Whether we do or do not agree on the advisability of confusing military and political leaders in theory, we have a history of doing so in practice... Unless Powell or Schwarzkopf run for office, the Gulf War will be the 1st war the US was a clear victor in and didn't subsequently elect a military leader of same to the White House...Washington...Grant...Ike, etc. It's a really long list, and a surprisingly consistent pattern given that we theoretically don't believe in the kind of military style leadership favored by other forms of government...
Maybe its a reflection of America's longstanding freedom of press that puts these characters more in the spotlight versus a reflection of the style of leadership preferred by the country - probably a combination of both.
THe point is that you don't have to point out that white people are articulate or well spoken. You assume that it is within the normal range of things that people are. The implication, then, is that it is so extraordanary for a black person to be articulate that it should be especially noted, whereas white people are held to a higher standard. Searching the web, I came upon this from our very own Will, whom I think most people at least respect. I imagine that this may have been where I was initially introduced to the concept, though I'm not sure. I'll just quote from him verbaitim complete with the link: Slate: The Soft The Soft Bigotry of Loose Adulation By William Saletan
Ok well it seems like a damned if you do and damned if you don't sort of situation you and this writer puts out there. Is it wrong to call them gifted, talented, or articulate? No it's not wrong, but if you say that then it means you have some sort of underhanded, stereotypical meaning is basically what yall are saying. So should you just not compliment at all? Or would a different choice of word suffice for you? Anyhow, at the same time Palestinians, Iraqis, and black and hispanic minorities in America have not been able to realize their full potential in society. The writer says "What, in Bush's eyes, makes Iraqis and Palestinians so gifted? The fact that they can run functioning societies. " I'd say it is pretty debatable that these two groups are running functional societies, since one was run by a mad dictator that oppressed and held down his people, and the other hardly has what could be called a government. He also seems to take Bush's words out of context and look at them as condescending when in reality I am going to guess that he was trying to point out that both of those groups have talent that is not being shown because of the circumstances that are holding them down. So is it wrong to compliment the people who have done something by calling them gifted and talented? Don't minority leaders do that same sort of self-affirmation all the time by talking about the proud history their ancestors have had? Is there something wrong with it when they do it or only when someone who is white does it? Finally, I want to say that is it wrong when black comedians or even black intellectuals make fun of other black people who talk clearly and articulately by calling them white or sellouts? How about when they stereotype white people as people who talk in nerdy and articulate voices? Is it wrong when commercials directed towards the black demographic use more slang than a commercial directed towards the white demographic? Do you consider slang more articulate? Would you consider that if commercials change the way they speak when they are appealing to a certain demographic then that might indicate that is how that demographic speaks more often? I dunno I am just rambling here and also I want to know who the hell had the time to count how often Bush has used the word gifted?
