More Than Race
Are angry right-wing outbursts against President Obama based in racism? Yes. Would any Democratic president, of any color or gender, see the same animosity? Yes; the tone might not be so overtly racial but the hostility would be just the same.
The right-wing mindset - especially in the South (where I grew up) - has a deep belief that historically prevailing social order is "right"; that it is a product either of divine intent or social Darwinism or both, and that it is inherently wrong for liberal government to interfere with it (e.g. through redistribution of wealth, legislation protecting minority rights, affirmative action, etc.). The right-wing base believes that all of us - not just minorities - should "know our place" in the prevailing order and hold to it. It is not a surprise that market fundamentalism is attractive to the far right: market fundamentalism is simply a form of social Darwinism, proposing that markets have a "natural" output that it is anathema to interfere with. One could easily substitute "God's will" for "the Invisible Hand". It is not a surprise that illegal immigration is the hot button for the right wing: Hispanic immigrants, legal or otherwise, are perceived as a tremendous threat to the culture.
Modern Southern racism is not rooted in obselete views of racial superiority; it is based on cultural exceptionalism - the view that white, Christian "culture" has demonstrated its superiority by building the world's greatest nation, and that liberalism is an effort to undermine the prevailing culture. Minorities who aid in promoting the superiority of the prevailing culture are welcomed, embraced, even venerated by modern racists.
Very important not to simply view today's right-wing rage through the outdated prism of the Civil Rights era.
The right-wing mindset - especially in the South (where I grew up) - has a deep belief that historically prevailing social order is "right"; that it is a product either of divine intent or social Darwinism or both, and that it is inherently wrong for liberal government to interfere with it (e.g. through redistribution of wealth, legislation protecting minority rights, affirmative action, etc.). The right-wing base believes that all of us - not just minorities - should "know our place" in the prevailing order and hold to it. It is not a surprise that market fundamentalism is attractive to the far right: market fundamentalism is simply a form of social Darwinism, proposing that markets have a "natural" output that it is anathema to interfere with. One could easily substitute "God's will" for "the Invisible Hand". It is not a surprise that illegal immigration is the hot button for the right wing: Hispanic immigrants, legal or otherwise, are perceived as a tremendous threat to the culture.
Modern Southern racism is not rooted in obselete views of racial superiority; it is based on cultural exceptionalism - the view that white, Christian "culture" has demonstrated its superiority by building the world's greatest nation, and that liberalism is an effort to undermine the prevailing culture. Minorities who aid in promoting the superiority of the prevailing culture are welcomed, embraced, even venerated by modern racists.
Very important not to simply view today's right-wing rage through the outdated prism of the Civil Rights era.
Advertisement
Modern Southern racism is not rooted in obselete views of racial superiority; it is based on cultural exceptionalism - the view that white, Christian "culture" has demonstrated its superiority by building the world's greatest nation,
By almost any objective measure, the West (i.e. Europe and North America) are far more successful than the rest of the world, with the exception of Japan (which has largely emulated the West) and maybe recently South Korea nad Taiwan (ditto).
and that liberalism is an effort to undermine the prevailing culture.
And you deny this? A large amount of liberalism is based on the idea that whites are evil, and that we must celebrate and tolerate all cultures except for Western ones.
Minorities who aid in promoting the superiority of the prevailing culture are welcomed, embraced, even venerated by modern racists.
Whites largely designed and built current Western culture. We obviously tend to prefer minorities who are willing to live within our culture than those who wish to live outside of it. To call this "racist" is to say that whites have to hate their own culture not to be racist.
It is not a surprise that illegal immigration is the hot button for the right wing: Hispanic immigrants, legal or otherwise, are perceived as a tremendous threat to the culture.
You seem to be suggesting that we ought to welcome far larger numbers of immigrants and to welcome the change they bring to our culture.
Pray tell, why should we want a culture more like that of South America (which is ultimately what taking in a too-large to assimilate number of Latino immigrants will cause)? Do you really think that they have it better down there?
You seem to be arguing that you hate Western culture and whites, and want whites to give up their "racist" desire to retain their culture. (No one else has to give up their culture, only white culture can be racist).
This once again proves that "anti-racism" is usually just a euphemism for "anti-white" and "anti-Western."
September 18, 2009 8:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Your arguments are based in racist ignorance.
September 19, 2009 9:53 AM | Reply | Permalink
Glaivester - I hesitated to reply to your comments, as experience suggests that time invested in long and thoughtful answers to points such as yours may not be productive.
I'm guessing you are well aware that most of the straw men advanced in your response are false choices. To point out that modern racism and American exceptionalism have the same roots is not to be anti-American. To say that cultural bigotry is real is not hatred of whites. To observe that anti-immigrate sentiment is rooted in cultural insecurity is not to throw open our doors to any number of immigrants.
I'm a believer in dialog between people of opposing beliefs, but I'm also a believer in efficient use of the energy that goes into such dialog. My advice to you is, if you are looking for constructive engagement on issues, you should avoid advancing so many obviously false choices. It discourages people from replying to you at all.
September 20, 2009 11:21 AM | Reply | Permalink