The blindness of privilege

Let us assume, for sake of argument, that the controversy over giving bonuses to folks involved in the financial melt-down  that led to the Great Recession that led to untold misery for much of the American public and an up-ending of expections and politics in this country — that the controversy was overblown. That the bonuses involved were, in fact, justified in some fashion.

(Without going into details, I'll note that some financial bonus deals that seem, on the face of it, to be unfair, are actually justified and worthwhile from a corporate standpoint, and that they really are far less evil than they seem.)

Let us assume that.

Even so — even so — it is both historically bizarre and rhetorically idiotic (if not simply evil) to assert, even through metaphor, that they were the equivalent of lynching parties in the South.  No, sirs, your argument is disqualified.

Reshared post from +Les Jenkins

The uproar over bonuses “was intended to stir public anger, to get everybody out there with their pitch forks and their hangman nooses, and all that– sort of like what we did in the Deep South [decades ago]. And I think it was just as bad and just as wrong.

Yes, that's right. AIG's Chief Executive Robert Benmosche just claimed the outcry over his company handing out bonuses after they helped to destroy the economy to lynchings of African-Americans in the deep south. Seriously. 

Here's a tip: Nothing you're saying is helping to improve your image or that of your company.