Michael Jackson's racist rant resurfaces

[Hyoha 1,613]

Why are people saying he shouldn’t be held accountable for this because he was a drug addict? He was an adult for God’s sakes. We didn’t hear Amy Winehouse trashing minorities when she was high as ****.

It’s just the kind of person he was. Flawed. Not really a bad person necessarily, just a deeply flawed human being and a great artist, which is why he is so polarizing.

What can’t be done is remove responsibility from his actions because he was a privileged manboy with an addiction. Yes it is a disease but it doesn’t make you say things you don’t believe in. That’s like defending abusive alcoholics because they are drunk when they do bad things.

[2School4Cool 6,434]

3 hours ago, PunkTheFunk said:

Why can't we focus on both? The fact that he was a sh*tty person and also an artistic genius? Why one and not the other?

I get what you’re saying, I just personally feel like there isn’t really a point. I’m not necessarily saying let’s choose one or the other, I’m just saying he isn’t alive so why are we still digging up alleged voicemails from 14 years ago? It would be different if we were discussing someone who’s still alive and benefitting from commercial success, but he’s not, so I guess I just think it’s a little much to harp on one email from 14 years ago by a dead man. I also personally think there’s a difference between saying “yikes, that wasn’t a great comment” and trying to cancel his legacy all together, and I realize not everyone is doing this. This is all just my opinion, and I respect yours  

[Chickens in Malibu 7,873]

13 minutes ago, Hyoha said:

Why are people saying he shouldn’t be held accountable for this because he was a drug addict? He was an adult for God’s sakes. We didn’t hear Amy Winehouse trashing minorities when she was high as ****.

It’s just the kind of person he was. Flawed. Not really a bad person necessarily, just a deeply flawed human being and a great artist, which is why he is so polarizing.

What can’t be done is remove responsibility from his actions because he was a privileged manboy with an addiction. Yes it is a disease but it doesn’t make you say things you don’t believe in. That’s like defending abusive alcoholics because they are drunk when they do bad things.

First of all being drug addict is different from the side-effects of opioids. He wasn't just "high". He was most likely suffering from the side effect of such powerful drugs which you can look up online.

And what I said is that the things one does or say under such effects shouldn't define who he is. We must look at the whole picture. An antisemitic person would've had a repetition pattern of antisemitic gaffes. MJ doesn't as shown in the article I posted. He was a friend to the Jewish community as documented in the timeline, visited many jewish monuments with his rabbi friends and was moved by them, married a jewish woman and has jewish children. 

[PunkTheFunk 124,403]

56 minutes ago, ILoveGypsyLife said:

I get what you’re saying, I just personally feel like there isn’t really a point. I’m not necessarily saying let’s choose one or the other, I’m just saying he isn’t alive so why are we still digging up alleged voicemails from 14 years ago? It would be different if we were discussing someone who’s still alive and benefitting from commercial success, but he’s not, so I guess I just think it’s a little much to harp on one email from 14 years ago by a dead man. I also personally think there’s a difference between saying “yikes, that wasn’t a great comment” and trying to cancel his legacy all together, and I realize not everyone is doing this. This is all just my opinion, and I respect yours  

He might not be benefitting from commercial success, but his family still is -- and this is the same family that has tried to silence the victims of his abuse.

His influence and impact is so great and far reaching that no one could cancel it even if they wanted to. In my opinion his legacy as an entertainer and artist shouldn't be up for debate, but his legacy as a human being is fair game. If he was a despicable person behind closed doors, then that should absolutely be discussed because the people who suffered as a result of his actions are still alive and well. If anything, we have to take off our rose colored glasses and start seeing him for what he really was -- an incredibly talented singer, dancer, songwriter, and performer, who also happened to be a sh*tty person.

[2School4Cool 6,434]

21 minutes ago, PunkTheFunk said:

He might not be benefitting from commercial success, but his family still is -- and this is the same family that has tried to silence the victims of his abuse.

His influence and impact is so great and far reaching that no one could cancel it even if they wanted to. In my opinion his legacy as an entertainer and artist shouldn't be up for debate, but his legacy as a human being is fair game. If he was a despicable person behind closed doors, then that should absolutely be discussed because the people who suffered as a result of his actions are still alive and well. If anything, we have to take off our rose colored glasses and start seeing him for what he really was -- an incredibly talented singer, dancer, songwriter, and performer, who also happened to be a sh*tty person.

I respect that, and I think you make several good points. Maybe I just feel the way I do because there is no way to have a two sided debate when he cannot speak on his statements. Even though these comments are awful, and I am not defending them, they go against so many things he always stood for, so I feel like we should know more about the full story before immediately branding him as a “racist.” I cannot tolerate any form of hatred, so if he truly was racist, I would never stand for it, it’s just that we do not know the full story. And we also shouldn’t ignore his activism and philanthropy if we want this to be a fair debate. I agree that discussing him as a person is fair game, I just get frustrated when people make up their minds immediately without knowing the full story, like saying the TDCAB lyrics are racist without knowing the meaning of the song or purpose of the lyrics for example. 

[ALGAYDO 32,411]

2 hours ago, nicolasrumet said:

First of all being drug addict is different from the side-effects of opioids. He wasn't just "high". He was most likely suffering from the side effect of such powerful drugs which you can look up online.

And what I said is that the things one does or say under such effects shouldn't define who he is. We must look at the whole picture. An antisemitic person would've had a repetition pattern of antisemitic gaffes. MJ doesn't as shown in the article I posted. He was a friend to the Jewish community as documented in the timeline, visited many jewish monuments with his rabbi friends and was moved by them, married a jewish woman and has jewish children. 

Drugs don't turn you into a prejudice person lmao 

And you're giving me major "I'm not racist, I have a black friend!!!" type of vibe. Why is it so hard to hold him to his actions? He's dead, it doesn't ****ing matter  

[Chickens in Malibu 7,873]

16 minutes ago, ALGAYDO said:

Drugs don't turn you into a prejudice person lmao 

And you're giving me major "I'm not racist, I have a black friend!!!" type of vibe. Why is it so hard to hold him to his actions? He's dead, it doesn't ****ing matter  

First, please learn to read. I emphasized that these are not the "typical" drugs (weed, heroin etc..), these are opioids. And you don't know what they can do. Are you a medical expert? If the side effects included are hallucination, change of mood, confusion etc... does it say anywhere "except that hallucination can't come in the form of imagining people conspiring against you"? No it doesn't.

Those side effects can come in different shapes and forms. And you can't cherry pick. One user here for example said that his mother would steal stuff from his grand mother and they realized that it's because of the opioids she's taking etc...

The bottom line is that you can't call someone an antisemitic person based on one instance of something they probably said when they are under the effects of such opioids. 

I will condemn MJ if I see a pattern of antisemitic behavior, not a rant in a voicemail where it's clear in his voice that he's not sober. And again, who in his sane mind would go on such rant in a voicemail?

 

 

[diamondheartxx 176]

15 hours ago, Jakkusan said:

Him being a paedophile wasn’t enough.

lol i was just quoting a meme, but i guess ppl hung on to the fact that we was proven not guilty for that, but you can't deny those racist statements

[ALGAYDO 32,411]

This just in! According to medical (and apparently law) expert @nicolasrumet, opioids turn people slightly racist. But only when they're on opioids! 

[Chickens in Malibu 7,873]

23 minutes ago, ALGAYDO said:

This just in! According to medical (and apparently law) expert @nicolasrumet, opioids turn people slightly racist. But only when they're on opioids! 

Nice distorted oversimplification of what I said. Quite reductive indeed 

Also when I said "are you a medical expert?" I didn't claim I was one obviously. But asked on what basis you're claiming that imagining your lenders conspiring against you, can't be a form of hallucination? How do you know? Because medical experts agree that such opioids alter the mood and the state of mind of the patients who take them. And side-effects include hallucination, change of mood and confusion just to name a few.

[Jakkusan 799]

8 hours ago, ALGAYDO said:

This just in! According to medical (and apparently law) expert @nicolasrumet, opioids turn people slightly racist. But only when they're on opioids! 

Is that @nicolasrumet guy a Gaga fan or is he just some expert in sexual abuse and opioids? 

[Jakkusan 799]

10 hours ago, nicolasrumet said:

First, please learn to read. I emphasized that these are not the "typical" drugs (weed, heroin etc..), these are opioids. And you don't know what they can do. Are you a medical expert? If the side effects included are hallucination, change of mood, confusion etc... does it say anywhere "except that hallucination can't come in the form of imagining people conspiring against you"? No it doesn't.

Those side effects can come in different shapes and forms. And you can't cherry pick. One user here for example said that his mother would steal stuff from his grand mother and they realized that it's because of the opioids she's taking etc...

The bottom line is that you can't call someone an antisemitic person based on one instance of something they probably said when they are under the effects of such opioids. 

I will condemn MJ if I see a pattern of antisemitic behavior, not a rant in a voicemail where it's clear in his voice that he's not sober. And again, who in his sane mind would go on such rant in a voicemail?

 

 

The LEVEL of delusion.

Drugs DO NOT turn you into a racist. Ever. 

[Chickens in Malibu 7,873]

8 minutes ago, Jakkusan said:

The LEVEL of delusion.

Drugs DO NOT turn you into a racist. Ever. 

I don't think there's anything I can respond to in this post, since it's an opinion tried to be passed for a fact.

If you read again I didn't say "drugs turn you into a racist". What I said is that opioids can alter your state of mind and make you say things that you wouldn't say when you are in your sane mind.

Learn to read.

[Jakkusan 799]

11 minutes ago, nicolasrumet said:

I don't think there's anything I can respond to in this post, since it's an opinion tried to be passed for a fact.

If you read again I didn't say "drugs turn you into a racist". What I said is that opioids can alter your state of mind and make you say things that you wouldn't say when you are in your sane mind.

Learn to read.

I read what you wrote. I disagree that MJ just randomly spouted anti-semitism due to opioids. 

Anyway, I don’t want to keep quoting in a mean or facetious way. I genuinely do feel a bit of concern for you. I am curious as to how you got to this point of being so defensive of MJ. 

I don’t want to infer that you’re a bad person. I’m just struggling to figure out your thought process...

[Chickens in Malibu 7,873]

12 minutes ago, Jakkusan said:

I read what you wrote. I disagree that MJ just randomly spouted anti-semitism due to opioids. 

Anyway, I don’t want to keep quoting in a mean or facetious way. I genuinely do feel a bit of concern for you. I am curious as to how you got to this point of being so defensive of MJ. 

I don’t want to infer that you’re a bad person. I’m just struggling to figure out your thought process...

It's called reasoning.

In the old days, people were so simple-minded and judgmental that a mob would lynch people in public based on the smallest piece of evidence or even rumors out there. And that's what mob justice is; judging based on shock emotions, without examining the facts and giving people the benefit of the doubt before proving their wrongdoing.

Nowadays, I see more and more people acting like that. I beg to differ. I am not going to call someone a racist based on one instance of unusual behavior that may be attributed to the side effects of the opioids he was taking. This is the same man who died from opioids overdose. And as shown in the excerpt I posted, his doctor started becoming suspicious of overuse in 2002 already. So we never know.

Instead, what you should do is look at the whole picture, see if there's a pattern of antisemitism (racists have patterns of racist remarks/behavior). The article I posted documenting his relationship with the jews over the years shows otherwise.