Jackson says 'refugee' is racist.

Published on September 7, 2005 By dharmagrl In Current Events

The Rev Jesse Jackson has said that calling the victims of Hurricane Katrine 'refugees' is racist.

He said that it implies they are 'second class citizens' and is 'racist'.

Apparently 'evacuees' or 'displaced' aren't appropriate terms either, because they're too clinical.

I'm in awe that we're even discussing such issues at a time like this. We have thousands, possibly tens of thousands people dead in Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama, hundreds of thousands of people destitute and in dire need of the basic necessities for life, an entire city nearly wiped out.... yet he's complaining about the terminology used to describe them?

Does he have nothing else to do except stir up crap?

Comments (Page 2)

ParaTed2k

on Sep 07, 2005

Jesse Jackson has gotten rich ensuring that racism continues. His greatest fear and worst enemy are those of us who don't have anything in particular against people of different races. We might cost him his gravy train.

dharmagrl

on Sep 07, 2005

Really, its not like all these white leaders and media reporters got together and had a meeting about how they could advance their racist causes by referring to the victims as refugees rather than evacuees or even deepees, (displaced persons.)

Oh, but it's a 'Great White Conspiracy'....'Da Man' decided that he'd make the victims feel like second class citizens by calling them 'refugees'. All of us crackers had it planned out in advance.....just another way of keeping his people down, ya dig?

dharmagrl

on Sep 07, 2005

I have to say that he and 'Waste Of Flesh' Sharpton do a remarkably good job of keeping prejudice alive and well.

Dr Guy

on Sep 07, 2005

think the key there is "war or political or religious persecution."

You left out the clause leader - as in. As in examples. We are not asking the International agencies to treat them as refugees, we will take care of them. But they are still seeking refuge from the storm, and hence are refugees. And laast I checked, they are red, black, white, brown and yellow refugees. So is it racist because there are no purple blue and green ones?

shadesofgrey

on Sep 07, 2005

Why is he concerning himself with it now? Why create drama over a word when there's so much more going on that's more important? Why isn't he getting his hands dirty helping these people out? Where was he last week when his 'people' needed him? I didn't see him on the streets of NO or at the convention center.

I'm not a Jesse Jackson supporter, and I'm not going to try to get inside of his mind and figure out why he does what he does. I was simply pointing out that it is not the best word to use in this case. Last Wednesday, someone told Wolff Biltzer (I don't remember who) that he should be saying evacuees instead of refugees and he made the change immediately.

I understand being annoyed with Jackson--but I don't get the uproar about changing the terms we use to be more accurate.

shadesofgrey

on Sep 07, 2005

But they are still seeking refuge from the storm, and hence are refugees. And laast I checked, they are red, black, white, brown and yellow refugees. So is it racist because there are no purple blue and green ones?

I DID NOT say that it was racist--that was Jesse Jackson.

Dr Guy

on Sep 07, 2005

Parish or county	White	Black
Jefferson, La.	69.8%	22.9%
Orleans, La.	28.1%	67.3%
Plaquemines, La.	69.8%	23.4%
St. Bernard, La.	88.3%	7.6%
St. Tammany, La.	87.0%	9.9%
Hancock, Miss.	90.2%	6.8%
Harrison, Miss.	73.1%	21.1%
Jackson, Miss.	75.4%	20.9%

Note the percent of Black and white, and that they dont add up to 100%. That is because it is only showing those 2 races, and not brown, red and yellow. Now, you can link to the respective censuses right from the table above, or you can take my word for it that there are a lot more White People who are now homeless (evacuees or refugees) than black people, so how does that make it a racist statement?

Perhaps if an Asian uses it since there are so few of them in the group?

bakerstreet

on Sep 07, 2005

it would only be racism if we just used that word for black refugees. Given ALL races are being called refugees, and the word itself has no relation to 'blackness', his point is moot.

Jackson is an ignorant ass, and I can't understand why the press keeps printing his irrelevant opinions.

shadesofgrey

on Sep 07, 2005

so how does that make it a racist statement?

who are you asking? No one here is saying that it is racist--only Jesse Jackson said that and I would venture a guess that Jackson doesn't read Dharma's blog (he should, though

)

ParaTed2k

on Sep 07, 2005

Apparently he thinks "Refugees" and "Evacuees" are races of people. Doesn't suprise me, considering he is a mindless bigot who lines his pockets by making everything all about race. He'd gladly watch slaves get whipped as long as it feeds the kitty. He'd probably even provide the whip... but of course he would never crack the whip himself, that would require effort.

msladydeath

on Sep 07, 2005

And when Iowa was flooding, no one called them anything. What about when Texas was flooding? Florida? I don't remember anyone from those areas being called "displaced", "refugees", or whatever. Victims of circumstance. Oh well, this bugs me and I'm not sure why.

bakerstreet

on Sep 07, 2005

The people in those places could go home. These people won't be going back to their homes anytime soon. For the next months or more they will be "displaced", however unsavory it seems to you. The people from the worst parts of New Orleans may not go home at all, or it may take a year or more.

The reason we don't call people refugees, I think, is because we easily forget them. This will be literally millions of people left homeless for weeks, months, or more. They won't be forgotten so easily.

msladydeath

on Sep 07, 2005

The people in those places could go home.

Lets see here, Nope, I don't think it was one of those done in a day things. Florida took ages to get back to "normal" Iowans were "displaced" for months or more while they rebuilt, as were Texans. A comunity near me had their homes completely distroyed by tornados, they homes didn't rebuild themselves, and it wasn't overnight.

Sorry if the smaller disasters don't mean as much, and are forgotten in a matter of days. MY MISTAKE

bakerstreet

on Sep 07, 2005

"Sorry if the smaller disasters don't mean as much, and are forgotten in a matter of days. MY MISTAKE"

Sorry that its the truth, but that is the way the press/society as a whole works. We pay attention to what impacts us. This is about as big a disaster as we have had. For that reason, we need someway to refer to these people, and people chose to use the word refugees.

I think it is funny that people get all outraged as if there is some government office releasing rules as to what we should call people. No one came out and defined these people as refugees, the press simply started calling them refugees.

Who's fault is it that they needed to call them something? Who's fault is it they picked 'refugee'? I think in order to say "HOW DARE YOU!!!" you kind of need to know who "you" is.

bakerstreet

on Sep 07, 2005

Jesse probably blames 'Hymies from Hymietown'. If 'refugee' is racist, I wonder what "hymie" counts as...

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!