Ethics Observations On The Great Central Park Dog-Walking Controversy

Oh, fine, another one of these.

Isn’t it fun how, thanks to the toxic combination of cell phone cameras and social media, a few minutes of what once would have been an isolated moment of bad judgment and rude behavior is now able to metastasize into a life and career-destroying catastrophe? Do you like that new reality? Awfully brutal and unforgiving, isn’t it?

The episode at hand involved the woman in the video above, Amy Cooper. She was walking her cocker spaniel off leash when  a bird watcher named Christian Cooper—no relation—told her the unleashed dog  violated park rules. When Amy refused to put her dog on a leash, Christian told her he was going to offer her dog a treat because this typically makes owners want to leash their dogs in response. That wasn’t the other Cooper’s response, however. She threatened to call the police and tell them that “an African American man” was threatening her life. She did too, as Christian recorded it all. Later, Christian’s sister, also named Cooper, posted the video, which got 33 million views on Twitter alone, and is now pushing 200 million views on other platforms.

Then, the deluge. Christian appeared on CNN with Don Lemon, where he accused Amy of trying ” to bring death by cop down on [his] head.” She got death threats, which Christian said was wrong, though his accusation would seem to have helped spark them. Amy Cooper, seeing what was coming,  told CNN she regretted calling the police, saying,

“It was unacceptable, and words are just words, but I can’t undo what I did. I sincerely and humbly apologize to everyone, especially to that man and his family, I’m not a racist. I did not mean to harm that man in any way.”

Unfortunately for Amy, apologies don’t make a dent in the fervor of social media mobs. Some members of this one, after somehow tracking down her dog-walker,  contacted the Abandoned Angels Cocker Spaniel Rescue, Inc. where Amy had obtained “Henry” several years ago, and the organization announced on Facebook that she had “voluntarily surrendered” her pet to the organization. “He is safe and in good health,” the group wrote.

Cooper had been a head of insurance portfolio management at Franklin Templeton, but her employer announced that she had been placed on leave while the incident was being investigated. By yesterday afternoon, she had been fired. “Following our internal review of the incident in Central Park yesterday, we have made the decision to terminate the employee involved, effective immediately. We do not tolerate racism of any kind at Franklin Templeton,” the company announced.

Now Christian Cooper is having twinges of regret. “It’s a little bit of a frenzy, and I am uncomfortable with that,” he said. “If our goal is to change the underlying factors, I am not sure that this young woman having her life completely torn apart serves that goal.”

He might have considered that before turning the video over to the mob.

Michael Fischer, president of the Central Park Civic Association, decided to pile on—heck, why not?—and issued a statement calling for Amy to be banned from Central Park:

“This disgusting display of intolerance is unacceptable and should never, ever be accepted in the City’s public domain like Central Park.The Central Park Civic Association condemns this behavior and is calling on Mayor de Blasio to impose a lifetime ban on this lady for her deliberate, racial misleading of law enforcement and violating behavioral guidelines set so that all can enjoy our city’s most famous park.”

Let’s all applaud the impeccable virtue of Mr. Fischer, since that’s obviously what he’s after.  I’m sure, if we think creatively, we can think of more ways to punish Amy Cooper beyond destroying her reputation, ending her career and taking away her dog. Make her change her name, move out of the country, have plastic surgery, end up pushing a grocery cart full of junk…after all, she was really horrible to a  stranger for about two minutes. What else?

Ethics Observations:

  • “Proportion” is an ethical value.  It appears to be completely absent from this fiasco, on all sides.
  • This kind of episode should never be national news. Never. Making it national news is inherently divisive and inflammatory. Naturally, Don Lemon chose to elevate it to national news.
  • Amy Cooper is an asshole. I think that is a fair and just assessment. Non-assholes never say, “You have displeased me, African American man, so I will falsely claim you are threatening me, a helpless white woman.” This is signature significance if I ever saw it.
  • Is she also a racist? Technically, she was exploiting racism for her benefit. That doesn’t necessarily mean she’s a racist, but it’s equally despicable.
  • Yes, her employers had to fire her once they were brought into the story. Still, I find my mind reaching back to the worst I have ever behaved, and wondering what that might have done to my career and life if it were captured on video and went “viral.” The Golden Rule is relevant here.
  • The woman’s treatment of her dog on the video is disturbing. I’m glad she had to surrender it. That kind of dog abuse isn’t flagged often enough.
  • No question: Christian Cooper was the victim here. BUT…

1) I have allowed dog-owners who had control of their dogs to continue walking their pets off-leash when there seemed to be no harm in the offing. christian was within his rights, but also officious. Society often requires loose rules and leniency, not dictators. It is ironic that accounts are calling Amy Cooper the “Karen” in this encounter, but actually the “Karen” was Christian.

2) His claim that she was calling down death-by-cop on his head was inflammatory and irresponsible.

__________________________________

Sources: Insider, The Blaze 1, 2, 3, New York Times

62 thoughts on “Ethics Observations On The Great Central Park Dog-Walking Controversy

  1. By his own admission he did threaten her. He said something to the effect: if your not going to follow the rules you’re not going to like what I’m going to do next. He then said he gave the dog treats. I’m not sure that played out the way he thought it would play out, but it’s hard not to see it as a threat. The biggest problem with this is we only see what happens once he starts recording. This doesn’t excuse her actions, but he is by no means the victim here. Just two jerks going at it.

  2. The female-looking banshee was torturing the dog. That’s what stood out to me. The dog was rescued from the female-looking banshee. Happy ending.

  3. >Technically, she was exploiting racism for her benefit.

    Well, this has worked pretty well for a number of politicians at all government levels. It is enabled by the media and supported by about half of the country. I understand why she may have thought that would work out.

    Oh, never mind! That only works when the target of racism is melanin-deprived.

  4. Jack said:

    Do you like that new reality? Awfully brutal and unforgiving, isn’t it?

    Mighty Hobbsean there, Jack.

    She got death threats, which Christian said was wrong, though his accusation would seem to have helped spark them.

    No way he could’ve foreseen that, though.

    Okay, you can giggle now. It was, indeed, a joke.

    Unfortunately for Amy, apologies don’t make a dent in the fervor of social media mobs.

    WIIITTCCHH!

    Now Christian Cooper is having twinges of regret. “It’s a little bit of a frenzy, and I am uncomfortable with that,” he said. “If our goal is to change the underlying factors, I am not sure that this young woman having her life completely torn apart serves that goal.”

    Really? Well, you know, I’ve always heard that you had to break a few eggs to make an omelet. Is one woman’s career to much to ask to “…change underlying factors…”, whatever that is supposed to mean?

    Somebody needs to tell him it’s far too late for that, and his invocation of the mob was completely successful in exactly what he intended — and he knows it. Own it dude, it’s yours. Nail that white scalp to the wall and worship it.

    Perhaps he will revel in her incipient poverty and excommunication from the human race. Might as well — after all, it’s what the mob he summoned delivered, and exactly what he hoped for.

    Make her change her name, move out of the country, have plastic surgery, end up pushing a grocery cart full of junk…after all, she was really horrible to a stranger for about two minutes. What else?

    She must wear the scarlet “B,” for BIIITTCHH! Bonus! That rhymes with WIITTCCHH!

    Ethics Observations:

    I think your observations are all correct, but my question is this:

    Where is the mercy, forgiveness, and tolerance? Where is the Golden Rule, on either side?

    Everyone knows how social media mobs react to viral videos and pictures. He would have to be from a third-world jungle not to have heard of how social media reactions have destroyed people and their careers.

    But all I see here is vengeance, and a touch of later regret after his vengeance proved to be as complete as possible without actual physical harm. He got his pound of flesh, and then some.

    Congratulations, dude. I hope the stain on your immortal soul was worth it.

    As for the lady? Well, when you act like a nasty bitch, don’t be surprised if someone shows everybody pictures, and sics a mob on you. That’s who we are, apparently.

  5. Christian Cooper’s fault is a common one in this culture: the desire to be famous. I’m sure he’s couched it in more reasonable terms. At first, I’m sure he thought “I need to protect myself from accusation”…which is probably true. But that’s not where it remained. Once he posted it online, he became little more than any other attention whore that salivates at the notion of “likes” and “retweets”. If he wasn’t after notoriety, he would have simply filed the video away in case the authorities came knocking. That’s not what he did. His desire for lots of page views trumped his need to cover the indiscretion of Amy Cooper, so he trashed – at least temporarily – a woman’s life for his own fame.

    Yuck!!!

    Jack, I’m curious…you wrote that her employer “had to fire her once they were brought into the story.” Did you write that because you agreed with the decision, or more because you saw it as an inevitable consequence of cancel culture? I do have to say that just once, I’d love a Franklin-Templeton-type company to say something like, “Ms. Cooper clearly overreacted and did the wrong thing, but she did not do it on company time or company property. We are extending grace to a valued employee the same way we – or anyone reading this – would want grace extended for a similar offense.” That would be so refreshing. Your Golden Rule reference is 100% spot-on. Or better yet, “Ms. Cooper’s statements and actions were done independent of her work at Franklin Templeton, and therefore we have no comment, not now nor in the future.”

    I’m so grateful that camera phones weren’t around thirty-five years ago.

    • Pure cognitive dissonance scale survival tactic. They lose if they allow themselves to be seen as supporting “people like her.” She can be replaced. It’s a pure business decision, and the only one left to them. She’s become a distraction and a problem. She had to go.

      • Yeah, probably all true. These incidents don’t very often happen at work (or well-disciplined HR departments would deal with it quietly and internally), so I think it’s safe to write that people broadcast an “offender’s” employer because it’s an almost sure bet to get the person fired.

        It’s just another way to anonymously do extra damage from a distance.

        Still, I wish just one company would stand up to the mob and tell them to pound sand.

      • Jack: “She’s become a distraction and a problem. She had to go.”

        I understand the rationale. However, there is a fine line here and the one where Harvard fires a Law Professor representing Trump (?) Epstein (?)(sorry, I forget the story).

        If distraction if the issue, it applies across the board, even to lawyers. If we expect the public not to be distracted by stupidity, it should apply to Cooper.

        How do you walk that fine line?

        -Jut (The guy who posts anonymously online so as not to alienate potential clients and usually keeps his damn mouth shut on Facebook for mostly similar reasons.)

        • Businesses are beholden to stockholders and are ill positioned to take principled stands. Tom Donohue, soon retiring as head of the US Chamber, told me 40 years ago, “Jack, here’s the #1 secret to keeping any job: Don’t be a problem. Solve problems.”

  6. Jack,

    I am not sure I have ever disagreed with so much of what you write as I do with this post. First, and foremost, I will state where we agree:

    Everyone in this story is a jerk. Everyone last one of them. From Amy to Christian to Don Lemons to the Social Media Lynch Mob to her employer to NYC politicians to the fuckers at the Spaniel Rescue Club (where do those bastards get the right to take her dog away because of this one incident [from what I saw that pooch is well-cared for]). They should all hide their heads in a bag.

    Where we disagree:

    1. Proportionality. Yes, we agree Amy freaked out and called the police to report an African American man threatening her over what Christian said to her, which she perceived as a threat. That she called the police is a sign of lunacy. Christian, on the other hand, has surrendered any right to complain about this incident. He video taped her meltdown and published it on social media with the intent of destroying this woman.

    2. This incident should have been solved with a few choice words, perhaps a hurled insult or two but every bully on the planet is equipped with a cellphone just waiting to ruin someone. Christian, as far as I can tell, instigated the whole damn thing by confronting her about stupid leash rules. Scold that he is, Christian clearly intended to provoke her. He got what he wanted: Fame. Everybody is talking about this guy and what a 110 pound investment banker from Canada said to him. He should have minded his own business and left her alone. But, no. He decided that he was Park Cop Dog Leash Enforcer Guy and picked on someone smaller and younger. Jerk. His life should be destroyed as well.

    3. Amy is an asshole; Christian, on the other hand, is Supreme Leader of Assholes, Inc. He provoked her, recorded her, and then, “allowed” his sister to post an inflammatory video on social media, knowing that the Mob would track her down and destroy her. What a coward. He knew exactly what was about to happen but he gets to sit back and say, “Well, gee, I do wish sis hadn’t shared that to Twitter. It’s much ado about nothing – can’t we all just get along?” This is especially true in light of what happened in Minnesota yesterday and in Georgia a few weeks ago. Nerves are frayed, people are terrified about the near future, and race relations are at a breaking point (thanks, St. Barack You did us a solid on that one). I read an article about this story this morning. Comparisons were made the Emmitt Till Emmitt Till! Can you believe that? Yet, this jerk provoked an altercation and obliterated a woman for his own gain. She is in hiding. The Mob has sought out her address, her employer, and laid waste to all of it. Thanks, Christian. You’re a supreme asshole. I hope you are happy with yourself. Fame is fickle, though, Chris. Be careful when it turns around a tears you to pieces. You just might not have many defending you.

    4. Is Amy a racist? Who knows and who cares? Her life is ripped apart for an admittedly stupid outburst. I just can’t wait until that bozo Ben Crump takes the case. He is such an impressive legal mind, that one. I will bet dollars to donuts, though, that Christian is a racist. i would bet this isn’t his first ride at the rodeo in stoking race tensions.

    5. Should she have been fired by Franklin Templeton? Probably not but they had no choice in the matter. They are cowards, though. I am sure the disruption to their business is still going on as we read this. Franklin Templeton probably has a long history of hiring racists and white supremacists. Sure. They are a Wall Street investment bankers who live to exploit the poor and step on the downtrodden. They deserved it, too. Yep. Go get ’em, boys!

    6. I don’t like the way Amy grabbed the dog by the collar. Neither did the dog by the looks of the video. She should have put the leash on and walked away. She didn’t. She kept engaging Christian, not realizing that her dog was doing cartwheels. At least the dog had the sense to try to get away from both of them. But, is this a sign of animal abuse? I don’t see it. And those scolds at the Spaniel rescue club can go straight to Hell. Who are they to sit in judgment of all others. Where in the adoption papers does it say that they get to do “dog well-being inspections” and may remove the dog if they conclude there is abuse? They need to mind their own business. But no, the busybodies that they are decided that would show how virtuous they are and removed this woman’s dog from its home. Nice to know.

    7. Di Blasio, the city managers, and a candidate for DA have all declared that “this kind of hatred will not be tolerated in New York City” or some such nonsense. That does beg the question: What kind of hatred do they tolerate in their city? The NYC civil rights commission is going to investigate this incident as a hate crime. Think about that! The DA candidate thinks that there should be a separate hate-crime law to deal with people who make “fake” calls to the police. Yep. A DA wants to punish people for calling the police. Totalitarians the whole damn lot of them.

    8. The Mob. Weaklings keyboard surfing destroyed someone’s life. She is unemployed and a social pariah. She will forever be labeled a racist. When she applies for her next job, the HR police will search her name and this incident will come glaringly into focus. Who the hell is going to hire her after this? Who wants to deal with some brave social justice warrior who will undoubtedly find out that she has a job and will rain unholy hell on the new place. She is toast. She would be better to go back to Canada, where at least Canadians are more tolera . . . wait. This is Justin Trudeau’s domain. She should move to Ukraine to work with Hillary’s new preside4ntial campaign.

    I followed a couple of people’s posts on this story this morning. The comments were terrifying. Everyone declared that Amy got exactly what she deserved; some went so far as to say that she deserved even more abuse. What does that say about us as a nation? Why have we become so quick to lynch people for an incident like this? Maybe Jack was correct that we would become a nation of assholes as a result of Trump’s election. Who knows? Maybe we were assholes already and we just needed an excuse to let our true colors show. This is a dangerous time for the nation and I am not hopeful we can correct it.

    jvb

    • Glad you posed this, AIM. I think there’s a lot more to this story than was reported, other than in the National Review. The guy threatened her. I’m just not sure she was being an asshole and he sure seems like a grade A jerk in this reportage.

    • A good perspective there and a further cautionary note.

      Off the topic, I couldn’t help but notice that web sites such as that basically assault me with multiple popups, videos, and other ads when all I am trying to do is peacefully read a story. That’s not a good way to get me to return to your site.

  7. If Amy had had the presence of mind to quickly announce that she supports Joe Biden, she would have been golden.

  8. Why did everyone conclude that her animus was racial in origin. It is equally likely her animus was predicated on his gender and he just happened to be black.

    The entire “believe all women” kant has promoted the idea that women’s accusations carry more weight than male defenses.

    My take was her calls to police were to deflect away her own guilt of violating the dog walking rules. By calling the police she could assume that the first responders would take her side.

    I know this is unethical but I do hope karma visits all concerned.

    • There is also the possibility (although highly unlikely) that in mentioning his gender and his skin color, she was giving the police an identifier. BOLOs do it all the time: give identifiers.

      Doesn’t matter. I saw her mis-handling of the dog and she was done in my book.

    • You have to remember the “progressive stack.” Black female > Black Male > White Female. She wasn’t going to win playing the female card.

      That is not a thing I made up, by the way. The “progressive stack” is actually a real term that progressives use.

      • Issac, Exactly my point. It might not really be about race it was about the ability to garner sympathy from the authorities. Society is conditioned to believe males as protectors of women against the vagaries of nature and other men. She may have just as pulled the call the cops stunt had the man been white.

        Consider a police call for a domestic altercation. Cops show up and find a women crying and says man hit her and shows a bruised arm. Man’s story is she attacked him with a knife and he held her off by grabbing her arm. He then called police. He goes to jail because she shows evidence (bruised arm) to support her story.

        I did not see the complete video so I can’t comment on her actions with the dog.

  9. It seems to me one must start from the larger issue: a war against whites and whiteness. One must identify the larger movement that has been set in motion, and then look at how the individual players enter into each situation that arises; giving it a slant, bending it to the purpose of the larger narrative, but to the larger meta-political fact: displacement of whites by a new rising demographic. This was set in motions decades back and is now maturing.

    Each situation that arises, if it has the necessary and needed elements, can be bent to fit the larger pattern. The surface of this one does not look good (to sic the police on someone under those apparent terms is ugly indeed, and dangerous). Is it possible there is more here?

    It is quite possible that this man, aware as we all are, and as all people of color likely are, of the race-tensions, and possibly caught up in their anxieties him self, did things, or took steps, that deliberately triggered this woman. If one considers the *larger narrative* then this is not impossible and is likely. The act of filming is, as is obvious, an act of aggression. So would be giving someone else’s dog food to eat (in that circumstance, in that way).

    I have seen these situations develop dozens of times in America: where one person, for their own reasons, uses their power to trigger and provoke the other. It is all deliberate and calculated to escalate. I’ve never seen these games played out except in America. They take place very differently here (in Colombia) for example. You are very advised not to provoke people here. *Law* hardly exists and for about 300,000 pesos, if you have the right connections and the will, you can eliminate someone (that’s about $80.00). Avoid conflict. The ones that can do harm are far more numerous.

    Giving an *order* to someone which you know they must disobey to protect their sense of self and integrity is common. I’ve seen it many times. But since this man is aware that there are Karens out there it is likely that he found one and provoked her. It would fit into the larger, on-going and developing narrative.

    People seem to be getting skilled in how to *play* these situations, these theatrical social rehearsals. There is a (really ridiculous) article in the Times about this man today. His thoughts on his *Karen* are intercalated with musings on migratory birds. Its a set-up obviously. As is so much going on today.

  10. Jack – ask one of your African American friends or colleagues whether “His claim that she was calling down death-by-cop on his head was inflammatory and irresponsible.” is accurate or not.

    I’ll wait.

    • That would apply to whites as well given that more whites are shot by police than are other races. Please don’t use disproportionate impact because I will counter that disproportionate impact is a BS unless you want to make the claim that 99% of police officers, white and black, are hunting blacks or choose to use more force than necessary. If so, prove your case. A black person believing that the police will arbitrarily shoot him is no more legitimate than thinking that a person wearing a burka on a plane is a terrorist. These ideas are propagated by racialists who are no better that the white supremacists they decry.

      Disproportionate impact cuts many ways. We hear about outrageous cases of what appears to be police misconduct like what happened to George Floyd, Eric Garner et al. We heard about the cop that shot the white women as she approached his car (no riots) but when whites are shot by cops it does not make the news. Thus, we treat cops shooting whites is ok but when they shoot a minority this is evidence of a police war on minorities. That is disproportionate impact from news coverage.

      • “Facts are meaningless. You can use facts to prove anything that’s even remotely true. Facts schmacts.”

    • So they have been misled and brainwashed by the cynical and politically-motivated Obama-era demonization of law enforcement and whites. That doesn’t make them correct. It’s still bigotry, just like whites who believe blacks are instinctively criminals.

    • I sort of agree and sort of don’t. It was irresponsible in the sense that he, nor any of us, really know what her motive was in making that call in the way she did. Hell, even she may not have know just what she was wanting to accomplish in the moment.

      But it’s completely valid to say that what she did, and the way in which she did it could have gotten the man killed. I was particularity disturbed by the way in which she got super shrill towards the end of the call, like she was in imminent danger or actively being attacked. Play the video, close your eyes, and listen to the audio. If that audio was all we had to go by here, things would certainly be a lot different – and if he would have been shot & killed by police, that audio would have been more than enough evidence to justify it. Killings of unarmed people have been justified by less.

      And anyone saying that she may have legitimately felt threatened is onto some next level rationalization considering that in the video he stands his ground, she voluntarily (and somewhat aggressively) approaches him, and he asks her to not come close to him – all things which happened after his “threat” against her.

    • It’s not. That’s a left-wing, anti-cop fever dream. Police don’t just up and shoot black men. Review any case you want, even the worst of the unarmed victim shootings. Behave respectfully toward a police officer, don’t resist arrest or physically interfere with the officer’s duties, and there is no peril whatsoever. Your assumption that all police are homicidal racists is unsupported by reality, and the promotion of that propaganda gets people killed.

      • Behave respectfully toward a police officer, don’t resist arrest or physically interfere with the officer’s duties, and there is no peril whatsoever

        How did that work out for Daniel Shaver? You made a post about the episode when the cop walked free.
        Sometimes the cops decide to play a deadly game of Simon Says where a slip up gets you killed. Black lives matter overplay their cards often, but don’t pretend that there is nothing there.

        • It didn’t, obviously. There are killer doctors too. Hundreds of thousands of interaction with citizens of all colors and creeds, and the outliers are used as the norm. Does that seem just, fair or logical to you?

          • There is something there, the something being, anytime a situation develops where one party has a loaded gun, the likelihood of a tragedy is higher than it would be otherwise. That’s why it is in the interest of all parties not to get into such situations, and to deescalate as quickly as possible when such a situation arises. Beginning with a presumption of murderous racist intent does not advance this objective.

      • All add to that: have you seen the security camera footage of the arrest of George Floyd? Even the narrative of resting arrest is a lie. He peacfully went with the police before he was murdered by one of them.

        • Murder? No. Some sort of accidental or unintended homicide, yes. But the circumstances of how and why he ended up on the ground being restrained, that needs to be looked into carefully.

          But it must be interpreted to be a vicious murder. And this justifies the general lawlessness that is taking shape. Each of these recent cases is different and distinct. But each of them are bent to serve already established and existing purposes.

        • I can’t comprehend what happened to George Floyd. From what I saw, he was handcuffed and complied with the police. I have no idea why he was not placed in a patrol car after he was handcuffed. Then, somehow he ends up face-down on the pavement with a police officer kneeling on his neck for somewhere between 6 to 8 minutes, all the while telling the officer he couldn’t breathe, and not hysterically or offensively, kind of matter-of-factly saying, “Uh, officer? Down here. Can’t breathe. Could you, by chance take your knee off my neck?” Three other officers stand around scratching their heads, doing next to nothing. Awful on every level. Doesn’t justify burning Minneapolis to ground, though.

          jvb

      • “all police are homicidal racists” – didn’t say that or even imply that. In fact, I said nothing about race whatsoever. But do I think he would have been more at risk than a white man if the cops had shown up while he was still there? History and statistics tell us yes, he probably would have been.

        When cops are called, particularly in confusing situations such as this, things can escalate quickly based on a variety of factors, and yes, people can and do get killed.

        I don’t see this as all that dissimilar from swatting. Contacting authorities and implying a serious threat that is in reality non-existent. Again, the shrillness of her voice would have told me that there was an act of aggression in progress, and if I was a cop responding to that I certainly would be more primed for conflict. Whenever cops are primed for conflict, shit can go sideways regardless of skin color.

  11. John Burger wrote:

    8. The Mob. Weaklings keyboard surfing destroyed someone’s life. She is unemployed and a social pariah. She will forever be labeled a racist. When she applies for her next job, the HR police will search her name and this incident will come glaringly into focus. Who the hell is going to hire her after this? Who wants to deal with some brave social justice warrior who will undoubtedly find out that she has a job and will rain unholy hell on the new place. She is toast. She would be better to go back to Canada, where at least Canadians are more tolera . . . wait. This is Justin Trudeau’s domain. She should move to Ukraine to work with Hillary’s new presidential campaign.

    I followed a couple of people’s posts on this story this morning. The comments were terrifying. Everyone declared that Amy got exactly what she deserved; some went so far as to say that she deserved even more abuse. What does that say about us as a nation? Why have we become so quick to lynch people for an incident like this? Maybe Jack was correct that we would become a nation of assholes as a result of Trump’s election. Who knows? Maybe we were assholes already and we just needed an excuse to let our true colors show. This is a dangerous time for the nation and I am not hopeful we can correct it.

    It is not ‘weakling keyboard surfing’ that have caused Amy Cooper’s dread fate. The destruction of her life is — in my view — directly tied to a larger issue. The ‘keyboard warriors’ are functionaries. That larger issue is the undermining of the power of the white majority in the US. It is tied in this sense to the deliberate effort to undermine the dominant culture through a whole range of strategies.

    The ‘purpose’ of this elaborate rehearsal to have been put in motion — I guess I am repeating myself — has a function that is to further undermine the legitimacy of a former white culture which is soon to become, or to be made, into a minority. What must be noticed is a) that this is happening, b) that it firts into a larger social engineering plan, and c) that it has been established that it is no ethically or morally possible to oppose this fate. That is the most interesting part, at least from where I stand: Because I take the oppositional stands I am well aware that I have to be the price of being branded as a moral and ethical retrograde — as a racist or simply as a bad person. Here, on this blog, I have received every insult that is possible. This does not so much bother me since I place myself in this position. What interests me is to notice the function of ‘social coercion’ and ‘moral shaming’.

    You see? To get out from under that pressure, which is completely controlling and is intended as such, one has to choose a complete independence. I recognize though that no one of you could, in your daily civic life, take any such stand. Why? Simple! They would destroy you and you know it!

    That is what lies behind this whole rehearsal.

    In thousands of different cases — these do not get discussed in the conversations about ethics on this blog (for understandable reasons) — many different people whose names I can mention if you like have suffered at the hands of an empowered *mob*. Getting their news sites shut down. Demonitization. Social shunning. So let me say this: Amy Cooper should instead of *cowering away* and whimpering like a child should educate herself as to what is being done to her, her people, her culture, her civilization — and so should everyone of you! Her entire perspective should change . . . and so should yours.

    But let’s be realistic and very honest: no one here can take this step because you are, each in different ways, on one hand terrified of what could happen to you, on the other in a profound state of ethical and moral mystification. Because you are essentially *progressives* and because this false system of ethical values has been established in you, you cannot make the jump to self-actualization, to self-empowerment. You participate, each in your way, to the general disempowerment that Amy Cooper is now suffering. Her fate is your fate — eventually. But this is what you work for!

    But there is — there really is — an alternative. But all that I really want to point out here is that you cannot conceive of what that alternative is! Literally, you cannot conceive of it: it cannot coalesce in your mind. And that is why I say that *you* serve the progressive trends — like marionettes on strings. But the minute you notice those strings, and the minute you cut just one of them, is the moment when self-recovery might begin.

  12. While I agree with John B and others that this single incident shouldn’t consign The Bad Cooper to permanent cultural infamy, I don’t see how her “I’m being threatened by an African-American man” can be brushed off. What earthly difference does it make what color man is threatening you? That feature is indefensible, and has no innocent interpretation, right?

  13. I do not agree with the view that to-the-park-rescue Cooper-man made the video with the intention to humiliate her publicly. At least not at first. And also not with the opinion that Cooper-girl is not a racist.

    After watching the video, I concluded that he started recording precisely when she threatened to call the cops, to have proof in case the cops shot first and asked questions later, so to speak.
    Later on, the desire to take revenge obviously revealed a weakness of character, especially that he agreed to go an a talk show – if he had regrets about how it turned out, the way to go would have been to “no comment” this thing death.

    Of course, it has also been established that he made veiled threats – to feed her dog as an incentive to keep it on the leash. To him that might have seemed funny but if you start off a conversation with “Do what I tell you to, or else.” – the other person (in that case, lone woman in the woods) might stop listening after that lead-in and go on the defensive. Not very smart.

    Thirdly, she seemed not only mentally distressed and but even disturbed – the strangling of her dog (while hard to watch) didn’t seem like negligent abuse but like she was clinging to that dog in her mentally distressed state, and was so out of it that she didn’t realize what she was doing (the dog even seemed to attack her at one point to free itself).
    This ties in directly to my fourth point: when it comes to her counter-threats – telling the police that an African-American man was attacking her – I do believe it revealed her hidden attitude towards black Americans. She didn’t make any old trashy threat like “shut up or imma serve you a knuckle sandwich”. Being in that agitated a state, it’s hard to guard your words – in agitation veritas est. Not only does her choice of words reveal that she thinks herself superior but she consciously uses the fact that her country’s police has a known history of racially motivated violence against black people and she has no problem using this to her imagined advantage to subdue her accuser. (For rightly calling her out on the leash rule. Yes, he was a nosy busy body, but com’on, it’s not like he ran around the park, calling the police on people who don’t leash their dogs)

    This incident also strikes me as a question of timing: not so long ago, a 911-call like that could have turned into an episode of “To kill a Mockingbird”.

    • I think this is a fair analysis. I continue not to comprehend the dog treat part of the story at ALL. This guy, who doesn’t have a dog, carries dog treats around to get people to leash their dogs? Huh? Yes, it seems like he behaved like an officious jerk, but one with the rules 100% on his side. Such people do like to use cell phone video as implied threats—maybe I should teach a course in how to respond when someone does this, and how to turn such videos into your presentation, not theirs.

      • I suspect that Christian has a habit of harassing people who don’t have the dogs on leashes. Therein lies his reason for having dog treats in his pocket. Otherwise, it is frickin’ creepy as all get-out: “Let’s see, Chris, you don’t have a dog, you’re not walking a dog, and you keep Milk Bones in your pocket just in case you see a dog off a leash? Yeah, I’m not buying it. Besides, you’re a jerk and coward now, put away your cellphone and go away.”

        jvb

      • I think that the treats are intended to explode the owner’s assertion that the dog is under control, even if not leashed. Here’s a treat, call your dog and have him come to you. That’s control.

  14. Something else I don’t understand about the story: if the woman has owned the dog for years, what authority does the rescue organization have? None, presumably. What kind of dog-owner just surrenders her dog like that?

    The more I think about this, it seems like two weird Coopers, one a jerk, the other an unstable asshole,met by chance and brought out the worst in each other.

  15. Apparently I had a completely different take on this situation. I was more struck by Amy Cooper’s tone.

    When she told Christian Cooper she was going to call the police and he told her to go ahead, she then said in effect “I am going to tell them that a black man is threatening me, you want me to do THAT?’. That seemed very manipulative. She had been very aggressive towards Christian, she obviously wasn’t scared of him, so why would she say this? She was letting him know she planned to use the police against him as a weapon. She planned to manipulate the police to punish Christian.

    Then, when she called the police, he demeanor changed to a frantic, panicked woman. Why? Theatrics. I interpreted this as her trying to manipulate the situation. I actually expected her to hang up the phone, immediately compose herself, turn to him and say “See, you’re going to get it now!”.

    In her apology, she said she never meant any harm to come to Christian. That is obviously a lie. The call to the police was specifically to do him harm and she pointed that out before she made the call.

    If I were a manager at Franklin Templeton and saw that video, I would have immediately called HR to see if she had ever filed any sexual harassment complaints. She was way too manipulative in that whole situation to keep her as an employee.

    • What do you want to bet that in her “real life” she’s an entitled NE leftist who mouths support for various SJW positions, BLM, etc.? Could be wrong, of course, but the theatrics and the lack of reams of press pegging her as a “Trump supporter” push my thoughts in that direction.

      • Nope. She is Canadian, from Toronto, I believe. I am not sure if she is a Rush fan, though. Canada’s education has faltered in the last two decades or so and Rush is no longer required listening for all education (primary, secondary,high school) and the universities/colleges don’t teach it unless you are studying an advanced degree (e.g., Ph.D, Post-Doctorate, LLM, etc.).

        jvb

      • I would never peg her for a Trump supporter. Plus, what are the chances that this would happen to the only Trump supporter in NYC? Her act came so naturally that I wondered immediately how many times she has done something like this.

        One little incident acting like a jerk in the park? Probably happens 10,000x a day in NYC.
        Acting like a jerk, calling the police, and trying to get someone arrested under false pretenses? Something needs to be done about that. She needs to be charged with misuse of 911 or something similar. She didn’t sign a police report, so that is out, but you can be charged for misusing 911 and I would think this counts.

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.