If one goes to dictionary.com you will find the definition of great as:
1. unusually or comparatively large in size or dimensions: A great fire destroyed nearly half the city.
2. large in number; numerous: Great hordes of tourists descend on Europe each summer.
3. unusual or considerable in degree, power, intensity, etc.: great pain.
4. wonderful; first-rate; very good: We had a great time. That's great!
5. being such in an extreme or notable degree: great friends; a great talker.
6. notable; remarkable; exceptionally outstanding: a great occasion.
7. important; highly significant or consequential: the great issues in American history.
8. distinguished; famous: a great inventor.
9. of noble or lofty character: great thoughts.
10. chief or principal: the great hall; his greatest novel.
11. of high rank, official position, or social standing: a great noble.
12. much in use or favor: “Humor” was a great word with the old physiologists.
13. of extraordinary powers; having unusual merit; very admirable: a great statesman.
14. of considerable duration or length: We waited a great while for the train.
definitions 3,6,7 and 11 are of relevance to our discussion. Anyone who is familiar with Hitler would have to conseed that Hitler was:
Unusual or considerable in degree.
notable, remarkable and exceptionally outstanding.
important, highly significant or consequential.
and of high rank, official position or social standing (in the Nazi Party at least).
Thus to desribe Hitler as a "great" man does not mean that one agrees with his ideology. Rather as commentary on hist historical role, he is a great individual. There is no questioning this. But Mr. Bashir, all brit-accented and all, apparently doesn't have the same range of vocabulary as Farrakhan and I and therefore said, on record, that he did not think Hitler was a great man(We'll interject here to point out that one weekend, the HIstory channel spent it's entire daytime broadcast time on WWII. So anybody who says with a straight face that Hitler was not great was either born yesterday, has amnesia or os a bald faced liar.). Of course Mr. Bashir confuses great in it's common vernacular usage as a compliment, with it's other equally valid, and in the case of the specific statement, more relevant meanings.
moving along we find that "wicked" means:
1.evil or morally bad in principle or practice; sinful; iniquitous: wicked people; wicked habits.
2. mischievous or playfully malicious: These wicked kittens upset everything.
3. distressingly severe, as a storm, wound, or cold: a wicked winter.
4. unjustifiable; dreadful; beastly: wicked prices; a wicked exam.
5. having a bad disposition; ill-natured; mean: a wicked horse.
6. spiteful; malevolent; vicious: a wicked tongue.
7. extremely troublesome or dangerous: wicked roads.
8. unpleasant; foul: a wicked odor.
9. Slang. wonderful; great; masterful; deeply satisfying: He blows a wicked trumpet.
–adverb
10. Slang. very; really; totally: That shirt is wicked cool.
It is clear from the speech that contained the phrase "wickedly great" that Farrakhan was not using wicked in it's common slang usage, which eliminates definitions 9 and 10 and leaves us with definitions 1 through 8, none of which are "positive"
Thus when we put "wickedly" with "great" we get:
evil(ly) unusual or considerable in degree.
evil(ly) notable, remarkable and exceptionally outstanding.
evil(ly) important. Highly significant or consequential in an evil manner.
etc.
clearly there is no way, except in the fanciful imaginations of those of the employ of the ADL, AIPAC and others trained in the art of Farrakhan hating, that the statement "Hitler was wickedly great." can be taken for positive admiration for Hitler.
So exactly what was the reason for putting Farrakhan on air last night? Well it actually was an attack on Obama. That was revealed when the question was asked about whether Obama was afraid of "controversial" black figures such as Farrakhan and Al Sharpton. Farrakhan wisely dodged the question, but the real answer is yes he is. That was shown in my oft cited refusal to comment on the Sean Bell murder. I have covered this ground extensively already so I won't go through it here, but needless to say such a position underscores the point that Obama's "lack of blackness" is very much in play and not entirely about genetics either.
Technorati Tags: Al Sharpton, Barak Obama, critique, Leadership, Farrakhan
2 comments:
Whilst I admire the clarity in your writing (am a subscriber) am trying to understand your reasoning for Obama's apparent blackness or lack of it.
Surely it can't just hang on his commentary or not on Sean Bell?
It wholly depends on what you mean by "apparent" Blackness. Since I'm not clear on that I can only point you to a couple of posts in regards to race, racism, Obama and "black" as it pertains to US politics.
1)http://garveys-ghost.blogspot.com/2006/01/im-racist-are-you.html
2)http://garveys-ghost.blogspot.com/2007/02/obama-love.html#links
3)http://garveys-ghost.blogspot.com/2006/08/death-knell-of-black-protest-poltics.html#links
My position regarding Sean Bell, is that I have argued that the incident goes beyond race, but rather to a police state, no consequences mentality that is a threat to all Americans. as pointed out here:
http://garveys-ghost.blogspot.com/2006/12/white-boy-shot-by-police-why-it.html#links
If Obama is so scared of being seen as a 'Black candidate" that he cannot see the problem with police letting off shots that nearly killed two other police officers and two civilians at a train platform, then I question is leadership ability. No other "black" candidate (as discussed in the "death knell" post would have made such a move.
That also calls into question the White supremacist notion that 'black politics" isn't good for everyone. Who exactly in America has been the most inclusive?
Post a Comment