This was inspired by several NYT articles asking whether the Obama candidacy spells the end of the civil rights struggle...sounds like wishful thinking by The Man.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Followers
Blog Archive
-
▼
2008
(310)
-
▼
August
(22)
- Cartoon for September 1This was inspired by severa...
- Cartoon for August 30Pakistan impeached their dict...
- Barack's Big NightObama's acceptance speech, like ...
- Cartoon for August 28I know this is kind of stupid...
- THIS WEEK'S SYNDICATED COLUMN: THE MUDDLE IS THE M...
- Cartoon for August 25It took me a while to get aro...
- Early WarningStay tuned...I'm rolling out my first...
- Biden? ZzzzzzzzzThis isn't as bad as 2000, when so...
- Cartoon for August 23John McCain's inability to re...
- Cartoon for August 21Barack Obama's text message a...
- THIS WEEK'S SYNDICATED COLUMN: 13 DAYS IN AUGUSTTh...
- Cartoon for August 18A sex scandal claims John Edw...
- Cartoon for August 16The individual quest for shor...
- Cartoon for August 14In an information economy whe...
- THIS WEEK'S SYNDICATED COLUMN: HOPE FOR AUDACITYWh...
- Cartoon for August 11The commander of Guantánamo a...
- Cartoon for August 9I never understood why newspap...
- Ted Rall Cover Story on AfghanistanFor seven years...
- Cartoon for August 7Just when you think Obama was ...
- THIS WEEK'S SYNDICATED COLUMN: IT'S THE TORTURE, S...
- Cartoon for August 4Nations could burn. But we sti...
- Cartoon for August 2McCain needs someone to his le...
-
▼
August
(22)
Fat white guy? What about Taft?
ReplyDeleteMy favorite type of cartoon is the kind where a lamo surface issue is devoured by a real issue.
ReplyDeleteGreat clip, I was thinking the same thing when I saw those articles. It's a fairly racist notion that this will somehow sweep the slate clean, because it treats an entire group based on spokespeople for the group. So from Jesse Jackson to Barack Obama.
ReplyDeleteTwo observations; Barack is only partially black, so his election only wipes clean the Dredd Scott issue. Second, in classic fashion, where are the native Americans? They've been forgotten again.
Genocide is an ugly business, it depends on even the best of the population disenfranchising the victims.
The civil rights movement will never be over. It's a profit center for race hustlers targeting guilt-ridden white liberals.
ReplyDeleteAs long as groups of people are different, there will be different outcomes between them.
ReplyDeleteAs long as there are different outcomes, there will be envy. Along with envy comes demands for preferential treatment, double-standards, set-asides, quotas, guilt for the "white oppressor", etc.
Obviously the "civil rights" redistribution program isn't going to end. Obviously, white people are going to have to pay for black people's shortcomings until the empire collapses.
Ted-
ReplyDeleteI am very impressed that you continually allow Edward to post his moronic drivel here! Seriously!
You certainly put your money where your mouth is in terms of censorship, but perhaps you should consider QUALITY of comments too, not just outrageousness- i.e. just because some uber-right wing retard wants to spew venom here, it doesn't mean (by default) that his comments are worth publishing
And if you can't make it, it's your own fault. Look at Obama and Michael Jordan. You can do anything in life if you work hard enough.
ReplyDeleteEdward, you are a hard person to like. Are you serious? Do you genuinely believe that no serious civil rights issues persist? For instance, the way that our broken funding model for public schools has made African American schools (and poor white schools) ridiculously bad? It's not a black/white thing as much as a rich/poor thing, but it's a serious problem. Or that 1 in 9 African American men are IN JAIL right now? It's so statistically aberrant that you have to either say they are different or that social factors are making them more likely to be incarcerated. That's just the opener.
ReplyDeleteI think the fat white guy angle has been covered a few times over.
ReplyDeleteObama is Half Kenyan.
ReplyDeleteI think that in this country, the term "black" refers to decedents of people forced into American slavery.
Calling Obama black (even half black) insults Kenyans and American blacks by lumping them together because of their skin color.
Angelo: Excellent point on him being half Kenyan.
ReplyDeleteEdward: you're such a moron that I'm not going to dignify your pathetic race-baiting comment.
Anon 3:55 PM: "As long as groups of people are different, there will be different outcomes between them."
The key is to define "different" in this context, and examine what differences matter socio-economically and what differences don't. Country of origin? Hair color? Eye color? Facial bone structure? What is it about the physical characteristics of darker skin color that matter when other physical characteristics don't, to the point that you refer to a segment of the population as "different" from the rest, and attribute their social status in the country to that "difference"?
This is the difference between racism and bigotry. America is a racialized society, which means if you grew up here (Jesse Jackson has made this point very eloquently in the past), you can't help being scarred racially. It's THAT ingrained in American discourse.
Choosing to embrace those artificial claims of people, and then act on the assumptions that spew hence, is being a bigot.
Incitatus, are you reading this? Look at Edward's and Anon 3:55's comments and tell me honestly if you think my characterization of bigots in America is THAT far off?
I am very impressed that you continually allow Edward to post his moronic drivel here! Seriously!
ReplyDeleteOne of the things I like most about you Marxists is you no longer give the false impression of being tolerant and open-minded to others with opinions different from you.
I'll leave you all to your bitterness and hatred of others not like you. Try to enjoy your lives!
This is a good idea. I look forward to one day seeing homelessness solved by the major-party nomination of our first homeless presidential candidate.
ReplyDeleteEdward,
ReplyDeleteMay I introduce you to the kettle. You are a half-wit, but I think it may be intentional.
Kurt
Oh hold up, here, at my last Marxist-Leninist blog commenter orderer meeting we were ordered to continue to pretend we were tolerant and stuff.
ReplyDeleteOnly after Comrade Obama dissolves Congress can we start putting those who express independent, patriotic opinions in gulags and parcel out their women.
Edward is totally jumping the gun!
Aggie,
ReplyDeleteI am curious (genuinely, I don't mean to pick up a fight) as to how a naive opinion or an inaccurate comment can be construed as fairly racist? Methinks this term is abused for political reasons, but this does not justify it.
Angelo has a fair point: Obama's ancestors were never chattel, at least not in the US. What makes him so qualified to represent people whose ancestors suffered enslavement, prejudice and repression?
Lastly SDS is dead on the money: one in nine male blacks in the US are touring the prison system, most for non-violent offenses, i.e., crimes with no victims. This is due to the heinous and dysfunctional war on drugs, but the Left, or rather the Democratic party, is not willing to touch that bugaboo with a ten-feet yardstick.
Quoth Aggie Dude:
ReplyDeleteIncitatus, are you reading this? Look at Edward's and Anon 3:55's comments and tell me honestly if you think my characterization of bigots in America is THAT far off?
Yeah, Dude, I think Edward's comments were unkind and don't do justice to people that gave up their lives for a noble cause. That said, I don't really think that Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton are of the same breed as Martin Luther King Jr, Medgar Evers or Andrew Goodman. And I don't think the fight for civil rights has to be intertwined with socialism. It's a fundamentally liberal (in the Classical sense) cause and it's basic human decency.
I have to observe too, apropos your comment:
"America is a racialized society, which means if you grew up here (Jesse Jackson has made this point very eloquently in the past), you can't help being scarred racially. It's THAT ingrained in American discourse."
The US is far from being the only, or even the most, racialized society in existence. Take a trip to India, and talk to earnest folks there. Go to Japan, which an Australian acquaintance described as the most racist society he knew (this was a well-travelled guy, and he elaborated on the scale by which the Japanese see themselves and the rest of us Earthlings). And look to Africa, where the horrible events in Rwanda and the less severe, but equally appaling incidents in South Africa remind us that bigotry is spread even across the globe.
You don't need to venture that far, though. If you look down South, you'll find lots of countries where many races (and every mixture thereof) coexist in a seemingly graceful manner, but where, in spite of the replacement of a colour line for a colour continuum, the racial divide is even steeper than in the US. Try this experiment on: walk into a fancy restaurant in Venezuela, Brazil or Peru.
Look at the people being served.
Look at the people doing the serving.
Look at the people working in a nice office.
Look at the people doing menial jobs.
You might conclude that the US still has a long ways to go in terms of race relations, but it sure is lightyears ahead of its Southern neighbours. Notice also that the racial thinking is as ingrained, if not more so than in the USA. There is no discourse, though: there's no need to spell out what "everybody knows".
Incitatus,
ReplyDeleteNot a problem. I'm trying (albeit may not be doing a good job) to distinguish between racism and bigotry. I agree wholeheartedly that 'racist' is a charge that is grossly misused and therefore overused, and it's because of that, that I try to explain the distinction.
Racism is a socialized process by which one is systematically conditioned to recognize a phenotyical characteristic about others that is deemed important (in the sense of conveyed meanings, generally negative). Using this definition, even African Americans have been demonstrated to favor Caucasians as more trust worthy and preferable. This has been demonstrated in numerous studies one can search for.
Bigotry, on the other hand, is acting on those preconceived notions negatively toward anyone of that group, and doing so deliberately.
We all react in some ways (some not noticeable) toward groups, often subconsciously. This makes us racist but not bigots. It's easy to modify bigoted behavior, it's probably impossible to decondition racialized attitudes.
That's the difference, I didn't take it out of a textbook (Edward!!) so it might not be that good. I think the words are sorely misused and on that you and I agree.
incitatus said
ReplyDelete"The US is far from being the only, or even the most, racialized society in existence."
I think it is funny when people compare the US to third world countries. It is a tacit admission that we suck ass, and we know it.
Now, with Japan, I think you are onto something. If Japan is having trouble passing civil rights legislation, doesn't that just meant that there are conservatives blocking it. You are saying that these countries suffer from lack of progressiveness.
I think it is much more useful to look at countries that have a higher standard of living than the US, and simply copy them.
Angelo,
ReplyDeleteWow, great point dude. The problem is that most countries are pluralist, in that there are a lot of interests at work. It's not that "Americans" are 'more racist,' it's that conservatives are better positioned politically to block progressiveness.
By the same token, the reason we don't have universal healthcare isn't because it's 'socialist' and that's bad. All those countries that do have universal healthcare systems have conservatives that fight against it saying the same things.
It's about political process and political environment. The American public won't call conservatives out for their silliness and laugh at them.
Sarah Palin as VP? That is LAUGHABLE.
Maybe one could say the same for Obama or McCain or Biden, but it's not AS laughable.
Let's just put soccer moms in charge of everything.
"All those countries that do have universal healthcare systems have conservatives that fight against it saying the same things."
ReplyDeletethanks ag.
Sadly, to the extent that conservatism is anti-progress, we can probably also say the constitution must me a conservative document since it is all about preventing meaningful national legislation from happening.
Angelo,
ReplyDeleteDoes Japan have a lower standard of living than the US?
Do you think there are no so-called conservatives in, say, Germany? Or do you think the political discourse in there is entirely monopolized by so-called progressives?
Sadly, to the extent that conservatism is anti-progress, we can probably also say the constitution must me a conservative document since it is all about preventing meaningful national legislation from happening.
ReplyDeleteYes, the constitution is a conservative document. It was written at a time when most governments were monarchist and also a time when a substantial portion of the American population was fairly self sufficient.
It made sense at the time. The problem was that we refused to change it much with changing times. France has had 5 constitutions, which allows them to adapt in ways Americans have trouble with.
Incitatus: You've commented both that other countries are racialized, and that other countries have conservatives.
I agree to both points, but evaluating the racialization and the conservative political machine in the United States does not discount this in any way. I think what Angelo and I are trying to say is that it appears there is more pluralism in a parliamentary system. The structure of the election system in the US right now most closely reflects that of Germany in the late 19th Century, where an overwhelming bias toward rural influence leads to a perpetual lunging to the right.
We need the kind of reform in the United States that allows us to call ignorant and unsophisticated political arguments out in the open and ridicule them forcefully.
It's not Slovenian it's Slovene, bub. Slovenian is the language, not individuals belonging to the group.
ReplyDelete