Relatable with Allie Beth Stuckey - Ep 26 | Racism, According to Twitter

Episode Date: August 7, 2018

Trump slams LeBron & Don Lemon and is accused of racism. NYT editorial board member Sarah Jeong expresses hatred of white people but is, according to the Left, A-okay. What’s the standard?  Copyright CRTV. All rights reserved.

Hey guys, welcome to the podcast. It's Ali Stucky, your host. This is CRTV's Relatable, where we talk about culture and politics from a biblical perspective. If you don't already, you should definitely subscribe to CRTV.com using promo code Ali 20, so you can watch me instead of only listen to me, because this is also streamed online for subscribers only. You also get lots of other content along with me from other great conservatives, so I very highly recommend it. here we are on a Tuesday. I don't know why, but do you remember that song from like 2012 when everyone, every Tuesday I feel like people were like going up on a Tuesday.

I just feel like that's something white people do. Like we latch on to a song, like a title of a song and then we do it or we say it for like 10 years. Like right now it's the In My Feelings Challenge that cool people stop doing like three weeks ago. White people were still doing an ice bucket challenge. I feel like it lasted for an entire year. Why do we do these things? I don't know. Anyway, that doesn't have anything to do with what we're talking about today. But it actually, it kind of does. I'm going to use it as a transition. So speaking of social media, let's talk about Twitter. Specifically, President Trump's Twitter account, as well as the Twitter account of Sarah Ziong, the newest member of the New York Times editorial board. And intertwined in this Twitter conversation is the subject of racism. I know everyone's favorite. subject. What racism is and why it seems like we cannot stop talking about it, then we'll have some kind of ending segment, maybe, possibly, if we have time to be determined. So if you did not hear

over the weekend, President Trump tweeted on Friday, this about LeBron James, the basketball player. LeBron James was just interviewed by the dumbest man on television, Don Lemon. He made LeBron look smart, which is it easy to do. I like Mike. Okay. So, you just kind of have to laugh at the fact that the president of the United States is saying this. But then after I laugh just for a second, my reaction, my reaction is why? Why? Why? Why? Why? President Trump, why do you do these things? Why can't you just stop? So, okay, for those of you who don't know, I did vote for Donald Trump. I categorize myself as a skeptical Trump voter. He's done a lot of good things that I talk about a lot. And I do think that he

was and is certainly better than Hillary Clinton. And, but just because I voted for him doesn't mean that I don't have the right to criticize him when I do think that that's justified, which is pretty regularly. I've also had reason to praise what he's done over the past two years. And I'm more than happy to do that as well whenever that is needed. But I have been a particular critic of Donald Trump's tweets. I know you guys might disagree with me on that. I think it's great for a president to tweet in general. I see why people like it. And I also, honestly do understand why people don't care that Trump's tweets are so tactless. They look to the media.

They see them as snobby as dishonest, patronizing. And then they look at Trump's Twitter and they say, hey, he might not be nice, but at least he's honest. At least we know what he's thinking. So I totally get that. I get that. But my problem is, is that is what he is thinking. That's my issue.

So why is he so relentlessly petty? Why does he have to punch down so much? much. Like, it's one thing to be tough on your enemies or even your allies, tough on any other world leader. If you want to do that via Twitter, you know what? It's the 21st century had that it. But for me, it's when he goes after specific people who are just private citizens that I just roll my eyes and I yell into the wind. Why? Why? Why? And this was one of those times. So LeBron James criticized Trump in this interview, which is probably what caused Trump to tweet this. here's what LeBron said.

For him to, like I said, use sports to kind of divide us to something I can't sit back and not say nothing. You tweeted about a couple of answers. You tweeted about Charlottesville. You tweeted about when Steph Curry, you know, he called him, you called him a bum. Yeah. But Steph had already said I'm not going to the white house. Yeah, he already said he wasn't going. And he tried to use it after that to say, well, you're not invited.

Well, you can't uninvite me to something I've already said I'm not going to go to. And we all know Steph Curry, model citizen, great kid, come from a great background, great family, great father. And so many different kids, so many kids, white, black, Hispanic, all different race, loved what he's doing and rightfully. So there's no reason for anyone to ever attack him, you know, and that's, I felt that. Do you, whenever there's something like he's in trouble, he can't wiggle his way out of something, he'll bring up the national anthem thing and kneeling or standing. Do you think he uses black athletes as a scapego? At times, at times. And more often than not,

I believe he uses anything that's popular to try to negate people from thinking about the positive things that they can actually be doing and try to just to get our minds to not be as sharp as possible right then. LeBron has also been a critic of President Trump in the past, has said basically that the reason people voted for Trump was that they were uneducated. And what we know about President Trump is that he does not like people that don't like him.

He has incredibly thin skin. We've seen that proven time. And again, during the primaries, that was actually my main reason for not voting for him. I just thought that he couldn't take the flack that leaders get. And he can. I still think that he can. Like I've said, lots of good things have resulted from this presidency, but a strengthening of character for President Trump

doesn't seem to be one of them. So President Trump did what Trump does and he went after LeBron. Of course, the entire internet erupted and you can all guess which direction most reactions went. Ardent Trump supporters laughed and said, yes, Trump, you are so right.

And a lot of people on the left who hate Donald Trump called him a racist. Well, I think both of those extremes are wrong. No, Trump isn't right to target LeBron or Don Lemon in that way. And also, no, I don't think it was racist. So let's start with this first idea. The side that says Trump is right on for doing this. This is what we love.

Well, the reason I've seen from these people on social media is that President Trump is called names. He is attacked viciously by the media and by people on the left. So why shouldn't he punch back? LeBron said something negative about Trump, why shouldn't he respond? This is what he does. He's a counterpuncher. Why should he stop now? The answer to that should be obvious. And it is because he is president. He is president. That is why. He is the leader of the free world. He is commander in chief. I know that he's not our traditional politician. He's not a statesman. He does things differently. He shakes things up. That's all fine. I'm not talking necessarily about his style or

all of his tactics, I am talking about having just a tiny bit of character, just a little bit. Sure, we already know the guy is an choir boy, and I'm not asking for that. I am asking for a little bit of respect for the office of the presidency by showing a little bit of respect for the people in this country. Yes, even the people who don't like you. That's what real character is, right? Every single president and politician since the beginning of America has been sullied in the press. Every president has been called a name. Every president has been smeared. Presidents are supposed to be too busy working on their agenda to obsess over what an athlete is saying on CNN. If I remember correctly when Kanye West said that President Bush doesn't care about black people after Hurricane Katrina,

I know we didn't have social media then, but I don't remember President Bush going after Kanye West and anyone who interviewed him. That's what I remember from that. There's just nothing productive about that at all, especially a special. when LeBron James is actually doing good things for this country. Things that a proponent of the free market should be applauding. He just opened a school in Akron, Ohio for 240 at-risk third and fourth graders. The school provides meals, transportation, uniforms, tuition. They'll get job placement help, help getting their GEDs.

This is what we want. This is something conservatives should be over the moon about. Here you have a man who used his talent to become something. that is turning around and giving that back to the community. This is a capitalist success story. If everyone gave as generously as LeBron has in proportion to their own wealth and success, then maybe we'd all be better off. Now, I'm not saying that LeBron is some all-around great guy, awesome person.

I don't really know. I'm not the biggest sports fan of the world, so I don't really care about him one way or another. But in this particular instance, he is doing something good for our country, for society, and we should be lifting him up and saying to young people, this is what happens when you work hard and succeed, when you don't give up. This is what it looks like when individuals are free to make enough money

to give back through their own free will. Now, we don't know if the school will ultimately be successful, but that doesn't really matter right now. We don't know how it works out. But he is doing something. He's aiming to help rather than to hoard. And that kind of kindness is something to be praised. How amazing would it have been?

How much more productive would it have been if President Trump would have tweeted, hey, LeBron James doesn't like me very much. But you know what? I really appreciate what he's doing for the community. Wouldn't that have been a lot better? Now, I'm not saying he would have necessarily won people over. We know that the people who hate him really hate him. But wouldn't that have added something a little more positive to the conversation?

But President Trump doesn't see that. He's not looking for those kind of opportunities. He sees someone who doesn't like him on a network who doesn't like. him and that's all that matters. Remember he said at the end of his tweet, I like Mike, referencing Michael Jordan, since there's been this incessant debate over whether LeBron or Michael is better, I don't have an opinion on that. Michael Jordan issued a statement backing LeBron saying, I support LJ. He's doing an amazing job for his community. Malanya Trump, interestingly enough, also backed LeBron. Her spokeswoman said, it looks like LeBron James is working to do good

things on behalf of our next generation and just as she always has, the first lady encourages everyone to have an open dialogue about issues facing children today. As you know, Mrs. Trump has traveled the country and world talking to children about their well-being, healthy living, and the importance of responsible online behavior with her B-Best initiative. That is funny. Responsible online behavior. That has to be a little bit of a jab, right? And I mean, her B-Best initiative is a campaign partly against cyberbullying. So it's just all very ironic and just another episode in the reality show. And there have been a lot of people on the left and the right who have criticized Trump in a way that I think is pretty fair in a way that I'm doing right now,

which I hope is fair. But then there are people like those that I mentioned that are calling Trump a racist. The Los Angeles Times listed some of the tweets from public figures on Twitter saying this. Max Boot, a foreign policy analyst at the Council of Foreign Relations, said, I'm sure it's just a coincidence that Trump thinks African Americans are dumb. Jamel Hill, who used to, I don't think she does anymore, used to work for ESPN, said, there's a lot of insults the president could have hurled at LeBron and Don Lemon, but it says something that the president openly questioned their intelligence. Gee, wonder why. Journalist Dan Rather said, this is apparently what the president of the United States

feels the need to share with the world at what should be long past his bedtime. It's a disgrace. It's a disgrace. It's a racist. And it's the product of petty but dangerous hatreds. I repeat, this is the president. CNN contributor Anna Navarro said Trump called Don Lemon, LeBron James, and Maxine Waters dumb. One is from the South. One is from Cleveland. One is from L.A. One is in the NBA. One is on TV. One is in Congress. Hmm. I wonder what they could possibly have in common. wait, dot, dot, dot. And then she puts the black hand emoji. And see, this is why people no longer take accusations of racism seriously. It's because it's used so stupidly and liberally.

No one believes you when you say something is racist anymore. Donald Trump is an equal opportunity insulter. And there is no evidence that this was racially motivated. He's insulted John McCain, Alec Baldwin, Joe Scarborough, Mika Prisinski, Ted Cruz. I mean, the list goes on and on of white people whom Donald Trump is insulted in really degrading ways. So there's a whole host of things you could say about Donald Trump's tweet about LeBron James. But I actually think the fact that he's willing to insult him so publicly, just like everyone else that he insults, shows that he's not racist. If anything, the guy is just immature.

Racially ignorant, perhaps, I will give you that. But this particular tweet has no signs of actually being racist. It was just stupid. You know what? I don't even understand what racist means anymore. Is it just insulting anyone with a non-white skin tone? Is that what racism means? I thought racism was demeaning someone because of their race. But it doesn't matter. The left doesn't care about the actual definitions of words.

They just make up their own and then they call you a bigot when you don't agree with their changes. All this said, I do just wish that Trump would stop doing these stupid things. and would just focus on carrying out his agenda, which I happen to like. Put America first, execute peace through strength and foreign policy, push the economy forward, secure the border, defund Planned Parenthood, help protect our individual liberties. People are going to vote for you, dude. You've done a pretty good job.

Now just stop talking. Just stop. Okay. In actual racist Twitter news, Sarah Zhang was just employed by the New York Times. She is a tech writer whose Twitter history shows that she is quite unashamedly an anti-white racist. Here are some of her previous tweets. Hashtag cancel white people.

Dumb-ass effing white people marking up the internet with their opinions like dogs pissing on fire hydrants. Are white people genetically predisposed to burn faster in the sun? Yes. Thus logically being only fit to live underground like groveling gobbels. Oh man, it's kind of sick how much joy I get out of being cruel to old white men. Sounds like a really lovely person, right? Just like life of the party, the kind of girl you just want to hang out with. Well, of course, people dug these tweets up and called for her firing from the New York Times.

I just had a podcast, I think last week or maybe the week before about digging up people's tweets and how I think that's pretty stupid to try to ruin someone's life over what they said years ago. and I still think that. But we have to point out the double standard here. Liberals were calling for Roseanne's dead body for her decapitated head on a platter when she compared Valerie Jarrett to Planet of the Apes, which of course was really, really dumb.

I said that at the time. But with this, they're like, me, you want to be cruel to white men? Whatever. Not that big of a deal. Compare white people to goblins in BD. The New York Times put out this statement amidst the controversy. Here is an excerpt.

Her journalism and the fact that she is a young Asian woman have made her a subject of frequent online harassment, the time said in its statement. For a period of time, she responded to that harassment by imitating the rhetoric of her harassers. She sees now that this approach only served to feed the vitriol that we too often see on social media. Okay, Jung herself said in her statement, as a woman of color on the internet, I have received torrents of online hate. Then she gave these two examples of this online hate. One tweet said, if I saw you, I would sock you right in your lesbian face. Second one, shut the F up, you dog eating gork.

And then she called her racist tweets counter-trolling to things like this. Oh, man. So she justified her racism by citing two examples of mean tweets from people. They were mean. But girl, do you want to know what I've been called on the internet? I like so many other women on the internet of all different races and political affiliations, of all different men on the internet too, have been threatened with horrific things. I've been threatened with rape, with murder.

I've been, I've had people say that they're going to come to my house and shoot me. I've had people call me ugly, stupid, talentless, a bitch, a bimbo, you name it. I have been called it. If I turned around and started calling other people, that, specifically people of a certain race, which I would never do, by the way, you think that that would work as an excuse? No, of course it wouldn't, and it shouldn't. Seriously, seriously, grow up. Like, if you can't stand the heat, just get out of the freaking kitchen. Like, some of us are able to actually withstand the storm of unfair criticism we get, but you clearly can't without

pitching a fit and acting like a petulant child and a racist child at that. But most people on the left just nodded their heads to her statement and the New York Times statement and said, yep, yep, that's fine. Her reasoning is perfect. That works. And in fact, girl, we support you. Zach Beauchamp from Vox printed what I think is probably one of the most dishonest and purposely obtuse articles I have ever read Defending Zhang. So Beauchamp responded to a piece by David French in National Review in which French says very aptly. It is simply, false to excuse anti-white racism on the grounds that people of color lack power. This argument confuses the gravity of an offense with the existence of the offense.

A powerless person's hate may not harm the powerful, but it is still hate. Of course, that's absolutely true. But to this, Bochamp says, he says this, just wait. The problem here, though, is assuming that Zhang's words are meant literally, that when Jean wrote hashtag cancel white people, for example, she was literally calling for white genocide, or when she said white men are BS, she meant each and every white man is the human equivalent of bull feces. To anyone who's even passingly familiar with the way the social justice left talks,

this is just clearly untrue, Beauchamp says. White people is a shorthand in these communities, one that's used to capture the way that many whites still act in clueless and or racist ways. It's typically used satirically and hyperbolicly. Blah, blah, blah, blah. He goes on and on about this making these stupid excuses. No, no, no. That is not the assumption that French or any other conservatives making.

No one thinks that Zhang is calling for actual genocide when she says to cancel white people or that she thinks that a bull has actually defecated inside a white person. No one actually literally thinks that. No one. This is the definition of a straw man. You are creating another argument so you don't have to. to address the truth that French expressed in a statement. Hatred of white people by minorities is still hate and is therefore still racism,

even if minorities don't have as much, supposed, supposedly as much power as white people. So to say that people should just brush off racism as a euphemism or exaggeration is absurd. He's saying that if we take Zhang's racist tweets as racist, then it's not actually her fault. It's our fault. We're supposed to read between the lines when she says things. like she enjoys being cruel to old white men. Oh, okay, okay. My bad. My bad. I thought that when she said she enjoys being cruel to old white men, she meant that she enjoys being cruel to old white men, but I can see now how I completely misinterpreted that. I should read between the lines there

and see that what she really meant is that she likes pictures of golden retriever, puppies rolling downhills. Duh. How could I have missed that? That's on me for not being woke enough. Um, Look, I actually agree with David French, who also said in the National Review column, that she shouldn't get fired from her job because she represents the values of the New York Times. That's the sad part. She represents a lot of the mainstream left in how she thinks. It's not fringe anymore. The New York Times thinks clearly that open hatred against white people by a minority is okay.

So if those are the kinds of people that they want to hire, more people. power to them. Fine. So, but I want us to just brush up on the rules here, according to the New York Times and according to Vox. And it seems like most people on the left, when a white person like Donald Trump says something rude, that I think definitely was rude in the LeBron case, when Donald Trump or any other white person says something rude to a black person that has nothing to do with race, that is racist. But when an Asian person like Zhang says something rude about a white person that is explicitly about their race, that is not racist. And we're all supposed to pretend like it's justified.

Got it. I'm so glad that we cleared all of this up. It makes complete and total sense. And see, here I thought that social justice warriors actually advocated for justice. But, oh, wait, no, that's not what they do. And that's not what they've ever actually cared about. They don't care about what is just or what's real or what's true. They care about intersectionality, the completely inane practice of devaluing one

group of people to elevate another group of people based on some arbitrary definition of oppression, which is not justice, not truth, not even based on any type of reality, and therefore its manifestations are unequal and nonsensical. And that is why it is okay for an Asian woman to talk badly about white people because they are white. Because she has more oppression points according to the social justice gods and the more oppression points you have, the less liable you are for what you say and do, and the more justified you are in shifting responsibility from your to other people, and in this case, white people. And since this is a Christian podcast, let me just say, the people who try to tell me, which I've had many people try to tell me this, that intersectionality

and social justice is somehow biblical, I laugh in your face. This is exactly what intersectionality and social justice is. This is how it manifests itself. So when God tells us in Micah 6-8 to seek justice and love mercy, I'm pretty sure he didn't mean except for white people. I said it, million times before, and I will say it again, social justice isn't actual justice. And along with that, intersectionality is glorified victimhood. These are unbiblical concepts and they have no place in the church, none whatsoever. God calls us to advocate for true justice for every person and to show no partiality. God calls us, not victims, but heirs and saints and members of the household of God more than conquers in Romans 8. This doctrine is not just a logical,

this doctrine of intersectionality. It's also ungodly. And I know that home girl Sarah Zhang is not a Christian, so I'm not trying to hold her to that standard, but I am calling out you Christians out there who lay claim to these mentalities and movements. You will not find support for them in scripture. And therefore, you and I have no business ascribing to them ever. Do you want to pursue justice? That's great. We should all want to pursue justice as Christians. Do what Christians have been doing for literally millennia, which is feeding the poor and the hungry in advocating on behalf of the truly oppressed. You don't need to latch on to worldly movements to do what the Bible has been telling us to do

forever. Because when you do, you get all of this unchristian, ungodly stupid stuff thrown in like reverse racism, which just results in injustice. You really think that's what God is calling the bride of Christ to? I don't think so. I recently heard about a book club at a church in Georgia that is focusing on racial reconciliation. I have made my thoughts very known about racial reconciliation, how it is working within the church right now. I've talked about that a lot in past episodes. One of the books that this church book club is required to read is between the world

and me by Tanisi Coates. Well, the problem with this is that Coates is an atheist. So why would a church ever ask its people to gain perspective on an issue through the lens of someone who does not believe in the gospel? Why? Anyone who does not know Christ has an incomplete picture of truth. And while they might have some good wisdom to offer, anything that they have to say is going to be tainted by the denial of Jesus. It's not going to be the whole picture. It's going to be flawed.

It's going to be ultimately hopeless. It's going to be shaped by the world rather than by the Holy Spirit. And look, I read a lot of books by people who aren't Christians, but if I am seeking to lead a church group who is coming together because of our desire to grow in Christ, then I am not going to give them a book that is not centered on Christ. No. The other book they're reading is, of course, wide awake, which is the social justice de jour in the church right now.

I've actually yet to read it, so I can't honestly comment on it. but from what I have read about it, which is a lot, I know it is a book about waking up white people to all of the oppression of minorities that we do not see because of our white privilege. So what we're seeing is churches going outside of Scripture for truth because they are seeking cultural relevance instead of obedience to God's word. God's word says that there is neither Jew nor Greek,

nor slave, nor free, nor male, nor female. Not really sure where he says that we should foster resentment between races, tell white people to take a back seat, and elevate minorities for the sake of superficial diversity and visibility. Just not seen that in scripture. So thank God. Thank God that we serve a king who doesn't show partiality, whose justice is so much bigger and better than all of this crap that we are seen

from the social justice movement. And unfortunately, we are seeing it, even in the church. So what I encourage you to do, Christian, is to first of all, recognize it when it's given to you. It'll be offered deceptively, manipulatively, in a probably very attractive way. They'll say, if you're really a Christian, you should care about social justice. If you really love Jesus, then racial reconciliation should be your priority. If you're really following God, then you'll want open borders.

All of these things sound compassionate until you consider that they missed the point. That Jesus didn't come to reconcile the races to each other, he came to reconcile all races to himself. He came to save us regardless of our race or gender or back. and he calls all of us, regardless of our race or gender or background, to serve and love the bride of Christ. And guess what? You cannot serve the bride of Christ if your chief concern is how you've been oppressed. God has made you a new creation and he doesn't define you by your oppression. He defines you by his sacrifice, which makes you whole and complete and new. Okay. I also encourage you. Also, I just want to add this in there because I know this part's kind of scary,

but I also encourage you to say something to your teachers, to your small group, to your pastor, to your mentor, to your Bible study leader. If you see your church headed in this direction, say something. Just ask questions. Of course, I would encourage you first to seek counsel, to pray about this, to pour over scripture, make sure that you're concerned. and questions are biblically sound. But if they are, then don't be scared to speak up in power and in love. The truth is at stake and the gospel is at stake, quite frankly. Okay, I hope that you are sufficiently riled up after all of this as I am. I feel like I need to go preach somewhere to only women and children, of course. Come on, we're reformed Protestants here. Anyway,

thank you so much for listening to the relatable podcast. You can follow me on social media if you so desire, Twitter, Instagram, Facebook. You can just type in Allie Beth Stucky. I should come up on all of those things. And please give me a five-star rating on iTunes or wherever you listen to your podcast. If you so desire, share this with your friends, especially your liberal friends. And have a great day. Thanks for listening.