Unethical Website of the Month: Million Hoodies Movement for Justice

Different hoodies, different races, same ethics...

Different hoodies, different races, same ethics…

Million Hoodies Movement for Justice is, in its own way, as racist as “Chimpmania,” and, I would argue, far more harmful.

The Chimpmania racists live on the margins of respectable civilization. They are the direct ideological descendants of those who wore hoods and lynched blacks in the South, but they operate in the shadows. Their hateful words and beliefs are almost universally recognized for what they are, the product of ignorance. The vast majority of Americans of any race or creed would be mortified to be associated with the site, or with anyone who read it.

In contrast, Million Hoodies Movement for Justice projects the sheen of respectability, and aims to advance legitimate, if debatable causes: the elimination of police militarization, and the banning of profiling. It is, however, as racist in its assumptions about whites as Chimpmania is regarding African-Americans, just more subtle.

We all accept the fact that there will be violent riots in Ferguson, and perhaps elsewhere, if Officer Darren Wilson isn’t convicted of murder, correct? Since it is increasingly clear that he won’t be convicted of murder or even tried, riots are a certainty, and were a virtual certainty the moment civil rights activists, race hucksters and cynical politicians decided to construct a useful narrative about the shooting of Michael Brown, well before any facts were established.

Until I learned about the Million Hoodies Movement for Justice, I wasn’t going to write about the issue any more. I had already posted this, in which I explained why the Ferguson situation had been so thoroughly mishandled on all sides that there was no longer any chance that the end result wouldn’t be ugly and damaging to national race relations. It is increasingly clear, however, that the media and African-Americans especially are embracing reverse-racist passions and sentiments as irrational and ugly as any of the anti-black beliefs my family used to listen to, with mouths agape, on PBS programs like the David Susskind Show.  There the provocative host interviewed white supremacists and American Nazis for the edification of normal, civilized Americans just as P.T. Barnum entertained their ancestors with freaks of nature. We did not regard their outrageous statements as legitimate or worthy of respect, however. Today, virulent anti-white racists are being featured as pundits on cable news.

Yesterday on CNN, I watched a St.Louis columnist, an African-American woman, reject the possibility that Darren Wilson could be anything but a racist killer. Her reasoning was as deranged and bigoted as anything I heard from those skin-heads and hooded racists on PBS. First, she said that since he was white and Michael Brown was black, the killing should be presumed to be based on racism unless Wilson could prove otherwise. This is a racist statement per se: it means that all whites are racist by nature, and absent proof to the contrary, are to be presumed so. She then declared that Wilson’s self-defense and reasonable fear claim was itself proof of racism. “‘He’s big, he’s scary, he’s violent’—this is just the stereotypical white fear of blacks that has been used as an excuse to kill them for centuries,” she said. The fact that Brown was big, had just assaulted a store owner on camera, was stoned and had tried to grab the officer’s gun didn’t factor into this journalist’s reasoning at all. Whites are out to kill blacks, that’s all. Back in the Sixties, hateful whites with such paranoid biases against blacks were mocked and held up as a societal malady. Now reverse racism exactly as indefensible and hateful is presented by the mainstream media as a rational view.

Million Hoodies Movement for Justice embodies the acceptance of these racist assumptions about police, whites, and white police. The name of the group is itself a lie. It refers to the initial false narrative presented by the news media and Trayvon Martin’s family that the young man was profiled because of his apparel by a racist “stalker.” There was and has never been any indication that this was true. George Zimmerman did not profile Martin, nor did he stalk him; nor was there any evidence that Martin’s race played any role in the tragedy. Nonetheless, that version of events, the fictional, racially divisive version—the one bolstered by the President of the United States when he irresponsibly identified with the victim—is still referred to as if it were accurate, because it inflames emotions and encourages hatred of whites. Facts do not matter to the Million Hoodies Movement for Justice, any more than facts mattered to the KKK members David Susskind slyly mocked on his show all those years ago. While white racists were once exhibited to draw the nation together, however, these black racists are being allowed to try to tear the country apart. They will begin with Ferguson, Missouri.

How much more harm they can do we can only wait to find out. Meanwhile, the official position of the Holder Justice Department and Holder’s rumored successor, Thomas Perez, is that reverse-racism isn’t a problem.

I am tempted to conclude that this constitutes an endorsement.


Pointer: Jeremy Wiggin

Graphic: NBC

34 thoughts on “Unethical Website of the Month: Million Hoodies Movement for Justice

  1. I take issue with the term “Reverse-racism”. If white to black racism is racism, and black to white racism is ‘reverse racism’, we’ve already made the assumption that white people being racist is normal, and black people being racist is so abnormal that the phenomenon needs a new designation. Racism is racism, regardless of the color of your skin.

      • Considering I think the term and ideas behind “race” is pure crap to begin with – other than perfectly acceptable estimates of likely illnesses or ailments known to be prevalent among certain “races”, I think identifying any group as a “majority race” is extremely flawed also.

        Since we are at a point, and a point that I can quite comfortably say exists, that “whites” don’t view themselves as “whites” insomuch as “being white” isn’t a prevailing concern driving their decisions, then it doesn’t make sense to say there is a majority “race” except from the point of view of the minority. And one minority has shown its entrenched obtuseness in refusing to assimilate. Sorry guys, at this point, the racists for the most part are you not us.

        • Probably not, except perhaps through Don Lemon. Barkley says as many dumb things as not, and I regard anything he says like the flavor of gum coming out of a gumball machine. He’s outspoken without being educated, wise or especially perceptive; he just has the courage of a big rich celebrity who isn’t afraid of anyone.His message happened to be worth discussing, but he’s such a dubious messenger.

    • So true and I applaud your comment. More open conversation needs to happen for things to change. Even in the election process we separate the races instead of just going after “the vote”. Only when the vote is needed do you see candidates sitting down with anyone.

  2. After looking at the website, I don’t see anything particularly racist on there. They seem to want to decrease unjustified police actions and shootings and increase awareness of voting and civil rights. Who is against that? I don’t see anything anti-white (or any other race) on the site. What am I missing?

    • Please. The site presumes that Brown and Martin, among others, were MURDERED because of race. There is no evidence of that in either case, yet the site says so directly. The very name of the site and group is racist, by implication. Nor is there any evidence that the death of Eric Garner is race-based. The group is organizing protests based on the presumption that every black man killed by police is a victim of racism, and as its name implies, it will tolerate of give credence to no factual rebuttal or verdict.

      Is anyone who still says George Zimmerman killed Trayvon Martin because he was black a racist? Yes. A whole organization based on that false premise is a racist organization.

      • Where do they say that on the site? Can a person feel that someone was unjustifiably murdered by the police without feeling that it was (directly) racist? There is nothing to assume that Wilson killed Brown directly because of his race. The police and media reaction in the aftermath may have been race-based reactions, but I think one can say someone was unjustifiably killed without thinking it was directly due to race.

        You seem to making logical leaps without any sustaining evidence. If you are going to say the site is as bad as Chimpmania(!), I’m going to want something a bit stronger than what you have put forth and what is shown on the site itself.

        • OK, what do YOU think the reference to “hoodie” means? The focus is on racial profiling. Martin was not profiled. To believe he was, you must assume that all whites profile (are antagonistically bigoted against) blacks. That’s a racist position. Saying, without evidence, that Mike Brown was murdered (not “killed,” which is the fact) is an assertion of animus and a criminal act, again, based on race, since the organization’s mission is entirely based on race. From the blog:

          “Million Hoodies staffers and members have worked tirelessly to support the local organizing efforts in New York, NY and Ferguson, MO in the aftermath of the murders of Eric Garner in July and Mike Brown in August, two unarmed Black people killed by the police.
          We’ve put together a round-up of important analyses on police violence and a summary of our latest activities to shift the narrative from criminalizing young people of color.”

          There is no evidence in either case that race played a part in their deaths, and at the time of HIS death, at least, Mike Brown was a criminal, having threatened a cop and resisted arrest. The group is putting out false, racially divisive narratives.

          Black racism against whites has been made respectable during the last 6 years, because it has been tacitly endorsed by the Democratic party for cynical partisan gain. This is one of the results.

        • Look under the News -> Statements section:

          “The muder of Trayvon Martin has sparked outrage among millions of Americans. However, there are those who seek to use Trayvon’s case to advance their political agenda. Many in the media are trying to portray Trayvon as an aggressor who deserved to be attacked. Know the facts! Below is a fact sheet that you can download and share with others. Let’s not let misinformation get in the way of getting justice for Trayvon.”

          It is the very first one.

          • Thanks, missed that. And that is the smoking gun. “there are those who seek to use Trayvon’s case to advance their political agenda”—yeah, like you guys, the NAACP, the Congressional Black Caucus. “Deserved to be attacked”? The evidence indicated, if anything, that Martin was the attacker. The key defense witness said he told her was waiting to attack Zimmerman because he assumed Zimmerman was gay–talk about “profiling.” I’m afraid to download that “fact sheet” for fear that my head will explode for good. An entire prosecution and trial raised no evidence whatsoever that Zimmerman was profiling Martin or stalked him, or that he initiated the fight that ended with Martin’s death. There was no evidence that Zimmerman has a history of racist attitudes or conduct.

            “Let’s not let misinformation get in the way of getting justice for Trayvon.” Unbelievable.

    • I think that’s a bad question, “who is against that?” I’m not against the demilitarizing the police force, or increasing awareness of voting and civil rights, but boiling that site down to just that statement is oversimplifying.

      Those issues are civil rights issues, and everyone should be concerned about them, not just blacks, not just latinos, not just whites, everyone. An overzealous police force driving around in tanks that has lost the general faith of the citizenry is a problem.

      Making it racial, especially when it isn’t racial, just compounds the issues. George Zimmerman may have been an idiot, but there wasn’t any evidence that Trayvon’s shooting was racially motivated. Darren Wilson may have used excessive force with Michael Brown, but we don’t have any evidence that the shooting was racially motivated. So instead of having healthy conversations over gun culture and militarized police, America has drawn a huge arbitrary line, with one side yelling “racist” and the other side yelling “thug”. It’s bullshit. Referencing the hoody, which is imagery associated with Trayvon, to talk about police brutality, voting information and civil rights is Bullshit. assuming these specific issues are specifically African American issues is Bullshit. It’s like they don’t know how to recognize real issues. These are HORRIBLE examples. I don’t get it. There are legal disparities, there are real police actions that should result in murder charges, but somehow all the attention gravitates to this Bullshit.


      • I agree with you that the militarization of the police, rise in police brutality, and violation of civil rights is an issue which should concern everyone. Do you agree that the overzealousness of the police force has been particularly focused in the African-American and other minority communities? Especially considering the “stop and frisk” statistics which showed that 90%+ of people stopped where minorities, and taped conversations from police officers and their superiors ordering them to stop even more minorities? In light of the reports around Ferguson and surrounding counties about how the police were using minorities to fund their payroll? I

        think some people are quite content to stick their head in the sand when it comes to these issues, as long as it is happening “over there” to “those people”, so I don’t see anything particularly racist about bringing special attention to it. It should be a de-racialized subject, but because the phenomena does not happen in a de-racialized way, it is hardly surprising that it gets expressed in the manner that it does. But just because it may deal with the subject of race does not, in and of itself, make something racist. I’m still not seeing the case that the site should be compared in any way to Chimpmania.

        • “Do you agree that the overzealousness of the police force has been particularly focused in the African-American and other minority communities?”

          N-yes. It depends on what we’re talking about. Stop and frisk is a great example. It absolutely targets more black people than white people. It also targets more men than women (by a greater margin, but no one talks about that) Stop and frisk is a BAD policy, executed horribly. But I’m not convinced that we can take broad policies and attribute the outcomes of those policies to the actions of individual officers. I wonder if a lot of the issues that are seen as racial issues aren’t really socioeconomic issues.

          Take the crack/coke example. It’s seen as a racial disparity because black people are more likely to use crack and white people are more likely to use coke, and crack carries a heavier jail penalty. Is that racial? Maybe. But crack is also about a third the price of coke, and has more damaging health effects. So are those addicts smoking crack because they’re black and it’s cultural, or because they’re poor? And are the laws more intense because the primary users of crack are black, or because the drug does more damage?

          • Stop and frisk is a BAD policy, executed horribly. But I’m not convinced that we can take broad policies and attribute the outcomes of those policies to the actions of individual officers.

            Well, in the case of stop and frisk, I think it would be difficult, if you were a young, black male stopped by police officers not to feel as if the individual police officer had targeted you. Policies don’t just exist on their own, someone has to enforce them. In the case of stop and frisk, we have the secret recordings of officers being threatened with demotions and such if they were loathe to carry out the racist policy.

            Coke and crack. Crack might do more damage (citation?), but does it do 100x the damage of coke, which was the sentencing disparity. The policy may not have been intended to be racial, but the effect, in this case definitely was. I think people were in a panic over the whole “Crack War” thing in the 80s, and overreacted. My big problem is that the disparity took so long to correct after the effects became clear.

            • Ok…. On stop and frisk… We agree. But that has nothing to do with million hoodies. They don’t mention stop and frisk. They talk mainly about gun violence and police, with a strong focus on Trayvon. If million hoodies talked about stop and frisk, and not about America’s greatest examples of race-bait fuckery, I’d give it to you. They don’t, so I don’t.

              As to crack:


              “Crack, the most potent form in which cocaine appears, is also the riskiest. It is between 75% and 100% pure, far stronger and more potent than regular cocaine.

              Smoking crack allows it to reach the brain more quickly and thus brings an intense and immediate—but very short-lived—high that lasts about fifteen minutes. And because addiction can develop even more rapidly if the substance is smoked rather than snorted (taken in through the nose), an abuser can become addicted after his or her first time trying crack.”

              It’s an advocacy site, so take it with a grain of salt, but the takeaway is that crack is more concentrated, and therefore more addictive, and therefore more dangerous.

    • Deery

      You need to look at the website again. The website declares as its mission that it is an organization of over “50,000 members working to protect and empower young people of color from racial profiling and senseless gun violence”. Interestingly, ‘senseless gun violence’ does not address the problems of black-on-black crime, only police-on-black ‘crime’.

      The site details and describes a vigil as a “National Day of Silence vigils being held for Michael Brown, John Crawford, and all victims of police violence.” IT assumes that all police action is police violence where the person killed is a minority. It states “Million Hoodies staffers and members have worked tirelessly to support the local organizing efforts in New York, NY and Ferguson, MO in the aftermath of the murders of Eric Garner in July and Mike Brown in August, two unarmed Black people killed by the police.” It declares that Garner and Brown were ‘murdered’ by police. Based on its assumptions, the State of Missouri should dispense with tedious show trial of the police officer, reject 250 years of legal tradition of due process, issue a judgment condemning him and impose the maximum sentence – death – forthwith. Hell, Missouri should just execute the police officer and forget about the whole judgment and sentencing stages. Furthermore, the site links to another website called “The Frequency” (http://mhfrequency.org), which calls for direct protests and demonstrations if the police officers in the Garner and Brown cases are not indicted. How can these sites be anything but racially motivated.


      • See above in my reply to Humble Talent. I see nothing wrong with calling for (peaceful) demonstrations and protests in the face of something of you believe to be wrong. It’s the American way. I think in the case of Ferguson, it was the police reaction to the protests that actually caused most of the trouble, as they themselves later acknowledged.

  3. A lot of people are needless victims of police violence. Whether Michael Brown is among them is not something I can conclude with confidence at this point. I would agree with the group’s goals and motivations, apart from that caveat.

    • I have no problem withe broad objectives of the group. Its definition of the problem, which involves the presumption pf racial animus by whites against blacks, is despicable and indefensible.

  4. To be clear Jack, I think there will be riots if the Officer Wilson does happen to be indicted.

    You don’t prematurely whip people into a pent-up-frenzy-to-be and then hope all that contained energy just magically dissipates.

  5. When can I start my group, “Mongrels for a Better America”? Few of us ‘white’ people are really ‘white’. Maybe it has come to the point that the only way to end the racism of the left is for ‘white’ America to embrace its inner mongrel (30% of US whites have some African ancestry and the amount with American Indian ancestry is probably larger).

  6. Seems to me like this particular nigger lover is slowly coming to terms with reality. That there is no multicultural society. It’s them and us. One side against the other. There will never be peace. Now all you need to do is choose side. One day, when you’ll be ready to admit your mistakes and denounce your fellow race traitors, come to Chimpmania and apologize.

    • Another self-indicting comment from the apparently bottomless pit of immoral and counter-ethical vomit that is the racist enclave called Chimpmania. Just to remind us that it’s scary out there. Don’t worry—Fist won’t be back.

      By the way, though silly left-wing bloggers are crowing about it (confirmation bias), the racial epithet spewing caller on C-Span who claimed to be a Republican was pretty obviously a false-flag GOP hater, and not a very skilled one at that. It tells us something that so many media outlets either fell for the ploy or pretended to.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.