The Word “Lynching” by Itself Does Not Denote Racism

Oct 27, 2019 by Susan Rosenbluth

Last week, New Jersey State Assemblyman, Benjie E. Wimberly, who also serves as the state’s Deputy Speaker, followed the example of many of his fellow Democrats and issued a press release in which he railed against President Donald Trump for comparing the US House Democrats’ secretive, riddled-with-questionable-tactics Congressional impeachment inquiry to a “lynching.”

Mr. Wimberly insisted Mr. Trump had engaged in “racist, hateful language” because “the word alone reminds of the darkest time in our country’s history and the terror African-Americans faced in the wake of Reconstruction.”

I wish I understood Deputy Speaker Wimberly’s comments and complaint because the word “lynching” has nothing to do with race. Lynching is the terroristic extrajudicial murder of an untried (or unfairly tried) suspect, usually by a mob and often by hanging. Colloquially, the term is used to imply a severe punishment meted out without giving the victim a fair trial or even the benefit of the doubt. While one could argue that anyone, such as President Trump, using the term “lynching” when the victim is not being murdered is engaging in objectionable hyperbole, it is very unfair to say it is objectionable because it is about race.

While all historians agree that, in the United States, the majority of victims of lynchings were African-Americans; a substantial minority were not. It is estimated that, between 1882 and 1968, close to 5,000 lynchings occurred in the United States. Conservatively, it is estimated that at least a quarter of the victims were Caucasians. Some historians believe that close to half of the victims were white. Leo Frank was an example of a Jewish victim of a lynching.

As a Jewish American, I know that while 6 million Jews were victims of the Nazis, others, too, died at the hands of those criminals. Therefore, when someone says he or she feels like a victim of the Nazis, it is an example of objectionable hyperbole, but it is not necessarily an appropriation of Jewish suffering or an example of racism.

I understand that Mr. Wimberly and his supporters detest President Trump and that if Mr. Trump discovered a cure for cancer, Mr. Wimberly and his supporters would find something negative to say about it (“He’s a murderer. Cancer cells have a right to life”). However, objecting to the President’s depiction of himself as the victim of a lynching because they deem it “racist” is a step too far and does an injustice to those of us who complain vociferously when someone really does engage in racism.