Agema critics chose wrong post to take a stand

UPDATE: Those who argue that the controversial essay posted by Dave Agema lacks credibility because it was written under a pen name have to address a basic question. If the piece is a fraud, authored by a racist website by a bigoted ghost writer, then why would the folks at the American Renaissance site include this paragraph:
"I believe that those of us who are able to produce abundance have a moral duty to provide basic food, shelter, and medical care for those who cannot care for themselves. I believe we have this duty even to those who can care for themselves but don’t. This world view requires compassion and a willingness to act on it."
As I pointed out below in this post, those who have read the essay (and I have, several times) must concede that it does not ring hollow, it does not have the tone of a hoax. It sounds more like a disheartened liberal beaten down by what he has witnessed in the criminal justice system.

 

Is it possible that Republican National Committee member Dave Agema's online post of a "racist" screed has been substantially misinterpreted?

Former congressman Allen West (who is black) certainly thinks so. In fact, one of West's closest confidantes asserts that the controversial essay posted by Agema on Facebook, after being discovered on West's website, is far from racist.

Critics say the essay is "a blanket statement about all black people. Clearly that is an absurd premise," said Michele Hickford, editor-in-chief of West's site. 
The essay, she said, is a first-person account of urban black criminals written by an attorney who serves as a public defender in a big city.

West was widely criticized by pundits (including me) for some of the far-right, caustic comments he made while serving in the House. But Hickford points out that, in the midst of the widespread condemnation of Agema in the media and by GOP officials, "Oddly, the press has not attacked Col. West for the article (essay)." The colonel title she bestows on West refers to his past military service. 

The key point here is that the media, by ignoring West's full embrace of the essay's controversial claims, grants Agema an out. The former state representative can continue to say that he is being singled out for special treatment by the PC police.

While Agema gives the state and national GOP fits by refusing to step down from his RNC position, he recently made a statement insisting that he saw the essay on West's site and found it intriguing because it was posted by a black man who grew up in inner city Atlanta.

"I believe Col. West's purpose for reposting this was to demonstrate the breakdown of the family and how it effects (sic) crime in our society and the fact that these things must be addressed and changed to solve the problems that presently exist," Agema wrote.
Liberals -- and quite a number of Republicans -- protested loudly when Agema suggested that he didn't necessarily embrace all facets of the essay but instead gave it online exposure because it amounted to a black man sharply criticizing urban black culture.
On his Dec. 31 Facebook post, Agema called the essay "very interesting" and "very enlightening."

Subsequently, numerous critics have pointed out that West posted the essay under the headline "Quite possibly the most racist article you will ever read."
It turns out that the headline was written by Hickford and intended as an attention-grabber, while West, a conservative Republican, made it abundantly clear in his introduction to the essay that he agreed with the author's premise whole heartedly.
Those who never read beyond the headline of West's short commentary missed this:
"It will take you only five minutes to read this article — and I would bet you’ll read it again. Then ask yourself, is this something you hear Al Sharpton addressing? Or President Obama, Eric Holder, Jeh Johnson or Jesse Jackson?
"I’m quite sure the progressive socialist left will criticize me for sharing this article – that’s just who they are, they hate the truth. But if there is a war to be fought, it is for the soul of the inner city and the black community. The facts and observations in this are not shocking to me. They are quite well known, but the manner in which the writer so eloquently presents them is quite commendable."

So, why has the press condemned Agema but not West? Indeed, that is a good question.

Has Agema repeatedly made comments -- verbally, in print or online -- that suggest bigoted stereotypes of blacks, gays and Muslims? Absolutely.
But his Dec. 31 post (since erased) recommending this essay doesn't qualify as "the straw that broke the camel's back." Maybe all of this is more about timing and political embarrassment, with the winter session of the RNC just completed and the party's state convention coming in February. GOP officials can magnify this straw, but they can't seem to get rid of Agema before he becomes more of a thorn in their sides.

To be clear, the first strike against the May 2014 essay is that it was published on a website produced by American Renaissance, which is linked to white supremacists.
The second strike is that it was written under a pen name, Michael Smith, and there is no way to verify if the author is a public defender who has dealt first-hand with the ugly side of the American judicial system, as he claims.
But there is no third strike.

The essay essentially adds another chapter to the long debate about nature vs. nurture, whether dysfunctional black families can be lifted out of poverty and crime, and whether anyone can break the cycle of a seemingly permanent black underclass in the inner cities.
The tone of the writing is confessional, not hateful, as the author -- a self-described liberal do-gooder -- lays out his intense disillusionment with urban crime and his conclusion that blacks play a dominant role. This lengthy piece could be fiction, but the writer sounds too credible for readers to dismiss this essay as a hoax.
The details are harsh and the contention that the vast majority of crime and dysfunction -- based on the writer's clientele -- is associated with blacks, not whites, Hispanics or Asians, seems forced. But this essay, while filled with generalizations, is clearly not a Klan leader's hate-mongering rant.

Unfortunately, writings such as these only strengthen the pre-determined, racist views of too many Americans.
Yet, the Republican Party, at the state and national level, may want to catalog Agema's many grievances before they attempt to lay out a lawful means of removing him. The Michigan GOP has had numerous reasons to oust Agema in the past for intolerance and baseless stereotyping. But this newest post by their RNC man is not a clear-cut, black-and-white example of menacing racism on Agema's part. There are a few shades of gray.

Here is the email response I received from Hickford when I asked about West's views on the controversy:

I’ve been following the controversy. It seems Mr. Agema has on more than occasion made comments that some found offensive. Oddly the press has not attacked Col. West for the article. 

As it happens, I chose the headline for the post. I generally write all the headlines for Col. West’s articles. I was quite certain many people would find that article "racist.”

I personally do not doubt the veracity of the experiences the public defender recounted regarding those charged with crimes. Neither I or nor Col. West saw this as a blanket statement about all black people. Clearly that is an absurd premise.

But as a nation, we cannot have “an honest discussion about race” until we acknowledge because of nurture - not nature - there is a large portion of the urban black community growing up without a father in the home, expecting the government to take care of them and in fact feeling entitled, without any sense of personal responsibility for their lives. They are kept on this economic plantation by liberal progressive policies and have their anger stoked by race-baiters like Al Sharpton.