This is what I was talking about in the Dr. Gates thread here: http://bbs.clutchfans.net/showpost.php?p=4673620&postcount=345 I think the race card gets played way too often in situations where race has little to do with the actions that are done. It's sad because it takes away from real problems dealing with race. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090917/ap_on_re_us/us_crying_racism Everybody's racist, it seems. Republican Rep. Joe Wilson? Racist, because he shouted "You lie!" at the first black president. Health care protesters, affirmative action supporters? Racist. And Barack Obama? He's the "Racist in Chief," wrote a leader of the recent conservative protest in Washington. But if everybody's racist, is anyone? The word is being sprayed in all directions, creating a hall of mirrors that is draining the scarlet R of its meaning and its power, turning it into more of a spitball than a stigma. "It gets to the point where we don't have a word that we use to call people racist who actually are," said John McWhorter, who studies race and language at the conservative Manhattan Institute. "The more abstract and the more abusive we get in the way we use the words, then the harder it is to talk about what we originally meant by those terms," he said. What the word once meant — and still does in Webster's dictionary — is someone who believes in the inherent superiority of a particular race or is prejudiced against others. This definition was ammunition for the civil rights movement, which 50 years ago used a strategy of confronting racism to build moral leverage and obtain equal rights. Overt bigotry waned, but many still see shadows of prejudice across the landscape and cry racism. Obama's spokesman has rejected suggestions that racism is behind criticism of the president, but others saw Wilson's eruption during the presidents' speech as just that. "I think (Wilson's outburst) is based on racism," former President Jimmy Carter said at a town hall meeting. "There is an inherent feeling among many in this country that an African-American should not be president." That's an easy charge to make against the rare individual carrying an "Obamacare" sign depicting the president as an African witch doctor with a bone through his nose. But it's almost impossible to prove — or refute — assertions that bias, and not raw politics, fuels opposition to Obama. "You have to be very careful about going down that road. You've cried wolf," said Sean Wilentz, a Princeton University professor who studies U.S. political and social history. "It's a way of interpreting the world, where race runs through everything — everything is about race," said Wilentz, who supported Hillary Clinton in 2008 and claimed Obama's campaign falsely accused her of stoking racial fears. "Everything is not about race," he said. "It's not Mississippi in 1965 any more. Even in Mississippi it's not Mississippi in 1965 any more." Still, race remains a major factor in American life, said Brian D. Smedley, director of the health policy institute at the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies, which focuses on people of color. "We know from a large body of social science that a large portion of Americans harbor racial bias," Smedley said. "In the context of health reform, it's quite evident that race plays a very large role in helping shape public opinion." Yet Smedley chooses not to deploy the R-word: "It's difficult to say racism is the reason (for objections to health care) because people don't believe they are racist." Many, though, have no doubt that other people are racist — even when those other people are black. The Manhattan Institute's McWhorter said that during the affirmative action battles of the 1990s, "racism" and "racist" began to be applied to liberal policies designed to redress past discrimination, then were extended to people who believed in those policies. That's how they have come to be wielded against Obama. "A racist is a person who discriminates or holds prejudices based on race. Discrimination is treatment based on category rather than individual merit," said Tom Molloy, a 65-year-old retired financial services executive from Brentwood, N.H. "Barack Obama favors policies that will give preference to groups based on race rather than individual merit. It's called affirmative action." Mark Williams, one of the leaders of the Sept. 12 rallies in Washington D.C., headlined a blog entry about the arrest of black scholar Henry Louis Gates Jr. at his own home by a white police officer, "Racist In Chief Obama Fanning Flames of Racism." And too many bloggers to count are saying that Congressman Jim Clyburn, who marched with Martin Luther King Jr. and has called Wilson and other health care protesters racist, is the real racist himself. This infinite loop is the inevitable result of years of black identity politics, which created a blueprint for whites who feel threatened by America's changing demographics, says Carol Swain, a Vanderbilt University professor and author of "The New White Nationalism In America." "We need to rethink what is racist and who can legitimately call whom racist," Swain said, citing the argument that blacks can't be racist because racism requires power. "With a black president, a black attorney general, and blacks holding various power positions around the country, now might be a time when we can concede that anyone can express attitudes and actions that others can justifiably characterize as racist." Perhaps this is even a strange symbol of racial progress — equal-opportunity victimization, so to speak. "In 100 years, when people chronicle how America got past race," said McWhorter, "the uptick in white people calling blacks racist is going to be seen as a symptom of the end."
I agree to a point that we shouldn't jump to conclusions regarding racism. I brought that up in the Wilson apology thread. At the same time though it is obvious that racism still exist and we need to be vigilant about it. This is one that I think it might be better to err on the side of caution about wielding it especially when we are looking to challenge what we considered a wrong viewpoint there often is a lot of other things to challenge that viewpoint on. For example I wasn't prepared to call Rep. Wilson a racists until I knew more about him but whether he is a racist or not there still is a lot that was wrong about his outbursts.
I think that is a pretty common belief, not many would argue that the race card is played far too often.
With racism as anything else, people should be given the benefit of the doubt. That's why I hate the charge of racism. It's more of an over-sensitivity issue then anything else. I mean, how the heck does someone prove someone is a racist? Especially since nearly everyone has racial biases. It's programmed into us. Racism should be a charged leveled by fact. By true discrimination or proof that behavior is being based on race. Speculation just opens up a massive can of worms.
The definition of racist is so vague it can literally apply to everyone. So it's not like anyone's technically wrong. In the end, it's up to people to use good judgment to use the word only when it's necessary and pertinent to the issue at hand. But of course, that is simply impossible when it comes to politics.
The racism card is often underplayed because even when there is plenty of supporting evidence (as in Wilson's case) that someone is likely a racist tons of people want to deny the facts either out of fear of being accused of "pulling the race card" or because they don't want to admit that racism still plays a major role in our society. I think based on the level of hatred directed toward Obama there is definitely a large component of racism. He hasn't been President long enough to screw something up so badly that people could genuinely and reasonably be this angry with him. All of this "let's give the benefit of the doubt" talk is part of the problem. People attempting to be moderate on EVERY issue end up enabling those being the aggressors or the bigots by repeatedly giving them the benefit of the doubt.
don;t even make that argument. It is normal for people to dislike a president at any given time. If hatred towards obama has to do with racism, so does his support. It works both ways
Ah, I didn't realize that all those people who were opposed to John Kerry attacked him -- rightly or wrongly -- because of his skin color, not because of his positiions or past actions.
Two things... 1. A lot of the attacks on John Kerry weren't because of his skin color, past actions, or his positions. They were because of lies that were told about him by swift boaters. There was some reaction against some of his positions. 2. The attacks on John Kerry weren't as fanatical as the attacks against Obama. There weren't pictures of John Kerry dressed up as an African tribal witch doctor. There weren't pictures of John Kerry as Hitler. Rush Limbaugh wasn't asking if John Kerry's distant brother was still living in a hut. John Kerry wasn't accused of doing the terrorists work for them. John Kerry wasn't attacked for supposedly wanting to destroy the U.S. from within. I'm sorry, but there is race involved in many of the attacks on Obama. You can ignore it, but that doesn't mean everyone else should.
racism is a subset of intolerance. as such, it serves to diffuse the more general problem of creating a world where everyone gets a fair shake.
But you did realize that McCain wouldve been the nominee for president in 2000 if bush didnt tell all of South Carolina that he had a black baby...even if he did, so what? He couldve had a Mexican baby, and still wouldve been more qualified than Bush.
someone who thinks that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular ethnicity is superior to others. nothing vague about it, and doesnt apply to me. sterotypes are the best though (if you have a sense of humor) sorry triple post
I think the race card is used conviently from both sides. Some on here like to use the "you're playing the race card" quote and most of the time its to deflect criticisms of things they've said that are of the "race baiting nature. Why is it Ok for some and not for others? I think it goes back to racial sensitivity, Many are too racially sensitive while others are too racially insensitive, and its like pulling on a tug of war rope to see which person is right in the way they feel. Are opponents of affirmative action and reparations using the race card to justify their opinions
I think part of it has to do with a lot of blacks not being intimately involved in politics before Obama came around. They're not used to seeing all politicians get blasted by their opponents, and when they see people attacking Obama, it's pretty easy to cry race as the reason.
