"It's Not About Race!" "It's Not Racism!!"

Oh, yes it is.

They may not perceive it, it may not be conscious, but it's about race. And it's racism.

No, I'm not talking about any and all criticism of President Obama. It's perfectly legitimate to criticize the President, if you disagree with his actions or his expressed policies. And it's possible to do so with acerbic wit and biting satire and hyperbolic rhetoric and yes, even with anger and outrage, and not tread on the ground of race and racism.

But, by and large, that is not what is happening in America. That kind of criticism is not what we saw in the hysterical, hyperventilating flap over the President of the United States telling school children to work hard and stay in school and make us all proud. That kind of criticism is certainly not what motivated a man elected to the U.S. House of Representatives--an adult who should know better--to make a complete assclown of himself on national television. That kind of criticism is not what motivated most of those tens of thousands who showed up to scream and wave signs picturing the President with a Hitler moustache or as the psychopathic villain from the last Batman film.

No. THAT criticism is all about race. And yes, it's based in racism.

I am old enough to remember the Civil Rights movement. I am old enough to remember the efforts to drive a stake through the heart of Jim Crow, and to give people of color equal access to the ballot box and the levers of political and economic power in this nation. I was there. And the eerie thing about this current ruckus is the way it's echoing the very tapes that were recorded in my memory back then.

For those of you too young to remember or too young to have lived through it, it might seem ludicrously unbelievable when I assert that yes, those are exactly the same things white people who opposed the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act were saying back then. Yes, seriously. And, just as they do today, they honestly believed that they were not being racist.

Yes, there were hard-core racists back then who were perfectly willing to admit that yes, it was about race, and yes, they were discriminating, and trying to protect institutionalized discrimination, against persons of color because they believed persons of color were somehow inferior. There's still a few of that creepy breed around today as well. But the majority of these wackjobs are entirely sincere in their assertion that it's NOT ABOUT RACE and they are NOT RACISTS!

They aren't being disingenuous when they claim this --they really believe it!

Because their definition of racism is an extremely narrow one:

It's only racism if I do something to actively discriminate against someone, or say something nasty about someone, explicitly because I want them to experience pain or suffering because they are a different race, and only if I know that's why I'm acting that way. Otherwise, it's not racism, you see.

They have had to narrow the definition of racism to this extent, because it is the only way to protect themselves from having to acknowledge some very unpleasant, negative things about themselves. By defining racism that narrowly, they can justify all their fear- and hate-based actions and utterances. It's not vile of me to speak or act thusly because I am not a racist.

In spite of the fact that my nasty, hate-based words or actions are rooted in a fear of Scary Brown People so visceral and so intrinsic to my own concept of self that I am not even aware of that fear, I cannot possibly be a racist. My reasons for vile speech and pusillanimous action are explainable by all kinds of other, entirely legitimate reasons.

But there is a perceptible difference between the kind of speech and actions that are rooted in rational conviction and manifested in passionate opposition, and the kind of speech and actions that are rooted in fear and manifested as hate. Each can use hyperbole. Each can use satire or mockery. Each can use emotional language. But the signature of hate is unmistakable, and the root of hate is fear.

It's not always fear of Scary Brown People. But it's invariably revealed in two words:

those people

As soon as you hear those two words or any reasonable facsimile thereof, you can be sure that the person uttering them has created an us/them construct in their mind. And when that us/them construct becomes integral to their concept of their self, and their sense of value and self-worth, 'them' becomes something to despise.

And as soon as what we despise starts to threaten us in any way, hate blossoms.

President Obama is a brown "them" for these white people. And they are being told that he threatens them. Threatens their wallets, threatens their religious beliefs, threatens their security. Worse! Because he IS a "them," he will inevitably enable OTHER brown "thems" to acquire illegitimate benefits that will increase the threat to an intolerable level.

No wonder they are hysterical with fear and hate. And yes, it is about race. And it is racist.

And I pity them. Living in hate and fear is not only incredibly tiring and unpleasant, it floods your body with stress hormones that damage your health and impair your ability to enjoy life.

They can deny that their hate is based on race by blaming it on the "threat." But that "threat" alone is not sufficient to send them into frothing convulsions of horror. Many of us felt a very real and very tangible threat under George W. Bush and his cabal of vicious and incompetent greedheads. We expressed ourselves strongly. We "hated" him, and some of us allowed ourselves to wallow in that hate to a degree that was probably unhealthy for us. But the threat he represented to us was not based in the color of his skin.

There are more people in the ranks of liberals who nourish a robust sense of humor, and more who have achieved a fairly good level of education and a broad view of history and society, than in the ranks of conservatives --this I believe. I don't assert it as a fact, but I'd stake quite a lot on that belief. And so we have an abundance of liberals who can communicate passionately and effectively, using tools like mockery and satire and hyperbole. It may sound like hate, but the visceral fear of a threatening "them" is not nearly as prevalent.

Remember: If "those people" hovers about the discourse, even off-stage, as it were --it's about race. And it's racism.

We need to be aware of that racism, based in fear, and how strong a motivator it is, and how effective a barrier against rational analysis and decision making. And we need to be aware of how sincerly these very racists believe that it's not about race, and it's not racism. No matter how clearly we point it out to them, no matter how cogently we draw the connection, they will not be brought to believe or acknowledge their own terror of the Scary Brown Other.

It's important to know this about them. Because unless we understand the terror that lurks unacknowledged at the base of their reptilian cortex, we can't parse their wild, irrational hatred.

They're doing an excellent job of exposing that hatred-- to the point where those who oppose President Obama's policies and actions for reasons other than racist terror are starting to draw back from them, and perceive the peril that lurks in alliance with them.

So much so that the most effective action we can take to counter their wild outbursts is to methodically and constantly pull out the reality checks. Apply them with humor and good nature, and yes, with a little passion as well-- but concentrate on getting the reality checks across, not on opposing the racist haters with a level of invective and fury to match their own.

And when they assert "It's not about race! It's not racism!!"-- shake our heads and politely disagree and, if we aspire to or have attained a sufficient level of spiritual growth, pity them.

Because it's about race. And yes, it's racism.

assertively,
Bright

My pleasure to kick it.


But I'm afraid you will be disappointed in me - I do think of 'them' - well -as a 'them'. Those ones. Over there on the right.

You are only as good as the most vocal in your group. The most vocal of 'them' are the teabaggers. I no longer make a distinction between teabaggers and 'republicans' - it's just 'them'.

They threaten me, they barely veil their threats against the President. They threaten all of us at D.U. They are dangerous. Them. Those ones.

Them--those people--those irrational bigots, those delusional deniers of reality who allow their very souls to be manipulated by sophisticated con-men who have twisted religion into a hate and fear-based social control mechanism. Yes, them. Those people.

Now, I'm no Obama worshiper, but he is clearly one of my tribe. If he disappoints me, it is one of us who has let me down. I will communicate my displeasure to the extent I reasonably can, and then I will expect better of him tomorrow, because he is one of us. Rational, educated, generally wise, motivated by good will, possessed of a sensibility dominated by love rather than hate. I see in him the attributes I try (haltingly and with many setbacks) to nurture in myself.

and yet, 'those people' coming from our tribe, does not signify bigotry. We can do it, you see, because we are educated and sensible, but when they do it, it just shows how vile they are.

Because I'm white, and they're white. How is that racism????

The Prez has not acted nutty or threatening. They're scared.

It is not racist to be afraid of crazy. It is not racist to be scared of stupid.... with a gun.

Get real!

but that it was bigotry. A bigotry that claims that 'those people' are all the same.

It is bigotry to see two or three crazy people in a crowd or two or three stupid people in a crowd and then claim that the entire group is crazy or stupid. Since gangbangers or wanna-be gangbangers really are dangerous, it's also not racist to be afraid of gangbangers. It is racist to generalize that fear to the entire race just as it is bigotry, IMO, to generalize a fear of 'crazy' or 'stupid' to the entire Republican party.

"We're not racists, but those people . . ."

You think the rightwing has not heard this message?

I think it plays right into their hands. Their second message is, according to Somerby "Liberal elites think they are better than you." and we do the work in spreading that message for them.

That's their message, not ours. They will say it anyway. Let 'em. I'm not cowering to fools who think someone can be a socialist and a fascist at the same time. Why give the benefit of the doubt to those who don't know Hawaii is in the US? I'm suppose to have respect for people who listen to Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin? Get real!!!! If they showed some intelligence, then that would be different. But why should I give in to ignorant-and-proud-of-it?

ARE better than rednecked racists. Why not brag about it?...

K&R

And it needs to be pointed out again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again.

And fuck 'em if they get affronted. It NEEDS to be said, again, and again, and again, and again, and again. Rub their noses in it. As our President, Barack Obama, said last Wednesday night in his speech to a Joint Session of Congress, if they insist on continuing to lie and distort, THEY NEED TO BE CALLED OUT.

So by all means! LET'S CALL 'EM OUT. EVERY LAST MISERABLE LITTLE TEENY ONE OF THEM.

Thanks for the post.

and there wouldn't be any court cases of that had McCain won the election ...

and his birth was not in this country ...

I've still not forgotten "that one".

If the GOP is being called racist on a grand scale, it's because they want to be. If they want to be, there is a reason. If there is a reason, it's advantage. They aren't stupid. Don't let them distract and divert.

If they were to actually use the nword, the answer would be "Yes, he's an nword and we're going to get single payer, raise the mileage on cars, and stop the coal companies from blowing the tops off mountains."

that racism should not be the focus of our criticisms of the right. Yes, there clearly are racists there, but they're trying to bait us, to make us play the race card, and scare away all of those voters from the mushy middle who don't like to hear such talk.

Barack Obama won the Presidency because he was a break from the past. That's how JFK was, he was an educated man, not one of the old rough-and-tumble Irish pols who were synonymous with an earlier angry age of "Irish Need Not Apply" signs in windows, and the counter-reaction to them.

That's what hurt Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton the most in their runs for the Presidency, they were most identified with the politics of the radical 60's, and President Obama has been smart to distance himself from that, even when it came time to deal with Reverend Wright. The reason the reich wing brought Wright up was to tie Obama to the "burn, baby, burn" images that tend to be frightening to people who lived through that time.

If any and all criticism of Barack Obama's policies is going to be labeled as racist, then you can expect honest disagreement with the President to disappear, and people will just make their opinions about it known in the privacy of the ballot box.

I guess people believe that if they are simply said angrily enough, then worn out words retain power. It's simply not true, especially when it comes to public opinion. Labeling everything as racism, a 100% word even if the allegation is only 20% true, will lead to a response of "Yeah, yeah, I'm a racist....."

On the other hand, we can look at "male chauvinist pig" and see that while it fell into comic use, at the height of feminism no less, while men were laughing off male privilege and antifeminist attitudes, they were overall changing for the better.

to acknowledge the racism in the first place. You don't have to be a confederate flag toting, cross burning, sheet wearing, klansman to be a straight up racist.

20%? Unbelievable! 20%? Well that 20% has 100% impact on the person who is on the receiving end of the racism.

Not only do you seem to be missing the entire point of the OP but you also seem intent on minimizing the effects it has on an entire segment of the population. Why is that? Do you not think they and how they feel in the country in which they were born are not important enough to deal with their issues? Is that really the message you want to send to people whose votes you'll be looking to garner at the next election? Really is that how you want to go?

It's no wonder why some people are ready to leave the country and never come back.

What do you have to do to be a non-obvious "straight up" racist?

when the statistics say that they're barking up the wrong tree? How we're more often followed in stores, our neighborhoods underserved by municipalities, our schools underfunded, the presumption of unintelligence, banks steering us to sub prime loans even when our credit history warrants a prime one?

How about people considering it a complement to say "well I don't really see you as black" (The translation of that phrase being "I don't see you as the stereotypical black person" which generally means criminal and less than in this country.) How about when you tell someone something about computers and have that person look surprised at your knowledge despite the fact that you're the go to person when it comes to the computer in the office AND the general knowledge that you're a computer nerd. Or what about when you make a suggestion only to have it ignored, until a white co-worker makes the SAME suggestion at which time the talk is about what a good idea it is. Or perhaps, to borrow from another DUer, it's being thanked for "fetching" reports. Fetching, being something that dogs do. Shall I go on?

Straight up is obvoious BTW. It's not the obvious that's the problem. It's the more subtle forms that when pointed out make some people go "You call racism on everything" a bit of hyperbole which is both patently untrue, deliberately dismissive, and completely offensive.

in the first paragraph, but do you really think that the majority of baggers are law enforcement officers (who probably don't want their photograph being part of a public protest), or who are the ripoff artists who sell loans? You do make a point about being underserved by municipalities and having underfunded schools, but that's a function of living patterns, not overt racism. The teabagger in East Frogspit, Nebraska really doesn't consider himself to blame for the fact that schools in Detroit are underfunded.

That "I really don't see you as black" comment is being misinterpreted by you. It's a clumsy attempt of a white person to say, "I grew up in a culture that taught me that black people and white people were very different, but after I've gotten to know you, I no longer feel this way." No, it's not eloquent, it's not politically correct, but it is an attempt by a white person to come out of the shell of a racist upbringing. To verbally smack them across the forehead for saying it is suggest that maybe Grandpa knew what he was talking about.

Same way with "fetch". Some people just use that word for "get". I use it relative to things that I obtain. Not every white person in America is familiar with the Stepin Fetchit character.

It's not always as straight up as you think it is.

I was inspired by the following words of Candidate Obama on the subject, "... I have asserted a firm conviction - a conviction rooted in my faith in God and my faith in the American people - that working together we can move beyond some of our old racial wounds, and that in fact we have no choice if we are to continue on the path of a more perfect union."

Perhaps you should look into the term redlining.

Fetch has a specific meaning. Dogs fetch, not people. It is an insult. I haven't misinterpreted a damn thing.

You seem rather invested in deciding that I am misinterpreting a parts of the bullshit that I've had to put up with in my life. And I've also noticed that there's no excuse for the ignoring of suggestions only to hop on it when someone else give it or the computer thing. I suppose I should be glad for that SMALL bit.

Did I mention that I don't appreciate it when people tell me I don't know what I'm talking about when I talk about my own experiences?

So what's the excuse for the missing white woman syndrome then if you have so many answers (not valid ones mind you but answers nonetheless) Why is it that when a white woman goes missing the cable news channels will plaster her face all over the place ad nauseam for days yet a missing black woman (or man for that matter but I'll stick to one gender for this example) doesn't warrant a peep. Are you about to tell me that it has NOTHING to do with which woman is more valued in this society?

Fetching is not reserved for dogs or black people. Some browsers even say "fetching" when they are running really slowly. It's British and rural American perhaps, but hardly exclusive. It's also a favorite with pretentious people and schoolmarms.

Jack and Jill went up the hill
To fetch a pail of water.
Jack fell down and broke his crown,
And Jill came tumbling after.

Oh, and if someone tells you that you look fetching, say "Thank you."

associated with dogs.

So spare me the bullshit. Look you want to make excuses fine, but to call me a fool because I understand the use of a word and that it's use is associated with dogs is just picking a fight for no damn reason.

I guess that's my fault for mistaking you for someone reasonable. I should have stuck with my gut and ignored you since you're other posts put you in the category of apologist.

I shan't make that mistake again.

and it has been made illegal. Is it completely gone from everywhere? Of course not. Making murder a crime doesn't make it go away, either. Rights must be fought for and defended every day.

You are right about the racism that led to the living patterns. I'm glad to see neighborhoods far more integrated than I remember in my childhood in Gary, Indiana. Admittedly, we have some ways to go. Extending loans to the subprime market was a flawed way of trying to help people of all colors attain the American dream of home ownership in a desireable place. It's too bad the loan sharks screwed that up for everyone.

Merriam-Webster has a number of definitions for the word fetch:
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fetch
None involve the use of the word dog. Just because some people who are more accustomed to using that word for "get" also use it with their dogs doesn't change that.

I can certainly imagine that you don't like having someone else explain other possible meanings for your experiences. You seem rather invested in keeping your own interpretation of them, without examining the possibility that there might have been another meaning.

You're right about the missing white woman syndrome, but in the news in the background on my TV set, there's a story about the sad ending to a story of a missing woman of Vietnamese ancestry whose body was found yesterday, and was formally identified today. Ever since she disappeared on Wednesday, there have been stories about her. The reporting of missing women of color is not yet perfectly on a par with the blond-haired and blue-eyed, but it may possibly be getting better. I hope so.

If everyone holds on tightly to their hurts, President Obama's message of racial reconciliation that I referred to above will fall on deaf ears.

NOT act as though you are a better arbiter of what they experienced than they are.

I don't think that's too much to ask. And frankly, I'm not asking I'm expecting it.

Reconciliation will not come if we simply decide not to look into grievances and pretend all is well. THAT is what people want to do now. It just doesn't work that way.

I'm sorry you found it disrespectful.

Is that really the message you want to send to people whose votes you'll be looking to garner at the next election?

I'm not clear on what you're asking here because of all the pronouns. Do you mean the GOP will be looking to garner black votes at the next election? I doubt that the GOP is concerned about how many black votes it gets. The GOP has had two lessons in black voting in the last couple of years. When black voters would not vote for Michael Steele, and when virtually every black voter voted for Obama.


It's no wonder why some people are ready to leave the country and never come back.

That's perhaps the one threat which unifies all Americans, as they respond with, "Don't let the door hit you in the ass."

"Is that really the message you want to send to peopel whose votes you'll be loooking to garner at the next election"

You would be the Democratic party, or progressives. Obviously it's not the GOP that's pretty much a given is it not? We're talking about GOP racism, and Democratic dismissal. Let's try to keep things straight here shall we?

In addition, when you make people feel unwelcome or less than in their country it is rather dickish to get mad when they may consider other options. Despite what Pat Buchanan may have some believe, there are other countries where people can go to and not be treated like shit. It's not a threat it's a mere statement of fact. So typical for you to go to the despicable retort favored by the RW.

Only I don't think people who don't consider themselves racist will laugh it off. They'll fight back at the ballot box.

Every once in awhile I listen to Hannity on the radio (you have to know what they're saying to know what they might be thinking) and he was already going with the theme of, "Now, if you criticise Obama or his policies, you'll be called a racist!"

It's one thing to be saying "Republicans are assholes" on this forum, but when someone appointed to the Obama Administration does it, he's gone. I have the feeling that the same thing would happen if someone in the Administration is emboldened by the rhetoric here to make the same statement about ascribing opponents' views to racism.

that I feel that way.

For me, I don't see the Lefts, that happen to be White, continuing to jump on each and everything that they say about him as "Racist" as productive.

If we take our cue from him, it's pretty clear that he is articulate enough to say " STOP. BEING. RACIST. BAGGERS" if he wanted us to say that to the Bags.

He does not want us to get into name calling and take away from his mission for Health Care etc.

The Baggers are Thrilled that we are calling them Racists, have you noticed that they have not stopped doing it?

In fact they are doing it more -- it's the only card they have and we are letting their Race CARD win.

They know that it really makes Clear Thinking Whites mad at them and that is exactly what they want to do.

Are African Americans angry -- YES!
Is this the first time we have faced RACISM - NO
And for us, it is not a surprise but we want to use Obama's technique as the way to address the issue.

Of course we want him protected and we love him dearly- just as the huge majority of ALL people around the World do but don't make him weak by saying it's only about RACE, it's not.

It's about A MAN (that happens to be African American) taking the POWER that they believed belonged only to them. Does his RACE play into that " You BETCHA"--- says good old Sarah.



PS: Selling new for $170 (was completely out of stock during the election process) on the web or $21 Used (I just purchased it for $21 Used) let you know in a few days about the Old Time Baggers that didn't have the internets and M$M to make "news "travel faster.

"Six Black Presidents: Black Blood : White Masks USA "

They reason that looking guilty when caught confirms guilt, so it's better to say it louder to prove that you aren't being a racist, because if you aren't hiding it then it must not be racist.

Look at how they have liberated "arrogant" in the last couple of days. Most people have avoided calling Obama "arrogant" because they get accused of using it in lieu of "uppity". Truth be told, the man has an arrogant facial expression from time to time, but the word has been avoided. The last couple of days, arrogant has been rolling right off the tongues of Republican congressmen and newsies.

what, exactly, is an arrogant facial expression? What exactly does it look like? What differentiates it from a look of concentration when, say, delivering an important speech?

.... is like trying to get someone online to recognize a song you have stuck in your head that you can only hum.

It happens when he's looking downward or sideways and showing too much lid instead of moving his head. I looked for a photo of it, but can't find one, it must be a live thing.

We went though this with Bush fans, trying to examine what it was about Bush's facial construction and expressions which came off as being "dumb looking". While it's perfectly alright for a person to disagree, for one to be utterly blind to observations and get upset at the conversation itself suggests a lack of objectivity I am unable to understand.

If you honestly don't think that Obama has a momentary facial expression which comes off as arrogance and is repeated often enough to be noticed, then I don't suppose it can be explained to you. I do understand that there are people out there who don't interpret facial expressions the same way the rest of us do.

interesting choice of words

Of course, it's possible that you are simply a jackass.

and juvenile behavior such as calling you out of your name.

It's a shame that you can't discuss your premise without such an epic fail in articulation. Welcome to my ignore list.

I hear everyone saying it's about Racism.

OK,let's say that it is ---- and what will change it?

I have yet to hear a plan from the Left about what they will DO about it -- other than to say it's all about RACE.

I think Barack Obama takes his example from Nelson Mandela, who had every excuse in the world to stick it to the architects of apartheid when he was finally in a leadership position, but clearly did not do so. I'm sure Gandhi would not have inflicted revenge on the British, had he lived long in the newly liberated India.

President Obama has tried to stay on the moral high ground of reconciliation every chance he gets. That doesn't mean forgetting the past, or pretending that it was OK, but it does mean moving forward. I think he expects those of us who agreed to give him our votes to follow his leadership in this area.

If we don't find a way to get past the extreme polarization of the last few decades, we are doomed to careen wildly between the extremes every four or eight years.

existed or exists of actually has a negative impact on some people's lives. the OP was so correct about this tradition. the same people who opposed civil rights are now screaming for birth certificates and lying about death panels. not only is racism not a distraction, it's the putrid, disgusting underbelly of america that needs to be exposed.

and the history of america, which includes slavery and apartheid. and the decimation of the indians. and racism against just about every "other" group imaginable. this is an AMERICAN problem...it has nothing to do with what happens in the Sudan or in Nazi Germany. germans acknowledge their problem...it's high time for americans to do the same.

Albeit I can't think of a single American who doesn't acknowledge a tradition of racism in America, even if they aren't in agreement with you or me on where and when it's taking place or how it's taking form.

A healthy portion of the anti-Obama stuff is anti-Democrat stuff. We know this, because they threw everything they had at the Clintons for eight years to sabotage them, and that can't be blamed on racism.

but some of it is anti-black as well. i bet i can find plenty of people in america who either don't know the truth of our history of racism, or deny it completely, or make excuses for it. denial is the glue that holds it all together. nice chatting with you

in the comment section at CNN under the story about Gibbs saying "The President doean't believe the teabaggers are racists..." BS. My blood pressure is still up.

"This country is not ready for a black president"

I always thought the person saying this was really saying "I cannot vote for a black man".

"I don't think a black man will ever be elected", meant, "I cannot vote for a black man".

But we're not allowed to remember things, of course.

But I never said he was born in Kenya. I said he was born in Russia and that his mother was a communist spy.

And Bush racked up the deficit Conservs are so concerned about today.

What's your point?

During the race I continually said I did not think this country would vote for a non-white, non-male or non-theistic candidate.
Not because I wasn't passionately supporting our candidate; I am behind President Obama fully (even though he is nowhere near my leftist views). It was due to the fact that I see so very much racism, sexism and religiosity everywhere around me.
Mind you, I only said that to those on the same end of the political spectrum who were already guaranteed to vote. I would never want to have an Independent infer that their vote would be wasted.
Perhaps it is because I live in the fly underneath the bible belt. Florida, while rather broad in its cultural and racial reach, has always tended to cling desperately to its historical conservatism. Also, after my state's shameful part in the Gore/Bush election, it was extremely difficult to not be pessimistic as to the honesty of those counting the votes.

I never thought in my lifetime I would see a non-white President.
I am still surprised we have one.
I am still waiting for the alarm to go off and find myself in a world run by BushCo.

Perhaps one day my pessimism about my fellow Americans will disappear, but after seeing the overtly racist imbeciles this summer, it will be a while.

I could really rub their faces in Hillary. But they have to pretend to be OK with the black guy. It takes a lot of the fun out of it.

Very nicely put

It amazes me that people who talk about "colored people" think that they aren't racist. I worked with an African American woman who explained to me that if people were colored, it meant that their color was just a second thought by God. I know that a lot of DUers are Atheists so this may not appeal to them. But I expect the idea helps it to be understandable. When so many make jokes about race , they say it's just a joke and assume that everyone can see the humor of it. Most of racism is very subtle, but if you are the subject of subtle racism, you can easily feel the real intent of the comment. I just hope that I haven't shown myself to be racist. I was for a long time but I'm over it now, at least I hope so.

they can't just look at him for what he is a MAN...

In the musical "Showboat" there's an opening chorus

In the 20's it went "Niggers all work on the Mississippi...."

In the 30's it went "Darkies all work on the Mississippi...."

In the 40's it went "Colored folks work on the Mississippi...."

and in the 50's nobody worked on the Mississippi 'cause they cut it.

I find the term "African-American" dumb because not all black people are from Africa. Or actually, every homo sapien comes from Africa. So no matter what color you are, you're an African-American. I mean, what's the statute of limitations on ancestors?

"Colored People" is a bit archaic, but shouldn't be insulting. Still, it's an emotional thing and we must try to be sensitive to others' feeling.

African-Americans can proudly trace their post-civilization ancestry back to West Africa, where their ancestors were captured and sold as salves for export to the British Colonies. Similarly, most European-Americans can trace their post-civilization ancestry back to the European and Caucasus continental regions.

As for your "Out of Africa" analogy, you may be correct, but the worldwide human genome project has not been totally completed and verified as yet (depending upon which scientific community your rely on). There is a competing view which holds that humans evolved "multi-regionally" in various parts of the world simultaneously. It is true however, that all humans are related in one way, or another, and are 99.99% alike.

Please change "salves" to "slaves" in 2nd line from the top.

most African Americans can proudly trace some of their post-civilization ancestry back to West Africa. They can trace their other post-civilization ancestry back to the European regions.

was a lot of that going on back then...

And yes, racism is a large part of it. Ignorance is another. Calling Obama a Nazi or a socialist displays a profound ignorance of what Nazism and socialism actually are. Any person who thinks Obama is a socialist should read Eugene Debs or Emma Goldman. Anyone who thinks Obama is a Nazi should read Mein Kampf. They won't do that, though, because it would upset their cherished misconceptions and, perhaps, force them to confront the darkness in their souls.

It's been raising its ugly head around here for some time, usually around the subject of immigration; so the baggers were already well-practiced in their excuse-making (as in, "it's about illegality, not immigrants) by the time Obama came on the scene. And the ugliness migrated with repulsive ease into the healthcare town hall meetings, where we were told, loudly, that it's about socialism-communism-fascism-otherism. And, of course, we're accused of racism for having pointed out their racism.

Your OP should be on the pages of our local newspaper. If you were of a mind to submit it I'd be pleased to provide the necessary details. But even with such encouragement I have to be honest enough to advise that the editors would not be likely to run it. More's the pity.

I am so terribly sick and damned tired of white people telling black people, Hispanics, Asians, Arabs etc. - the very people in this country who have actual FIRST HAND EXPERIENCE of racism what is and is not racist.

These same people seem to believe that unless a white person is calling somebody black a nigger, burning a cross in somebody's yard, denying someone a home or job because of their skin color, or screaming at Mexicans to "go back where they came from" that the behavior cannot possibly be racist and that there simply MUST be another reason for it.

America is a racist nation founded on the rock-hard principles of white cultural and intellectual superiority. Even still, many of the most vile, most racist acts in this country that occur every single day even today are done with relative finesse and subtlety. People don't HAVE to come out and be blatant with their racism; the effects are still the same. And most people of color and a large group of clue-full whites (Morris Dees comes immediately to my mind) are smart and savvy enough to know the signals.

Unfortunately, for every clue-full white, there's another one who absolutely refuses to see what's right before their eyes. A person on this site yesterday admitted to giving the birthers the "benefit of the doubt" and was ASTOUNDED that people would automatically attribute the birther movement to racism. I really don't know what can be said to people like this, who are somehow that ignorant of our country's shameful history of racism and are that willing to automatically give all whites the benefit of the doubt, whether they deserve it or not.

Exactly! And the number of times it happens ON THIS SITE ought to be unbelievable but sadly isn't.

Straining to keep the thought in my head from typing itself.

"Racism?"

We will be speaking only to those that are not Racists.

Now if those that are so fired up about us to continue the back and forth with the BAGS, and adding to the "FIGHT" that MSM wants there to be ~ where does that get OBAMA and Health CARE, major issues?

Help me understand?

All those that are so Fired Up about Racism- then go out to the next BAGS rally and carry your sign that tells them they are RACIST TO THE CORE!

Face them head on and scream at them to stop it!
They would love to have that happen.

For better or worse, this is a country that allows for "Free Speech." Democrats have always stood for that - to our favor.

However ~ the last time I checked, it is not against the law to call someone a N-----. If it was the case, my people would be in jail(sad as it is) for calling each other that terrible word.

Recall that Wilson called him a LIAR to his face, in public, for all to see on television and all he had to do was say, "Sorry" and he still raised $$$'s for his campaign.

It is not against the law to question the citizenship of anyone. The Dept.of Motor Vehicles does it everyday.

Can the NAACP come out and condemn it -- Yes They Can and believe me they would if they thought it was in the best interest of this country and the President to do so.

Would the BAGS stop -- HELL NO! They would love for the NAACP to say something to them.

IMO,the BAGS would love that to happen! They would feed on it with open arms.

I taught Kindergarten, treat them like they are 5 years old -- ignore their bad behavior(name calling birth certificate questions and MORAN signs etc.) they want exposure.

Our problem is that MSM wants a good fight and they are just waiting for US to really start a full scale WAR on the "N" word to our President and then their ratings will really go up!

You make quite an assumption about the number of racists on this site. I'm not so sure I'd make that assumption.

Racist if they see that they are on the front page.

have you ever seen a reparations thread HERE? you would swear you were in mississippi circa 1945. do not assume that everyone here is enlighted when it comes to race.

Is the racism from those denying reparations or those insisting on reparations?

i'd like to have a civil discussion about reparations without people quoting racist assholes like david horowitz, and to date, that hasn't been possible here.

Many bigots only know what they know because of what they see on tv/what their mamas and daddies told them/what they heard growing up in their neighborhoods etc. Getting information from people outside of their own culture, actually SEEING things from someone else's eyes is the only way to move past our own personal biases and bigotry.

I agree with some of what you said and am actually blown away by other things you wrote.

It is not against the law to question the citizenship of anyone. The Dept.of Motor Vehicles does it everyday.

You are not seriously equating what the Birthers are doing with what the DMV does in an effort to deny the blatantly transparent racism behind the birther movement, are you? This type of argument serves you no purpose and gives you no credibility, at least not with me.

I taught Kindergarten, treat them like they are 5 years old -- ignore their bad behavior(name calling birth certificate questions and MORAN signs etc.) they want exposure.

I'm all for ignoring the Birthers and the fools at the town halls and wish the media would do the same. But when a sitting member of Congress gets so fevered by the hostility in the current political environment that he has no problem calling the President of the United States, MY President, a "liar" to his face before the entire world, there is no ignoring that. He should be publicly censured and fined as far as I'm concerned.

But. They AREN'T 5 years old! They're brains are as fully developed as they're gonna be. Treat them like the foolish adults they are. Call 'em out.

exactly.

But, I have never understood their fear.

There has never been a time in this country's history when Blacks beat, raped, lynched and killed Whites without having to suffer consequences. Evidently, the fear was not there when the Africans were enslaved. Evidently, the fear was not there during Jim Crow. It seems they became afraid when their Masters told them to be afraid.

They are afraid of the scary Black/Brown man, or so they tell themselves. Yet, there are no White Emmet Tills. There is no ongoing history of Black violence against White people.

Yes, I can understand if they are afraid they will lose power. But, this level of hatred for a perceived loss of power that they did not have in the first place, it's mind boggling. The tea baggers are merely pawns in this power game.

i totally agree. the fear of retribution is not understandable considering there no black equivalent of the KKK? if such a group existed, one might understand the fear, but it doesn't. crazy mofos.

And I've written a couple rambling posts about it elsewhere on DU this week-end.

But we need all of us to write it out, to put our own unique individual perspective on it, whether we're white, black, brown, green, orange, or pink and blue striped.

Obama gave a rousing speech about race during the crisis over Rev. Wright. But a speech isn't a dialogue and we still haven't had that in this country. A dialogue isn't a shouting match. It isn't a debate. It's not a matter to be "fair and balanced" and treat both sides as if they're equally correct.

I know the president's spokesperson can't come right out and say, "Yeah, we think they're all a bunch of ignorant bigots who just left their white sheets home 'cause it's September and it's too hot to wear 'em." You know that, too.

But there damn well ought to be some surrogates in the administration who CAN get out there and make the case that this is really all about race, that some of it is economic but it really goes back to the emotional inability to give up white skin privilege.

They don't want their taxes to go to welfare/healthfare, because they believe most of teh people on welfare are black or brown. At the same time, they don't mind (so much) if their tax dollars go to bailout the bankers 'cause most of the bankers are white men, and white men are supposed to be privileged.

They "support the troops" because they see the military as over there in Eye-rack and Afaghanistan kicking brown butt. They don't have a concept of the military as comprising black and brown and white and male and female and gay and straight and jewish and christian and muslim and pagan. To them, the military is John Wayne and Tom Cruise and Audie Murphy and Alvin York. It's nice white boys, just like the nice white boys who defended the Confederacy.

They're devout fundamentalist christians because the church gives them the answers they find comforting. Jesus loves them, but he doesn't necessarily love anyone else. They don't have to think, they don't have to ask questions. And if they ask, the answers are always there, always unchanging. They don't like change. It frightens them. They like things to stay the same. Women should be women, and men should be men. Everyone knows their place, and that means white folks are supposed to be better than "those folks." 'Cause it's always been that way and it shouldn't never change. If it wasn't supposed to be that way, God wouldn't have made it that way.

They're anti-abortion because havin' babies it what God made women to do. Challenging God's plan is very frightening to them. You can't even try to explain to them than judaism and its "laws" came out of nomadic tribal society that lived in a very different and much smaller world than ours. (You can tell people not to at pork because they could get sick and die, but there will always be those who will think it's going to happen to them; but if you tell them God told them not to eat the flesh of pigs because they're unclean animals and if you back of God's wrath with social ostracism, it's a whole lot more effective and it keeps your tribe from losing a few idiots to food poisoning and trichinosis every few years.)

They're afraid of losing their place in the world. They've had a certain amount of social mobility removed from their desires because their own hierarchy needs to maintain its status quo. They're allowed only so much hope for upward mobility, but they're kept terrified of downward mobility. (it's a sign of God's displeasure with them). And so they see anyone who tries to come from beneath them and go above them as an horrible threat, a sign that not only does God not favor them but that he favors someone else more, someone who used to be lower than they.

Am I making any sense? I'm trying to distill so many concepts into one post and it's difficult, and I know I'm missing things.

But the point is that these are not people with whom a dialogue is even possible. They are 20% or maybe even only 10% who are beyond reason. But there is still another 20% who are on the edge, and they are the ones with whom the dialogue must be initiated. The 10%ers, they should be simply tuned out. Ignored. They should not be given any legitimacy by the media, and the media should be called out on it. I know that's not going to happen, because I know they have a self-sustaining media in Faux and Limbaugh and Murdoch and all the rest.

They are racists, and they are making so much noise and making so many threats that they have bullied the rest of us into submission. They are the willing executioners of the insurance companies' policies of denial of coverage and outrageous premiums and even more outrageous executive salaries. It's not because those people believe the insurers are acting in their best interest; it's that they don't believe their best interest matters. What matters is the system, the very system that takes unfair advantage of them. And we can't get them to understand that.

We want to, and we try to, but it never works. And so we have to take a lesson from Lee Iacocca and just tell them to get out of the way.


Tansy Gold

"They're afraid of losing their place in the world." Here I felt you getting close to some visceral issues that DO NOT just apply to the 20%... Lemme mull a bit. Catch up with you later.

And I do think ALL of us are afraid of losing our place in the world, but the difference is that "they" feel entitled to theirs and they feel any threat to it from below is less a measure of their own personal failings than a warning from either God (of his displeasure) or Satan (of his generally evil intent).

So it's one thing to have a rational fear and it's quite another when the fear is irrational. A rational fear can be deal with rationally; an irrational fear can only look for a scapegoat.

For example, I have no health insurance and I have pre-existing conditions that put private insurance out of my financial reach. I have too many assets and too much income to qualify for Medicaid. So I'm on my own. Therefore, I am very much in favor of a single-payer program that phases out most of private insurance and phases in a tax-payer funded system similar to those of Canada and other "civilized" countries. I can also do my best to maintain my health until I do qualify for Medicare.

An acquaintance who is similarly situated is far less afraid of his own lack of insurance and his health concerns because he is desperately afraid that his taxes -- he pays very little because he has very little income, owns no property, often can't even afford to buy gas for his aging pick-up -- will fund some other person's health care. And Holy God forbid that that person be black or brown or even cafe au lait. From his taxes going to pay either for all their abortions and killing all the precious unborn babies or for them having one ********* baby after another (depending on whether he's drinking tequila or beer), he immediately extrapolates a fear that they're going to come and take his guns. He can't think his way through the fact that his drunk driving convictions are putting him cloe to felony conviction and then it would be HIS OWN ACTIONS that resulted in loss of his guns (one of which he carries in his truck at all times).

The paradox, of course, is that it's all about him -- he can never put himself in anyone else's perspective -- and at the same time everything he does is in his own worst interest.

And that's so far beyond even remotely rational that he can't be reasoned with. Lack of reasoning ability leaves his vulnerable to the social dominators -- especially the charismatic preachers, who give them all the answers, all the reassurances, and get them to put all their trust in their imaginary friend Jesus.

The terrifying thing is that people like him are walking and driving the streets of every community. And they are dangerous.


Tansy Gold, who isn't

The whole thing rests on the inability of these/those people to integrate information. Whether it's because they don't have the native intelligence to do so is one thing, but for the most part it's a psychological refusal.

The birthers are the perfect example.

They are all hot and bothered about a Kenyan birth certificate. They are all hot and bothered about a Kenyan father.

They can't digest the fact that neither is relevant. By having an American mother, Obama was born an American citizen. It doesn't matter where. it doesn't matter who his father was.

Barry Goldwater was born before Arizona was a state; it was merely a territory. After a little bit of discussion, his candidacy was accepted with hardly a protest. Same with John McCain. But the ultimate legal definition is not WHERE they were born but WHO THEIR PARENTS WERE. And it only takes one parent to make a child a natural-born citizen. END OF DEBATE.

This doesn't even enter into the birther debate. They can't integrate the information. THEY ARE NOT RATIONAL.

I am, and I have work to do.



Tansy Gold

Indeed. Glenn Beck thinks Obama is a racist and has a "deep seated hatred for white people"

So, Obama, Glenn thinks, has a deep seated hatred for his Mother and his Grandmother who raised him.

Interesting.

Tells us more about Beck than Obama.

Swami P. called it, "poking the honeycomb of understanding." I so often want to reply but I'm just.so.tired. of engaging those whose denial overwhelms their common sense. That is, if there were any to be had having the power to put the visceral stuff on the table. What I see happening from across the Big Pond, in the land of my birth, is just.so.painful. I look for ways that I can disengage emotionally.

I've been on the "bleeding edge" since integrating the elementary school on the south shore below the MD line. My dad was a shrink and I remember asking him if racism should be a part of that diagnostic book he'd talked to me about. He doubled over laughing.

Thank you TansyG for your contributions to this thread. You must be a cipher or something. I think that's the best analysis of the "Moran" mindset i've ever read. I wish i was better at typing... maybe i could wrangle my thoughts better and put something as lengthy and coherent as this together someday. I tend toward poetry though, hence oblique references and concise wording. Cheers.

He's got money for booze and guns?

Yes, he has money for booze and guns, because those are more important to him than other things. Like rent, groceries, dog food.

I don't know who he thinks pays for his ER visits -- and I'm not really sure he ever goes to the ER. It wouldn't make any difference, because he doesn't think rationally. I tried, on several occasions, to "reason" with him, when he was drunk and when he was sober, and although he was more violent and abusive when drunk, he was no more rational when he was sober. After he threatened to beat me to a pulp, I refused to go anywhere near him again. Last I heard, he had joined a christian commune in Kansas.

These people do not think the way we do. They cannot see the contradictions between being against paying for abortions for poor (read, black) women and being against paying for them to have their babies and then paying for the babies via welfare and/or being against paying for them to get borth control which might be used by unmarried women to have sex without consequences which is a sin. They put each of these concepts in its own little box and it doesn't touch any of the others.


"Are you against paying for abortions for poor women?"

"Yes. Abortion is murder!"

"So you would rather pay for their prenatal care and labor and delivery in a hospital?"

"No! Why should I have to pay for them to have one illegitimate kid after another? Then they got half a dozen of 'em on welfare!"

"So would you be willing to pay for them to get free birth control?"

"No! Birth control is like abortion! It might be killing unborn babies! And women were made to have babies, it's what god made them for."

Well, I'll let you imagine the rest.

They can't wrap their heads around two ideas at the same time and see the paradox. It's the same with inheritance tax and self-reliance. Inherited wealth without taxation is anathema to the protestant work ethic. But they can't see that.

That's why it does no good to even try. If you give it a whirl and it doesn't work, don't drive yourself insane trying to convert them. Let them go. Step back, walk away, do not compromise with them, do not grant concessions. Walk away and leave them be.


But don't turn your back on them. They're dangerous.



Tansy Gold

but I certainly don't mind SHARING it. The 9/12'ers don't even want to share.

You've really captured it.

Reminds me of a sappy little thing I read in Reader's Digest a couple hundred years ago.

The difference between heaven and hell --


Hell is a place where everyone sits at a huge banquet table that's overflowing with the most marvelous food of all kinds. But everyone's hands end in long spoons, so long that when they bend their arms, the spoons don't reach their mouths. In the midst of all this food, everyone starves.

At first glance, heaven is identical. The banquet table is covered with every imaginable delicacy. And the diners' hands end in spoons too long to reach their mouths. So they happily feed each other.





Tansy Gold

there are many wonderful, insightful posts in this thread, and this is definitely one of them

over come it with reason.

overcome their fears with reason. You just plain can't.

It's sort of like Obama trying to placate the pukes in congress with all his "concessions" on health care. If he proposed a plan that was 100% mandated health insurance from the existing companies at rates they themselves set, the pukes wouldn't accept it. They could turn around the very next day and propose the same thing themselves and they would not ever ever ever admit it was the same thing.

The more intelligent of them, which probably includes a portion of the political elites, knows exactly what they are doing, and they don't care, because they see themselves as entitled to their position. Once again, anyone who hasn't read Bob Altemyer's "The Authoritarian," just find it on the google and READ IT NOW. You'll understand a lot more.

I sent a friend the link to the Altemyer book and she read it in a single day. Her response: "Now I know why I've never been able to get through to my dad. No matter what, no matter how much information I give him, he just can't see it. Now I know it's all been a wasted effort."

Sad, but true.

The thing is, and I probably haven't made this clear in my numerous disjointed rants, is that there ARE moderates and independents and middle-of-the-roaders who are not brainless, who can be reasoned with. They're the ones we should be talking to, not wasting our time on the 10-20% who will NEVER get it.


Tansy Gold, who needs to get supper.

That's not racism? The birthers? Same thing. The deathers are just stupid.

I am going to steal that concept from this post.

I think you hit the nail on the head; the reality of this reaction is in the wild irrationality of the tea-bags. There is no logic to it, just pure emotion, and that emotion is fear.

I was reading up on the Ku Klux Klan the other day, reminding myself of the second re-birth era in the 1910s and 1920s, when they had their peak of popularity. They remade themselves as a nativist organization, not only anti-black, but very anti-Catholic, Jewish, immigrant, and any other person perceived as the other. They had a peak membership of about 3 million then.

They even marched in Washington in 1925. This is where the tea-baggers want to go.

http://www.shorpy.com/node/5572

For the Klan's vitriol? All of those groups might get something that they wanted for themselves.

Like a job.

Like - The Ultimate Job in America.


They just can't stand the fact that a Black Man - Bi-Racial at that - earned by virtue of his character, intelligence, and integrity THE Ultimate Job in the US.

"The Ku Klux Klan - A Secret History" on the History Channel. It's very instructive.

those other lazy/scary/brown/whatever people are gonna take so much they think they won't have 'enough'

it's absolutely tragic

another excellent essay Bright, thanks

to vividly remember the days of "Whites Only," school segregation, back-of-the-bus-please, separate-but-equal, rednecked racists. I enlisted in a segregated U.S. Army, and was threatened, and called a "ni---r" lover for hanging out with black guys from my home state of California because I had absolutely nothing in common with the "South Will Rise Again" assholes. I have been in a "mixed-race" marriage for 50-years (next year), and here in Hawaii no one has EVER mentioned the fact that I am white.

Racists? Of course they exist! They are plentiful, but are dwindling in number with each passing generation. The world is becoming more of a community, and it's newest inhabitants are seeing the error of their parents' irrational hatred and fear based on nothing but beliefs and skin color.

Of course, as long as there are religious bigots, racism will remain as one of their most visible by-products.

needs any other "bigotry" religious or otherwise, to exist.

could you explain why almost every "white-supremacist" hate group also claims Christianity as their "religion," and includes "Jews" among those they choose to single out for hatred? The KKK, the Aryan Nation, and Neo-Nazism, all profess to be on missions from some lilly-white, racist, God.

and I'm NOT singling out the Fundamentalist variety, is the majority religion.

My "majority christian" by the way, includes Mainstream Protestants and Catholics. I mention Catholics because because they were one of the "targets" of the original KKK and, they are not now viewed by the Fundies as "Christian".

Point: Given the demographics of this country, any crackpot Amrican group is going to be, more likely than not, White and "Christian".

all that you've stated, but there is no denying that racism and radical fundamentalist religious bigotry (Christianity, Islam, Judaism) go hand-in-hand, and always have. I realize that atheists can also be racists, as can members of any other belief (or non-belief) system. Religion, or other belief systems are NOT a "requirement" for racism, and most truly spiritual people are neither racists, nor bigots.

My point is that racist groups often use (I can't think of one which doesn't) a religion (pick one) as an excuse for their anti-social behavior, and their hatred of other races and beliefs. At times, racism is just a by-product of a religious group. Most antebellum "mainstream religious" Southerners sincerely believed that it was their God-given right to own slaves, and their "mainstream religious" descendants believed that it was their God-given right to have segregated communities, school systems, public facilities, etc.

The fundamentalist American faux-Christian ministers who support and preach hatred of Muslims, Jews, homosexuals, and yes even African-American Presidents, are no better than the faux-Islamic Mullahs who call for a Jihad against all infidels.

To sum up, not all (or even most) Christians are racist, but many radical and fundamentalist off-shoots of Christianity, and their followers, are. Racism and bigotry are just different terms for the same thing: fear and hatred of our fellow citizens' differences.

Religion is simply divisive. Doesn't have to be Christian. Religion feeds racism. And lots of other prejudices as well. Gays, women....


BTW... there's nothing faux about it.

preaches and espouses hatred, is a faux-Christian in the eyes of most sincere followers of Jesus. You can call them what you want, but "false Prophets" seem to be a popular topic throughout the history of Christianity. Most followers of Islam and Judaism hold similar views about those who preach hatred.

I'm not exactly sure how I rattled your cage, but I don't believe that I've disagreed with anything that you've posted. If I have somehow offended you, I sincerely apologize, as that was never my intent. I am not an atheist, and do not believe that religion is inherently "evil," but neither am I a big fan of organized religion, or the "selfish and vengeful God" theory.

I have firsthand knowledge of the "snake handling" extremists of Christianity who also come from generations of racists and bigots, so I know that they exist in all of their ignorant, arrogant, indignant, and self-righteous hypocrisy. My maternal Grandmother had a KKK outfit tucked away in her "ceder chest," and was (in her mind) both a devout Christian, AND a soldier in the fight against the "black menace," which were NOT separate causes -- to her and her generation. My parents, although not members of the KKK, were very vocal racists, Republicans, and professed Christians, and were a constant source of embarrassment during my early years.

So, once again, if my ramblings have somehow offended you, mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa.

Aloha,
Bill