The tragic racial politicizing of the Kyle Rittenhouse trial

Nov 23, 2021 by

by Michael Brown, Christian Post:

As soon as the “not guilty” verdict was announced in the trial of Kyle Rittenhouse, I posted the news on Facebook and Twitter, asking readers if they agreed with the decision. The vast majority did agree, as the video evidence and verbal testimony pointed to Rittenhouse acting in self-defense. For others, however, this was another example of “white privilege” or “white supremacy.” And that, quite tragically, will be one of the lasting legacies of this case: it will be used to further inflame racial tensions when this was never about race.

I too agree with the verdict, although I don’t believe Rittenhouse should have been in Kenosha with a gun. If he wanted to offer medical help or clean up vandalized buildings, that would be one thing. To show up with a gun, especially at such a young age and without adult supervision or explicit permission of the police was, in my opinion, very poor judgment.

But either way, I do not believe that race was the driving issue, nor should it be made into the central issue. Not for a second.

Rittenhouse did not shoot and paralyze Jacob Blake, the black man shot multiple times by police after his former girlfriend called them for help and he did not obey their commands.

Rittenhouse, who is white, killed two white men and shot another white man.

The business he chose to protect, named Car Source, was owned by two, brown-skinned brothers, Sahil and Anmol Khindri. And even if they did not ask for his help, it was not a white business that Rittenhouse was protecting, nor were the rioters primarily black.

Read here

Read also: 10 heinous lies about Kyle Rittenhouse debunked by Miranda Devine, New York Post

Please right-click links to open in a new window.

Related Posts


Share This