The New Justice
By James Fitzmaurice
I am hoping that the tragedy of the Trayvon Martin incident and all of the ensuing drama will become a teachable moment for all of us and also a call to reflect on our own reactions to the story.
On social media, thousands of people were posting the message, “Justice for Trayvon”, with an account of what allegedly happen on that night. The thing that struck me most about the ubiquitous postings was that in order to repost “Justice for Trayvon”, one must accept the premise that justice will NOT be served.
In my schools and at home we learned not to pre- judge anyone because of skin color, race or creed. The lesson was simple enough; but that was before a new language was introduced to deal with our differences and with it a philosophy that has undermined race relations and pitted all types of “groups” against others, despite the indisputable fact that the intention was to overcome our differences and to learn to get along. If you are under 40 years old you have never known any different.
My questions are: Why did so many people automatically jump to the conclusion that justice cannot be served? Why did the media use old pictures instead of more recent and accurate pictures? Why did the New York Times refer to Mr. Zimmerman as a “white” Hispanic? Why is it that the Attorney General has no interest in the New Black Panther party placing a bounty on the head of a private citizen? Why did the president think that his comments regarding the matter were appropriate? Why did Trayvon’s mom use the plural (they) instead of the singular (he) when speaking of her son’s shooting? Why did Spike Lee tweet the (wrong) address of the Zimmerman family? Please notice that I have not included the more incendiary comments and charges. Where does one learn this behavior? Could it be the same place they learn that Black children learn differently than White children, and that all “cultures”, instead of all “Individuals” are equal? Is it the same place where they learn about victimhood, institutional racism and group identity politics?
Multiculturalism is a philosophy that pretends to be a uniting system of tolerance and diversity. In actual practice it is exactly the opposite. The insidious genius of Multiculturalism is in placing some “groups” in a position where they are forced to accept the original sin of past deeds and prejudices’ of unrelated ancestors and similar “colored” people, while forgiving others from being personally responsible for their own actions due to injustices of the past. It also asks decent and fair minded people to defend themselves against unwarranted charges of racism by proving that they are not racist.
The philosophy of multiculturalism actually is a very divisive form of tribalism and collectivism. Multiculturalism separates us into opposing camps and it threatens to Balkanize our country. True diversity and tolerance comes from equal opportunity, economic freedom, and the rule of law.
We must wake up and realize that we are a country of “Individuals” (not groups) from many backgrounds, with certain inalienable rights that are protected by our laws and the Constitution.
It may be that the desire for instant retribution is responsible for the unseemly reactions by some to the slow process of obtaining the facts in the case, processing them and presenting them to a Grand Jury, but the behavior exhibited by far too many, looks a lot more like prejudice than “Justice”.
James Fitzmaurice is an artist living in Rumson, NJ
More from my site
“Just because you’re paranoid doesn’t mean they aren’t after you”
Hiding Behind Executive Privilege
Opinion | Racial insensitivity exists everywhere, we are not immune
Atlantic County Justice
“I’ll be back faster than you can say furious”
Obama Circle ‘Shaking with Laughter’ Over Hillary Rosen Distraction
Judge tosses sex assault conviction of man long fighting to clear his name
Ho Lee Fuk, Howie Felterbush!
Wall Street Journal: Menendez charges could come this week
CNN: Feds will bring criminal charges against Menendez
What is lost in this case is that under the Zimmerman families account Trayvon was “standing his ground” and had every right to do what he allegedlly did because I would feel threatened if someone was following me in a car in a developement my father lives in.
What is lost in this case is that under the Zimmerman family’s account Trayvon was “standing his ground” and had every right to do what he allegedlly did because I would feel threatened if someone was following me in a car in a developement my father lives in.
Live like a thug, Die like a thug.
Unfortunately Brian, Zimmerman the thug is still alive.
Brian you have no credibiliy. Zimmerman has yet to state anything about what happened except for a self defense claim by Trayvon. He could look like a gang banger. on facebook, bog deal. He was walking in his own developmentand some hot head says he looks suspicious.
What exactly did Trayvon do that would require a 911 call much less being stalked (the race issue is irrelevant )? , Zimmerman was stalking. If he then attacked Zimmwerman then that would be classic self defense since hias retreting was in vain and the stalker came after him.
Since you were there observing—why don’t you tell us what really happened??? Did Trayvon confront him or back away?? Since you were there, tell us. Who threw the first punch–when you were there??? How did Zimmerman get a bloody nose and gashes on his head—that ABC now admits happened–since you were there–tell us???
ONBC admits doctoring the 911 tapes, so observing–what really happened when you were there???? The only people who ACTUALLY KNOW what happened were those on the scene, and since observing won’t tell us what he saw there we will have to wait for the proper authorities—unless observing breaks his silence.
@Observer. Zimmerman did state “what happened” to the correct authorities.
Martin was NOT “walking in his own development.” He was visiting his father because of his third suspension from school.
The President’s comments were respectfull and appropriate. Two of the Republican Presidential candidates comments were disgracefull and showed just how unfit for office they are.
The entire article was terrible. Whether justice will be served or not is still an open quesiton but until there was media focus on the story, it was obvious that justice was not being served.
Bottom line, Zimmerman was told by 911 not to follow Trayvon and he spoke his acknowledgment that he understood that. The only scenario wherein shooting this boy could be justified was if he was breaking into Zimmerman’s car or home. There is no other reason for Zimmerman to have been in close proximity to someone who apparently “scared” him after he was told police were being sent.
If Zimmermans story is true and I say if because we really do not know what the facts are yet, and Travon punched him in the nose and was on top of him banging his head on the pavement then the “stand your ground” doctrine does not even come into play. At that point it becomes a simple case of self defense. Zimmerman would have justifiably been in fear of his life and was unable to retreat. If Zimmerman continued to follow Travon after he was told not to he was wrong. There are some claims that he was getting back in his car when Travon approached him. If Travon confronted him and the attacked him he was also wrong. However there are some questions as to wether Zimmerman was actually attacked.
Either way this is a tragic event and the way many politicians and media outlets have handled this story is a disgrace.
One thing I will say is I do not think this is a race case and the presidents comments that indicated it is where inflamatory.
[…] MoreMonmouthMusings » Blog Archive » The New Justice […]
It’s about Right and Wrong not Black and White.
Please tell Obama that.
How many people who look just like me (white) were shot by someone who looked just like Obama (black)?
No outrage, no Sharpton bandwagon
It’s wrong no matter what color. It’s a tragic situtation when anyone’s life is lost to violence or by accident.