Is Thomas really a hypocrite?

Ezra posted a great message the other day that made me do a complete 180 degree shift in the way I viewed Clarence Thomas :

This argument that Thomas is hypocritical for benefitting from and then decrying affirmative action strikes me completely wrong. I’ve benefitted from white privilege - I’m against it. I benefit from the lack of economic affirmative action - I’m for it. The idea that we have to refrain from attacking societal wrongs that have aided us is insane and will pretty much stop social justice in its tracks because social movements require converting those who are benefitting from an injustice. I might not agree with Thomas’ position, but he has every right to hold it without being held up to some standard of hypocrisy that none of us match.

I guess now I’ll have to be content with disliking him because he put a pubic hair on someone’s Coke.


posted by greg on June 27, 2003 @ 3:56 pm

7 comments

  1. One thing that bugs me, and I’m working on a post for this on my blog, is the idiocy of some of the attacks on Thomas.

    I don’t like Thomas at all, but think about the logic here.

    Thomas says that Afirmative Action is bad because it stigmatizes minorities.

    Some liberals respond by saying that Thomas is a hypocrit because he only got where he is because of Afirmative Action.

    You see the connection there? They’re proving his point.

    Comment by JoeF — June 27, 2003 @ 9:51 pm

  2. Justice Thomas received and benefitted from affirmative action. But Thomas was stigmatized by affirmative action. So if Thomas had not been the beneficiary of affirmative action, would he have reached the Supreme Court the same way that Thurgood Marshall did - by continually challenging the establishment and paving the way for civil rights and affirmative action for minorities, including Thomas? Thomas in his dissent was basing his views upon his “expert” testimony that was not under oath and not subject to cross examination. He should have recused himself. Whether or not he is a hypocrit I leave to others. But he did not pull himself up by his own bootstraps, whereas Marshall did. What civil rights victories can Thomas point to?

    Comment by Shag from Brookline — June 28, 2003 @ 2:29 pm

  3. That’s just ridiculous! Should the females have excused themselves too? And why should Thomas have had to engage in the battle for civil rights to get to the Supreme Court

    Comment by Earnest — June 29, 2003 @ 12:44 pm

  4. here’s a letter from yesterdays la times…

    In the Texas case, there were three dissenting justices. One was Justice Thomas. In his 1991 Senate Judiciary Committee nomination hearing, Thomas testified: “I will not provide the rope for my own lynching or for further humiliation. I am not going to engage in discussions, nor will I submit to roving questions of what goes on in the most intimate parts of my private life or the sanctity of my bedroom. These are the most intimate parts of my privacy, and they will remain just that, private.”

    Marco Fuentes

    Solana Beach

    that sums up ct, no?

    Comment by josh — June 30, 2003 @ 5:03 pm

  5. I don’t like the guy. Personally it’s just wrong for him to do that. By the way I like spagetti. and i’m single

    Comment by kimberly Bertolo — December 9, 2003 @ 7:43 am

  6. I don’t like the guy. Personally it’s just wrong for him to do that. By the way I like spagetti. and i’m single

    Comment by kimberly Bertolo — December 9, 2003 @ 7:43 am

  7. I don’t like the guy. Personally it’s just wrong for him to do that. By the way I like spagetti. and i’m single

    Comment by kimberly Bertolo — December 9, 2003 @ 7:43 am

Copy link for RSS feed for comments on this post

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.