I don't know, I have have been around a lot of people comfortable around me, and never been shocked by what they said. If some of my good white friends referred to AA's as monkey's. They would be racist. I actually grew up in New Orleans and went back once to visit child hood friends, and they did say things like this. And I mentioned how that it's racist and I explained why. They sat in silence for a while and one finally said, yeah, it is. I remember being in Australia once in the outback for a few weeks and there was this man I kept running into and chatting with. One time he stopped and he said, you aren't bad for a blackie. And he went on to say some of the most horrible and bizarre things about Aboriginals. Good people know what is racist and what is not. Bad people try to hide their true feelings. Reagan was a racist. It's not that he had a moment of weakness in private when he was comfortable with someone - it's that he was comfortable enough to reveal how he truly felt, he let the facade come down.
1) Calling someone a monkey is a racist statement, no doubt. People do say racist things though without being a racist. The purpose of the insult is to wound, to insult. You can look at even, sadly, married people. When they get really mad at each other they let things out that they don't really mean because they want to hurt. There are all kinds of studies on this. Not that EVERYONE does this, but it's definitely unfair to say that simply saying something racist makes you a racist. Set aside race and you can see it more clearly. People who argue, get frustrated with each other, etc. often target something where they know it will hurt you personally. Whether it's class, career, weight, etc. People say really hateful things. 2) I'm not disputing Reagan was a racist. I think you judge people by their whole record, not statements without context, said in private and in frustration. Edit: Also, I agree with your point that a lot of people in private express who they really are. No doubt that many people who say racist jokes, etc. are really just racist and try to hide it.
People do say things in the heat of the moment when they are stressed or in an argument that they don't really mean. But in this case, Reagan wasn't arguing with his wife and trying to wound or insult here. It wasn't a direct confrontation with African delegates. It was a degree of separation here. No time in my life has someone said something like that to me that wasn't racist or mentally unstable. It's one or the other. And for Reagan it was not the latter.
Some only look for the worst in people and refuse to accept when someone makes a mistake... all while supporting an individual who stands for nothing except whatever gets them the most votes.
50 years ago, I didn't use language like that. My father, many years before, would have taken a belt to me if I had. It depends on how you were raised. I simply don't know what environment Reagan was raised in. I had relatives we visited in East Texas that used the "N" word like it was the most natural thing in the world, yet they would do anything for you. Anything if you were a neighbor, or a stranger broken down on the side of the road, or certainly for a family member down on his or her luck. But none of us were Black. Dad, who was never remotely racist and brought us up that way, just ignored what they said. He didn't laugh at their language, or their jokes that involved that language. He just left the room without making a big deal about it. He said he learned something during WWII about race. He never explained exactly how that came about, but he clearly was impacted by something he experienced in the Navy. I found that interesting to think about much later, especially after I learned about how segregated much of the armed forces were during the war. Dad could be an intimidating guy, more because he was incredibly smart, but also because he had a temper he rarely showed, but it was there. I had lots of questions I wished I'd asked him, still do, but he passed away in the early 80's. I wouldn't give Reagan a pass. He used racist language, language that's pretty damning, and he was talking to the President of the United States when he did it, and talking like he expected Nixon to agree. My understanding is that he knew Nixon pretty well. Having said that, trump is vastly worse than what this little window of history that's been opened for us tells us about Reagan. I haven't the slightest problem with saying that, because it's true. Mr trump has given us ample proof of that. Far more than we will ever need, and trump isn't done. If anything, he's getting far more open about showing our country just how racist he is. Reagan at least kept it to himself, at least in public, and it appeared that this outburst was driven by anger. That's not an excuse.
I think our dialogue would be helped if we spoke of 'racism' and 'racist' as: - non binary (as spectrum rather than either of two extremes) - thoughts, words, behaviors rather than identity Most Americans, liberal and conservative, when describing a person using the word 'racist', mean it as a binary identity: either really totally racist, or pure ("I don't see color.") This prevents us from ever getting anywhere in a dialogue, because when the word is used, the accused will place the bar as high as they want to say "look, I'm under the bar. Therefore, not racist." The fact is there are tons of small behaviors and thoughts that we all do every day that are on the racism spectrum, but we refuse to look at that honestly because we don't want to define ourselves on the binary of "totally racist." If we accepted that racism isn't a binary identity, then we could more easily look in ourselves and see that there are numerous things we think and perhaps do that fall on the spectrum. When my supervisor at one of my first jobs was annoyed with the service at a McDonald's and said "Look, I'm not a racist or anything, but that's why you don't hire n*ggers." he was completely serious. Even though he had the power to hire and fire, and would never hire a black person, he saw himself as 'not racist.' For him (and for a lot of Americans), to qualify for your binary racist identity, you need to actually wear the white hood and lynch black people.
I agree 100%. We can look and see people who don't hate people of a certain race. But they do harbor stereotypes, treat them differently, and have negative assumptions about people of a certain race or several races that are different than their own. This allows them to like certain members of that race and thus satisfy themselves that they can't be racist because of that.
He opposed the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act, and now he was shown joking around about Africans being monkeys who aren’t accustomed to footwear. Looks like a racist to me. But I’m sure he was a swell guy, otherwise.
Too true. I think many people around the country have a romanticized idea of just who Reagan was. He came across on TV as folksy and sincere, but he was also a trained actor. I was happy to vote against him twice.
Don't be too hard on your Mom. Ronnie fooled a lot of people. He was good at it. The irony? He wouldn't be given the time of day by today's Republican Party. He would be seen as too moderate. I was lucky. My parents came of age during the Great Depression and were FDR Democrats.
Which is bullshit and they should called out for being racist. Maybe if more people do this then then things will change. Instead the president taps into this segment of the population and uses it for his political gain. Quite disgusting whether trump is a racist or night.
He was America's white grandpa. African Americans pretty much knew what they were getting with him, though; people sense scorn pretty easily. You can add "homophobe" to the list. Not that he was evil about it, it just wasn't stamped into his DNA. At all. "What about gay rights?" "OH SHUT UP!" Crowd goes wild. But the hecklers did stop, so I guess it worked.
Reagan wouldn't recognize today's Republican Party much. The anti-brown people thing is more overt. The sucking up to Russia would make his head explode.
Excellent point! Mr trump's obsession with Putin and Russia, combined with the clear willingness by him and McConnell to accept any help Russia can give them in 2020, going so far as to actively work to prevent major bipartisan efforts to protect the upcoming elections, has to have Reagan spinning in his grave. If Reagan were around today, holding his head in his hands to prevent it exploding, he would be ripping trump apart. McConnell, too. Interesting how Reagan's being ignored by the GOP during this campaign, isn't it? Usually, they invoke Reagan like he's the Godfather of the GOP. Not this time. I wonder what his ardent supporters here have to say about that?
Here? Yes, they will if they can think of a way to do it, but they're more likely to ignore the things about trump in the White House and McConnell in the Senate that they can't defend. On the national level, I haven't seen any reference to Reagan worth mentioning. If there's been any "invoking of President Reagan" from the White House, the McConnell led Senate, or the national GOP, I've missed it. I wouldn't put uncorking some outright lies in an effort by them to do it, but I haven't seen even the attempt. Not yet.
Reagan also contributed to destabilizing Central America to the current state it's in today. Part of the reason for so many asylum seekers in present day is because of his administration's policies towards those countries.
