"I will not provide the rope for my own lynching"

ByBobBarrett
legalBob.com
Updated 5/25/2011 11:54:21 PM MST

“I will not provide the rope for my own lynching”,

Justice Clarence Thomas doesn’t usually speak.   The extra attention seems to bring chills to his spine. Despite the introversion, he has been ruthlessly attacked by civil rights advocates for his “change” intolerant approach as a black American leader.

This brings an odd question. Why does Thomas claim to be a fighter of issues like civil rights when his historical jurisprudence towards this civility has been quite the contradictory. Justice Thomas is the least likely – ever – to vote in favor of them. A blind man only familiar of his character might even dare to think… he grew up wealthy. May even think his grandparents were “cool-aid” conservatives—pretty much slave owners. but that would be impossible.   He’s African American.

For some, it has become cynically appropriate to attend the stereotype; 

white people are conservative; nonwhites are liberal. Justice Thomas has rebuked the politically deaf stereotype; often placing civil rights leaders as part of the problem.  He thinks they are in reality the real hypocrites. 

3They “[four-letter word] and [expletive], moan and moan, whine and whine, [that’s all civil rights leaders are good for],” he said.  

So, why does he claim to be an advocate for such a predominantly liberal issue as civil rights? To answer this requires taking a few steps in the shoes of the judge, the student, and (in his case, shoes may be expecting a bit much) southern boy.

As expected for it’s times, growing up in a southern community, Thomas had frequently encountered racism.

3In a small town, in Georgia; Justice Thomas was born in a “ranshakeld” home, often without running water or power. After a few years, his mother was unable to continue in raising him. Young Clarence was sent to spend the rest of his childhood with his grandparents.

 His grandfather felt he needed to help him toughen up –“get tough skin" against racism. He did this by verbally abusing Clarence, and often required him to do heavy labor. 

 3 “I could do more with a teaspoon than you can do with a shovel”, said his grandfather while Clarence was digging. “You['re] worth less than a carload of dead men,” he repeated. 

This often bleak and demanding atmosphere is what instilled the groundwork needed to change "young" Thomas into "Supreme Court Justice" Thomas.

When most of the country today is accusing him of being anti-civil rights, many are misunderstanding his intentions. Thomas firmly believes the best way to fix racism is by this "tough skin," and to him "skin" is neither black nor white.

Often he argued against affirmative action claiming it was hypocrisy of his culture; 

once while on a similar topic, he even dared to say, 

 “this is not an opportunity to talk about difficult matters privately or in a closed environment. This is a circus. It's a national disgrace [and] from my standpoint, as a black American, it is a high-tech lynching for uppity blacks who in any way deign to think for themselves, to do for themselves, to have different ideas, and it is a message that unless you kowtow to an old order, this is what will happen to you. You will be lynched, destroyed, caricatured by a committee of the U.S. Senate rather than hung from a tree”. 

8Today, these words continue to be re-quoted by the media.

3Still today he fights for principles of ‘tough'in up’,

even further, when an African American is fighting for “generosity," conversely they are fighting for an acceptance of weakness, said Thomas. He also strongly opposes the idea 

“all blacks [are] equally disadvantaged by virtue of their race alone”. 

This thought brings insult to his long held principles. 

Justice Thomas confronts, even today with great animosity from what many believe is his own culture. Repeatedly, his responses to the opposition have been almost brutal. When faced with civil rights issues, he has made it clear he is pro "letter of the law".

Many accuse his ideology of lacking compassion. Although, this argument becomes quite problematic when one has not yet walked in the shoes of young Clarence—well shoes would be assumptive. For a boy who was “lacking compassion”, how could the accusers walk in the young boy’s shoes, when often the boy (who apparently lacks empathy for the mis-fortunate,) may have not owned a pair of shoes himself?

Read Sources

[1] Barrett, Robert D. "Does Anyone Ever Actually Read the Footnotes?" Web log post. In Color We Trust. LegalBob_, 25 Mar. 2011. Web. 25 Mar. 2011. http://ww.incolorwetrust.com.

[1] “Anthony A. Peacock "Thomas, Clarence" The Oxford Companion to the Supreme Court of the United States. Kermit L. Hall. Oxford University Press. 2005. Oxford Reference Online. Oxford University Press. Brigham Young University (BYU - Idaho). 18 May 2011 http://www.oxfordreference.com/views/ENTRY.html?subview=Main&entry=t184.e1224

[1]  "Duke Law Journal: Hannah L. Weiner, The Next "Great Dissenter ..." EBESCO. N.p., n.d. Web. 25 May 2011 http://www.law.duke.edu/shell/cite.pl?58+Duke+L.+J.+139

[1] “American Rhetoric: Clarence Thomas - Statement to the Senate ..." American Rhetoric. N.p., n.d. Web. 25 May 2011  http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/clarencethomashightechlynching.htm

[1] "A "High-Tech Lynching" in 2009 | Black Youth Project." Insert Name of Site in Italics. N.p., n.d. Web. 25 May 2011 http://www.blackyouthproject.com/blog/2009/12/a-high-tech-lynching-in-2009/

[1] Hearing of the Senate Judiciary Committee on the Nomination of Clarence Thomas to the Supreme Court." University of Virginia Library. Electronic Text Center, University of Virginia Library, 11 Oct. 1991. Web. 18 May 2011. http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/etcbin/toccer-new-yitna?id=UsaThom

[1] Kroft, Steve. "Clarence Thomas: The Justice Nobody Knows - 60 Minutes - CBS News." Breaking News Headlines: Business, Entertainment & World News - CBS News.

Columbia Broadcasting System, 30 Sept. 2007. Web. 18 May 2011. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/09/27/60minutes/main3305443.shtml