The Washington Times is, in a moment of right wing desperation, trying to revive the latte liberal libel, publishing a supposed study by the Heritage Foundation demonstrating that Democratic districts are wealthier on average than Republican ones. Roy Edroso has a round-up of information on why this “study” is incredibly flawed and proves nothing, specifically pointing out that the study ignores the average income of voters, most likely because that more accurate measure of class and party affiliation is also the one that turns up inconvenient results. But just off the cuff, I wouldn’t at all be surprised to find that Democratic districts are wealthier, but I think the causation that the Times is trying to imply is completely backwards. It serves one well to remember the adage about how all politics are local. Democrats, unlike Republicans, are not ideologically committed to the idea that the government’s only legitimate functions are graft and panty-sniffing,* and therefore are far more likely on average to do crazy things like represent their district’s interests, making their districts far more pleasant places to live and thereby attracting the coveted tax-paying professional class to live there. I got another strong reminder of that over the holiday, after visiting with my family in a Republican-heavy area that’s notable for being unpleasant and ugly and the sort of place that most people of means get the hell out of. And move to places like….Austin, TX, where things are far from perfect, but at least the place isn’t falling apart by the seams.
Common sense aside, it’s clear that the whole point of this non-study is to give wingnuts a chance to indulge the latte liberal libel, a bit of political smearing that’s never quite made sense to me. It’s wrong that some liberals have money because…..? It’s hard to really say, especially when the people whining about it usually think that having any wealth at all is an indication of moral uprightness and the authority to tell other people what to do. You get the sense that some slow-witted wingnuts tend to think there’s some hypocrisy involved, but if so, that’s a really weird understanding of hypocrisy. In the real world, a hypocrite is someone who tells other people not to do things (recycle, get abortions, fuck strange men in airport bathrooms) , but the latte liberal’s crime is having enough (food, housing, health care, opportunities) and wanting everyone else to have enough. It might actually be the opposite of hypocrisy, in fact.
In actuality, though, the logic behind the latte liberal slur is a little more complex than a weak stab at confusing non-hypocrisy with hypocrisy. The illustration the Times chose to go with this story indicates what the dog whistle is:
There’s some caption justifying the use of Rep. Rangel’s picture instead of one of the many other representatives of wealthier districts in the U.S. who are mostly white people, but let’s not kid ourselves about what’s going on here. The latte liberal stereotype becomes much easier to understand if you think about the Republican history of race-baiting. The story goes something like this: White, wealthy liberals are in cahoots with/suckered through white guilt by scheming black politicians to deprive the working class white man of his right to say, “Well, I may not be Bill Gates, but at least I’m not a nigger.” I wouldn’t say that Rush Limbaugh puts it exactly like that, but it’s the general gist of the complaint. Sometimes in the myth we white liberals are considered to be naive and stupid (especially if young and female) and sometimes it’s assumed, if the white liberal is older and male like Ted Kennedy, that it’s all a conspiracy against the common white man. The possibility that intelligent, thoughtful white people might oppose racism out of good faith isn’t even vaguely entertained. The picture of a black congressman is a reminder to the reader of their irritation that even a single black man possesses so much power when they don’t have that much.
From that perspective, it’s easy to see why a lot of conservatives will resent a liberal who has enough money to buy a daily latte, but then turn around and hero worship people with enough money to buy a failing oil business a day, so long as they’re good Republicans. The latter aren’t considered race traitors, to make a long story very short. It also explains why there’s this ever-present desire from right wingers to trot out theories about black people and IQ. It’s as much about trying to get under the skin of latte liberal race traitors as it is anything else, which is why Lord Saletan smells the contrarian urge all over it.
*Not that Democrats are innocent of the political pleasures of cronyism or panty-sniffing, but at least they occasionally take breaks to serve their constituents.
81 Responses to “Latte liberal race traitors”
Leave a comment
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>
I’d be interested to hear from MAJeff on this one, given his chosen home. Lowest divorce rate in the country, low crime rate, #4 in per capita income (nearby blue states do even better), lowest or near-lowest in homicides, superlative libraries and culture, open spaces, diversity in the economy and population: yep, Taxachusetts.
This post is so loaded (with correct assertions) it’s hard to know where to start. But I deal with this “We are Republicans, we have money, and assets, and what do you stupid, naive liberals have?” remarks from my next door neighbor. Atleast I did before I stopped talking to him.
I’ve pointed out to him that we have IRAs and a 401k, stocks and property. And while we don’t have a boat, a camper, a rental property, we probably don’t have as much debt as he does either.
I have asked him what charities he has donated to, how has he made this world a better place. . . don’t get much of an answer, and he’s not much of a church goer.
HA HA HA HA HA
TAXACHUSETTS !!!!!!
What are property taxes like there? Cuz here in Austin it is not uncommon for people to be paying two GRAND a MONTH in Property taxes.
Are the MA rates even higher than that?
Because here in TAXAS, I feel like I am getting exactly JACKSHIT for my tax money.
Amanda-
My only pet peeve with your writing is how frequently you place asterisks above the fold. The sequence of clicks and scrolls takes away from the continuity of your otherwise consistently awesome posts. Just my two cents, of course.
Right on, Amanda. There’s a tangent to this that I find fascinating. I live and work in Chicago, which is a bluish city in a red state. However, many of my colleagues (granted, I work in a profession that is disproportionately reactionary, given its high union membership and taxpayer-funded salaries) and many other blue collar white males in this town seem to be staunch social conservatives. While they do sniff derisively at “yuppies” (a stand-in for ‘latte liberals,’ I think), their worst vitriol is reserved high-profile (African-American) professional athletes. My guess is that such Barry Bonds Hatred is closely related to Marge Schott’s “million-dollar nigger” sentiment; these Angry White Men find the specter of a few black men earning more in a five-year contract than many of them might earn in a lifetime to be morally repellent. The overprivileged assholes (Bush and the GOP) who are mortgaging away their grandkids’ futures are A-okay, though.
My guess is that such Barry Bonds Hatred is closely related to Marge Schott’s “million-dollar nigger” sentiment; these Angry White Men find the specter of a few black men earning more in a five-year contract than many of them might earn in a lifetime to be morally repellent.
Are you sure its not because hes a cheater who uses steroids? Thats why I dislike the man.
Perhaps I should explain that Barry Bonds Hatred is merely the most easily justified version of a wide swath of hatred that stretches to just about any high-profile black athlete. While Barry Bonds is widely believed to have ‘cheated,’ white steroid-using athletes– even those who lied about it and/or were caught– don’t raise so much as an eyebrow. Furthermore, one need not deal with the steroids issue to see my point. Athletes like Terrell Owens, Randy Moss, and just about any negro who dances after a good play turn these guys’ blue-collar guys’ faces deep red.
We rank somewhere in the middle of the pack when it comes to income taxes. I think people get hit harder on property taxes though because, a) state funding for cities suffered under the Romney administration, forcing localities to try and raise funds in other ways–property taxes; and b) the exorbitant price of real estate in the commonwealth.
It’s an expensive state to live in. But we get a pretty high quality of life. I think in many ways Minneapolis offers things that I would like to see more of in Boston (better parks, better theater, etc). but other than the cost of things, I adore living in MA, and Boston in particular. Sure, there are issues, as there are with any city, but I do really, really like living here. Looking for full-time faculty positions isn’t a happy prospect, because I could really see myself happily staying here.
I do not doubt there is a large element of racism in regards to pro athletes, but it seems to me that most people (especially conservatives) just hate celebrities, period. Even loosely-defined or local “celebrities”. Is it jealousy? Resentment? It’s difficult for me to wrap my mind around it, as they are simply people with jobs to me.
Word.
Our murder rate hasn’t been great in Boston. The last couple years, parts of Boston have seen rates that haven’t been seen in over a decade (50-60 murders per year). We’re not as deadly as Philly, but it’s not as though there isn’t any violence in the city. It’s still a fairly segregated city. It’s a changing city, though.
Statewide, the political system remains a fairly “old boys” club centered in the legislature (even if the new Senate Majority Leader is a woman). Politics is a nasty sport, and I really prefer the type of welfare state modeled more on a european social democratic tradition (those swedes, germans, norwegians, and finns had an effect) that we had in Minnesota than what I see here, with the Irish and Italian tribalisms. But, hey…..
Speaking of Race Traitors (I am happily one, thank you), I would suggest folks read Mab Segrest’s book Memoir of a Race Traitor. Fantastic book about being a lesbian doing anti-Klan organizing in North Carolina during the Reagan-Helms years, as well as a fantastic essay tracing the construction of White Supremacy through her own family;s history in the US (great example of Mills’ “sociological imagination”) and the final section is a speech she gave at the NGLTF Creating Change Conference The first two sections are phenomenal.
I just want to say, if being a Race Traitor is working to ensure that my ‘race’ isn’t the one on top and ’superior’ to all others, then call me a Race Traitor
I don’t think I have to worry about being a “Race Traitor”. I’d have to find out a way to betray half of myself, which is kind of impossible
“I don’t think I have to worry about being a “Race Traitor”. I’d have to find out a way to betray half of myself, which is kind of impossible”
Betraying half (or more) of yourself may be easier and more common than you realize.
There are degrees of betrayal. Even if you can’t “pass for white” or some traditional betrayal of heritage, you can deny you know a foreign language (that you might have been raised speaking), embrace “lightening” creams (as have been documented by Pam Spaulding here and at her place), reject your native culture (if you have one and are embarrassed by your connection to it), reject food connected with your homeland, etc.
Never underestimate the human ability to pretend to be something you aren’t, or to pretend to NOT be something you are…
I would expect a ‘Race Traitor’ to be one of those people working to save the whales or working with ‘Canines for Independence’.
(I DO know the Canines for Independence people really train helper animals, but prefer to think they’re agitating for dogs to overthrow humanity)
The Vast Right Wing Conspiracy now has to resort to defamation in order to appease their hacks. Can’t the racist nuts at the Washington Post come up with anything original?
^^ Huge difference between the Wash. Times and Post, as many failings as the latter has too…probably an unintentional mistake but reread the first line.
Don’t forget the circumstances under which doing the same thing is “liberal latte-ish” matter. When Michelle Malkin goes to Oberlin, it’s her getting a good education; when everyone else does, it’s contributing to the brainwashing of the youth by the elitist liberal-arts educational-industrial complex.
OOPS, that should read the Washington Times.
Sorry ace about the mistake, I probably should get a little rest.
Well said, Church. It’s worth noting that a lot of lynchings in the days of lynching may have had some “white woman” justification, but a lot of the time it was a way to punish any black person viewed as striving to take jobs that white people coveted, anything skilled that brought home a real paycheck. Reading Black Boy, I’ve noticed that it seems that Klansmen would hang out at hotels where prostitutes worked so they could see what black men had the money to pay for them, and then lynch them supposedly for touching white women.
Never underestimate the human ability to pretend to be something you aren’t, or to pretend to NOT be something you are…
Oh, certainly.
In a way, this can happen in the opposite direction as well. The constantly occurring phenomenon in American culture of “The White Negro”, for example.
Amanda, that is a really excellent analysis, and surely correct. I think I’ve mentioned this before, but it is great to see your analytical and literary powers growing over time.
The NYT, of course, will fail to consider the political leanings of the state at large. Being democratic in a blue state like NY isn’t terribly significant; being Republican in GA is also par for the course. Since GA is less wealthy than NY, you’d expect disparities in their individual districts. But, hey, who needs controls when there’s propaganda to be slung and bullshit to be sold.
The photo is a reminder that a civil rights revolution cannot happen again. The media is alert, irresponsible, and wholly corrupt. The honest, harsh images that mobilized people in the sixties wouldn’t hit the airwaves today — at least, not without very heavy counterspin. (Some of the more startling footage from the 2000 election never made it on newscasts — only on movies made after the fact.)
The web’s no replacement — those who need it most can’t afford it.
but a lot of the time it was a way to punish any black person viewed as striving to take jobs that white people coveted, anything skilled that brought home a real paycheck
Some of the more recent work on lynching suggests that a significant percentage (nearly half?) were for theft - (and not just the white cattle rustlers/horse thieves who were the primary targets of lynching in the west!), but even in the deep south. I try really hard not to be all economic determinist about the world - especially as the *rules* of economics get written and enforced by humans - but it is so hard not to see so much of the right wing chattering - from centrist to insane - as so much “hey! look over here!” posturing so that the angry and gullible will quit looking at their money so it can be stolen more easily.
I thought Dems were mostly welfare queens who were jealous of the rich. Now you’re telling me Dem areas are wealthier than pug areas, and thus those caviar eating Dems are out of touch with common values.
Then there is the right to private property, no matter what, conservative movement…. that is going on here in red, red Arizona. They actually voted to build a water theme park in Mesa that will use billions of gallons of ground water. In the worst drought on record, going on for ten years now.
Sheer stupidity.
shano - i had to leave new mexico because the golf courses kept getting special exemptions to water restrictions. of course, you know who will suffer in the more extreme drought to come.
I don’t like latte, can I be a hot chocolate-liberal?
Same here Burning Prairie…also the Heritage Foundation is well linked to racist organizations/clubs/people
Sound like another way of saying “elitist” b/c apparently, there’s something wrong with being at the best
I thought Dems were mostly welfare queens who were jealous of the rich. Now you’re telling me Dem areas are wealthier than pug areas, and thus those caviar eating Dems are out of touch with common values.
If common values are the racist, right-wing, religionist crap I was subjected to in Iowa last week, well let’s hope the Dems remain out of touch; and let’s tell those “values voters” to fuck themselves, because they’ve imbibed far too much of the “we’re the heartland and therefore real americans” bullshit.
The NYT, of course, will fail to consider the political leanings of the state at large.
Which might be a point if this were the NYT that had published the article, but it was the Moonie Times.
Another wrinkle: Rangel is now chairman of the powerful House Ways & Means Committee (and John Conyers is chairman of the House Judiciary Committee).
It kills the wingnuts that these two are in such powerful positions. And how did they get there? By representing majority-black districts for decades and thereby having the seniority to become committee chairmen when the House turned over.
Yep, two Civil Rights-era black congressmen in charge of the money and overseeing the judiciary. Republicans aren’t happy about that one bit. I’m sure that’s part of the dog whistle — they think that any white liberal who supports these men are working directly against the interests of white people.
Yep, two Civil Rights-era black congressmen in charge of the money and overseeing the judiciary. Republicans aren’t happy about that one bit. I’m sure that’s part of the dog whistle — they think that any white liberal who supports these men are working directly against the interests of white people.
Just a certain class of white people
I’m Bi-racial, male and Republican. I have said for years that all White liberals are racist and that the farther left one leans, the more likely it is that they’ve never had to make an honest buck (thus why higher taxes don’t bother them).
The above article implies I promote these ideas because I’m reaching out to poor Whites (who are all racists) by and I guess betraying Bi-racial people everywhere, or so I’m told by a rich White liberal.
Do any of you understand how bigoted it is to “I’m a good White person, he’s a bad White person” card? It implies we non-Whites can’t judge for ourselves who is and isn’t a racist. Since I “pass” I’ve been in the room when rich White liberals thought no Blacks were around. I know the truth.
Isn’t it also elitist to describe all White people who aren’t a s rich as you as racists? Do you really think your money, privillage and DNC party card makes you less bigoted than anyone else?
How many of you defended Francis Holland when he go called a monkey at DailyKos? Why are asian ping pong references to Malkin considered O.K.? Why do I have dozens of e-mails from White “liberals’ calling me zebra, monkey, house nigger etc?
Methinks the lady protests overmuch.
Rob Sayeth
You mean like the good conservative Republican racist friend of my ex-husband that said that all bi-racial children were stupid and mentally challenged.
Or my good fundie Republican uncle who taught his white children that it was a sin for them to even be friends with blacks - so that when I as a preteen expressed to my cousin that I thought a black boy in my class was cute, she came unglued.
How did grandpappy Bush make all his money again?
You see I’m rather far left leaning and I’m in a inter racial marriage and I have been called “race traitor” to my face. I have almost kicked the hell out of a neo nazi for approaching my whiter that white son (number 1) on a Denver bus. (one of the bus stops we had to wait at was full of them)
It has been my experience that it is conservatives in every state that I have lived in are the most racist people I have ever met. They veil their racism in terms like “compassionate conservatism,” and “ownership society.”
and “market forces.”
I’d expound but I have to leave to take my left leaning bi-racial children to school.
Well I hope my last comment went into moderation, because I’ll have to reconstruct it. . . but continuing
Feel better Rob? Just waiting for everyone to jump on to your post so you can “hammer” us down? Got anyone else in the wings or posting this on some right wing blog to demonstrate how “right” you are?
You mean like trying to totally dismantle the inheritance tax so the likes of Paris Hilton and Fabian Basabee never have to do an honest days work, or “earn” anything for their entire life. BTW what honest days work have the Bush twins put in?
Meanwhile my eldest son (5 years younger than the Bush twins) who is so far left he’s a socialist, works a at a car lube place and attends college.
Also it is realy rich of a Republican talking about liberals never making an honest buck when your party has become an over acheiver in graft and correuption.
And thus illustrates another difference between “liberuls” and “conservatives.” We tend to back up statements like that with links and sourcing. So until you provide the links, I’m not going to respond.
I will say this, however, DailyKos has shown far more care and concern for the safety of Malkin’s children than she did for the Frost children.
After Malkin web published the names and addresses of people she disagreed with, many on the left went after her address to do the samething. The day her address began appearing DailyKos made a decision not to allow her address to be posted, not in a front page post, not in a diary and not in a comment. And they deleted her address where ever they found it on the DailyKos site.
She still moved, obtensively for the safety of her children, because her address had gotten out there. But that doesn’t diminish what DailyKos did and the correctness of the actions they took.
Fast foward to the Frosts, Malkin is said to have web published their address, the address of a home of 4 children. I say “said” because I didn’t see it in her article, by the time I read it, it had been scrubbed. BUT their address was posted on Free Republic, and it is still there - posted on 10/06/07, still there almost 2 months later. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1907687/posts
Where was Malkin decrying that move or forcing Free Republic, a place that publishes her “stuff,” to remove that address for the sake of the children? She didn’t.
She could move for the safety of her children, but she let the working poor who disagreed with her, who could not move, fear for the safety of their children. No, that’s not racism, that’s classism and elitism.
Now, because I have a busy day, I have to get ready for an appointment. I hope my comment about me being in an inter-racial marriage comes out of moderation soon . . . I’m sure others will do a better job than I taking on some other “baits” that you used.
Devil’s Advocate, it’s all very simple:
the non-white dems are all welfare queens and felons who are trying to destroy America by leeching her to death.
The straight white dems are latte-drinking, caviar-earting, foreign-car driving elitists, out of touch with America, who are aiding their own destruction.
We won’t even talk about the nefarious plot of the rest of “those liberal people.” /pearl-clutch with a faint.
Not only is there a race element to the idea, there’s a strong classist one. Most of us in middle America are brought up not to talk about money. Not having any is God’s plan and plain folks. Having money is seen as suspicious at best, enviable, but something to avoid. Because we all know about the camel and the eye of the needle.
The shorter form of the study is “The dems care about the poor. But they aren’t poor. So they’re hypocrites!”
Rob taylor, you call yourself a “Bi-racial” Republican. If that’s the party you wish to be affiliated with, that’s fine. But are you really aware of what the current bunch of social troglodytes who call themselves “republicans” and who dare to tie themselves to The Party of Lincoln really represent?
Are you aware that, with few exceptions, a huge percentage of current “republicans” were racist Southern “democrats” just a few decades ago? (or would have been if they were old enough…)
That they were taught to hate The Party of Lincoln because of their loss in the Civil War and what that party did to the South after the war was over?
That they are the inheritors of an attitude that sees in the Civil War a military loss but a moral victory because their forefathers stood up for their “rights” - including the important right (to them) to deny certain people all their rights and make them subhuman?
That many of the current crop of “republicans” were “democrats” who fought tooth-and-nail to maintain Jim Crow, maintain segregation, and deny blacks Civil Rights until the federal government forced the issue, and after that Nixon’s appeals to their bigotry resulted in mass political transformation into becoming “republicans”?
You may be biracial. But that doesn’t mean that half of you doesn’t hate the other half over the betrayal of being a “republican”. The Party of Lincoln was assassinated in 1865. It just took the next 100-years to become a parody of itself…
No one who voted for Bush ever gets to extol the virtues of tax cuts. You stole my future money to pay for the Iraq war which you’re so manically in love with.All right-wing cranks have some annoying maxim that they’ve said over and over again, for years. Doesn’t make it true.
The only people described as “racist” in this thread:
The Washington Post (erroneously, as the article from The Washington Times)
Many organizations who link to the heritage foundation
Some of MAJeff’s family members (who are both wealthier than he and, of course, one should be given slack when it comes to making judgments about the people one knows best)
White liberals (by you)
But I thought you said I never made any money. I’m a liberal, after all! Tell me, what would be the correct, ROb-taylor-approved way?Well I hope my last comment went into moderation, because I’ll have to reconstruct it. . . but continuing
Feel better Rob? Just waiting for everyone to jump on to your post so you can “hammer” us down? Got anyone else in the wings or posting this on some right wing blog to demonstrate how “right” you are?
You mean like trying to totally dismantle the inheritance tax so the likes of Paris Hilton and Fabian Basabee never have to do an honest days work, or “earn” anything for their entire life. BTW what honest days work have the Bush twins put in?
Meanwhile my eldest son (5 years younger than the Bush twins) who is so far left he’s a socialist, works a at a car lube place and attends college.
Also it is realy rich of a Republican talking about liberals never making an honest buck when your party has become an over acheiver in graft and correuption.
And thus illustrates another difference between “liberuls” and “conservatives.” We tend to back up statements like that with links and sourcing. So until you provide the links, I’m not going to respond.
I will say this, however, DailyKos has shown far more care and concern for the safety of Malkin’s children than she did for the Frost children.
After Malkin web published the names and addresses of people she disagreed with, many on the left went after her address to do the samething. The day her address began appearing DailyKos made a decision not to allow her address to be posted, not in a front page post, not in a diary and not in a comment. And they deleted her address where ever they found it on the DailyKos site.
She still moved, obtensively for the safety of her children, because her address had gotten out there. But that doesn’t diminish what DailyKos did and the correctness of the actions they took.
Fast foward to the Frosts, Malkin is said to have web published their address, the address of a home of 4 children. I say “said” because I didn’t see it in her article, by the time I read it, it had been scrubbed. BUT their address was posted on Free Republic, and it is still there - posted on 10/06/07, still there almost 2 months later. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1907687/posts
Where was Malkin decrying that move or forcing Free Republic, a place that publishes her “stuff,” to remove that address for the sake of the children? She didn’t.
She could move for the safety of her children, but she let the working poor who disagreed with her, who could not move, fear for the safety of their children. No, that’s not racism, that’s classism and elitism.
Now, because I have a busy day, I have to get ready for an appointment. I hope my comment about me being in an inter-racial marriage comes out of moderation soon . . . I’m sure others will do a better job than I taking on some other “baits” that you used.
That’s the attitude I get from a lot of Republicans. They are the party of the wealthy and proud of it.
You’d be surprised how much contempt the country-club Republicans have for their base. They view them as ignorant tools who vote on the most irrelevant of issues.
“Tell me, what would be the correct, ROb-taylor-approved way? “
…get born into a wealthy Republican family in New England. While your dad sucks at the government teat as a congressman, CIA chief, Vice President, etc., waste your life in a haze of parties, drinking, and drug use. Start pretending to be a Texan and use dad’s contacts to get plum jobs in succession of businesses, where your lack of intelligence and business acumen inevitably lead to failure. Eventually wind up as the republican candidate for governor, smear your way into office where your only accomplishment will be expiditing the execution of prisoners on deathrow. Daddy’s political cronies then see you as their ticket to power (again) and make you republican candidate for the presidency. Dad’s supreme court makes you president and you’re home free…
See, it’s not THAT hard…
Ahhhh, the sweet smell of moderation….
yeah I know MikeEss - I’ve got two comments in there now — atleast I hope I do.
I wish there was a screen that popped up and told you that your post was in moderation and not lost somewhere in the internets
You’ll notice that “rob taylor” doesn’t say anything about what he’s heard in rooms full of white conservatives when they don’t think there are any black around. Maybe he prefers his racism open and out front.
I alway have to wonder what self-styled conservatives think of when they say “liberal”. The US political landscape has shifted so far to the right that pretty much anything to the left of the late Francisco Franco seems to be considered “liberal”, even when it’s centrist or center-right. Richard effing Nixon was a liberal by today’s standards.
I believe that the correct term is “wigger “.
I would dearly love to see a post/analysis describing how to re-direct the “latte liberal” stereotype. Because in my neck of the woods (”ex-urb” Texas) it is a difficult wall to break through…
Anyone with good pointers that don’t come down to anecdotes? “Yeah, so the Democratic Party has its share of hooligans, check out how bad the GOP is though!” doesn’t fly too far. I’ve tried “Look, the Dems are in truth the old GOP, and the new GOP is the neo-Nazi Party; in short, we haven’t seen a real liberal on the national stage since LBJ…” but that quickly leads to an argument over the definition of “liberal” vs. “conservative”.
Every stereotype has a nugget of truth to it. Most people have known a self-identified leftist who is astoundingly racist, classist, and/or generally misanthropic. Many of us might have also gone through a period between ages 18-25ish where we thought, “If only the world would think as I do it would all work out!” I’m grasping here…but the point is how do I possibly convince my neighbors that the GOP does not represent their best interests without falling into the holier-than-thou stereotype myself?
One thing I notice is that the Republican voters in my family tend to use “us-vs-them” language a LOT. “We need to change X before they use it to ruin everything.” “Blah blah has always been important to us.” “Can you imagine being OK with doing X? I’m glad we weren’t raised that way.” It’s become obvious to me now that they really don’t think as I do, and I’m at a loss to bridge the gap. The best I’ve managed is analogize from specific examples where their own actions have disagreed with their stated worldview (e.g. divorce) and pointed out that other people have to make similar decisions and maybe “they” are “us” too — but by then it’s so abstract I may as well be quoting gospel (”of course we should love all people as God’s children”).
I’m beginning to believe that the only real way to affect change is through actual suffering. They won’t believe that accidents can happen, or that the wealthy can truly be so horrible, until it is their retirements being bankrupted through no fault of their own.
Hey Rob,
As a white liberal who does anti-racist work (yes work) I’d like to take this opportunity as a gay man to tell you and your fellow conservatives to kindly fuck off for consistently attacking me and attempting to make my life worse. Bigot.
According to some recent commentator whose handle eludes me at the moment, Nixon, Ford, Reagan, and both Bushes are all actually “socialists,” whatever he means by that exactly.
I guess maybe in his terminology Grover Norquist might be a “liberal?”
—
PS in that Left-Blogtopian spirit of citation and linkiness, I took some time to find who I was thinking of. “Lee Richards.” In the spirit of avoiding being modded I will cite just the first instance, which I responded to:
http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2007/11/19/6343/#comment-467769
which included
Shorter me a bit down that thread–”No, can’t say that I have…”
In a response to “Mike” (MikeEss?) further down:
And though no leftist and not liberal, still a “socialist.”
I’m not sure what “part-socialist” would be; some kind of human-animal hybrid that W is so worried about maybe?
“I’m beginning to believe that the only real way to affect change is through actual suffering. They won’t believe that accidents can happen, or that the wealthy can truly be so horrible, until it is their retirements being bankrupted through no fault of their own.”
I think you’re right, the problem is the country isn’t going to hell in a handbasket quite fast enough for them to really see what lies ahead under continued Reichwing rule…
MikeEss:
And of course the biggest example of socialism in the US is the military corporate welfare where the government pays mostly white people in conservative congressional districts (and their managers and stockholders) to engage in make-work projects building piles of khaki-painted stuff that gets stored in warehouses for decades until it can be scrapped to make room for more of the same. (And when some idiot like GWB is stupid enough to actually try to use the stuff, it turns out much of it doesn’t work worth a damn and has to be replaced yet again at inflated “rush” prices…)
I would dearly love to see a post/analysis describing how to re-direct the “latte liberal” stereotype. Because in my neck of the woods (”ex-urb” Texas) it is a difficult wall to break through…
I tend to ignore the liberal vs. conservative rhetoric and target interests and issues.
“How much has YOUR health care and insurance increased over the past 8 years? Isn’t that ridiculous? The insurance companies are fucking over the little guys like us. Why isn’t anyone standing up for us against those greedy, evil bastards?”
“Why are you defending marriage from gays? ‘re worried about gay marriage? More marriages end because of financial crisis than any other reason–yes, even more than because of gays. Have you seen the foreclosure and bankruptcy rates lately? Have you noticed how many houses are going up for sale in your neighborhood? Most of those represent an existing marriage in imminent danger, and the government could help save those marriages, right now, today, by reforming mortgage rules and stopping credit card companies and banks from gouging their customers. But nooooo, they’re too worried about whether some gay guys somewhere might get married sometime in the future. Why don’t they focus on helping married people stay married instead?”
“Ten years ago, I got laid off 4 times in less than 3 years. I was damn glad that my unemployment benefits didn’t run out in between jobs, and we didn’t have to worry about losing our house. And yes, I’m perfectly OK with my taxes going up a bit to keep benefits going, because I know what it’s like to need them, and by god I want to make to make sure they are there just in case I need them again. Cause when you’re looking for a job and watching your savings deplete every month, you don’t have time to worry about politics or elections or anything. So I’m going to worry about those things NOW, while my job is relatively secure.”
etc.
Rob,
I have read your blog and I regularly read well-written conservative blogs also; smart people routinely read the best of the other team. Liberals should not be emailing you with nasty epithets, if it’s liberals who are doing it. They should be emailing you to encourage you to be something other than a stick figure caricature of a conservative and to improve your writing, as well as your layout.
If you “always” claim that “all White liberals” are racists, these nice folks have the right category for you.
Looks like Rob has disappeared. Does that make this a drive-by trolling?
To be honest, I kind of like the here because their posts always elicit eloquent rebuttals, like clytemnestra’s posts above.
Amazing. Don’t these people know that Rangel represents the Bronx — which happens to be the single poorest county in the United States? Incredible.
gee, wow . .. why thank you mirabile_dictu!
I think Rob will be back when he thinks no one is watching . . . look at the time he first posted.
unpleasant and ugly and the sort of place that most people of means get the hell out of
Amanda, tell me you weren’t in San Angelo this weekend. If we were in the same town putting up with the same crap, I definitely need to buy you a drink.
This is exactly what raises the spectre of race-treason in the minds of a certain sector of the white population, who, without being able to resolve it, are faced with the following riddle:
a) Black people have a fantastically accurate understanding of political mechanics, and nobody can deny that, but
b) Black people are just not very intelligent—or so say Murray, Herrnstein, Watson, Lord S. et al., to the sound of year after year of trumpets and fanfare and to the accompaniment of publicity in gobs.
How is a white person who honestly (or even dishonestly) believes black mental inferiority to reconcile that belief with the reality of black political achievement? The puzzle only gets harder when one considers that there are powerful black politicos on both sides of the aisle. Since influential black conservatives do exist, it can’t quite be the case that lefties, on their side of the divide, have lowered the standards for achievement so as to let the black folks in.
But the answer toward which a specific type of white mind tends is a not-too-different one. Since black people are more or less incapable of attaining political prominence on the own, the reasoning goes, prominent black political figures must have been deeded their political prominence by scallywaggy white folks, much as they might have been deeded 40-acres-and-a-mule after the Civil War. This line of thinking says that black political influence is not so much earned by blacks as given away by whites—no doubt for inexpressibly corrupt reasons. Treasonable reasons, even.
If it’s impossible for Charlie Rangel to be where he is, and if it’s equally impossible to ignore the fact that he is where he is, there must be something jiggy in the system somewhere, no? Pair that notion with the notion that (white) liberals are just naturally nefarious and you get a belief that somehow, in some way, renegade whites must be secretively transferring their white mojo to blacks so as to enable the blacks in question to rate Bronze Star medals, pass their Bar Exams, and get elected to the House of Representatives. (Etcetera.)
To what purpose? Why ask? The ways of wickedness are always murky…and if, in the meanwhile, some small portion of Rightie Cognitive Dissonance Rampant gets put to rest, I suppose that’s a limited blessing. (One can only hope.)
Yawn. So let me understand the theories here:
You’re all rich White people who spent all day commenting at Pandagon instead of working like I did but I’m a country club Republican. And a troll.
Half the Republican Party are actually racists who were purged from the Democratic party, and who keep voting for Byrd I assume. And putting Micheal Steele in Backface on liberal Blogs. And according to some e-mailing me racist comments while pretending to be liberals.
Michelle Malkin did something wrong several years after Asain prostitute jokes circulated about her so she in essence deserved to be called names.
Even though I and most Republicans I know support civil unions for gays and gay adoption rights, we’re all anti-gay because the Conservative (not Republican) position is to be against gay marriage. That explains Cliton signing the defense of marriage act.
For my gay friend above, describe one time I’ve made your life worse, so bad that you can barely tear yourself from you misery in the middle of the day to comment on a blog. Why, it’s like you’re living in the Warsaw ghetto.
Here’s your link to the Francis Holland affair http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/12/3/195440/248
And just to my above go back to my point, I’ve been at work where I don’t get to sit on my ass commenting on blogs all day, you guys are “poor working class folk” who have done just that. Hmmm.
Also, my point was about the innate bigotry of Whites pretending to be better than other Whites they’ve never met based on steriotypes they trade on the internet. In response there sure are a lot of talk about welfare, Trent lott and “jiggy” (why not join us in 2007 beckabot) but no self reflection about how y’all come off.
But I didn’t expect there to be, I just wanted to get a bunch of racist/crazy/hateful comments to cut and paste into my blog under a post called Pandagon “Calls Bi-racial Man Race Traitor!”
I always pull out the exclamtion point for especially “red meaty” headlines. I increases my ad clickthrough rate…
“I always pull out the exclamtion point for especially “red meaty” headlines. I increases my ad clickthrough rate…”
Boy, Rod is just a regular Drudge Jr. isn’t he. Hopefully the era of wingnut welfare will last long enough for you to get a slice…
“But I didn’t expect there to be, I just wanted to get a bunch of racist/crazy/hateful comments to cut and paste into my blog under a post called Pandagon “Calls Bi-racial Man Race Traitor!””
…because, as we all know, it would be physically impossible for a biracial man to be a “race traitor”.
Except for Clarence Thomas. And don’t forget J.C. Watts. And Michael Steele.
Or any of the many other Uncle Ruckus types out there…
MikeEss,
I almost went on this road myself as a bullied 7 year old before my elementary school teachers and older neighbors and friends provided critical support and encouragement to see that cherishing my familial heritage is not incompatible with being a good American.
It is one reason why my blood now boils when I see “whitewashed” Asian-Americans who are often from upper/upper-middle class homes who are not only ashamed of their familial heritage, but downright contemptuous of it by falling into a colonialist mentality trap where all things Asian are unquestioningly thought of as bad and all things Western (read White) are unquestionably good.
cpp,
I can vouch for this as I’ve encountered more than my fair share of “leftists” whose traits match your description above almost to a T. Only thing I would alter was that they were much better at concealing their racism than their classism or misanthropy.
To be fair, however, many of the ones I had the most issues with would probably be far more politically radical than the “leftist” you’re thinking of. Many of them were old school Marxists/Maoists from upper/upper-middle class backgrounds with an overly romantic view of Mao Zedong and his policies. They didn’t appreciate my challenging their romanticized view…notwithstanding the fact that my information came from first-hand accounts from relatives who lived under his rule…or that most Mainland Chinese scholars had conceded by then that he had erred in his policies.
There was also some incidents where students expressing any sort of theistic belief in introductions or in germane class discussions (i.e. Judaism’s role among Holocaust survivors, Zen Buddhism’s role in shaping medieval Japanese culture) were openly cruelly mocked as “unintelligent” and “uncritical thinkers”. That I’ll attribute to a mix of misanthropy and socio-economic snobbery….especially as the atheistic mockers all tended to be upper/upper-middle class White students with an air of superiority and class privilege. It is one thing to challenge ideas….it is another to be condescending and nasty about it.
So Black people who don’t agree with White people are “race traitors” huh? Nice. Are your friends still going to claim you, Mike, aren’t a racist.
How do you, some White guy, get to decide what makes a person a “race traitor?” Are you a “race traitor?” because your buddy Robert Byrd would say so. Funny, whether it’s aimed at Blacks or Whites it’s always White liberals calling people “race traitor”
Interesting.
But C’mon, you guys are really goign to pretend you’re less bigoted than Republicans after Mie Epps little tirade?
I’m just glad we have a Second Amendment so i can keep Mie from burnig a cross on my lawn.
I meant I and Mike aove obviously. My keyboards sticky with shock at the racism.
MikeEss and Exholt…
Why do progressives continually decry misanthropy? Quite frankly, I’m a misanthrope and I won’t apologize for it. The evidence that human beings are anything but basically good is everywhere, in plain sight.
“So Black people who don’t agree with White people are “race traitors” huh?”
Rob - Clarence Thomas, J.C. Watts, and Michael Steele no more represent all “Black people” than Jessie Jackson, Al Sharpton, and Cynthia McKinney. There is a great deal of political diversity among Black Americans.
Besides, it is generally believed that people like Clarence Thomas, J.C. Watts, and Michael Steele are far more in “agreement” with “White people” than most other prominent Black leaders/politicians/important figures. To Republicans (like YOUR friend Trent Lott - one good turn of the “byrd” deserves another) this is a good thing. To people like Aaron McGruder, who created the character of Uncle Ruckus, they represent traitors to Blacks and Black causes.
I can’t make that determination myself - as you point out I’m not qualified. But I did read a lot of the writings of the Late Great Steve Gilliard, who knew well the existence of the Uncle Ruckus “race traitors” who were actively undermining the Black Community. And since Steve was Black (god rest his soul), I guess he could no more be a traitor to his race than you can be, eh? So what he said must therefore be true…
(And don’t forget Pam Spaulding, who blogs here and at Pam’s House Blend. She’s Black too, so she can’t be impeached by your standard either…)
I just had to spend time with a bunch of hateful, racist, anti-gay, religious conservatives–you’re political bedfellows, Rob. I may be related to these asswipes by the mistake of birth, but you willingly choose to make alliances with them.
Tells me all I need to know about your character.
That and al that lies you started tossing out about liberals.
Worthless fuckwit.
And thanks for the oh so generous support of second-class, rather than third-class, citizenship for me. I wonder, has that support caused you to vote against republicans? Or is it just the “i think it’s a good idea” support which translates into zero action and pretty much means nothing. I’ve got an idea where I should put my money.
While my comment to Rob is in moderation…
“The evidence that human beings are anything but basically good is everywhere, in plain sight.”
You know, while I agree there are (some) very bad people who’ve done very bad things to many other people throughout history, my experience leads me to believe most people are not a problem at all.
Most of the time problems we have among ourselves trace to cultural conflicts and misunderstandings.
People like Hilter, Mao Zedung, Stalin, Tojo,
Cheney,etc., are the real problem. If they could be identified and kept from achieving power, the world would be a better, happier place…Agree with MikeEss. People are rarely the source of the problem. Ideologies are where people get tangled up in problems.
Here are some of the reasons I can deduce from observing progressive classmates and friends:
1. As MikeEss mentioned, not all human beings are irredeemably evil….most fall somewhere in between the absolutely good and absolutely evil spectrum.
2. Progressives tend to be those who believe that most human beings have hope to unlock their potential to better society and themselves.
3. Misanthropy is not only non-constructive in improving our own lot or that of the human species, but also has the great potential to be an undermining force against constructive improvement efforts to better humanity and ourselves. I’m betting that within the minds of Stalin, Hitler, Mussolini, Mao, Tojo, and both of the North Korean Kims, there is some misanthropy involved in their policies and actions.
I understand the arguments against misanthropy. However, Mike, I’d agree with Altemeyer that it’s not just the predators who are the problem, but their loyal sheeple as well. I personally don’t see misanthropy as being in inherent conflict with progressivism; in fact, I’d say that given the unfortunate tendency of humans to (a) prey on other humans or (b) suck up to the two-legged predators for protection, a state that imposes some rules of fair play is a necessity.
There are two things about the misanthropy decriers that rub me the wrong way. The first is the same thing that rubbed me the wrong way as a child when a self-righteous great-aunt lectured me about how I “should” love my brother (to whom, incidentally, I haven’t spoken in years). You can get people to play nice through social pressures and incentives, but you can’t make people like one another.
The second is the communitarian urge to make people socialize with one another, in the mistaken belief that it will make them get along better. It seems to me that most of the people who espouse this belief are extroverts. I happen to be extremely introverted, with probable (undiagnosed) ASD. I don’t like being around most people at all, and I even need “downtime” away from beloved friends and relatives. The sort of life that I perceive many social activists to lead would leave me anxious, exhausted, and, frankly, suicidal.
This may sound to some as though I’m parsing big social matters through a very idiosyncratic filter. But “the personal is political,” and I think it cuts both ways…I don’t trust people who want to direct my social life any more than I trust people who want to regulate my sex life. (Let me state that I’m not accusing anyone here of same, but I have seen that tendency all across the political spectrum.)
“I happen to be extremely introverted, with probable (undiagnosed) ASD. I don’t like being around most people at all, and I even need “downtime” away from beloved friends and relatives. The sort of life that I perceive many social activists to lead would leave me anxious, exhausted, and, frankly, suicidal.”
I can relate to that very well. One of the reasons I’ve made myself comment here and elsewhere since May ‘05 is an attempt to overcome my natural introversion. Forces me to express myself AND listen to what others say. (Even Rob taylor - but I don’t have to agree with what he says…)
Yes Rob if that is in the agreement one has with DailyKos about conduct, then DailyKos is in the wrong.
Yes asain prostitute jokes are wrong (and btw she has done many things wrong the most recent 2 months ago which she has not apologized for or even acknowledged what she did was wrong).
We could go tit for tat here Rob cause I’ve got a whole cannon full of Rush Limbaugh examples. You know the guy who said all drug abusers should go to jail, until he was found to be one.
Do you want to continue or do you want to do something more contructive than call me names or cast aspersions?
Yes Rob if that is in the agreement one has with DailyKos about conduct, then DailyKos is in the wrong.
Yes asain prostitute jokes are wrong (and btw she has done many things wrong the most recent 2 months ago which she has not apologized for or even acknowledged what she did was wrong).
We could go tit for tat here Rob cause I’ve got a whole cannon full of Rush Limbaugh examples. You know the guy who said all drug abusers should go to jail, until he was found to be one.
Do you want to continue or do you want to do something more contructive than call me names or cast aspersions?
Mike-
Your still making a assumption that Thomas et al are actively working aganst “Black interests” because a couple of Black people you know, who themselves parrot the anti-Black nonsense that being conservative is working against Black interests, say so on a blog.
I’d put forward that if you were so happy about Diverse opinions you’d respect Thomas and other Black conservatives (and maybe even Bi-racial Republicans) and be able to disagree with us without the racist name calling.
Look, if some Irish or polish or whatever said you were working against their interest even though you were Irish or polish or whatever, I wouldn’t go to my blog and call you a house mic. Steve Gillard’s criticism of other Blacks is a discussion other Blacks should have sans MikeEss and his “you’re a race traitor for not being on board with us” childishness.
Having found a couple Blacks who say the same thing as you doesn’t prove you aren’t a racist. Tom Metzger and Louis Farakhan were in synch on a lot of subjects…
Rob, I don’t know you from Adam. It matters to me not in the least if you wish to support a political party that since the 1950’s has done nothing but seek out the most bigoted people in American and provide them a warm home for their beliefs.
I’ll even fight tooth-and-nail for your right to do so, even if I think it’s self-defeating. In America, you have a right to believe anything you want, support any party you want, vote anyway you want - whether I or anyone else thinks you’re an idiot or not.
But I would hope you could admit, at least to yourself, even if you don’t wish to express it here, that I certainly didn’t invent the idea of Black Republicans (in recent times) being traitors to their race and their own interests. And Steve Gilliard didn’t invent it, Aaron McGruder didn’t invent it, nor any of the myriad of other Blacks who feel the same way.
It may make you feel better to call me a racist, but it won’t change the opinions of millions of Americans, Black and white, who fervently believe there are Blacks (often Republicans) who are working against the best interests of Black Americans…
I missed the most exciting things about Janet’s “letter”; the part where she’s forced to divorce her husband, get an abortion, and marry a lesbian–not necessarily in that order. I guess the Evil Left censored that part.
I live right next to Mass and have elected to do most of my business in Mass as the people there are easier to deal with, have more money to spend on my work, appreciate my craft and understand the value of investing in their property. I think also, overall they are far more welcoming to a woman in the trades.
Also, in my state of residence, a notable red state and home of a nationally recognized fishwrap of great stoopidness, the Republicans hold a most of the wealth and power and the distribution of that wealth is almost on all counts, nearly the worst in the country. The disparity between the rich and poor in this state is grotesque and the absolute control of a propagandizing media has only been recently loosened.
By immigrants mostly, ironically from the setting up of an asylum center to feed the now defunct mills new subjects to exploit and lie to.
The state has as little as 2% non-white population as well.
Well, well, looks like our little friend Rob
LucciTaylor has returned.You’re all rich White people who spent all day commenting at Pandagon instead of working like I did but I’m a country club Republican.
So…you’re saying that because some of us have spare time, we don’t work? I guess we should strive to be like you and work 170 hours a week.
Your still making a assumption that Thomas et al are actively working aganst “Black interests” because a couple of Black people you know, who themselves parrot the anti-Black nonsense that being conservative is working against Black interests, say so on a blog.
Hmmm…where the hell would we EVER get the idea that anecdotes were valid evidence?
*cough*
Since I “pass” I’ve been in the room when rich White liberals thought no Blacks were around.
But I didn’t expect there to be, I just wanted to get a bunch of racist/crazy/hateful comments to cut and paste into my blog under a post called Pandagon “Calls Bi-racial Man Race Traitor!”
By your logic, I could go to your blog, make the most vile comments I could think of, and attribute them to you? Cool.
Having found a couple Blacks who say the same thing as you doesn’t prove you aren’t a racist. Tom Metzger and Louis Farakhan were in synch on a lot of subjects…
Except that the wide majority of Blacks are Democrats. Imagine that.
For my gay friend above, describe one time I’ve made your life worse, so bad that you can barely tear yourself from you misery in the middle of the day to comment on a blog. Why, it’s like you’re living in the Warsaw ghetto.
It’s not just a matter of what you all have done to him, it’s a matter of what you all have done to other people, such as barring gays from visiting their partners in the hospitals or prohibiting them from being of next-of-kin status. Then again, what would you know about empathy and love?
Geeze Robert, why do you hate America so freaking much?
Oh, and if you disagree with me, you must be an anti-semite.
My guess is that the causal relationship here runs something like as follows: good geographic location –> wealth –> immigration and urbanization –> liberalism.
New York City isn’t rich and populous and Jackson Hole, WY small because NYC has benefitted from the beneficent liberal governance from New York State’s or New York City’s government while Jackson Hole has languished under local and state conservatism. The geography of rivers, natural harbors, etc means that New York City’s location is very good economically. This wealth leads to people concentrating in New York seeking employment and riches, leading to a highly urban environment.
I would guess that the area around NYC has been far more thickly populated than the area around Jackson Hole for at least three thousand years.
Urbanization and liberalism? Well, for one thing, cities tend to be more diverse and cosmopolitan, so forcing a narrow cultural (”moral”) code on the whole populace becomes unrealistic. For another thing, a city’s economy is simply too big to be dominated in a seignorial manner by a single individual or small club of elites. There are disparities between rich and poor in big cities too, obviously, and rich people are more influential politically and culturally, but the simple size of the economy means that it’s unlikely that all civic life will be dominated by four rich golfing buddies who share common sensibilities and views.
Didn’t see the Washington at the top. My mistake. In fact, the article didn’t come from either Times — it was from the Washington Post. The point still remains. While the paper may be different, the flaw in the methodology would exist no matter who the publisher is.
Rob taylor
November 26, 2007 at 3:08 am
I’m Bi-racial, male and Republican.
Do explain how one can be Republican without aiding white supremacists causes, at least indirectly.
bekabot
November 26, 2007 at 4:15 pm
a) Black people have a fantastically accurate understanding of political mechanics, and nobody can deny that . . .
“Even a dog knows the difference between being tripped over and being kicked.” Blacks have an edge when it comes to political realism because the political establishment really, truly is out to get them. This isn’t paranoia, or even a historical trend — it’s a fucking political strategy. Not a marginal strategy, not a fringe strategy, but a powerful method of getting elected even if your negatives would be otherwise overwhelming.
How many bullets need I fire at you before you realize I mean you ill?
There’s no counterbalance, either. Poor whites get abused in our system, true, but racism and fundie-pandering gives them the ego boost that takes the sting out of the more practical abuse. Sure, voting right-wing will destroy their children’s future, but at least they’re better than the niggers. It’s worked for over 200 years. Hell, it works so well that non-white immigrants are let into the Club of Whiteness the moment they, too, manifest contempt for non-melanin-challenged.
Not only do racists gain politically by being racist, they recruit.
So, yeah, political awareness amongst blacks requires a higher standard of realism than what’s found in the majority culture. The threat is larger.
How is a white person who honestly (or even dishonestly) believes black mental inferiority to reconcile that belief with the reality of black political achievement?
I LOVE white supremacy as a biological theory because of that little irony. See, the basic belief of white supremacy — unsaid, but it’s there — is that blacks really are more clever than whites. Otherwise, we wouldn’t need to keep them down. I mean, no one’s worried about people with Down’s Syndrome stealing our jobs and doing our women, right? People with the wrong number of chromosomes really do have mental deficiencies, so they aren’t a threat. White supremacy is the creeping, terrifying fear that those other guys do work harder and really do have bigger dicks.
I realize this is quite late, but I just came in to say that a very important element in the widespread hatred of Barry Bonds isn’t because he’s a wealthy black athlete, or even that he’s a steroid-abusing cheater. As others said way upthread, there are plenty of athletes (white and black, and latino… really probably nearly half the league if not more) who abuse steroids.
No, people hate Barry Bonds for two reasons:
1) He’s an asshole, as anyone who’s ever seen him give a press conference can attest.
2) He used his steroid-enhanced Frankenstein body to break the career home run record, perhaps the most sacred record in a game renowned for its fetishization of statistics and records. (Note that the previous record holder, Hank Aaron, was also a black man. Also note that four of the five all-time top home run hitters are black men, the lone whitey being Babe Ruth.)