protection bureau, ejected transgender soldiers from the military, enacted this particular version of tax “reform,” and tipped the Supreme Court to the right for generations, is out of their damn mind.

  • amanohyo

    I apologize for implying that racism, sexism, and classism are in nonintersecting boxes. While, these issues are highlighted in part as a distraction, they’re also genuinely emotionally moving and vitally important to many people. I agree with you that the treatment of African Americans, Muslims, women, and transgender people are a symptom of a larger problem of decreased levels of empathy which is no doubt connected to this windfall handout to the very wealthy.

    However, I agree with Tony Venuti’s basic point. If I was part of the 0.1%, and had 24 hours of news to fill on Fox News or CNN or even MSNBC, what would I prefer the 99.9% think about? Other than the reliable mainstays of celebrity and sports gossip, what can I rely on to reliably get eyeballs on the screen without upsetting the financial status quo? I would avoid economic inequality or tax policies as much as possible and focus on any story that highlights any social divide not based solely on wealth.

    We’re seeing the release of decades of pent up frustration and anger over sexual harassment result in a real (hopefully permanent) sea change – back in 2011, I was hoping that the Tea Party and Occupy movements would lead to a similar moment of reckoning when it comes to class. On the right, the new Reps have been assimilated into the mainstream without much effect, and it seems as though a lot of the passion on the left has been strategically channeled away from class issues (yes, I’m still bitter about Sanders). Hopefully, I’ll be proven wrong in 2018 and 2020.

    Clearly, the parties have real differences, but I still believe that frustration with the perceived sameness of the parties (a la “all those politicians are the same”) in part led to a theoretically populist (albeit a weird hyper-capitalist populism), but ultimately disastrous choice. One of the other reasons I think social issues are highlighted so much is that in the past, the distance between the practical financial philosophies of the parties was narrowing. Now that Republicans have gotten greedy and thrown us into trickle-down overdrive, the differences should become stark enough to highlight.

    The Democrats are in a weird place – most of the votes they need to earn are from people who don’t think too much on a day-to-day basis about BLM or transgender rights or even sexual harassment in Hollywood. Large portions of the population are also at a weird tipping point of rationalizing that, “Yeah, maybe wealthy people do deserve to keep all the money they earned as long as I get a little piece too, and maybe the government is totally corrupt and horrible at everything.” Of course the dems should fight for justice on all fronts and highlight what a shitty (possible illegal) job Trump is doing, but if they don’t also devote significant time and resources to convince Americans that the federal government actually does have a positive effect on the lives of millions of people, that it can and will root out corruption and inefficiency in its own ranks, and that economic inequality is a looming moral catastrophe, they’re just kicking the can down the road (or rather, temporarily preventing the can from being crushed by a bully).

  • Okay. You DO NOT get to tell other people they are stupid after posting your utterly incoherent rants. Behave yourself or go away.

  • And… abusive replies from this commenter have been deleted, and he has been banned.

  • Bluejay

    I agree with Tony Venuti’s basic point.

    He just responded to your lengthy comment agreeing with his point with a “Keep it simple, stupid” graphic. And his subsequent replies to MAJ (which she has now deleted) indicate that he’s an MRA asshole. You might want to be more careful with the company you keep.

    it seems as though a lot of the passion on the left has been strategically channeled away from class issues

    Your argument still privileges class as the most important issue, related to but still over and above issues of race and gender inequalities etc. You admit to being a bitter Sanders supporter, but Sanders’ problem was that HE didn’t get the intersectionality of all these issues, and so failed to develop broad support among women and black and brown people. He talked about economic inequality without acknowledging how its impact is gendered and racialized. He calls for going beyond “identity politics” in a way that unfortunately echoes what many on the right say, and naively dismisses the very real role that “identity” actually plays in people’s experience in this country. He’s fine with endorsing anti-abortion politicians as long as they share his economic perspective. He overwhelmingly gives the impression that class is really all he cares about, and he’s perfectly willing to throw people under the bus on issues of race/gender/sexuality if it means advancing his agenda on class while minimizing all these other things. He thinks class inequality is at the root of evil, without seeing how misogyny and white supremacy are JUST as deeply rooted — probably even MORE so, as these things can significantly shape economic policy.

    And surprise surprise — this race/gender-blind focus on class allowed him to attract supporters who turned out to be racist/sexist assholes, many of whom had no problem voting for Trump in the general election.

    So, no — hard pass on Sanders. We need leaders (and citizens) who understand that this fight IS on all fronts, and that women and POC and the LGBT community shouldn’t be sacrificed to further some white populist dream of trickle-down economic justice.

  • amanohyo

    You make a good counterargument. Sanders does over-privilege class divisions at the expense of other intersecting issues as do I. That single-mindedness was probably one of the reasons he lost the primary. Looking back, I also overstated the degree to which social justice issues dominate the news. I forced myself to sit down in front of a television and saw a refreshingly large amount of criticism of the tax plan (at least on MSNBC, CNN and late-night television which admittedly all lean left, Fox is still stuck in “Hillary would have been worse,” xenophobic paranoia mode – although for once, their “grab your God, gold and guns” apocalyptic fearmongering feels almost grounded in reality [albeit a reality of their own making]). So, I yield. The war for equality will never be won fighting on a single front.

    That reminds me – I never apologized to you and Danielm80 about the whole anti-semitic ninja turtle rant a few months back. It was dick move, you’re both good compassionate people who deserve better. I also want to thank you, Bluejay, for taking the time to provide considered, thoughtful replies. I play devil’s advocate a lot and let myself get a little too comfortable being evil, and you always point me back in the right direction. Thank you.

    On a lighter note, I was wondering is”watershed moment” redundant? The definition of “watershed” alone seems identical to that of “watershed moment,” and there isn’t any danger of confusing an actual physical watershed for a “watershed moment” or “historic watershed.” It’s not as bad as “my personal opinion,” but it feels redundant.

  • Danielm80

    I appreciate the apology, but this thread has made me feel less forgiving. I’ve been quietly seething for the past couple of days, and only my longstanding affection for you has kept me from saying anything.

    When you’ve been criticized repeatedly for your anti-Semitic comments, it might be wise to refrain from sharing your thoughts about prejudice. And if you do share those thoughts, and are criticized for them, too, angrily and at length, it’s a really bad idea to defend them by repeating the same lousy arguments.

    In this case, your comments were especially harmful because, by saying anything at all, you were feeding a troll, and you were making his word salad seem more coherent than it actually was.

    Also, you sounded like a Bernie Bro.

    Sometimes the best thing you can do is to shut the fuck up.

  • amanohyo

    Amen.

Pin It on Pinterest