Skip to main content

White racial terrorism in places like Tulsa and East Saint Louis was the tyranny of white supremacy in human form, bombing, killing, raping, and burning black people alive and their communities to the ground. Anti-racism has created no such terrors or blood-letting where white conservatives are victims.

I would like to develop my earlier thoughts on Jonathan Chait's bizarre feature for New York Magazine about race in the Age of Obama a bit more.

Tommy Christopher, writing over at The Daily Banter, kindly linked to my criticism of Chait's false equivalence excuse-making for white conservative racism.

He featured the following observation from a longer essay where I argued that:

Jim and Jane Crow were terrifying. Lynching parties that dismembered black bodies, cut them apart, forced black men to eat their own penises as the price for a “merciful killing”, or the white rampaging mobs that destroyed black wealth, life, and many dozens (if not hundreds of black communities) during the Red Summers of the American post World War one era, are terrifying.

The slave ship and the many millions killed during the Middle Passage are terrifying. The chattel slavery auction block is terrifying. The mass rape and murder of black men, women, and children on the charnel house plantations of the American slaveocracy, both after the seasoning process and in the hell that awaited the survivors of the Middle Passage, is terrifying.

Men like George Zimmerman and Michael Dunn who can kill black people at will under Stand Your Ground Laws are terrifying. Police who have the power of life and death, and can use that power to murder black people who are “armed” with house keys, wallets, phones, or their empty hands is terrifying. The “don’t get killed by the cops” lecture that responsible black parents give their children is terrifying.

The thought that how despite one’s successes and educational accomplishments that because they are identified, however arbitrarily, as “black” in America means that their resume will get thrown in the garbage, a mortgage will have higher interest, or how doctors will not give proper treatment or necessary pain medication, is terrifying.

It would seem that in some ways I "buried my lede".

The most troubling part of Chait's essay "The Color of His Presidency" is his suggestion that anti-racism is some type of "terrifying" social force in American life.

He wrote:

Few liberals acknowledge that the ability to label a person racist represents, in 21st-century America, real and frequently terrifying power. Conservatives feel that dread viscerally. Though the liberal analytic method begins with a sound grasp of the broad connection between conservatism and white racial resentment, it almost always devolves into an open-ended license to target opponents on the basis of their ideological profile. The power is rife with abuse.
Of course, such a claim is absurd. However, it is compelling for those who believe that white supremacy is a passing fad, something vanquished from American life, and how people of color--black folks in particular--are now the "real racists".

Shorter version: if black and brown folks would stop talking about racism the problem would go away. This is the central fantasy of aggrieved whiteness with its delusions of white innocence and black bullying along the colorline. American society was forged by white racism and white supremacy. The valiant resistance against the status quo by people of color and a few white allies helped to make America a more inclusive democracy.

I have read The Color of His Presidency several times. It has received praise from Isaac Chotiner at the New Republic as a "superb" piece of work. Others have also said kind things about The Color of His Presidency. I remain vexed and disappointed by it.

I generally like Chait's work. But, his latest essay makes me feel like I have watched some Lovecraft-inspired play that makes its viewers go insane. As a piece of work that purports to analyze the role of race in American politics, The Color of His Presidency is akin to the Yellow King: one cannot study it too much or they will go mad.

[I wonder how President Obama, who counts Chait as one of his favorite political essayists, feels about The Color of His Presidency? I worry that Barack Obama would agree with Chait's central thesis about racial "paranoia".]

Nevertheless, I have gleamed several conclusions from Chait's riddle.

The Color of His Presidency is the very type of writing on race by supposed "liberals" which makes people of color and serious anti-racists deeply suspicious of the commitment of the mainstream "Left" (who are really centrists and Left-leaning Republicans of another age) to social and racial justice.

The Color of His Presidency rings of a default type of white tribalism and an effort to understand and excuse-make for white racism across the political divide. As such, racism is just a bad habit or an outlier of bad behavior practiced by otherwise good and decent white people who we may happen to disagree with politically.

The centrality of white supremacy to American politics and history is lost and pushed away because it is inconvenient for how Whiteness (and White people) imagines itself as benign.

Chait's piece also seems to rely on a logic that racism in the service of politics is "just" politics as usual. Politicians will use any tool to gain leverage. If racism and white supremacy--or white racial animus and resentment--are part of the toolbox, then a given political actor should be judged not as a "racist" per se, but rather as someone who uses racism for political advantage.

Politics is about power, the allocation of resources and opportunities, and basic matters such as safety and security. For people of color, white racism and white supremacy are political projects that profoundly impact our life chances, health, sanity, and freedom from violence in negative ways.

America practiced state-sponsored racial terrorism and tyranny against non-whites for most of its history. Apartheid was not a crime against humanity only in South Africa. American Apartheid, de facto and de jure, was beaten back as a force of law, but remains entrenched institutionally as a type of day-to-day practice in the post civil rights era.

The victims of white racism, especially those people of color excluded from systems of white privilege and white advantage, cannot sit back and compartmentalize white supremacy as some type of interesting intellectual puzzle, or a footnote asterisk on public policy. That is a luxury allowed for those who do not have to deal with the lived consequences which result from excuse-making for white racism.

Chait's exercise in white victimology and excuse-making for Republican racism exhibits a common habit of white liberals and centrists among the American pundit classes (and likely of many white folks in their private lives) when the "race issue" comes up in conversation.

Racism is complicated and multi-dimensional. Nevertheless, we can develop a basic rubric for understanding it. We are what we do; our habits are reflections of our values and beliefs. As such, racists do racist things. As Chait concedes, for decades the Republican Party has relied on a concerted effort of white racist appeals, dog whistles, and other tactics under the guiding principle known as the Southern Strategy, to mobilize its base.

At present, the Republican Party is a White identity organization, a White People's Political Party, and the "polite" face of White Supremacy in America.

Conservatives who advance those interests are racists.

This plain on the face fact is dodged, avoided, talked around, and denied by the mainstream news media. Why? because to tell the truth is to risk career suicide by falling into the trap laid by the White Right and its propaganda machine wherein charges of racism are fuel for the rage engine.

Movement conservatism in the post civil rights era is functionally the same thing as racism. The Republican Party has developed this brand name. They should be held accountable for the decision.

White supremacy and racism are civic evils. By implication, those who practice, enable, support, or use white identity politics for political gain--such as the Republican Party in the Age of Obama--are practicing civic evil.

Why are liberal pundits like Jonathan Chait afraid to hold conservatives and the Republican Party accountable for their racism as opposed to making excuses for it?

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tipped & rec'ed nt (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Egalitare, poco, grover, koNko, Larsstephens

    nosotros no somos estúpidos

    by a2nite on Wed Apr 09, 2014 at 01:32:07 PM PDT

  •  Your previous diary on Chait's screed (10+ / 0-)

    really did sort of loose me with the wrestling matches and all. :) This one is much more to the point and it is a point with which I highly agree.

    I think that there is a historical context for this brand of crappy hypocrisy. That is the point at which the focus of the civil rights movement began to shift from doing battle with the forces of Jim Crow in the deep south to addressing the realities of de facto segregation in the rest of the country. Suddenly white people who had been contentedly clicking their tongues over those trashy rednecks were all freaked out that their suburban lives were being impacted.

    There are multiple forces of political and demographic change that are impinging of the traditional bulwarks of privilege. Obama has become the symbol of their "oppression". What they are afraid of is having to become part of the great unwashed mass.  

  •  what I think is the answer to this question (11+ / 0-)

    so-called "liberal" pundits are a little more interested in their own position of prestige and wealth than they are to the causes that they supposedly care about.

    Calling Republicans racists would endanger Chait's standing among the crowd that pays him. He would eventually be considered not "one of our kind" and phased out, to be replaced by some other more pliable writer.

    Rather than disturb his gravy train, Chait (and others like him) water down any criticism of the power structure.

    Dear NSA: I am only joking.

    by Shahryar on Wed Apr 09, 2014 at 01:50:23 PM PDT

    •  from the 1930s to the 1970s (6+ / 0-)

      journalists were plentiful, and generally part of the working or professional class. But never were they considered actually part of the "elite".  

      Today, there are very few authentic journalists, and almost none of them work at the most prestigious (that is to say, wealthy) establishment publications.  The people who work in corporate "news" now cover themselves with as much or more energy as politics, culture, sports and world events.  Today's "journalists" are mostly just actors, and their professional ethics have pretty much gone out the window.

      Shirley Chisholm was right. Our Republic is in deep trouble.

      by Big River Bandido on Wed Apr 09, 2014 at 02:01:08 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Funny How Corporations Behave Exactly the Same (4+ / 0-)

        way when they're deregulated, even when they are in the business of news and information, which the framers and the left have always fantasized to be driven by a magical public service force.

        Corporations owned by corporations and sponsored by corporations, Constitutionally forbidden to be checked, balanced or civilized by we the people or our government.

        What could possibly give greater public service than utterly liberated corporations.

        We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

        by Gooserock on Wed Apr 09, 2014 at 02:23:55 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Part of me wishes (4+ / 0-)

    that I hadn't read the passages where you described the tortures of Jim Crow. Despite my years and (I hope) the growth I've experienced, I still did not know that some people are capable of such vile, amoral, inhumane acts against others.  

    And yet, I suppose we must know evil in order to be motivated to prevent it.  But even just reading about such atrocities is, in a small way, brutalizing to the reader. The thought of actually going through it — either as the victim, the perpetrator, or a bystander — is not only terrifying, but horror.

    Shirley Chisholm was right. Our Republic is in deep trouble.

    by Big River Bandido on Wed Apr 09, 2014 at 01:51:30 PM PDT

  •  Please don't read my above comment as (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    a2nite, poco, offgrid, Ahianne

    a criticism of what you say, or the diary.  This is one of the most spot-on pieces I've read in 9 years on this site.  Thank you for writing it.  

    Shirley Chisholm was right. Our Republic is in deep trouble.

    by Big River Bandido on Wed Apr 09, 2014 at 01:53:45 PM PDT

  •  This passage from Chait (10+ / 0-)
    Few liberals acknowledge that the ability to label a person racist represents, in 21st-century America, real and frequently terrifying power. Conservatives feel that dread viscerally.
    But, see, the problem with this analysis is that I can't recall any person who was labeled a "racist" where that label was undeserved.  Conservatives complained about Paula Deen (and others) being labeled as "racists," but never did it seem to be explained how she was in fact not a racist, just that, well, it's not nice to call her that, you see.

    A lot of conservatives are just as racist as they've always been, but they've learned to be "polite" about it, using terms like "inner city" and "urban" when we all know what they really mean.

    29, white male, TX-07 (current), TN-09 (born), TN-08 (where parents live now)

    by TDDVandy on Wed Apr 09, 2014 at 02:03:15 PM PDT

    •  Really. Don't want to be labeled a racist? (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      TDDVandy, Ahianne

      Don't do racist shit or say racist shit.

      At least the word "racist" has power. For now, anyway. I am sure the right is working on ways to drain that "visceral" power away.

    •  Chait's true belief in the power of language (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      harvarddem

      where calling something or someone "racist" (or sexist, homophobic, etc.) makes it so as far as the mob is concerned.  Or worse, that the word is not actually a word, but like a wolf's howl it is instead a primal call to assemble and go on the hunt; echoed by all who hear it and then taken for one's own, it grows beyond the discipline of reason.  From that comes the idea that people should not use these words precisely because of their great and terrible power.  

      Chait also implies the conservative belief that in the post-Civil Rights era, the burden of proof now rests upon white people where guilt rather than innocence is assumed and the mere fact of the accusation of racism being made is regarded as the most damning evidence of all.  Just as "women never lie about rape" and teenaged girls in Puritan Salem never lie about witches, it's held to be axiomatic that people of color never lie about racism and thus the claim need not be examined.

      But the white and the male make the same counterargument: that what women and people of color are not lying about is their feelings.  Absolutely race is subjective and in the minds of people like Chait, that's something we all need to work hard to overcome by constraining ourselves to deal only in facts and cause and effect and accept that the perception of victimization (i.e. inequality) is not proof that victimization has occurred: "criminal intent" and all that.

      Domestic politics is the continuation of civil war by other means.

      by Visceral on Wed Apr 09, 2014 at 02:58:50 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I'm a white male (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Ahianne, SoCalSal

        and I've never thought any of the stuff you've just mentioned.

        The only time I've ever been accused of being a racist is by conservatives on Twitter who are accusing me of racism in the same sense that they consider Al Sharpton a racist for daring to point out racism.

        29, white male, TX-07 (current), TN-09 (born), TN-08 (where parents live now)

        by TDDVandy on Wed Apr 09, 2014 at 03:50:12 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  I thought that's the point (0+ / 0-)

      of what Chait was trying to convey, about conservatives' complaints about being charged with racism. Chait also says all the evidence is that racism is in play significantly more since President Obama took office.

      Chait wrote of Bill Kristal screaming "bullshit" on tv when confronted with charges of conservatives' racism. That was visceral. Paula Deen is an example of what can happen when a racist unwittingly reveals personal racism. Her very public cluelessness and racism cost her a lot of money and earned her deserved condemnation.

      Persons in the media spotlight who share Deen's racism have good reason to be fearful that their racism will be exposed. Good. Let them be fearful.

      Does the left not realize the power of a charge of racism, as Chait says? I'm not sure the left would not/should not relish that power. That's a more interesting part of the conversation from my pov. Chait cited some ways that the left goes over the top in charging racism where racism really isn't in play, and I agree with most of the examples he gave. But I don't mind that those over the top charges are made, I've even made some of them. (If that makes me a  hypocrite... oh well.)

  •  I grew up in Tulsa... (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    a2nite, poco, offgrid, Larsstephens, Ahianne

    ... and went to school there (graduating from high school in 1970) and NO ONE ever talked about the Tulsa Massacre. A classmate found a of of the WPA Guide to Oklahoma (published in the 1930s) in a used bookstore -- and that's how I (and my friends) first heard about this horrible event.

  •  Because it would make him appear too 'partisan' (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    poco, Ahianne

    The Very Serious People (you know people LIKE Chait) cannot - and will not - ever appear 'too partisan' since then they would lose their status as an erudite, objective observer of culture and life in America (please don't laugh, they TRULY think of themselves in this manner).  The second that they flat out say the truth....well then, they will get labeled 'partisan hack' or 'white-guilt laden liberal' or (snicker) 'race hustler accomplice'.  

    This is white privilege at its most obtuse: Chait simply CANNOT totally 'disenfranchise' his (largely) white liberal base, since his white liberal base oftentimes has 'conservative white friends'.  So, to show his 'I am not REALLY a sell-out' bona fides, he writes crap like this.

    Quite frankly, this is the Very Serious Liberal Person's 'Sista Souljah' moment - just simply more eloquent.  More eloquent bullshit, that is.

  •  The Republican party is not an entity (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Darmok

    that is necessarily racist.  It consists of an aggregate of individuals, many but not all of whom are likely racist.

    Best Scientist Ever Predicts Bacon Will Be Element 119 On The Periodic Table

    by dov12348 on Wed Apr 09, 2014 at 02:14:28 PM PDT

    •  At a certain point, though ... (7+ / 0-)

      ... when your party is comprised heavily of people who advocate and work to bring about racist policies, you have to be sufficiently racist (at least passively so) to be able to tolerate their company and not walk out.

      •  That would cover many more (0+ / 0-)

        but there are yet others who may really not be aware or are in denial.  Or do know but are working hard to change the party from the inside.

        Within all these groups are yet more shades of guilt or relative innocence that would be impossible to fully vet outside of what their own psycho-therapists might discern.

        So a small number are probably ok, but how small?  Impossible to tell.

        Best Scientist Ever Predicts Bacon Will Be Element 119 On The Periodic Table

        by dov12348 on Wed Apr 09, 2014 at 02:43:58 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Chait's whole approach (4+ / 0-)

    in this essay is to present himself as the disembodied voice of reason, which is impossible when dealing with something as subjective as race.  So, even if Chait were to get the history right or propose a remedy consistent with his diagnosis, he'd still be an asshole.

    This is why having a favorite political essayist is fraught.  Chait's someone who's written a few essays I've appreciated in the past.  I've read enough about this one to conclude that even reading it would confer it an air of legitimacy it doesn't deserve -- Chait is not my mother, and she disagrees with him on this particular issue, and therefore he is not an authority on how i'm going to talk about political adversaries.  He's also never to my knowledge written about race before, so he doesn't jump to the front of the queue.

    There's also a hell of a lot of difference between what the right imagines white liberals do, which is yell Racist the second they/we tihnk we're 'losing' an argument, and what happens in reality, which is to note the links between Paul Ryan's coded attacks on the "culture" of poverty and the cuts in his budget; Sheldon Adelson's dehumanization of Palestinians and his increasing influence over conservative foreign policy; and the popularity of Steve King's brainfarts and the difficulties moving an immigration bill forward.  Opposition to racism is a big motivator for a lot of us, in itself and because it influences policy in so many ways -- the influence is there on labor issues, minimum wage, criminal justice, and understanding this means recognizing that Chait is suggesting civility requires being disingenuous, and political self-sacrifice, and he has done nothing to earn the right to say that, and its repugnance means he never will.  

    Difficult, difficult, lemon difficult.

    by Loge on Wed Apr 09, 2014 at 02:16:04 PM PDT

  •  Jonathan Chait is no liberal... (6+ / 0-)

    He's another in a long line of conservadem TNR alumni filling up the public space with right wing nuttiness. He's a bright guy and has his place among the punditocracy, sure, but if you lift up that rock and look too long this is what you'll find.

    Republicans live in fear of being called racist? Like when Newt Gingrich called Obama the first Food Stamp President? Cause that's totally what you'd expect to hear from someone living in visceral fear of black condemnation!

  •  As a Generalization, Anyone w Access & Gig In the (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    a2nite, badscience, poco, offgrid

    media labeled a "liberal" probably is not. They're often at least leaning toward neocon in terms of empire and military, and neoliberal economics.

    supposed "liberals"
    I don't know Chait's work so I can't be specific, but I don't need to protest that "no true liberal" would be blind to racism in most cases because I'm almost never presented with a liberal to assess.

    No matter how vehemently Limbaugh insists someone is a liberal.

    We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

    by Gooserock on Wed Apr 09, 2014 at 02:27:35 PM PDT

  •  Because if 'racism' is merely a (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    grover, poco, Ahianne

    behavior or belief, or set of behaviors and beliefs, that injure and discriminate against people of color, instead of a Firebreathing Evil of Satanic Origin, then he's gotta face the fact that he's racist, too.

    What's 'terrifying' to someone like Chait, I presume, is the possibility that he's not as blameless as he hopes. Damaging his self-image is almost as bad, you see, as slavery.

    I think (some) whites have done a really good job at making 'racist' = 'evil' in such a way that it never applies to any normal human. So if someone calls me racist, it's like they're calling me evil. I know I'm not evil!

    On the other hand, I know I am racist. Which bites. But that's what you get, raised in a racist culture. I don't even think it's anything to be particularly ashamed of--but it is something to be constantly vigilant against.

    "Gussie, a glutton for punishment, stared at himself in the mirror."

    by GussieFN on Wed Apr 09, 2014 at 03:00:03 PM PDT

    •  If it isn't racism... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      grover, Ahianne

      ...I'm sure all of us harbor some sort of prejudice or other, whether we like it or not. The point is what we do - or don't do - with it.

      ...the ability to label a person racist represents...real and frequently terrifying power. Conservatives feel that dread viscerally.
      No one who, realizing how wrong harboring them is, resists giving voice or action to their prejudices need "feel that dread."

      The only ones who do are those aware that the "label" is, in their cases, on target.

      •  I disagree; I think the (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        grover, Ahianne

        majority of them are utterly unaware that the label is on target. I think they feel they're being called dirty and evil, and they're incredibly invested in thinking of themselves as pure and good.

        They experience being called dirty and evil as visceral dread. (Not just conservatives; I'd include the 'liberal pundits' of the diary title.) They give voice and action to prejudice in ignorance, of often willful ignorance.

        In some ways, it's a definitional thing. Racist means 'bad.' They know they're not bad. Hence, when they wave Obama witch doctor signs, that's not racist. QED.

        "Gussie, a glutton for punishment, stared at himself in the mirror."

        by GussieFN on Wed Apr 09, 2014 at 03:40:25 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I think it's more likely... (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          GussieFN, grover, Ahianne

          ...that the majority of them convince themselves their prejudices are justified and, therefore, can't be "bad," as you say. But they still don't like being called something that the "labeler" considers "bad," so - not wanting to believe there's anything wrong with their prejudice(s) - they resent it.

          It's what I'd call the "I Know I'm Right and Hate That Everyone Else Thinks I'm Wrong" Syndrome. Or, to put a finer point on it, "If you could see as clearly as I, you'd be racist too." Nobody likes being considered a pariah, no matter how convinced of the rightness of their thinking they may be.

          I don't doubt there are those (perhaps even among the Obama-witch-doctor-sign-wavers) who delude themselves there's nothing either "racist" or "bad" about their thoughts, actions or remarks, but it's been my observation that the accusations that sting people the most are those they know have hit their mark.

          •  I tend to agree. (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            GussieFN, StevenWells

            Someone calls me a label like that, I pretty much shrug and move on.  I know who I am. I know what I believe, what I value, and the kind of world I work to create.

            But many of the conservatives I know, they FREAK if there is the slightest implication that ANY conservative (including pundits at Fox News) might be racist.

            To paraphrase Shakespeare, the allegedly non-biased person doth protest too much.

            © grover


            So if you get hit by a bus tonight, would you be satisfied with how you spent today, your last day on earth? Live like tomorrow is never guaranteed, because it's not. -- Me.

            by grover on Wed Apr 09, 2014 at 04:33:49 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  That's a good point. But (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Ahianne

              you have a certain level of emotional maturity. We're talking about conservatives and pundits here!

              "Gussie, a glutton for punishment, stared at himself in the mirror."

              by GussieFN on Wed Apr 09, 2014 at 04:43:21 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  Thanks, grover (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Ahianne, GussieFN

              I was going to include some personal experience, but omitted it for the sake of brevity.

              That experience is this: as a gay men, my partner and I, just walking together down the street, have been subjected to venomous cries of "Homos!" and "Fags!" by total strangers. My rational mind concludes, "Well, as much as I dislike the word, I am a "homo," so why should I object?" My emotional reaction is only to the fact that the screaming jerk and others like him think there's something "wrong with that."

              So if someone were to yell "Child molester!" instead, my reaction would be an eye-rolling, "This person's psychotic," and my feelings wouldn't be the least hurt.

              So it is with anyone who cares to call me a "bigot" (or any other word to that effect). I know that whatever internal prejudices I harbor are personally abhorred, resisted and never displayed in voice or deed.

              So, to return to my original point, I have no such "dread," because of what I do - and don't - with those feelings.  

  •  It's the transitive property of unadulterated (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Ahianne

    power over other human beings.

    We're not supposed to speak the truth about the man behind the curtain. We're supposed to pretend we don't see him and what motivates him.

    Racism is about unadulterated power over other human beings

    A certain type of politics

    America practiced state-sponsored racial terrorism and tyranny against non-whites for most of its history. Apartheid was not a crime against humanity only in South Africa. American Apartheid, de facto and de jure, was beaten back as a force of law, but remains entrenched institutionally as a type of day-to-day practice in the post civil rights era....

    Movement conservatism in the post civil rights era is functionally the same thing as racism. The Republican Party has developed this brand name. They should be held accountable for the decision.

    is about unadulterated power.

    But we're not supposed to notice that this politics is about the unadulterated power that undergirded by racism.

    Some people are willing to play that game. Too many, unfortunately.

    But it's a semantic game.  People like Chait want us to think Politics is just something that your civic-minded neighbor or old college room mate signed up for.

    But the glee with which they use dog whistles, appeal to the most base of fears and desires of their supporters,  cut SNAP and other actual life sustaining programs makes it abundantly clear to me that they relish in their absolute power over other human beings.

    © grover


    So if you get hit by a bus tonight, would you be satisfied with how you spent today, your last day on earth? Live like tomorrow is never guaranteed, because it's not. -- Me.

    by grover on Wed Apr 09, 2014 at 04:28:31 PM PDT

  •  Thanks Chauncey (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    poco

    for being hands down the best damned writer on this site.

    Excellent post.

    •  so many good smart folks here (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      poco

      but I will go to my fainting couch as you have given me the vapors. if you have not, do check out my own site--shameless self-promotion--to get some more of my often failed efforts at witty missives :)

      •  chauncey, I am not sure if you are aware of this, (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        JoanMar

        but one of the ways this site works is by increasing mojo. So, if you like what some one has written in response to your diary, it is considered good form to tip them. Tips add to one's mojo. Answers are very good, but tipping is good, too. Now, I am assuming that you did not know that, but perhaps you did and you consider it all very childish, and that is why you do not do that. If the latter is the case, I apologize for bringing it up.

        It's *Gandhi*, not Ghandi

        by poco on Wed Apr 09, 2014 at 05:30:35 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Excellent and gutsy dairy (0+ / 0-)

    and a country were the left is dead or dieing, is always hopeful to read something like this.

Click here for the mobile view of the site