So we're agreed that the Confederate battle flag is an outrage and no small contributor to...what happened again?
Oh, yes, the monstrous act of domestic terrorism that resulted in nine martyrs at one of the nation's most historic, and consequential, African-American churches.
Sorry to offend, but from my Twitter and Facebook feeds, heavily populated by liberals ("progressives"), I might think the chief problem is the Confederate battle flag. The reality is more troubling.
The two elections of Barack Obama to the White House brought out something momentously ugly in parts of America. The radical right has proved more dangerous than jihadists, but the Southern Poverty Law Center focused on the "lone wolf" phenomenon of both in a prescient April report.
Beyond the assassins are the effective racist dog whistles that have sounded for the past six years, especially on talk radio and Fox "News." As recently as this year, a poll showed 34 percent of Republicans think it is "likely" Mr. Obama is not a U.S. citizen. This polarization has also been paid for by the wealthy oligarchs and corporate "persons."
I hesitate to say that the GOP and the tea party have the blood of Charleston on their hands. But even in the aftermath of the attack, Republican officials couldn't state the obvious: This was a deliberate attack on black people by a white racist.
Meanwhile, I wonder what the majority of whites who are not progressives are secretly thinking now. They are too respectable to be saying anything right now. They do carry tremendous weight in elections.
Since LBJ signed the civil rights and voting rights acts in 1965, thinking he was losing the South for Democrats for a generation, Democrats have never won a majority of white voters. Jimmy Carter came the closest in 1976, winning 48 percent. President Obama won 43 percent in 2008 and 39 percent in 2012.
And yet white voters accounted for 72 percent of all voters in 2012, down 15 percentage points from twenty years before, but still a majority bloc that must be reckoned with.
Beyond presidential politics, the situation has been nothing short of disastrous for Democrats, liberals and progressives. Since 2010, Republicans have gained control of first the U.S. House, then a commanding number of statehouses, and finally the U.S. Senate. All of this has come thanks to white voters and a good deal of it from racial anxieties, grievances, and hatred.
Culturally and ideologically, the New Confederacy has been expanding, including into once progressive strongholds such as Wisconsin.
In allegedly "blue" Washington state, Republicans have taken control of the state Senate and have for years prevented progressive measures in such areas as infrastructure and climate.
But aren't demographics on the side of progressives? Not necessarily. Suzy Khimm does a deeper dive in Florida, where a combination of a charismatic president and favorable demographic trends should have made the state a lock for Democrats. Quite the opposite has happened.
What do a significant number of those white voters secretly think while the progressive echo chamber pontificates about the battle flag, "Black lives matter," and "I can't breathe"?
I shudder to think, but I suspect it would go something like this: What happened in Charleston was a crime, only that. The other disorders of the past year are a sign we need law-and-order. We're voting Republican and are glad we're miles away from any people who aren't like us.
It's 1968 all over again.
And these are many "moderate" white voters, not the outright white supremacists — including one who has given tens of thousands to GOP presidential hopefuls and who is linked to the Charleston murderer.
Who knows, perhaps the social media campaign against the battle flag — which reappeared in the 1950s on state flags as a potent symbol of resistance against civil rights for blacks — will "succeed" in some high-profile example?
But the deeper causes, which I wrote about two years ago, will continue.
And a significant number of whites, more than you think, will harden their hearts and heads in response to what they regard as another left-wing victory over them.
My point is that symbolism alone is not enough. Symbolism is not a political program. The non-right must find a compelling message to win back enough of the white working class to begin the hard task ahead. Of retaking the Senate. Then state legislatures and governorships. Then the U.S. House.
Meanwhile, we must be fighting voter suppression, which is aimed at minorities, the elderly, and the young. It made the obvious difference in the North Carolina Senate race last fall, giving the seat to a Republican, and probably in many other races.
The presidency is important — essential for the federal courts. But alone it is not enough. Neither is flag-shaming on social media.
You write:
"Since 2010, Republicans have gained control of first the U.S. House, then a commanding number of statehouses, and finally the U.S. Senate. All of this has come thanks to white voters and a good deal of it from racial anxieties, grievances, and hatred."
Sure.
Couldn't have anything to do with a terribly slow economic recovery, the ridiculous snafus associated with Obamacare, backtracking on "red lines in the sand", no advances on tax policy, ISIS being referred to as the "JV", overstepping his immigration authority, lecturing the Supreme Court at the SOTU speech, crumbling relationships with Israel, Benghazi, Putin, the carbon copy of the Bush administration on foreign detainees, the utter failure of his cap and trade promise, a complete inability to unite, the IRS scandal, the brilliant idea to bring the terrorists to NYC for trials.
His disapproval rating has consistently been more than his approval rating:
http://www.gallup.com/poll/116479/barack-obama-presidential-job-approval.aspx
I'm sure that's because of those 14 Klan members in Mississippi- you know, the ones Gallup is seeking to get into the polls.
Posted by: INPHX | June 22, 2015 at 08:44 AM
'Couldn't have anything to do with a terribly slow economic recovery, the ridiculous snafus associated with Obamacare, backtracking on "red lines in the sand", no advances on tax policy,'
excellent points! all republican obstruction, foot dragging and a bit of pandering to the center...
obama might be less than efficacious but compared to republicans he's a mensch! and that is all he needs to compare himself to....
Posted by: david weiss | June 22, 2015 at 09:23 AM
Once again, INPHX accidentally shows his value to this blog.
Posted by: Rogue Columnist | June 22, 2015 at 10:01 AM
I'm not sure the Confederate flag is really "only" a symbol. Germany banned the swastika flag because the ugliness it symbolizes is - still - never far from the surface. Some things need to be shamed. Calling systemic racism a "heritage" issue is a subtle way of mainstreaming the most treasonous and vile aspects of our nation's history.
Republicans succeed by dividing this nation into us and them. If you're white, you get to be "us". If you're black, you're "them". It's mostly a lie - we are infinitely complex as human beings and the false taxonomy of race distorts more than it clarifies. But for low-information citizens, it has been elevated into a cosmic battle line. As Paul Krugman pointed out this morning, one reason why we're not a fully functioning social democracy has been the success of the right in racializing welfare. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/22/opinion/paul-krugman-slaverys-long-shadow.html?ref=opinion
The cowardice of GOP presidential candidates in not calling the Charleston massacre racism tells you everything you ever needed to know about Republicans and their famous Southern strategy. Fox News managed to find a way to call the attack a war on Christianity (!!!). We can complain all day about the failure of liberals and Democrats to find a voice that reaches the white working class but there was only one Bill Clinton and even he couldn't get a majority of them.
I am, by nature, a pessimist but I have no doubt we will eventually win. We have already won the culture war. Right-wing culture is a ridiculously bad joke. Virtually every young person knows it. When your main "voices" are boors like Rush Limbaugh, Sarah Palin, and Donald Trump, you've already lost the people who effectively guide and channel opinion. The American right is racist to its marrow and twists itself into a pretzel denying this basic fact. It's hopelessly uncool. And all those small and fearful people who vote Republican like their lives depended on it? They're old. Very old.
Posted by: soleri | June 22, 2015 at 10:13 AM
I read the Khimm article about Florida that Rogue linked. Good reading.
Funny
It mentions strategic blunders, changing Hispanic demographics and party affiliations, the differences in turnout during mid terms, college kids, fundraising, scandals, a lot of factors.
But somehow, she missed the racism that so many on this blog just KNOW was the reason for the GOP wins.
I wonder why that is.
Posted by: INPHX | June 22, 2015 at 10:30 AM
INPHX,
Maybe Khimm didn't mention racism because it is given in all political, economic and cultural activities in the US.
Posted by: jmav | June 22, 2015 at 11:19 AM
Achtung, soleri!
http://potus.wtfpod.com/podcast/episodes/episode_613_-_president_barack_obama/”>President Obama just appeared on an episode of WTF with Marc Maron. That’s “What The Fuck!” with Marc Maron, yes it is.
I spotted it on the chyron for CNN at work today: Obama’s in the news for using the N-word on WTF with Marc Maron.
He actually went to Marc’s garage for this interview. OK, that’s enough heavy breathing for now.
I only want to make the observation that the president - who sounded sincere and loose enough to satisfy me - supplied some of the “transparency” that I, we, crave on the why’s and wherefore’s of where we’re at today in terms of his policy and practices. I will note in passing that I am unsatisfied with the drones issue, but he made some statements about being in the “situation room,” and his responsibilities that derive from that, given the intelligence he receives. Fair enough.
The one area that interested me the most (besides his remarks about racism in America) was his discussion on the health care issue, and single-payer in particular, as that has been the subject of some of my more severe criticisms.
Go listen to the (amazing!) interview yourself, but I just want to let it be known that I am now satisfied with those why’s and wherefore’s of that particular policy construction.
He’s a good man in a position that does not allow goodness to flourish easily.
Posted by: Petro | June 22, 2015 at 06:39 PM
Somehow that link didn't take, will try again.
http://potus.wtfpod.com/podcast/episodes/episode_613_-_president_barack_obama/”>link.
Posted by: Petro | June 22, 2015 at 06:40 PM
Oh, hell. It's pretty obvious on the main page: WTF
Posted by: Petro | June 22, 2015 at 06:42 PM
INPHX: Did you know if you're white, and find yourself in certain social or workplace environments, sometimes a white supremacist will mistake you for one of their own and really let their hair down? Oh, sure, it's happened to me plenty of times in my life; I grew up around these people, and I still live around them. They vote Republican for the very reason LBJ feared: they hate black people. Is that too anecdotal? Guess we've had very different life experiences. None of the white people you've encountered in your everyday life ever assumed you were a fellow traveler, huh? You must move in very high social circles, you lucky fellow!
Posted by: Pat | June 22, 2015 at 07:03 PM
Pat:
I'm quite sure there are lots of white racists that vote Republican.
Enough to have an actual impact?
Well, apparently not in Florida, at least according to the article.
Posted by: INPHX | June 22, 2015 at 09:11 PM
As a white woman from the South who was allowed into both the 'front parlor' (where no one ever said the "N" word) and the 'back parlor' (where everyone felt free to say what they thought), I can tell you that you are absolutely correct in your assumption about what white folks are saying in private right now. That's the challenge with combatting racism- conservative southern whites have learned to be polite in public, so they can express moral indignation when confronted with crude racist statements. The truth is, though, that they utter those very same thoughts when among 'their own kind'.
Posted by: Jen | June 22, 2015 at 09:17 PM
Petro, I just finished listening to the interview. I'm glad I stuck with it. I can bearly stand the sound of the human voice over the computer and Obama's careful conversational style is not something that fills me with joy. But it did reaffirm my sense of the man being possibly the best president since Eisenhower. His temperament is superb. More than any other quality, it gives him the grace to push forward with what is actually achievable, like health care reform. The left, including myself, got very frustrated with him at various points. We wondered why he couldn't fight the Republicans like we wanted him to. The insanity coming from the right was painful to endure, born as it was of hysterical partisanship and often flagrant racism. Still, Obama endured with dignity and calmness. What better thing can you say about someone's character?
I sense Obama loosening up as his presidency winds down. I was particularly interested in his interview with David Simon, creator of The Wire a couple of months ago, just prior to the Baltimore crisis. His willingness to let Simon address the issue of systemic racism was fascinating because he finessed an issue that the right has ceaselessly demagogued. Was this an example of "leading from behind"? If so, it was brilliant.
Posted by: soleri | June 22, 2015 at 09:57 PM
Racism flourishes when the "silent majority" stays silent in the face of racism.
Posted by: Ruben Perez | June 22, 2015 at 10:00 PM
Yea, thanks for the listen, and reply, soleri.
I admit to having left this interview feeling more in sympathy and, dare I say, admiration, than going in.
I blame Maron.
;)
Posted by: Petro | June 22, 2015 at 10:06 PM
I feel that my comment was a bit flip, actully, soleri, after re-reading your comment.
Your observations about his poise and dignity in the face of the indignities that were thrown at him, early and often, are right on.
No matter your politics, you can't take that away from him. Smooth motherfucker (and I mean that in a nice way.)
Posted by: Petro | June 22, 2015 at 10:09 PM
Petro,
Thanks for the WTF link.
The podcast really shows how unique and varied Obama's background is compared to the vanilla presidents in my lifetime. For me, that is a great attribute, I can relate. Monoculture, white America feels differently and will undoubtedly be more at ease when vanilla returns to the White House.
Posted by: jmav | June 22, 2015 at 10:11 PM
Yea, jmav.
I hope that we are not to be at ease anytime soon, though. :)
Posted by: Petro | June 22, 2015 at 10:33 PM
Racism the word is incendiary and useless in most political discussions. We can use it here because we're not really trying to move the discourse so much as explain how power and language interweave. Is Rush Limbaugh a racist? I have no doubt. Is your nice elderly aunt a racist for voting Republican? That's unnecessary speculation.
I have a friend from childhood who is as kind and lovely as can be. She hates Obama with a passion, however, and it's not hard to figure out why. Her husband was a cop (Cal knew him) and like many cops, not shy about expressing his opinions. He used the internet to post racist pictures and diatribes. He died a few years ago and my friend has since remarried, to another former City of Phoenix cop who is much more mellow. Still, my friend still channels her first husband's political opinions as if they were holy writ.
I've seen this formula online and maybe you have too: not all conservatives are racist but all racists are conservatives. I think this helps a little although it still seems too pat. The problem is that the loose jigsaw pieces of our personality don't always fit together. We are imperfectly aware of our personality dissonances. Someone like Mike Huckabee exemplifies this problem. It's not that he's malicious so much as self-serving when it comes to tribe and religion. His empathy extends to Josh Duggar but not Caitlyn Jenner.
If you think Trayvon Martin deserved to die at the hands of a serial thug, I think it's safe to say you're racist. There's simply no other compelling explanation for your viewpoint except race. But if you believe that Michael Brown was complicit in his own shooting, that seems legitimate given what we know about the circumstances of his death. The difference between the two cases can be explained in the character of the victims. One was by all evidence a normal teenage boy and the other was far less benign.
The Rorschach tests we apply here are tentative and intuitive. We know racism like we know pornography. We don't have to overthink it but we do need to worry about it. We are all partial and flawed creatures. Our nation's history is embedded in our neuronal circuitry. For better or worse.
Posted by: soleri | June 23, 2015 at 07:34 AM
As James Carville famously said: "It's the economy stupid". Check the dow-jones on 1/30/2009 and today.
Posted by: Ramjet | June 23, 2015 at 09:40 AM
Soleri writes:
"If you think Trayvon Martin deserved to die at the hands of a serial thug, I think it's safe to say you're racist."
First, who thought Martin deserved to die??
Acquitting Zimmerman (which the jury did fairly quickly) does not suggest Martin deserved to die. Michael Brown tried to take a cop's weapon, but I don't know anyone who thinks he deserved to die.
See- you have to see things in black and white. It's hard for you to reconcile that while Zimmerman and the cop in Ferguson did nothing wrong, that doesn't mean that either Brown nor Martin deserved to die.
That's a hard concept for some to get their heads around. But it sure seems to help the incorrect racist accusations in both cases.
Now, let's point out your muddy thinking on the racism part of your quote
Neither the FBI nor the DOJ could find sufficient evidence to prosecute Zimmerman for a hate crime.
Here's what the head investigator concluded:
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Justice/2012/0712/FBI-report-No-evidence-George-Zimmerman-is-racist
http://www.cnn.com/2012/07/12/justice/florida-teen-shooting/
"In an interview with FBI agents in March, investigator Chris Serino told authorities he "believed that Zimmerman's actions were not based on Martin's skin color, rather based on his attire, the total circumstances of the encounter and the previous burglary suspects in the community," according to an FBI report."
There is no evidence anywhere that Zimmerman's motives were racist. None. Nada. Zilch.
Either produce some or try to get the story straight.
That is in stark contrast to this nut in Charleston, were there is compelling evidence that race was his motive.
Then there's this little jem:
"I've seen this formula online and maybe you have too: not all conservatives are racist but all racists are conservatives"
Well, there must be a pretty decent number of conservative blacks in D.C.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/aug/19/race-based-hate-crimes-spike-in-dc/?page=all
Here's a tip.
Avoid broad brushed absolutes, unless you're sure. Like, for example, a complete lack of evidence that George Zimmerman was a racist.
Posted by: INPHX | June 23, 2015 at 10:18 AM
As the Confederate battle flag (it's not the CSA national flag, BTW) falls into bad or worse odor, here's a Facebook comment from my former neighbor. He is in other respects a nice man.
It would be different IF we had a President and First Lady who liked America and worked hard for us, instead of putting all their efforts into promoting Racism and loving Muslims who want to change America.
Posted by: Rogue Columnist | June 23, 2015 at 01:01 PM
The Director of the FBI doesn't think the Charleston massacre was terrorism. There you have it folks: definitive proof that liberals are just making a big fuss over nothing. http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/2015/06/20/fbi-director-charleston-massacre-not-terrorism.html
You know what else sucks? Impugning racist motives to folks who accidentally killed nine black South Carolinians. http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/06/rick-perry-charleston-murders-were-because-drugs-not-racism
Republicans can't be racist because.....er.......Robert Byrd! And the KKK was founded by Democrats! And Abraham Lincoln freed the slaves! And a greater proportion of Republicans voted for the 1964 Civil Rights Act than Democrats!
You know George Zimmerman can't be a racist because he only targeted this black punk because.....he wanted to help him find his way back to the ghetto. Moreover, he was the victim in all of this because his gun accidentally discharged in the punk's chest while the aforesaid punk was unfairly fighting for his life. Leave George Zimmerman alone! He's suffered enough!
Brought to you by the Republican National Committee, fighting for white people everywhere and against libtards who side with blacks instead of real Americans.
Posted by: soleri | June 23, 2015 at 01:50 PM
Soleri:
So.
Zimmerman was (is?) a racist because of, well, Rick Perry, and a technical distinction the FBI is making based upon the legal definition of "terrorism" in the Charleston
shooting.
Only in Soleri-land.....
It's odd discussing this with you. You never refute any of the evidence I post; you never link to anything connected with the investigation; you never produce any history of Zimmerman's alleged racism. Just your take.
This time, you just came back with a 4th grade attempt at, I guess, sarcasm.
Again.
If you can post evidence of Zimmerman's racist motives, let's see it. There sure isn't any lack of evidence that he wasn't a racist.
Like this:
http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/federal-officials-close-investigation-death-trayvon-martin
"The Justice Department announced today that the independent federal investigation found insufficient evidence to pursue federal criminal civil rights charges against George Zimmerman for the fatal shooting of Trayvon Martin on Feb. 26, 2012, in Sanford, Florida. Prosecutors from the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division, officials from the FBI, and the Justice Department’s Community Relations Service met today with Martin’s family and their representatives to inform them of the findings of the investigation and the decision.
The federal investigation examined whether Zimmerman violated civil rights statutes at any point during his interaction with Martin, from their initial encounter through the fatal shooting. This included investigating whether there is evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman violated Section 3631 by approaching Martin in a threatening manner before the fatal shooting because of Martin’s race and because he was using the residential neighborhood. Investigators also looked at whether there is evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman violated Section 3631 or Section 249, by using force against Martin either during their struggle or when shooting Martin, because of Martin’s race."
If you can't come up with evidence that Zimmerman was a racist, then admit you blew it, and let's move on, trying to keep this a reality based blog.
Fair enough?
Posted by: INPHX | June 23, 2015 at 02:26 PM
BTW, with respect to Zimmerman, I'm out.
To further discuss the issue with Soleri is a waste of time and bandwith.
Posted by: INPHX | June 23, 2015 at 02:40 PM
How do you tell a Republican? Not necessarily by their racism but by their eagerness to deny that they or any fellow Republicans can be a racist. An entire party predicated on the Southern Strategy announces its moral squalor by a) minimizing the police killings of blacks, along with black mass imprisonment stemming from the disproportionate "war on drugs, and b) having media like Fox News continually rattle the cages of their frightened elderly cohort with stories of Scary Black People, and c) using dog whistles, race cards, innuendos, and voter suppression to further divide Americans, the most obvious evidence being their biting contempt for the President of the United States, and d) attempting to disenfranchise blacks with new voter ID laws.
I don't know if INPHX is a racist although I suspect, at a minimum, he's serenely comfortable with them. He argues like a College Republican, with an aggressive approach to issues that emphasizes winning the debate with ridicule and contempt. His all-white party is smug and dismissive of any concerns that don't somehow accrue to the benefit of corporate America and its millionaire CEO leadership. Environmental issues are routinely dismissed as fluff as are statistics about growing income inequality. Unions are attacked, the government is vilified, and minorities are scapegoated. Why? To divide America between a shrinking white majority and everyone else, and in the rubble of our civic lives, redistribute the nation's bounty to the rich.
If that asshole returns, I promise to keep my head low and my comments few. This blog deserves better than hotheaded debates between partisans. If I'm as guilty as INPHX in this way, my apologies. It won't happen again.
Posted by: soleri | June 23, 2015 at 03:31 PM
But the emotional COLOR'S are so beautiful.
I been here before on this subject. Maybe later I can find time to talk about FEAR and RACISM.
Posted by: cal Lash | June 23, 2015 at 04:47 PM
I commend Soleri's efforts to call out the vapid, reactionary arguments that INPHX habitually puts forth on this blog.
Posted by: drifter | June 23, 2015 at 04:53 PM
I think Rogue deleted a comment of mine.
He's certainly entitled to; it's his blog.
The core of that response was Soleri's suggesting that I am comfortable with racists and flat out calling me an asshole. My response was, I guess, too much.
I'm not comfortable with racists, and Soleri is is lower than a sewer rat for suggesting that.
i hope this is acceptable
Posted by: INPHX | June 23, 2015 at 05:17 PM
Racism flourishes in ignorance. As the American populace embraces ignorance more and more, racism grows and expands like a weed freshly watered and fertilized.
Posted by: Ruben Perez | June 23, 2015 at 05:54 PM
It is an odd thing to contemplate, that ignorance can "grow."
Posted by: Petro | June 23, 2015 at 06:11 PM
No, racism grows. Ignorance is like the potting soil.
Posted by: Ruben Perez | June 23, 2015 at 06:12 PM
INPHX, here's the deal: soleri interests me and propels the conversation forward even when he's in high dudgeon (perhaps especially then). He elevates the blog. You don't add value when you continue baiting. Otherwise, you are welcome here. As soleri wrote in another post, this is not a church.
Posted by: Rogue Columnist | June 23, 2015 at 06:15 PM
The only way to minimize the role of race in politics is to have both the right and the left purged of racists. And while the left has problems (do you really think these education reforms think highly of poor, minority students?) the right gets worse press because of stupid shit like this terrorist attack. The refusal to utilize racial remedies means that, even if there isn't racist intent, policies with racially disparate impact can be argued to be racist with no legitimate counterargument. Take voter id... do they even care that they lost the racial PR war? Has a Republican official even make assurances that they would make legitimate steps to reduce the potential impact of voter id on minorities? Like... that's all it would take to take the race card away from Democrats. And yet, they refuse to. Which makes you wonder-what else can be the point of this racially disparate policy except to exacerbate racial disparities?
The rebel battle flag is an abomination. It demonstrates the power the ideology of white supremacy has among many of our citizens and the lengths at which the majority have gone to accommodate those beliefs. On the 150th anniversary of end of the civil war (and American chattel slavery!) we are arguing over whether or not the states where those white supremacist traitors arose should honor their heritage by flying their battle flag?
There are some lies which need to be undone: the civil war was initiated by southern white supremacists interested in perpetuating the enslavement of blacks (who at the time... were not citizens.) That is the only acceptable answer. I'll go as far to acknowledge that neither side did the others favors, but the southern white supremacist slaveholder states were the ones who decided to break apart this nation-state, not the northerners (many of whom were white supremacists too) who wanted to keep the nation whole.
Now, despite my distaste for the Confederacy as an experiment in statehood, I understand that the rebel battle flag represents the heritage of southern soldiers and their descendants. As Rogue says, It's not until the mid-fifties that contemporary white supremacists utilized it as a symbol of white supremacy. However, it is emblematic of white supremacy because the soldiers who marched behind it did so in support of a rogue white supremacist state which tried to tear the United States in pieces. That sounds anti-American nation-state to me--to fly that flag.
Not all southerners fought primarily to bolster a rogue white nationalist nation-state. Some actively resisted that state. It seems like the rebel flag would insult their history too. Some fought to protect their county. Why not celebrate that heritage with a local battle flags? Ones that haven't been appropriated by white supremacists? You still get to celebrate your heritage and do so in a way which is conciliatory to the descendants of those who attacked, resisted, or were enslaved under the authority of those un-patriotic white supremacists who got the crazy notion that they should arm themselves, attack federal property, and destroy the American Nation-State.
It's racist. It's unpatriotic. The reconstruction amendments made state-sponsored white supremacy unconstitutional, and therefore, unpatriotic. Nobody is saying you can't segregate and be racist. That's what people in Idaho and central PA do. And nobody can stop them because it's legal and we have freedom of association. But to even flirt with the idea that the treasonous white supremacists who tried to destroy this country deserve to be honored in any formal fashion by any segment of the American government is bat-shit crazy. It was their fault. Northerners did horrible things, and the southern people (white and black) have been plundered by the north for a century and a half, but the civil war began because southern white supremacists (mostly slaveholders) voted to carve a white nationalist nation-state out of the southern appendages of lady liberty.
PS-Do you think the Orange flag would fly in Ireland if there was unification of Northern Ireland w/the rest of the country? Or even better, would the Confederacy have let unionists fly the American flag? Where else do defeated internal enemies get to keep their partisan symbols? That's crazy. And that is the problem with white nationalism/white supremacy. It is the gravest threat this nation has ever faced yet has kept the sympathy of a significant minority of the population-to the point that we celebrate the treason of rebellious white supremacists who tried to destroy the country out of their fear that they would not be able to continue the white supremacy of American slavery. That flag has gotta go-and all the white supremacists do too.
Posted by: #theintellectualassassin | June 23, 2015 at 06:28 PM
'Twasn't a criticism, Ruben - it does seem to be being embraced "more and more." It's just a strange idea, embracing ignorance. One would think knowledge was a one-way ratchet kind of thing.
Upon reflection, I think it is, actually. This latest spasm will result in a lurch upward, I am sure.
"The arc of history is long, but it bends toward justice," as the man said.
I would caveat that as long as memories remain contiguous (coherent history,) this is probably true. But there have been violent interruptions that made us start all over again...
Posted by: Petro | June 23, 2015 at 06:30 PM
"The Confederate flag is one of those symbols that should really only be seen on T-shirts, belt buckles and bumper stickers to help the rest of us identify the worst people in the world," -John Oliver
The sad irony of America is that a homeowner's association can make a woman take down her "relentlessly gay" rainbow colored patio lights but we can not, unless there is a homeowner's association with jurisdiction over the South Carolina capital building, make them take down the confederate flag. It is that freedom of speech thing. I have been unfortunate enough to read actual academic papers on home owners associations as governance that can, and often does, supersede national law, but I digress. Law makers in South Carolina are making an abrupt about face on the issue (The Gov. went from totally-not-an-issue-with-CEOs to get-it-off-of-me-it's-hot-it's-burning-me in a 48 hour period) and I would be very surprised if it is there a week from now.
What is of greater interest to me, almost perpetually, is the power of symbolic interaction. Any politician who has made it past class president understands it tangentially, and those who have made it to the national stage lay awake at night figuring out how to use it to their advantage. People will rip each other's throats out over their tacit, divergent understanding of a symbol. Symbolic interaction causes incredibly intelligent, highly educated, otherwise measured response people to engage in name calling that they would never engage in without the presence of those interpreted symbols. Nazi flag, confederate flag, rainbow flag, they all create the most unreasonable responses in otherwise reasonable people.
Taking down the confederate flag in South Carolina will not prevent one death because the evil people who engage the Dylann Roof's of the world have plenty more where that came from. It will serve as a powerful symbol to people, however. Voting for the removal of that flag is, at it's core, a demonstration of willingness to lose the next election to do what is right. It is horrifying that this is the case, but at least it isn't a state sanctioned death threat yet. Anti intellectualism is nothing new, indeed it coalesced around the Nazi flag not to long ago. The same people who use symbolic interaction to create the horror of Charleston will tell you that the holocaust never happened. I don't engage the folks down the street who had an Andrew Thomas for Governor sign in their front yard long past the primaries, because they are quite hopeless and there is no doubt in my mind that they are A) racist and B) not open to any persuasion to the contrary. As John Oliver pointed out their sign served a useful function for me. Perhaps, Rouge, your former neighbor now lives down the street from me. I have never missed a vote, however, and I serve in an advisory capacity for any number of commissions and politicians because it is something I can do to "push the peanut forward". Like giving my universal donor O- blood every eight weeks, it isn't much, but it is something. Doing battle with symbols is like fighting ghosts. Your weapons run right through them. You can go around them, though, if it is important enough to you and you put in the time and effort to learn how to do it. I think that is a lot more important now than it appears.
Posted by: Colleen | June 23, 2015 at 06:54 PM
Petro, remember the bumper sticker, "knowledge takes hard work. Ignorance is instantaneous."
Come to think of it, that may apply even more to the Internet age.
Posted by: Ruben Perez | June 23, 2015 at 07:47 PM
Colleen, any significant social change comes from simple peer affirmation or disapproval. Removing a symbol, officially, is one tool in this dynamic. If we generally agree that something is unacceptable, it seeps out of the zeitgeist.
One example of this is how anti-communism became so pervasive in this country that it hobbled unions and the true left. It's an unfortunate example, but the blade cuts both ways.
Posted by: Petro | June 23, 2015 at 07:53 PM
Embrace ignorance...knowledge causes anxiety.
Posted by: Dr. AZ | June 23, 2015 at 10:28 PM
Colleen, well said. Welcome to the round table. Where on occasion as Dr. AZ notes, a panic attack can arise.
I tire so I will digest the above as I watch, again,
The Death of a Prophet. Mañana.
Posted by: cal Lash | June 23, 2015 at 11:09 PM
One of the problems Republicans have - but one they're fairly adept at finessing - is their obvious alliance with white supremacists. What you see happening in South Carolina and in the GOP as a whole right now is the finessing part. Nikki Haley, Miss Lindsay Graham, Mitt Romney, walking anagram Reince Priebus, and the ghost of John McCain are all calling for the Confederate battle flag to come down. Two things here: the CEOs who pay the bills are embarrassed by weak image management, and the symbol itself has outlived its usefulness. The Republican base is ideologically unified so it's possible to just pretend it never meant what it meant and move on.
Arizona showed how to do this. Jan Brewer got a lot of bad press during her reign, much of it for SB1070. But she showed remarkable flexibility when the CEOs told her to sign onto Medicaid expansion and when they also told her to veto the religious liberty legislation (unlike the hapless Mike Pence in Indiana). Some liberal friends of mine in Arizona suggested that the tide had turned and that Arizona was finally waking up.
No.
The CEOs have what they want - ultra-low taxes, low wages, and a political power structure that is their pet rock. At the same time, they can pretend to be pragmatists about the feel-good facets of American life. The GOP base in on board here - Jan Brewer paid no price for her apostasies - and simply resumed its birdbrain obsession with loving fetuses and handguns, but hating Mexicans.
The Southern Strategy is ready for a make-over. The days of Ev Mecham and exulting in a cosmic war over symbols like the MLK holiday are over. The GOP has been remarkably successful at state level. Many states are devolving to virtual anarcho-capitalist polities that starve education and infrastructure (except for freeways, which keeps the built environment suburban and segregated). Most of these states are "takers", supported by high-tax blue states. Welfare for Republicans, as it were.
The dog whistles blow themselves. They don't even have to make sense as long as the reptilian brains on the right get validated in their victimhood. Essentially, if a Democrat is president, white people are threatened with FEMA camps, gun confiscation, higher taxes on their bosses, transgender Boy Scout leaders, and liberal science (let's face it: science is liberal in that it's based on fact rather than belief).
The cold civil war is not over but the burlesque entr'actes may well be. Right now, it's a waiting game to see how long the GOP's core constituencies can outvote less-real Americans.
Posted by: soleri | June 24, 2015 at 06:20 AM
? Is inphx a racist or merely a provaceteur (sp?)
If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck - it probably isn't a moose.
Posted by: Ramjet | June 24, 2015 at 07:11 AM
Sticks & stones, . . . kids.
Posted by: Terry Dudas | June 24, 2015 at 09:09 AM
Flag: Many White Republican politicians calling for the removal of the Confederate flag at the SC state capitol are taking advantage of the racist killings. They know the removal will just create more White Fury at the Carnival.
Now if LDS Mitt Romney left his racist religion and became an agnostic leading a civil rights movement!
Posted by: cal Lash | June 24, 2015 at 10:21 AM
Stixx and Rolling Stones. Music is life.
Posted by: Ruben Perez | June 24, 2015 at 11:13 AM
Money is right?
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/06/23/1395894/-Racist-slumlord-whose-group-inspired-Dylann-Roof-donated-to-48-different-Republicans-in-34-states?detail=email
Posted by: Cal Lash | June 24, 2015 at 08:15 PM
If U have not logged onto Petro ' s Deconstructing the Manifesto (see listed to the right under Rough Links) for his April 12 comment. It's a good read, I think.
Posted by: cal Lash | June 24, 2015 at 11:30 PM
Great post Petro.
Whenever I read petro's writing or hear his words, I always feel like going to Home Depot and getting a refund on my low wattage brain.
What an intellect his is blessed with. Wow.
Posted by: Ruben Perez | June 25, 2015 at 08:59 AM
Stop making me feel guilty about not posting for so long.
Geez, guys.
Posted by: Petro | June 25, 2015 at 07:22 PM