In defense of the sanctimonious women's studies set || First feminist blog on the internet

The White Racist Meme

IMG_8866-780259

(x-posted at Social Science Lite)

It would be an understatement to argue that the mass media has taken on racial analysis with unprecedented zeal since the election of Barack Obama. Unfortunately, in attempts to present fair and balanced news coverage, cable news programs have typically included panels with representatives from both sides of the Left-Right ideological spectrum.

The problem with this method, of course, is that subsequent analyses usually follow the same tired pattern: “That was racist!” vs. “That is ridiculous! Race was not a factor!” At best, this produces unproductive exchanges. At worst, it woefully simplifies complex social process and interactions, institutionalizing diametrically opposed ideological camps instead of offering nuanced analysis.

Luckily, the Washington Post has Eugene Robinson, who wrote an important op-ed last Friday:

Of course it’s possible to reject Obama’s policies and philosophy without being racist. But there’s a particularly nasty edge to the most vitriolic attacks — a rejection not of Obama’s programs but of his legitimacy as president. This denial of legitimacy is more pernicious than the abuse heaped upon George W. Bush by his critics (including me), and I can’t find any explanation for it other than race.


I’m not talking about the majority of the citizens who went to town hall meetings to criticize Obama’s plans for health-care reform or the majority of the “tea bag” demonstrators who complain that Obama is ushering in an era of big government. Those are, of course, legitimate points of view. Protest is part of our system. It’s as American as apple pie.


I’m talking about the crazy “birthers.” I’m talking about the nitwits who arrive at protest rallies bearing racially offensive caricatures — Obama as a witch doctor, for example. I’m talking about the idiots who toss around words like “socialism” to make Obama seem alien and even dangerous — who deny the fact that he, too, is as American as apple pie.”

Not to be outdone, Frank Rich weighed in on Saturday:

But there is a national conversation we must have right now — the one about what, in addition to race, is driving this anger and what can be done about it. We are kidding ourselves if we think it’s only about bigotry, or health care, or even Obama. The growing minority that feels disenfranchised by Washington can’t be so easily ghettoized and dismissed.”

Robinson and Rich hit the nail on the head. To argue one way or another that current debates over healthcare or other social policies are solely “about race” is to miss the point entirely.

Race is omnipresent in this country. Racial distinctions inform policy debates, delineate opportunity, and structure social interactions. But that doesn’t mean that all white people, or all white protestors, are uniformly “racist.” Nor can the omnipresence of race sufficiently and adequately capture the nuance of white racial identity. For different people, different social processes precipitate racial prejudice. Some learn from their parents, while others learn from conflict in the workplace. Some develop prejudices from economic competition with minorities, while others experience blind ignorance as a result of extreme social isolation. Among the so-labeled “racists,” some hold disdain for “welfare queens,” while others fear random violence from young black men. Some are overwhelmingly concerned with illegal immigration and “protecting our borders,” while others can’t even stand the thought of sitting next to a minority. Some believe in the racial profiling of Middle Eastern folks at airports, while others blame blacks for their own disadvantage. Some engage in recreational racism, while others use disdain for social policies like affirmative action as proxies for bigotry. Some whites hold a combination of these prejudices, while others hold none. Sometimes these prejudices are grounded in real life experiences, but sometimes they aren’t. At the very least, white racial identity and prejudice is complicated and takes innumerable, varied forms.

To discuss and analyze race is not to revert to an either/or, racist/not racist false dichotomy. Race matters as an everyday reality of inequality, yes, but it’s not as simple as the White Racist Meme suggests. Race matters because it’s always mattered. But racism matters in increasingly complex ways.

The question is not if race matters. The question is how.


16 thoughts on The White Racist Meme

  1. I have to take issue with Robinson’s point regarding the criticism of Bush- I seem to remember a fair amount of it dealing with his legitimacy as president. There were many who alleged that he literally stole the 2000 election with the help of his brother in Florida and a mostly conservative Supreme Court. Further, I think the characterization of Bush as a clueless puppet controlled by the far right and Dick Cheney also spoke to his legitimacy as president.

  2. Rich: The growing minority that feels disenfranchised by Washington can’t be so easily ghettoized and dismissed.

    Balls. Did they feel “disenfranchised” when a white Republican was in office?

    To Melissa, above: I take your point, but I don’t recall the challenges to Bush’s “legitimacy” being anywhere near as vitriolic. Even though it had a sounder basis.

  3. Melissa,

    The criticism against Bush’ legitimacy as President had nothing to do with his nationality, his religious views, and the color of his skin – very personal issues that cut deeper than allegations of nepotism.

  4. I thought Rich had a point that much of this feeling is motivated by economic marginalization that people like Beck prey upon, turning their anger at immigrants, minorities, women, etc.

    And the view that Bush was not a legitimate president was derived from the fact that he had, literally, not gotten the most votes. It was a question of process. No one questioned whether Bush was actually an American. The questioning of Obama’s legitimacy has nothing to do with whether the process was fair and reasonable but about the idea that non-white people have to prove their American-ness. “I want my country back” is not a claim about policy differences but about a view that America is a white country.

  5. Bitter Scribe: Did they feel “disenfranchised” when a white Republican was in office?

    I personally know some that did, yes. One particular woman who comes to mind; she’s a former Marine who was against the war, and she supported Ron Paul in 2008. Her political rants always boil down to whether something is Constitutional. I have no reason to believe that she’s racist. She is a white mother of two biracial children. As a coworker, I spent a lot of time with her, and I never heard her say anything that could be considered even remotely racist, and as a mixed-race person myself, I’m sensitive to that. She despised Bush, but she does buy into some of the 9-12 arguments.

    I do think that there are a lot of protesters out there for whom it’s really not about race. I think they can rightly be called to task for not speaking out against other protesters’ racism, for being tolerant of racism. I also strongly disagree with my libertarian friend’s interpretation of the Constitution. But it would be wrong to dismiss her criticism as racist in origin. Wrong? Yes. Batshit? Often. But racist? No.

  6. Agree w/Ghigau in that many people did feel that way, and comprised a lot of the people who voted for Ron Paul here in the south.

    The old fashioned litmus test holds: Would they say this about a white man? Did they say “Go back to Panama!” to John McCain (who was, incidentally, born in Panama)? This is where I start from. It’s an old approach, but it works. (I argue with these people every single day; several would feel totally comfortable carrying that sign.) They have a hard time denying it and have to twist themselves into bizarre ideological contortions to justify what they say and do.

    The one good thing we can hold onto is that they won’t admit it. To be racist, at last, is shameful in America. In the south too.

  7. I hate to say this, but I’m not at all surprised. I’m noticing a similar dynamic with the vitriol against Barak Obama that I saw with Hillary Clinton during the election. In Clinton’s case, a lot of people who didn’t like her or agree with her used very genered insults, misogynist language, and sometimes downright violent imagery–insults and rhetoric that would never be used against a man. The same holds true for Barak Obama–a lot of the rhetoric in opposition to his policies is very racist, xenophobic, and violent–stuff that would never be thrown at a white man. There was a reverend in Colorado that said he thought Obama should be killed.

    This is ironic on several levels, considering the fact that anyone who dared questioned Gulf Wars I or II were quickly shushed by the GOP and Democratic hawks, who said we must support our President without question. None of this unquestioning support was in evidence from these same folks when Bill Clinton was in office, or now with Barak Obama.

  8. I was going to say something similar to what Sheelzebub said…the vaguely cloaked racism that drives much of the irrational hatred/rejection of Obama as a legitimate leader looks very much like the same vitriol that was aimed at Hilary Clinton because many people were really bothered by the idea of a powerful and intelligent woman in a place of leadership who did not play to feminine stereotypes. She and Obama share the same qualities of sharp, educated minds and firm positions on issues, and don’t play to stereotypes or defer to the old guard. There are a lot of people in this country who are not ready to accept an “inferior” person (i.e. not white and male) in a superior position.

  9. While not all Ron Paul supporters are racist, he does have the support of a lot of white supremacists and he has expressed some pretty racist thoughts: http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/01/10/paul.newsletters/index.html I live on the Mason/Dixon and Paul has a lot of supporters around here, many of whom are the “keep yer government hands off my Medicare!” sort who, when pushed, really don’t mind big government, they just don’t like it when the government supports the “wrong kind of people.”

    That said, of course not all anger at the government/Obama is racist, it’s a matter of how the issues are framed that betrays a racist core. And I am certain many people have legitimate complaints that are often lost because they can’t get beyond the black guy thing. And Kaija, you’re entirely correct that this would also be an issue with Hillary as President. Hell, I remember all the class-based jokes made at the expense of Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton, two men who personify our bootstraps ethic who were made fun of for being po’ boys.

  10. Part of this issues is that there’s a difference between thinking of racism as an individual characteristic that some people have a lot of and some people have a little bit of (which isn’t necessarily untrue, but it’s not the whole picture), and thinking of racism as a societal characteristic that we are steeped in, whether we realize it or not. Barack Obama is an American biracial black man and he is President of the United States — either one of those is a pretty laden social identity, and together they’re a powerhouse of controversy (not to mention a heaping spoonful of awesome). I do believe that some people some of the time are able to disagree with him (even vehemently) without reaching somehow for the racism their society has ingrained in them as a weapon, but that’s the whole point about socialization — if it’s in the very air you breathe, how are you going to stop yourself from inhaling? And then exhaling?

  11. The Nixon Southern Strategy plays a big part in the current tea bagger movement. The tea baggers are Christian fundamentalists, pro-gun, anti-gay and racist. These are the people the Republican Party panders to for votes. The GOP can not run on a corporatist domestic policy and neoconservative foreign policy. The GOP would cease to exist.

  12. The Nixon Southern Strategy plays a big part in the current tea bagger movement. The tea baggers are Christian fundamentalists, pro-gun, anti-gay and racist. These are the people the Republican Party panders to for votes. The GOP can not run on a corporatist domestic policy and neoconservative foreign policy. The GOP would cease to exist.
    OH! You’re my new favorite blogger fyi

  13. Part of this issues is that there’s a difference between thinking of racism as an individual characteristic that some people have a lot of and some people have a little bit of (which isn’t necessarily untrue, but it’s not the whole picture), and thinking of racism as a societal characteristic that we are steeped in, whether we realize it or not.

    Yep. And all this “post-racial” and “you’re the racist for pointing out racism” and “some of my best friends are black” and all the other happy horseshit grossly conflates these two meanings of “racism”. It is perfectly possible to have a deeply racist society in which not a single individual is consciously “prejudiced” or “racist”.

  14. “The criticism against Bush’ legitimacy as President had nothing to do with his nationality, his religious views, and the color of his skin – very personal issues that cut deeper than allegations of nepotism.”

    True, but one can’t say that 911denailism, the dems birtherism, has noting to do with antsemitism.

  15. Jeremy, I agree as to the unproductiveness of an either/or analysis.

    I am no Bush fan, didn’t vote for him either time, but there was a whole lot of animosity there as well. People held up signs advocating that he be killed, that he was a Nazi, there was a book about killing him as well as a movie, I recall.

    I think the litmus test Daisy suggested makes sense. Would someone react the same way if it were Pelosi or Reid in Obama’s position?

    Another factor is that there is a comfort level with divided government. With Clinton, there was a Republican congress. For people in one party, there’s a heightened concern where both the Exec Branch and the Legislative Branch are occupied by the other party — a sense of loss of control that’s more about partisanship and their own political beliefs. Surely, in this group there are some who are motivated by race where there is black president (and there would be liberals motivated by race, or gender, if there is ever a Repub black or female president). But one can’t make across-the-board determinations along these lines.

  16. Jeremy, I’m glad I’m your new favorite blogger. Want to come and blog at Pushing Rope when your Feministe stint is over. I pride myself on stealing bloggers from A list sites.

Comments are currently closed.