Usually, the way to deal with the right wing noise machine is mockery and derision – especially as they lose more and more seats and make decisions or comments that sound like they are coming straight out of the 16th Century. But over the past few months, there has been some very disturbing trends that are more serious than the normal run of the mill crazy and teh stooped.
Much has been made about the intent of yesterday’s New York Post cartoon and whether it was racial, violent, both, or a "parody of a news event". And much has been made about Michelle Malkin’s Nazi fans (not to mention the crazy Colorado republicans who were at that hate filled rally).
In both instances, there was the lamest of half ass excuses – the former being a "parody of a current news event" and the latter being "the swastika is a Native American symbol" – neither of which were even offered up with any thought that it would be believed by anyone with the most rudimentary level of critical thinking. What is worse here is that those offering up the excuses don’t care about their actions and are pretty much sheltered from any meaningful backlash due to the similar Neanderthal thinking of their most ardent supporters (financially and other).
But what this is doing, as it has happened over and over and over and over and over and over in all areas of the country in the past few months, is making hate and violent threats acceptable – little by little.
The above links are just to instances where swastikas were painted on Obama signs, but we don’t have to look too hard to find threats of violence at Palin or McCain rallies, and the dog whistles in Palin’s or McCain’s speeches.
Now, I have a pretty high threshold for getting offended at a political cartoon or a joke, and I can find humor in most things – even things that others may not find humor in (call it a curse or call it a good thing). But, regardless of whether there was true racism intended in the NY Post cartoon (and I am still not really convinced that it was racist as much as it was advocating violence in a less than subtle way against Democrats – whether it be Pelosi, Obama or someone else), there really is no connection between the stimulus bill – which is favored by a substantial percent of Americans, including republican Governors – and the shooting of a chimp. Not in the "1,000 monkeys with typewriters kind of way". Not in the "this is unpopular" kind of way. Not in the "this should never been written" kind of way. If anything, it is only tied to Democrats in the "let’s go to a Church and kill Democrats" kind of way – something that recently happened in Tennessee.
The violent rhetoric has been around for a few years now, and the "Bush was called Hitler so what is wrong with this" analogy is (1) irrelevant (2) stupid (3) incorrect and (4) doesn’t consider what the Bush administration’s actions were, even if calling him Hitler wasn’t the best analogy (not that we need to debate that now). There were no progressive voices calling for his assassination. There were no talk show hosts calling for him to be lynched or hung or said that he hangs out with terrorists. There was a call for investigating him, for prosecuting him, for impeaching him, for trying him for war crimes. And while there certainly was hatred towards him and his administration, it was based on their policies and actions - if you recall, he was viewed as a potentially mediocre President (at best) before 9/11 and it was after the PATRIOT Act, the spying, the lies about Iraq and the torture that his approval ratings dropped from 90% to below 50%.
This hate speech – from Palin to McCain to Malkin to Hannity to Limbaugh to the NY Post cartoons – is not based on any policy decisions – it is based simply on hate and being in the minority and not having control anymore. It is unacceptable, inexcusable and more importantly, it is dangerous.
We know all too well how the right pushes the Overton Window towards the extremes – that is what people like Malkin, Coulter, O’Reilly and their ilk are there for. But when violent threats and violent hate speech and violent "cartoons" make their way into the mainstream, they become acceptable to talk about – and while they are talked about – even if they are derided or pushed back against, they seep in. Look no further than the issue of torture. Somehow, that was pushed so far that a disturbingly large number of Americans think that it is ok to do "when warranted". And frankly, that is insane.
Some things should be ignored and starved of oxygen. This is not one of them. We are one month into the Obama administration, and we already see violent political cartoons and swastikas at anti-Obama rallies. What will we see next month or next year?
****************************************
Update [2009-2-19 9:18:48 by clammyc]: To answer right up front the challenges I am getting about "how can I not see this as racist?", I will say this: I believe this cartoon would have been drawn the same way if it was a chimp, a tiger, a bear or a dog that was shot in Connecticut.
****************************************
Update [2009-2-19 11:46:53 by clammyc]: To further my point about the overall violent rhetoric that seems to be getting lost in the comments section, I wanted to reproduce something that was said by one of the folks at Sadly, No in an email exchange:
There's a larger trend behind the swastikas and cartoons and so forth. The notion on the right of an unspecified sort of patriotic revolt or resistance is really hot and widespread right now, and is being stoked by Limbaugh and other such characters. There are a lot of heated arguments on the Internet message boards as to whether it would be patriotic or treasonous to turn to violence. Opinion is strong on both sides, and for the vast majority of these people the prospect of violence is nothing but wank fuel, but -- you know, things bear close watching, I think.
I think it becomes dangerous when you see these obvious dog-whistle references to violence in the mainstream media, and they're allowed to stand. Because what conservatives do is push at boundaries, advancing by inches what they can get away with, day after day and year after year. If it's cops shooting Obama-chimps this early, it'll be something slightly more daring the next time, etc.
This is the bigger point and the bigger issue.
****************************************
Update [2009-2-19 11:46:53 by clammyc]: Since an overwhelming number of comments are about whether the cartoon is or isn't (predominantly) racist, there is a much bigger picture and story being missed. And that story is the precise point I am trying to make in the diary. What about the Nazi stuff with Malkin? What about stories like this one about Hal Turner and more hate speech/violent rhetoric?
Can we focus on the bigger issue, especially since it WAS the intent of this diary?