I saw this editorial in the Los Angeles Times.

Soul-searching in Jena
Residents of the Louisiana town must take a hard look at their racial problems.

My first thought was, "those who can, do; those who don't, preach."

You've noticed I've been following the media coverage of the Jena 6 demonstration. I've also been thinking about white folks' response to it. The blogification of online media has enabled me to work with actual evidence of their reactions. In fact, the lack of possibility of physical confrontation means you'll often find out things you'd never be told of face to face.

First, to get them out of the way, there are the crazies. And there were the few white bloggers that were following the story. There's always a few of those. The rest of the sane white folks are finding the whole affair troubling on several levels.

Most white people started the day thinking the Jena 6 story went like so:

1. Black kids sit under “white kids'” tree

2. White kids hang tiny toy nooses on the tree

3. Black kids jump a white kid

We concerned Black folk know there was much more to the situation than that, but you can't blame most of them because

1. they only heard of it in the last 48 hours

2. that's all the media has reported

So most white folks had a sort of O.J.-Lite reaction. In commentary on blogs and newspapers they railed about brutal beatings, how the boy, the victim, was knocked unconscious and kicked, how such savagery cannot be excused. I've engaged a few of them and found you can make the equal justice issue clear in the abstract but they will still want the young men punished. They will allow the white kids should have been punished.

We, who seek equal protection, equal justice, knowing the white kids will not be punished, wonder why they stop just short of the door. I'd like to provide some perspective that may help. I'm going to recall the last instance a white guy got fired for coming out his mouth unambiguously incorrectly.

No, I'm not talking about Imus. People have found ways to absolve him. I'm talking about Larry Krueger, ex-of KNBR San Francisco. I pick this incident, not for any real deep, symbolic reason but because it is the case that made me realize why folks stop just short of the door.

In 2005, Mr. Krueger, in castigating the Giants for poor play, made an unfortunate reference to “brain-dead Caribbean players.” This was a tough one for the foes of political correctness. The “hip hoppers made me do it” defense hadn't been conceived of yet; besides, no living rapper had ever mentioned brain dead Caribbeans. They tried to blame Giants' manager Philipe Alou's strong reaction to the comment for his termination. He was fired for defying management's ruling that the theme was not to be repeated, not for the particular incident.

The follow up discussion, about how unfair it was that Krueger wasn't given a second chance, was what made me understand what was driving their position. Watching those who felt it was unfair, it occurred to me that people were assuming their positions based on a gut check of they likelihood they themselves might be caught in the position. The people who knew they could have a “slip of the tongue” thought Mr. Krueger should get a second chance; those who were comfortable with his termination were also comfortable that they would never say any such thing as Mr. Krueger had.

So I've been checking this theory since and it makes sense. Take nooses. Your average white person judges your reaction to a noose by comparing it to his own. This isn't a weird thing...using oneself as the standard of normality is a sign of a healthy self-image. And yes, that is a dig at Black folks in general. It makes me feel, though, that the solution your typical white person suggests is the one they would want if they were they party being judged. That no attention at all is given to the actual situation at hand.