Race: To the Bottom
Obama’s widely reported and admired speech on race and religion has drawn not only praise. The worms are showing on the woodwork. Glenn Greenwald reports, citing “Instapunck,” a much linked to blog on the farrrrrrrr right.
On the other hand, I am sick to death of black people as a group. The truth. That is part of the conversation Obama is asking for, isn’t it?
Greenwald goes on:
This is just a slightly more explicit version of what one hears on so much right-wing talk radio, beginning with conservative hero Rush Limbaugh. Why is there so much hatred and extremism in black churches? Let’s talk more and more about all the racism and radicalism among isolated black people and ignore the endless bile that has long spewed forth from the far more powerful appendages of the right-wing noise-machine, exemplified by Instapunk’s Easter meditation on race.
While the dominant political faction in the United States built itself and continues to feed and nourish itself with this sort of endless exploitation of racial resentments and grievances — and while it openly embraces far more powerful religious fanatics who espouse ideas at least as radical and repugnant as anything Jeremiah Wright has ever said — let’s spend the next eight months talking about the controversial comments of a single, comparatively powerless black preacher and have our presidential election decided by that.
And asks:
What explains the media’s Obama/Wright fixation while virtually ignoring McCain’s embrace of people like Rod Parsley and John Hagee is the assumption that the controversial behavior of any one black person is easily attributed to black people generally, while white political leaders aren’t held accountable for the views of others solely by virtue of shared race.
Dave Niewert at Orcinus links to Greenwald and adds his own views, coming from decades of reporting on the racialist right.
I’ve been calling this “the new racism”, which really is just a slightly modified version of the truly vicious belief system that has been lying, like a cancer waiting to metastasize, from the body of movement conservatism for the many years since it was forced into semi-dormancy some 40 years ago. With folks like Rush Limbaugh leading the way, I describe it thus:
[It is] a trend in right-wing comentary, staking out positions that, if not overtly racist, at least seek to resurrect some of the hoary mythology of the era of white supremacy. As with most of right-wing race rhetoric of the past twenty years, it’s all done with a certain level of plausible deniability, couched in “jokes” or abstrations that let the speakers feign indignation when the racism is pointed out; the current trend is only slightly more overt in its racism, but the underlying sentiments aren’t hard to read.
It’s a step beyond wink-and-nudge racism — or, perhaps, more like that point in the winking and nudging when the winker begins nudging harder and harder.
Of course, it’s not just Limbaugh, but rather something systemic within the body of conservatism generally:
[E]merging from behind a mask of genteel conservatism, it openly calls for a revival of ole-time white supremacism, having found that the “liberal social experiment” with racial equality has failed. Already, we’ve seen Patrick Buchanan drop all pretense and adopt a position that shifts from simple white nationalism to outright supremacism. Michael Savage airs denunciations of the Civil Rights movement. TV talkers like Glenn Beck pretend that blind bigotry toward Muslims is a “normal” perspective.
1 Comment »
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Leave a comment
Comment Guidlines: This space is for commenting on the post above, the ideas, the context,the author. Your ideas, strong but civil, are appreciated. Long cuts and pastes from elsewhere are not. This is NOT the place to create your own private BLOG. Links to other articles are fine, if appropriate. Line and paragraph breaks are automatic; e-mail address are never displayed.
HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>



March 23rd, 2008 @ 7:45 pm
Corporate monopoly media installs these racial bigots to command their airwaves for a reason. The relevant question is why? Context is everything. It can’t be as simple as attempts to build market share, though this is a factor. There’s bigger fish to fry. I invite others to contribute their thoughts on this subject, so that we can go deeper into this subject together. While doing so, ask why the Democrats, especially the DLC, abandoned any attempt to restore the “fair comment” rule which Ronald Reagan got rid of. And ask why Clinton, and the DLC gave away the last restraints on corporate media monopoly consolidation back in 1996. Its not just about media and lobbyists dollars to candidates, though this too is a factor. I think the burning question should be about the value of “propaganda media”, for whom, and for what purpose, and to follow the money, the really big money, into the pockets of national corporate, media, political, and military leaders who are driving our domestic and foreign policy agendas. Then the question will pertain to how the grassroots can transform and convert these sick tendencies, and move toward policies of domestic and global human rights, fairness, and opportunity for all. Is “unarmed truth” enough?