Not long ago, I wrote a few columns on the history of lynching and the Walnut Street Bridge. Should we put a plaque or piece of commemorative art to memorialize the two men lynched there more than 100 years ago?
Many of you agreed. Others? My inbox and voice mail got loud, especially around the time of Ferguson.
David Cook“Go to hell, you (expletive) race baiter,” one reader said.
Not long after that, I wrote about race and the NFL, specifically the way pro football culture promotes black-on-black combat as our national narrative while white owners and white fans cheer.
Things got louder.
“You’ve become a white Al Sharpton,” one reader said.
“Surprise, surprise, more white guilt,” said another.
“Your chronic focus on racism probably does more harm than good,” said a third.
“You’ve become lazy,” said a fourth. “Every other article you write is some race baiting piece.”
Huh.
Chronic focus? Every other?
That got me wondering. So I did a little research.
Last year, I wrote 192 columns. Add in January 2015, and that’s a total of 207 columns in the last 13 months.
Out of 207 columns, want to guess how many dealt specifically with black Chattanoogans or racial issues here?
Only 33.
Barely 16 percent.
My column-counting also realized this shameful, awful fact: only one of my 207 columns dealt with Latino issues or featured any Hispanic Chattanoogans.
Only one.
So if anything, I’m not writing enough about race.
(Or rather, I’m writing an awful lot about white people.)
Race is the white elephant in Chattanooga, the big issue we don’t and won’t talk about.
When I write about education, nobody says: You’re stirring the pot with educators.
When I write about poverty, nobody says: You’re stirring the pot with poor people.
When I write about same-sex marriage, nobody says: You’re stirring the pot with gay and lesbian Chattanoogans.
But race?
Don’t stir the pot.
Don’t talk about it.
Don’t … bait.
The term “race-bait” is profoundly and immensely offensive. At its core, it suggests that black Chattanoogans aren’t capable of their own acute awareness of color. Like they could just blissfully forget, and were it not for a meddling columnist, everything could be happy-happy-happy.
That’s condescending, insulting and paternalistic. Overseers used to talk in similar ways.
It also implies white ownership of the way Chattanooga talks about race. In other words: We can talk about race as long as it keeps things somewhat tidy and comfy. (Nobody yells when I write about African-American success.)
But talk about reparations? Or lynching as it compares to Ferguson? Or the subconscious racial message that the NFL delivers?
You (expletive) race baiter.
I’m not trying to be sensationalist. (But I could be. Like this: If Christian Grey was black, would so many white women in Chattanooga line up to see “50 Shades of Grey?”) Nor am I some social necromancer bent on resurrecting things whose time long expired.
There is no issue so pressing yet so ignored as race in Chattanooga.
None.
Yes, I get it wrong at times. Of course, I’m a hypocrite. Without question, I will admit my own racism.
But as far as I know, nobody accusing me of race-baiting has been black.
In fact, one black Chattanoogan emailed me just days ago, wanting to talk about race, and saying this:
“African-Americans are not fooled,” he said. “We know that there are many who wish we were still slaves on the plantation.”
Shhh.
Don’t talk about it.
Contact David Cook at dcook@timesfreepress.com or 423-757-6329. Follow him on Facebook and Twitter at DavidCookTFP.