An example of this conventional wisdom comes
to us from Ezra Klein, who was sitting in for Chris Matthews on MSNBC’s Harball
a couple of weeks ago. While discussing a study on presidential approval
ratings by race, Klein said this:
“They found that to a degree that was
completely unprecedented among recent presidents, approval of Obama was driven
by the individual’s attitudes on race. This right here is a set of graphs they
published in their book Obama’s Race… No straight lines exactly, there’s some
evidence that more conservative opinions
on race line up with support for Republican presidents and disapproval of Democratic
presidents, but it’s not a huge gap until you get to Obama.” [Emphasis added]
The bias, the
conventional wisdom, is evident in the highlighted passage above. I left out
Klein’s summary of the graphs because they don’t translate without the images,
but in his summary of the study he never indicates that ideology was a factor
in the study. The study authors, according to Klein, asked about opinions on race and presidential approval, without asking
the individuals if they were conservative/progressive or Republican/Democrat.
Racist Opinions Are Not Ideological
This is an
important clarification. When Klein sees a change in the graphs with President
Obama, he has zero evidence that the gap
is a result of conservative or Republican opinions. What’s clear is that people
who are racist have a low opinion of Obama, and they may be on the left or the right. That should surprise no one. And there is no evidence offered that those who are racist are only conservative.
Yet Klein immediately describes racist opinions as the “more conservative opinions
on race.” It is just as likely that
those racists are on the left or equally split between left and right.
I have documented previously the strong record of Republicans on race and the very poor record of Democrats.
For example, Democrats originally labeled themselves the “white man’s party;”
when Lincoln abolished slavery, 99% of Republicans were in support with 83% of
Democrats against; and it was Democrats
who filibustered the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which was ultimately passed with
80% of House Republicans and 82% of Senate Republicans.
This history
matters because there is no particular reason why Republicans should be more
closely associated with racist opinions than should Democrats. Yet Ezra Klein slyly slips in the word “conservative”
when discussing an academic study that apparently did not consider ideology when
determining racist attitudes. He is subtly reinforcing the conventional
wisdom by associating conservatives with racism.
Conservative View on Race = Race Doesn’t
Matter
This leads me to
state what the actual conservative view on race is: race shouldn’t matter and race doesn’t
matter. As Martin Luther King said, what matters is the content of one’s
character, not the color of his skin. Conservatives
are indifferent to race and do not care about the race of President Obama. When
conservatives make individual or policy decisions, we don’t think race should
be a factor
Contrast this
with the progressive view that says race should
matter and race does matter. It is
the progressive who sees race in comments about food stamps and welfare, not
conservatives. It is the progressive who wants to assign advantages and
disadvantages based on the color of your skin. When progressive politicians
campaign, they target groups of voters by race while conservatives speak to all
Americans.
Given all of
this, how can anyone honestly say that racial or racist opinions are “conservative
opinions”? Simply put, they can’t.
The Democrats and liberals, actually, tend to strongly embrace some racist policies. In particular, the quotas and goals parts of affirmative action, which end up judging people by their skin color instead of the content of their character.
ReplyDeleteUnder these explicitly racist policies, princesses of power and privilege such as Barack Obama's daughters are given even more of an advantage than they already have, and the white son of a poor Ukrainian immigrant is assumed to have "white privilage" and is kicked to the back of the line in employment, university applications, etc.
Neither party is racist. Allegations on both sides are political lies.
ReplyDeleteI agree with John on this, neither party is racist. Democrats aren't a racist party and I assume any racists in the population cross party lines.
ReplyDeleteI think it's undeniable that the left thinks race should/does matter, while the right does not.
The Dems do in fact tend to support affirmative action quota policies, which are by definition racist.
ReplyDeleteBut yet again, many Republicans do support these policies too, which does blunt the point some.
Democrats support quotas because they want to correct historical unfairness, not because they hate white people and want to discriminate against them.
ReplyDeleteOh yes, the motives are as you describe. But the means end up being racist anyway. People are being discriminated against for their skin color, not out of some supremacist ideology, but the result is the same: people are being punished and rewarded due to their skin color.
ReplyDeleteAlso, the 'historical unfairness' excuse, even if it is their intent, does not wash at all. Those who favor such racial discrimination make no effort at all to determine if the person they are rewarding for their skin color was wronged in the past, or if this person engaged in racial injustice in the past.
Racism is any action or attitude, conscious or unconscious, that subordinates an individual or group based on skin color or race. It can be enacted individually or institutionally.
ReplyDeleteSource: US Civil Rights Commission.
The policies which we have been discussing, which explicitly punish individuals for having the wrong skin color, definitely meet this definition.
MSNBC's night-time line-up is fully comprised of hard-core partisans and liars. It doesn't surprise me one iota that they bring somebody like Klein of the bench. The dude was obviously starting with a theory and then trying to ramrod data in an effort to substantiate it. I would just as soon watch Gilligan foul-up yet another rescue.
ReplyDeletePrejudice is an equal opportunity affliction, but it is also used by politicians and demagogues as a useful smear tactic. Racism is institutionalized prejudice, so when people tried to use the government to end racism, some conservatives who sincerely believed in "states' rights" were vulnerable to the charge of racism. It's also true that a lot of racists hid behind conservative thought and individual rights to make their racism seem honorable. Racism was openly exploited by Nixon's Southern strategy, and Republicans lost the black vote for over a generation. Liberals now try to smear all TEA party critics of Obama as racists, but the very white John Kerry faced similar treatment at the hands of the Swift Boaters.
ReplyDelete