The Usual Voices on both sides are predicting -- and/or calling for -- some kind of "race war" over the Zimmerman verdict.
I'm not seein' it. There have been a few riots in few cities, in which the primary harm has been done by persons with something on their minds other than the perceived injustice of the criminal justice system.
But any time the TV cameras talk to real (non-celebrity) people who are not in the process of looting and/or burning, even people who deeply, sincerely loathe the verdict in the Zimmerman trial, you hear something else: they talk about non-violence; they urge people to call or write politicians, to picket, to urge action that, while I might not like it -- for instance, pressing DOJ to go after George Zimmerman over a supposed civil rights violation -- consists of working the system, not tearing things up. If you don't believe me, go watch the interview the Trayvon Martin's parents; I disagree with their read of the trial and verdict in every respect but they're specifically urging non-violent action.
Nobody in their right mind, nobody not criminally-inclined and/or glory-seeking (Rev. Sharpton, I'm looking at you, along with a handful of conservative and progressive bloggers) thinks that violence will improve matters -- no matter what they think of as an "improvement."
That's a notion people may be able to come together over. The criminal trial is over. Hate the result or be relieved at it, we now have a chance to do what didn't happen in the precipitating incident: let's all talk. That's got to be an improvement over repeating the tragedy of errors that led to the trial in the first place, no matter who you think made the first mistake.
From where I stand, it looks like a whole lot of people of a whole lot of hues and political inclinations feel the same way. A majority of people.
'Cos the only thing any "race war" creates is losers. Haven't we got enough of them already? Isn't it better to argue than to burn?
6 months ago