This Whole Racism Thing is So Complicated
Over at the National Review, Victor Davis Hanson engages in one of his favorite activities, pretending not to understand something that is actually very simple. He writes:
The only time I've ever heard people criticize the use of Obama's middle name is when, from the context, it was clear that it was being used in a derogatory manner. This isn't rocket science. It's pretty easy for anyone with a halfway functioning brain to tell, from tone and context, when something is meant to be derogatory and when it isn't. The former is going to generate criticism. The latter is not.
Is Hanson really too stupid to notice the difference? Of course not. This is all just an extension of the tired right wing pseudo-grievance that somehow there's a double standard when it comes to acceptable use of racially-loaded language (if they're using the n-word, why can't I????). The Victor Davis Hansons of the world seem to think that when it comes to racism, there should be simple and universal rules, i.e., don't say X, Y, Z.
But that's just stupid. Context, emphasis, and intent will always matter. Even perfectly harmless words like "black" or "yellow" can be used in a racist manner. We all know this. And in most cases we can all instantly recognize from the context and tone of a statement whether or not it was intended in a racially derogatory way.
But apparently this basic ability is not shared by Victor Davis Hanson and his cohorts. So here are some simple guidelines I've crafted just for them:
1) If you are mentioning President Obama's middle name in order play upon people's prejudices (i.e., by suggesting that he is somehow not American enough to be president or is some sort of secret Muslim terrorist sympathizer), you're probably going to get criticized.
2) If you are mentioning President Obama's middle name for any other reason, no one is going to care.
Got that? Or do I need to repeat them again more slowly?
President Obama reminded his European audience that just because he's not Bush, of non-traditional ancestry, and named "Barack Hussein Obama,” the war on terror won't just go away (you think?).First, I'm not sure what part of his arse Hanson pulled these rules out of, but I've heard plenty of Americans (including "liberal journalists") mention the President's middle name. I've mentioned it several times in posts here, and not in the context of complaining about people using it.
All of which brings up interesting rules of usage with the name "Hussein":
1) It is forbidden at home; any American who employs the tripartite presidential name does so only to fan religious, racial, or ethnic prejudice.
2) It is encouraged abroad both in Europe and the Middle East (cf. the al-Arabiya interview) both to establish our president's multicultural fides and sensitivity to Muslims, and to distance himself from our past illiberal foreign policy and attitudes.
3) Rule #2 only applies to the president himself. Even liberal journalists abroad are not allowed to say "Hussein" even in the most progressive of contexts.
The only time I've ever heard people criticize the use of Obama's middle name is when, from the context, it was clear that it was being used in a derogatory manner. This isn't rocket science. It's pretty easy for anyone with a halfway functioning brain to tell, from tone and context, when something is meant to be derogatory and when it isn't. The former is going to generate criticism. The latter is not.
Is Hanson really too stupid to notice the difference? Of course not. This is all just an extension of the tired right wing pseudo-grievance that somehow there's a double standard when it comes to acceptable use of racially-loaded language (if they're using the n-word, why can't I????). The Victor Davis Hansons of the world seem to think that when it comes to racism, there should be simple and universal rules, i.e., don't say X, Y, Z.
But that's just stupid. Context, emphasis, and intent will always matter. Even perfectly harmless words like "black" or "yellow" can be used in a racist manner. We all know this. And in most cases we can all instantly recognize from the context and tone of a statement whether or not it was intended in a racially derogatory way.
But apparently this basic ability is not shared by Victor Davis Hanson and his cohorts. So here are some simple guidelines I've crafted just for them:
1) If you are mentioning President Obama's middle name in order play upon people's prejudices (i.e., by suggesting that he is somehow not American enough to be president or is some sort of secret Muslim terrorist sympathizer), you're probably going to get criticized.
2) If you are mentioning President Obama's middle name for any other reason, no one is going to care.
Got that? Or do I need to repeat them again more slowly?
posted by A.L. at 2:27 PM
16 Comments:
While I agree that he's being intentionally obtuse, in a world where someone can be forced to resign when they use the word "niggardly" things might be more complicated than you let on. Especially since the use of the n-word is controversial even in the African American community.
I take offense to the way you asked if you needed to repeat them again more slowly.
It's as if you're comparing Republicans to slow people.
And that's just not fair to slow people.
You're right. The Sage of Fresno just wants to whine a little about how unfair it all is to the white man. It's a common theme amongst wing nuts.
You are correct, but it ought to be enough to reference the line in Wister's The Virginian - "smile when you call me that". Context matters even when you call someone a SOB.
His obtuseness is especially irritating since intent is a common standard in criminal law. It's the difference between murder, manslaughter, and justifiable homicide. It's the difference between association and criminal conspiracy.
I liked your comment so much I sent it to Hanson. Will he mend his ways? I won't hold my breath as I wait.
So Hussein is racist ?
Hmmm
A bit of a stretch there, old buddy.
"It's pretty easy for anyone with a halfway functioning brain to tell, from tone and context, when something is meant to be derogatory and when it isn't."
Would your brain be the benchmark?
You have half a point, but some numbers would make it more believable.
In defense of Hanson (who is honest most of the time), I would suspect (without numbers to cite!) any conservative, or for that matter, any opponent of Obama's would be at risk of being called racist for using Hussein. So have Obama and liberals decided it's off limits to opponents, and when the "tone" is right? What a convenient little act of speech suppression.
Maybe you should explain this to professor Hanson in Latin. You all DO realize that his professional expertise is in ancient history, particularly with the Greek historians like Thucydides and Herodotus.
Maybe conservatives can give us the 'reason' why they did not use Ronald Reagan's middle name. Or why the only reason of using H.W. and W. to distinguish George Bush (father) and George Bush (son)but without actually spelling out their names. The same goes for Richard Nixon.
For some reason they seem to insist on using Obama's middle name, for the sole reason it's a muslim sounding name. Other than that, they can claim whatever they want. They're only fooling themselves.
It is not racist as in black/white... it's racism as in christian/muslim.
Just another case of a right winger being stupid on purpose.
It's very simple:
It was a scare tactic that didn't work.
Like 'socialism!' and 'nationalizing" the banks.
They felt these words were powerful weapons. We wouldn't elect a black man named Hussein president,would we?
The answer to that was 'Rather than a Republican--you betcha!"
It's not that the word wasn't powerful--it's that they didn't--and don't realize how deep their disgrace is.
And when they scream that Obama's plan is socialism and the banks are being nationalized--they don't realize little power scary words have in the middle of an actual crisis.
It's not hypocrisy, Victor--it's mockery.
"When you call me that... smile"
- The Virginian
In fairness, Democrats often said the full names of George Herbert Walker Bush and J. Danforth Quayle with a sneer to reinforce the notion that these were men of privilege, out of touch with ordinary Americans who had more mundane middle names. This is a game many a school yard bully has played.
I suppose emphasizing Hussein is a bit different because it touches on prejudices against Muslims rather than prejudices against effete rich people.
In my opinion, as a big Obama supporter, now that the guy is president, I say call him Hussein all you want. It's his name. Everyone knows it. 66% of the country clearly has no problem at all with it, and the more the name is used the more it loses any sort of latent "otherness". I say bring 'em on.
"In fairness, Democrats often said the full names of George Herbert Walker Bush and J. Danforth Quayle with a sneer to reinforce the notion that these were men of privilege, out of touch with ordinary Americans who had more mundane middle names."
It's one thing to call a spade a spade. Its another to call someone a secret muslim, or whatever the right is calling him now.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home