IS JUSTICE JUST US?
Justice Clarence Thomas' autobiography will be officially released for sale tomorrow, October 1, 2007. This date coincidentally? happens to coincide with the beginning of the new Supreme Court term.
Since it is only Saturday, September 3oth I have not yet had a chance to read his book. However apparently others have. So what follows are my initial reactions to some of the reports I have read on Drudge and heard on NPR.
As I have tried my best to be respectful to the position of this man and the struggle it took him to become a Supreme Court Justice I appreciate that what is to follow walks an admittedly thin line between no one is perfect and send the man for a psychiatric consultation to protect the American people from him and him from himself.
The Associated Press who obtained a prerelease copy of his book: "My Grandfather's Son" states: "The 289-page book, for which Thomas has been paid more than $1 million by publisher HarperCollins, is an account of his up-from-poverty story from his first home in tiny Pinpoint, Ga., through his swearing-in as a justice at the age of 43."
The article also indicates that a third of the book recounts "his nomination to the court [during which] Thomas says his opponents were obsessed with the issue of abortion and determined to stop him because they believed he would oppose abortion rights."
Winning a difficult struggle winding up with his confirmation to the Court - 16 years ago - garnering the great power and authority that this title confers - has apparently done nothing to diminish Justice Thomas' festering psychological wounds.
Convinced of a conspiracy of "liberals" to kill his confirmation this book re-opens his personal Pandora's box of stored away bitterness directing it to a whole group of mainly liberal "rich white men" he believes were out to get him. Among those on his list he wishes to settle a score is Presidential challenger Joseph Biden.
Much of the book are JUstice Thomas' personal feelings of having been severely wronged during the confirmation hearings. He characterizes them as nothing short of a "high tech lynching" to put "uppity blacks" [a self attribution?] in their place.
I find his protracted tale of woe to be a pathetic confession of a tortured soul that is obviously obsessed with this historical idea fixe that still rages and apparently dominates much of his consciousness.
His main target is still Anita Hill - a black woman who worked with him - and who is the person who brought serious charges of sexual harrassment which almost blocked his confirmation.
It is noteworthy that Ms. Hill was not then nor is she now a "rich white man." She is in fact an attractive, articulate, serious minded afro american woman.
At best one might charaterize her accusations and his caustic rebuttal as a typical he said, she said court fight. I am certain that most reasonable people who value fairness and reasonablness would conclude that the fight should now be laid to rest. Particularly so, because Clarence Thomas officially won it.
I have wrestled with my intense reactions to the reports of his book wondering why I am so deeply moved. In thinking it over I am growing more and more suspicious about the timing, and the content, and the marketing of this particular autobigraphy.
WHY NOW IS IT BEING PUBLISHED?
On a surface level one might conclude that his reaction although extreme is understandable in the light of his complicated personality. Politics can be and often is quite nasty and no one side might rightly claim to be the bearers of absolute perfection, pure truth, and total righteousness.
However, I imagine that most reasonable people - even those who feel bitter about past injustices - sooner or later try to come to terms with them. And if they can't work their feelings out by themselves they often do and should consult professionals who are expert in helping those possessed to grow up, get a life, and move on.
If it were only that simple. But I am afraid - truly afraid - that this particular man - who happens to be a Supreme Court Justice - is not just an immature, psychologically disturbed rageful and vindictive and revengeful human being - but is also a highly intelligent, politically savvy and calculating partisan who has waited 16 years to drop his stink bomb at this particualr time in American history.
Why Now?
As I have no trust in our president leadership and am convinced they would do anything to hold onto power I think it not so far fetched to conjecture that if there was a way to divide the African American voters in this particular election it might go along way to keeping the Democrats from winning what appears at this particular time to be a near shoe in.
I hope I am wrong and am attributing too much to what might indeed be just a chronically disturbed possessed man who happens to be a Supreme Court Justice. But isn't it an interesting coincidence? that just a few nights ago four leading Republican contenders for the Presidency chose to boycot an important Afro American convention?
I will carefully tune into the ripples and waves the release of Clarence Thomas' authobiography will likely have come monday morning. And I fervently hope that the great mass of enlightened Americans will take heed of Thomas Jeffersons' warning about the ever continuing threats to Democracy: "ETERNAL VIGILIANCE!"
rate
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 24
Why not wait until you've had a chance to read the book for yourself and then base your arguments on your own opinions about the real thing rather than simply repeating and commenting on what others have said? It's just a few days -- surely the authenticity of a real review would make up for the couple of days we'd have to wait for your article?
I was absorbed in every word of the original hearings. From what I have read so far - what I have quoted are comments of Justice Thomas - I hear nothing different except more of same.
My arguments are strictly my own. In fact I have found my article to be highly original. If you can find someone I have based my arguments on please cite the sources.
I plan to read it. If there is something I should correct or you think I should correct please let me know and I will carefully consider it.
Too bad if he's still bitter. He's a man of incredible self-pitying ego anyway, that was clear during the hearings, and you're right. He needs a shrink.
As for the long term implications of what his attitude might bring, that is probably way under the radar of most people, but a few of us are rightly very concerned. Those numbers may grow with time, but I hope it happens before it is too late.
(1) "About Face" by Colonel David H. Hackworth and Julie Sherman
(2) Hegel's "Phenomenology of the Spirit"
(3) Gaetano Mosca's "Elementi di scienza politica"
(4) "UFO's and the National Security State" Richard Dolan
(5) "The Kingdom: Arabia and the House of Saud" Robert Lacey
(7) "Introduction to Algorithms"
(8) "Mysterium Coniunctionis" by C. Jung
(9) "Signature-Event-Context" by "Jack" Derrida.
I.e. the above are just some random readings that I may have read in the past few years that are much more interesting than this other individual we are talking about. Note: not that I endorse everything I read.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/02/opinion/02hill.html
Justice Thomas has every right to present himself as he wishes in his new memoir, "My Grandfather's Son." He may even be entitled to feel abused by the confirmation process that led to his appointment to the Supreme Court.
But I will not stand by silently and allow him, in his anger, to reinvent me."
I find the contrast netween him and her exceedingly interesting. Let's say she fabricated her accusations and tried to discredit him with lies. Ok - Then he would be mad as hell and fight like mad to both win the confirmation vote as well as to discredit her. Well he won (by 4 votes) but he did win. Wouldn't that be vindication enough for most people? So why - 16 years later - is he still trying to bury her?
Meanwhile - if we assume that Anita Hill was telling the truth - then it would be reasonable to conjecture she would be mad as hell and go all out to eat him up alive. But as her remarkably restrained response to Justice Thomas' resurgence clearly demonstrates this is a portrait of a mature person who firmly stays her course but leaves it up to each of us to make their own choice as to who is telling the truth.
I can't help but feel that Justice Thomas though coming across as quite charming and grand fatherly shows clear signs of being a clone of Captain Quueg in the Caine Mutiny. Me thinks the {Justice} protests too much. And to quote Montaigne: "Super celestial thoughts breed sub terranean conduct."
What are the motivations?
It seems to me that his failure to contribute to discussion is a symptom. His mind is closed. Arguments and discussion are irrelevant. His mindset and agenda are in place, unchangeable.
His presence on the court is a unfortunate. He contributes nothing and could be replaced with a robot.
Ha. That'll be the day. He is a vindictive, self-righteous, narrow-minded man. He is even less likely to apologize for anything than our illustrious president.
(I'll have to tell you about the conversation a friend had with him at lunch a few years ago. Since it's hearsay, I won't print it here.)