EatTheRich
President
Many whites voted for Barack Obama because he did not look like George W. Bush and the other politicians in Washington who'd screwed things up so badly. Many did it in the belief that voting for him would allow the United States to transcend racism. Many, who (although they might never have admitted it to themselves) didn't like Black people very much, voted for him precisely because of the things that made him different from their Black stereotype (a sentiment reflected in Biden's "articulate Black" statement). Many believed, and were eager to believe, that voting for Obama was proof that they were not racist, and therefore excused them from any responsibility to examine how they continue to benefit from the U.S.'s racist power structure.
Obama was also an attractive candidate (literally, in the sense that he is young, handsome, and witty; and politically, in the sense that he was arguably the most progressive Democratic candidate since Dukakis.) Thus it was that Obama did better than John Kerry among all groups of white voters, except white voters in the South. Obama also did better than Kerry throughout the South, except in areas with low percentages of Black voters; in those areas he did much worse. Perhaps Obama insulted rural whites with his stereotype of bitter people clinging to guns and religion. Or perhaps large numbers of people voted against him because of his race. Anyway, since that time, suspicion of the taint of racism has clouded all opposition to Obama and his agenda--something Obama supporters have used to silence their opponents. Recently (and I use him as an example because he's in the news, although white liberals are the more common culprits), for example, Julian Bond flatly accused the Tea Party of being racist.
Meanwhile, it is not a secret that Barack Obama benefitted from the almost unanimous support of Black voters, a group that was crucial to his 2 elections as president. To a large extent this reflected middle class Blacks' decades-long solid support for the Democratic Party, a party that has simply reflected their interests much better than the Republicans have done. Partly (especially in 2008) it represented the illusion that Obama's being in power in itself represents a significant blow at institutional racism--the illusion, as Kwame Ture (Stokely Carmichael) put it, that Black visibility equals Black power. Partly it expressed a wish-fulfillment fantasy identification with Obama's retelling of the politician's hoary son-of-an-immigrant, log-cabin-and-hard-cider story. Partly, perhaps, it also represents a repugnant, thuggish means of compelling unanimity--the theme which immediately follows from the idea that white opponents of Obama are racist, namely, that Black opponents of Obama are traitors to their race.
Whether directed at whites or Blacks, the appeal to racism has been used to silence conservatives with legitimate concerns about taxes, regulation, and government intrusion. This is what is meant by playing the race card. At the same time, Obama's election was met by a frank outpouring of racism. For example, a federal judge made a joke implying that Obama's mother had sex with dogs, and comparing interracial sex to sex with dogs. So the nation became polarized, with liberals seeing racism in every manifestation of opposition to Obama, and conservatives seeing a liberal president blunting legitimate criticism with spurious accusations of racism.
I am a white leftist. I did not vote for Obama because I do not like his politics, but I like those of his Republican opponents even less. Here's my perspective, looking at it from outside the 2-party system: first, liberals are abusing accusations of racism. Bond's recent comments are an example. However, racism does not just mean the open expression of virulent racial opinions--although these are common among conservatives. Racism can also be advocating policies that are objectively harmful to Blacks and other members of oppressed races--this is common among conservatives, as well; however, they may honorably be pursuing these policies in the conviction, wrong though the conviction might be, that the policies are not racist (because they are mistaken about the effects of the policies).
But racism can also be inferred as the most likely explanation when conservatives evince a pattern of disregard of reality so reckless, so unrestrained by the standard bourgeois conventions for political exaggeration, so paranoid schizophrenic, in their opposition to Obama as to recall Captain Ahab's obsession with the white whale. Some examples:
The millions of Republicans who tell pollsters that the Benghazi scandal is worse than Iran-Contra. Not only is it nothing like Iran-Contra in its scope, it is not even a scandal.
The idea that Obama's push for a return to taxes lower than the taxes we had under George H.W. Bush, and his pleas with Congress to fund embassy security and forest firefighters, are equivalent to a request for unlimited power and an all-encompassing government.
The idea that a health care plan largely modeled on Mitt Romney's is a form of radical socialism.
The idea that Obama, the NAACP, the Communist Party, the Weathermen, and the Black Panthers all march in lock step to silence Obama's opponents.
The idea that Obama must denounce everyone he's ever had the slightest contact with, if that person happens to say something controversial.
The idea that gun control proposals supported by the NRA in the 1990s are proposals for immediate disarmament of all whites.
The idea that a press that does not report everything with a ridiculously anti-Obama slant is equivalent to a state-controlled media.
Congressional Republicans' 4 years of opposition to everything Obama has tried to accomplish, including routine procedural votes and uncontroversial ceremonial duties like telling kids to stay in school--even when he is proposing what they'd proposed a few months earlier (as in the repeated debt limit negotiations), even when he is proposing a plan explicitly modeled on the Romney plan, even when credit rating agencies tell them their political gamesmanship is putting the country's credit rating at risk.
Repeatedly making demonstrably false claims about not just the economy in general, but specific, measurable parts of the economy, such as inflation, the stock market, the real estate market, commodities prices, jobs, wages, poverty, welfare, etc.
Promoting the idea that millions of Americans are leeches and that, as Rick Santorum put it, our taxes shouldn't go to "bla people."
The tolerance within the Republican Party for people who make explicitly racist comments and who think it's reasonable for members of Congress and presidential candidates spending months digging into a phony, manufactured, laughable-on-its-face conspiracy theory about the president's being born in a foreign country.
The exaggeration of the real threat Obama poses to constitutional government, and the transparent pretense that it is fundamentally different from the threat posed by Bush or Clinton.
The apparent agreement that Obama's administration (or "regime")--to all appearances the cleanest since at least the days of Eisenhower--is a cesspool of corruption.
The lack of decorum shown to Obama, e.g., in the Speaker's refusal to return his calls.
Overall, the credence and respect given to the bizarre "theory" that Obama's run of the mill, establishment politics represent a leap into the political style of Hitler, Stalin, and Mao (all taken clearly as content-free examples of great evil and not compared on the basis of actual political positions or accomplishments); and the willingness to defend this "theory" by pointing to the number of people Obama has killed, or plans to kill, in his death camps.
To some extent, these things represent growing polarization in the face of a crisis of capitalism that neither party can fix but that brings to the fore their strong disagreements. To some extent, they represent the delusional thinking that is inherent in conservatism. In fact, we saw some similar episodes of divorce from reality under Clinton and Bush. But the virulence with which Obama is denounced, and the huge increase in its prevalence compared to Clinton or Bush--compared with the minimal difference in policy between Obama and either of his predecessors--creates a presumption that Obama is disliked for some unarticulated reason, and opposition to his policy comes second. And what is that reason, if not race?
Obama was also an attractive candidate (literally, in the sense that he is young, handsome, and witty; and politically, in the sense that he was arguably the most progressive Democratic candidate since Dukakis.) Thus it was that Obama did better than John Kerry among all groups of white voters, except white voters in the South. Obama also did better than Kerry throughout the South, except in areas with low percentages of Black voters; in those areas he did much worse. Perhaps Obama insulted rural whites with his stereotype of bitter people clinging to guns and religion. Or perhaps large numbers of people voted against him because of his race. Anyway, since that time, suspicion of the taint of racism has clouded all opposition to Obama and his agenda--something Obama supporters have used to silence their opponents. Recently (and I use him as an example because he's in the news, although white liberals are the more common culprits), for example, Julian Bond flatly accused the Tea Party of being racist.
Meanwhile, it is not a secret that Barack Obama benefitted from the almost unanimous support of Black voters, a group that was crucial to his 2 elections as president. To a large extent this reflected middle class Blacks' decades-long solid support for the Democratic Party, a party that has simply reflected their interests much better than the Republicans have done. Partly (especially in 2008) it represented the illusion that Obama's being in power in itself represents a significant blow at institutional racism--the illusion, as Kwame Ture (Stokely Carmichael) put it, that Black visibility equals Black power. Partly it expressed a wish-fulfillment fantasy identification with Obama's retelling of the politician's hoary son-of-an-immigrant, log-cabin-and-hard-cider story. Partly, perhaps, it also represents a repugnant, thuggish means of compelling unanimity--the theme which immediately follows from the idea that white opponents of Obama are racist, namely, that Black opponents of Obama are traitors to their race.
Whether directed at whites or Blacks, the appeal to racism has been used to silence conservatives with legitimate concerns about taxes, regulation, and government intrusion. This is what is meant by playing the race card. At the same time, Obama's election was met by a frank outpouring of racism. For example, a federal judge made a joke implying that Obama's mother had sex with dogs, and comparing interracial sex to sex with dogs. So the nation became polarized, with liberals seeing racism in every manifestation of opposition to Obama, and conservatives seeing a liberal president blunting legitimate criticism with spurious accusations of racism.
I am a white leftist. I did not vote for Obama because I do not like his politics, but I like those of his Republican opponents even less. Here's my perspective, looking at it from outside the 2-party system: first, liberals are abusing accusations of racism. Bond's recent comments are an example. However, racism does not just mean the open expression of virulent racial opinions--although these are common among conservatives. Racism can also be advocating policies that are objectively harmful to Blacks and other members of oppressed races--this is common among conservatives, as well; however, they may honorably be pursuing these policies in the conviction, wrong though the conviction might be, that the policies are not racist (because they are mistaken about the effects of the policies).
But racism can also be inferred as the most likely explanation when conservatives evince a pattern of disregard of reality so reckless, so unrestrained by the standard bourgeois conventions for political exaggeration, so paranoid schizophrenic, in their opposition to Obama as to recall Captain Ahab's obsession with the white whale. Some examples:
The millions of Republicans who tell pollsters that the Benghazi scandal is worse than Iran-Contra. Not only is it nothing like Iran-Contra in its scope, it is not even a scandal.
The idea that Obama's push for a return to taxes lower than the taxes we had under George H.W. Bush, and his pleas with Congress to fund embassy security and forest firefighters, are equivalent to a request for unlimited power and an all-encompassing government.
The idea that a health care plan largely modeled on Mitt Romney's is a form of radical socialism.
The idea that Obama, the NAACP, the Communist Party, the Weathermen, and the Black Panthers all march in lock step to silence Obama's opponents.
The idea that Obama must denounce everyone he's ever had the slightest contact with, if that person happens to say something controversial.
The idea that gun control proposals supported by the NRA in the 1990s are proposals for immediate disarmament of all whites.
The idea that a press that does not report everything with a ridiculously anti-Obama slant is equivalent to a state-controlled media.
Congressional Republicans' 4 years of opposition to everything Obama has tried to accomplish, including routine procedural votes and uncontroversial ceremonial duties like telling kids to stay in school--even when he is proposing what they'd proposed a few months earlier (as in the repeated debt limit negotiations), even when he is proposing a plan explicitly modeled on the Romney plan, even when credit rating agencies tell them their political gamesmanship is putting the country's credit rating at risk.
Repeatedly making demonstrably false claims about not just the economy in general, but specific, measurable parts of the economy, such as inflation, the stock market, the real estate market, commodities prices, jobs, wages, poverty, welfare, etc.
Promoting the idea that millions of Americans are leeches and that, as Rick Santorum put it, our taxes shouldn't go to "bla people."
The tolerance within the Republican Party for people who make explicitly racist comments and who think it's reasonable for members of Congress and presidential candidates spending months digging into a phony, manufactured, laughable-on-its-face conspiracy theory about the president's being born in a foreign country.
The exaggeration of the real threat Obama poses to constitutional government, and the transparent pretense that it is fundamentally different from the threat posed by Bush or Clinton.
The apparent agreement that Obama's administration (or "regime")--to all appearances the cleanest since at least the days of Eisenhower--is a cesspool of corruption.
The lack of decorum shown to Obama, e.g., in the Speaker's refusal to return his calls.
Overall, the credence and respect given to the bizarre "theory" that Obama's run of the mill, establishment politics represent a leap into the political style of Hitler, Stalin, and Mao (all taken clearly as content-free examples of great evil and not compared on the basis of actual political positions or accomplishments); and the willingness to defend this "theory" by pointing to the number of people Obama has killed, or plans to kill, in his death camps.
To some extent, these things represent growing polarization in the face of a crisis of capitalism that neither party can fix but that brings to the fore their strong disagreements. To some extent, they represent the delusional thinking that is inherent in conservatism. In fact, we saw some similar episodes of divorce from reality under Clinton and Bush. But the virulence with which Obama is denounced, and the huge increase in its prevalence compared to Clinton or Bush--compared with the minimal difference in policy between Obama and either of his predecessors--creates a presumption that Obama is disliked for some unarticulated reason, and opposition to his policy comes second. And what is that reason, if not race?
