We Must Call the Cartoon What It Is: Racism. Or, We Will Not Progress

[tekisui]

We are, thankfully, past the days of accepting this:


And this:


And this:


And this:


And this:


And this:


Shouldn't we stand against this?:


And this:


The cartoonist of today, in a well-known publication cannot use those images of old. They are forced to use subtlety to print racist cartoons. The cartoonist did nothing but seize the opportunity of the chimp being shot as cover for a racist cartoon. Of course he couldn't and wouldn't depict a lynching. That would be indefensible. What he did, instead, is cover his racism with a 'story in the news'. What I find most appalling is the defenders his acts here on DU.

We cannot give an inch to this type of thinking. Tomorrow they will take a mile. If you deny that the cartoon was racist, then you deny that racism exists today. Only by calling it exactly what it is can we change society and move beyond it.

[Crazy Dave]

1. I think your point could have been made without showing the cartoons

If I hear a racist joke I don't repeat it to someone else just to tell them how offended I was when I heard it. I do agree with what you say but I disagree with posting those pictures. Someones feelings will be hurt and someone will be offended when they see them and like I said, it's really not necessary to make your point.

[tekisui]

3. I disagree. It provides context.

We can't act like this isn't a part of our history, that we have progressed beyond. Had I said, we don't allow some cartoons anymore. It would not have the same impact. This is the evolution of racism. It must be placed in that storyline.

[Crazy Dave]

4. Others were considerate enough to post links

Instead of putting it right in someones face.

[tekisui]

8. I know it is not easy to look at, that is the whole point!

We cannot sanitize and deny the history of racism in America. That is how we end up arguing about whether the vile cartoon printed yesterday is actually racist or not.

[Number23]

70. Amen.

[Mira]

18. Here is what happened to my inbox last week:

in reference to the "Inaugural" someone had forwarded something to me among many others, and had left on how they had altered the word
"I Nigger Al"
That this can happen in America today is a sign people do not have a proper reference, and sufficient knowledge to have a river of shame to do something like that.
Those depictions, though hard to see, need to be out there to link them to the roots of their ignorance and prejudice.

[noiretextatique]

65. what's really offensive

is this stuff was the norm for too many years. our parents and grandparents grew up with this kind of imagery as normal.

[1Hippiechick]

57. Amen. n/t

[Uncle Joe]

5. I believe the pictures made the point, especially for the young people or

those not familiar with past historical racist cartoon propaganda and how it relates to perceptions of this cartoon.

[Crazy Dave]

6. See #4

Links and if someone wants to see the pictures then they have a choice.

[Raineyb]

26. Why to make it easier to ignore it?

We've got enough of that going on do we not? There are people on this board who are twisting themselves in all kinds of knots to come up with reason why the Post cartoon was not racist. Clearly putting the old style imagery up puts the newer imagery in context. Besides, those of us who face racism don't have the choice of looking away. Why the hell should you?

Regards

[noiretextatique]

66. amen! eom

[Uzybone]

7. I agree with you

The cartoon was clearly racist. Those who disagree are either ignorant, in denial or racists themselves.

But the OP didn't need to post the pictures of hideous racism to make the point.

[Crazy Dave]

11. "In denial" was everywhere during the primaries

Reminded me of Archie Bunker who really didn't see himself as a bigoted racist.

"I got nothing against youse people" he'd always say.

[Uzybone]

12. Not sure what the primaries have to do with this

[Crazy Dave]

14. There was a lot of innuendos and just right in your face...

...discrimination against Obama and that hard working white voters and women would only vote for Hillary. Those same people are still here on DU today. That was my point.

With all that said I'm not accusing the OP of being in denial or anything like that. Just using poor judgment to make their point.

[noiretextatique]

67. i want people to see those hideous pictures

i want them to see the kinds of images my grandparents and parents had to look at for most of their lives.

[Spazito]

10. I disagree, this is exactly what is needed....

To have an understanding and a dialogue about race and what constitutes racist propaganda/material one needs to put it in context. Showing these previous depictions puts the NYP cartoon in the appropriate context. To merely describe them in text is insufficient, to make no mention of them is putting on blinders, imo.

It is easier to to question whether the toon is racist if the argument is in isolation of the history of racist propaganda in toons, etc.

[Mira]

16. There are those, who have never seen this part of our history,

just for the reason to be protected from it and shielded. If we pretend this proof of from whence we came to have that cartoon in the NY Post YESTERDAY, then that is exactly the reason the paper is in the streets this morning, instead of closed down by the wish of the masses.
I'm totally steamed about it.
It's like a denying of the holocaust photos, and saying a verbal history is enough.

[DevonRex]

30. I understand your feelings. But I think they drive the point home, especially

for young people who perhaps do not remember how bad things were before and how VERY public and overt the racism was AND that a very large portion of white society thought that way.

I agree that it is painful to see and that speaks well of your own beliefs that you find it difficult. I also appreciate that you care about others' sensibilities; however, I think this is a place where those pictures can be shown for a good purpose.

Photos of the holocaust are also difficult to view, but it is sometimes necessary to remind ourselves of what can happen when bigots take over. We must not let that happen again, whether the bigotry is against Jews, blacks, hispanics, gays, women, or any other group that evil people seek to diminish, mock, and even murder. We have our own national shames when it comes to hate. Slavery is one. The incarceration of Japanese Americans during WWII was another. Matthew Shepard died simply because he was gay.

We must not allow bigotry and hatred to hide in dark corners. It is our responsibility to shine a light on hate whenever and wherever we see it.

[Karenina]

40. Coward!

:rofl::hide::rofl:

[Runcible Spoon]

52. Your attitude is part of the PROBLEM!

Refusing to honestly look at the hatred straight in the face. Too many liberals just want to live in a protected bubble, and that's not the reality for the vast majority of the rest of the world.

[shagsak]

62. I have to disagree also

It's similar to looking at pictures from Iraq. You are forced to deal with it when it's right there in your face. It's easier to ignore if you don't have to look at it.

IMO, I don't ever want to forget our country's history. The only way to move on from mistakes in history is to not let them happen again, and to realize when they are being made. This is a new generation of individuals who haven't had the same brushes with racism and may not really know enough to guage how offensive some images can be to those who have lived it.

[sunnybrook]

2. Thank You

For providing some context!

No one has talked about this either, and it may be a smaller point comparatively, but the actual chimp that got shot, that story in general was so terribly sad. I don't believe people should be allowed to keep chimps as pets. Even if not for all of the HORRENDOUS suggestions that are being made by this cartoon, making light of such a tragic killing of an animal that mauled someone, the whole story was sad, not really funny.

[AspenRose]

9. In case you haven't seen it in the other threads I've responded to

Facebook group

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?sid=3e8d269d36ed2ab0a0bf0b3c8463642e&gid=4717573685

[tekisui]

13. Thanks, I joined.

[Mira]

15. WHAT !!! I'm only the fourth recommendation after one half hour. Let's kick this thread.

I doubly recommend the last sentence of the poster.

edited for typo

[Kind of Blue]

19. Glad to oblige!

[Kind of Blue]

17. Thanks for posting the pictures.

First of all, I was surprised by some on DU who staunchly denied the cartoon was racist and demanded to know where in American history were such images ever used. Well, I just took the subject as a matter of course as always being around. It was just a few years ago that Aunt Jemima's slave scarf was taken off and she got a new hair do and outfit. Secondly, the stereotypical images popped up during the campaign, as you've shown with the monkey doll and, of course, Obama waffles. And third, it just amazes me that more and more of these images pop up that I've never seen before nor could imagine.
I'm sorry to those who are offended but with a topic like this you've got to expect the unexpected, and look horror in the face without shutting down dialogue based on shocking images.

[Mira]

20. Thanks for saying that, kind of blue

actually, youmight be "bluer than blue" :)

[Crazy Dave]

21. It's like when O'reilly says he's "outraged"

Shepard Smith and I were friends and co-workers in the early 80s so I watch his show on FOX at 7pm. During his show O'reilly has previews for his show on there and if he says he's outraged by strippers, spring breakers or a hot school teacher in Playboy, you can bet that on his show he's going to show about five graphic minutes of what he's outraged over.

You see it one way, I see it another.

There will be undeniable abuse of these pictures today and I'm sure it's already happened. Someone has read this post, thought the pictures were hilarious and has already iPhoned them to his/her discreet, closet, racist buddies for them to laugh at and pass on too.

[Spazito]

22. I suspect the racist "buddies" already have these in their collections...

along with many, many others. Your post is not unlike those that feel Attorney General Holder should not have used the word "coward" in his speech, when talking about Black History Month and the NEED to have a real conversation about racism and racial issues, because the repubs will get upset and use it against the Dems.

Actually, you might want to read his speech to understand why some of us feel the OP inclusion of these racist toons is EXACTLY what is needed. Here is the link to AG Holder's speech:

http://www.usdoj.gov/ag/speeches/2009/ag-speech-090218.html?loc=interstitialskip

[Kind of Blue]

23. I agree with you, Crazy Dave that we see the images

differently but we agree that they are offensive. I just think that instead of the conversation being about how some in the media use them, have used them, and the impact on us, the topic shuts down and it's now about censorship. Maybe it's because I've grown up with them and now here's the proof that deniers demanded. IMO, the pictures will not be abused because they are already abusive. As far as the adolescent behavior you speak of, that's also nothing new. I can expound on far worse things that have happened in my family within the past 5years because of racism than someone passing those images along on iPhones.

[noiretextatique]

68. remember obama bucks?

another racist eruption during the campaign.

[Kind of Blue]

73. I totally forgot about Obama bucks!

And let's not forget Clinton was the only candidate who could get the White vote. Again and again, the desperate resort to racism as the last bastion of hope :rofl: I say let them keep exposing and marginalizing themselves as we try to fix the disgusting mess of a crazed fringe. How funny the associate editor of the Post tried to distance herself after the big protest there today. Let's see how many days the Post can go without an apology or booting the editor out. :popcorn::popcorn::popcorn::popcorn:

[AspenRose]

24. And how quickly we forget about George Allen and "macaca"

He knew damn well he was calling that young man a macaque. He's fluent in French.

This is the Post's "macaca" moment.

[nc4bo]

25. Here's one more for the collection.

from: http://aleph0.clarku.edu/huxley/comm/ScPr/owen.html

[DevonRex]

27. Yes. The double meaning was intentional. And disgusting. nt

[Beacool]

28. I actually like the Obama sock monkey.

If they had a blonde one in a pantsuit with a pearl necklace, I would have bought both of them. I like monkeys and have several stuffed ones and a couple of sock monkeys too.

Sometimes there's such a thing as being too PC..........

:shrug:

[Spazito]

32. At least you are being consistent in calling out the "too PC" aspect....

as you did on the subject of sexism....oh....wait a minute....never mind.

[Beacool]

37. Oh yeah, because there was any time during the primaries

that anything said against Hillary caused the ruckus that it's being made over the Post cartoon. I recall the media just chuckling and perpetuating the sexist crap. I also recall too many here making excuses for it.

Hypocrisy much?

:eyes:

[Spazito]

44. Oh, I see hypocrisy all right...

on that you ARE consistent.

[Beacool]

45. Can't blame a girl for trying.

:7

All I'm saying is that too much is made of that idiotic cartoon. There are real issues of racism that need to be dealt with, I don't see this as being one of them. Sharpton has cried wolf too many times over the years and it causes people to dimiss him when it really does matter. One should learn to pick one's fights.

[thewiseguy]

36. When are you going to stop?

:eyes:

[Beacool]

38. Stop what specifically?

:shrug:

[thewiseguy]

41. Stop BSing.

[Number23]

71. She won't until they pry her keyboard away from her cold, dead hands.

[DevonRex]

39. Bea, it is simply unacceptable to portray a black person as a monkey, sock puppet or otherwise.

[Beacool]

43. OK, if people are offended by it , then I guess it's a bad thing.

I just took it as being a cute sock monkey presidential series similar to the one done by Vermont Teddy Bears. They had 3 bears representing McCain, Hillary and Obama.



;)

[freemarketer6]

29. The only thing your presenting of these cartoons did is to give

the racists pleasure and a sense of accomplishment in that they created a rise in the non-racists. This post could have been used by MSM as a filler.

[tekisui]

31. Rise in the non-racists? What do you mean, freemarketer-6?

I remember another freemarketer being banned from here not too long ago. Are you the same one?

[AspenRose]

33. I don't give a shit about who gets a rise out of what

Silence is consent. Why should I give a rat's ass about what racists are concerned with or what they think?

But thanks for your concern, though.

[Spazito]

34. Bingo! n/t

[DevonRex]

35. Right on. Are we to passively accept it just to say they didn't get a "rise" out of us? I say NO.

We call it what it is: blatant, hate-filled, violence-inciting RACISM.

[Flying Dream Blues]

42. Exactly, AspenRose...silence is consent.

[last_texas_dem]

46. I don't deny that racism exists today

I grew up in and still live in a fairly racist part of the country, around white guys who unthinkingly used in the "n"-word in casual conversation. The county I live in includes the nearly all-white racist shithole of Vidor, and I live two hours south of Jasper, TX, where James Byrd, Jr. was dragged to death.

I am aware of the history of disgusting racist art in America. I majored in history as an undergrad, and had my eyes opened in particular in a Progressive Era class in which we watched part of Birth of a Nation.

I see how disgustingly racist all of the examples you posted are. Except for the last one. I think it's an unfunny cartoon by a right-wing hack who thinks the stimulus bill was so bad that it could have been written by a chimp on Xanax. Should I pretend I interpret it in a different way so as to not impede "progress"? Maybe the reason I don't understand the firestorm over a stupid cartoon is because I know that real and overt racism still exists today, and I interpret this as just another big distraction.

[tekisui]

56. Real and overt racism exists because it is allowed to.

Just as this more subtle racism is allowed to be printed a million times over under the cover of a cartoon.

It is still racism.

[last_texas_dem]

58. I disagree that this is a racist cartoon, subtle or otherwise.

You claim that someone who denies that this cartoon is racist denies that racism exists today, which is not true.

Simply believing that something should be true does not make it so.

[DevonRex]

59. It is NOT possible to look at the pictures in the OP and then deny the racism of the cartoon.

Unless the cartoonist had been living on a deserted island for his entire life and had NEVER seen black people portrayed as monkeys, then HE knew that there were racist implications, too.

I believe that the dead chimp story gave the cartoonist the opportunity to portray Obama as a monkey but with the thinnest possible cover for doing so. He can claim he's completely innocent and was just using the chimp story in the toon. Nobody's buying it.

[last_texas_dem]

60. It certainly is possible

The pictures in the OP are disgusting caricatures of black people- except for the last one which is a bad political cartoon asserting that the recent stimulus bill was so awful that it must have been written by that pet chimp who went wild and was shot down by CT police a couple of days ago.

I'd agree with and be disgusted like many on this board if Obama had been caricatured in a racist manner, as he was with the Curious George t-shirt or the Obama sock monkey from last summer. I think claiming that the chimp in that cartoon represents Obama is an unsupported claim. All I've seen are a bunch of people screaming that it's "clear" or "obvious" or "impossible to deny" or that "you're a racist if you don't accept" that that chimp represents Obama, which all prove absolutely nothing.

[captainjack08]

47. the monkey president meme started with lefties

Kind of sucks doesn't to hear the truth doesn't it. Progress is made when you learn from mistakes and stop repeating them. When you start a pattern of calling presidents monkeys then don't wet your pants when they start calling your president a monkey too. Saying Bush looks like a monkey because of his ears and facial features is equivalent to saying the same thing about a person of color, black, asian, indian, whatever. It just not a nice thing to do to compare a human being with a monkey. It was a RACIST thing when SOME Dems did it against Bush. And it is a RACIST thing when Rethugs do it against Obama. COMPARING HUMANS TO MONKEYS IS RACIST. SHAME ON DEMS FOR PLAYING ALONG. Yeah you heard me...SHAME ON ALL OF YOU THAT PLAYED THE NAME A MONKEY GAME

http://images.google.com/images?um=1&hl=en&q=chimp+bush&btnG=Search+Images

[tekisui]

48. So, you admit that the chimp in the cartoon was a reference to Obama.

What about the bullet holes in the chest then?

[captainjack08]

49. of course it was a sideways hit on Obama

The artist behind that comic knew what he was doing... he knew it would be offensive but the point is, it would generate controversy and put his name in the headlines for a few weeks. But he knows he is pretty much free of blame...because he didn't directly tie the cartoon to the president... he left that for you to do in your own mind... which SOME of you have been doing for the last 8 years. So the jokes pretty much on you. Calling someone a monkey based on facial features like was done with Bush is an inherently racist thing to do... so yeah, those who played that game are in the same boat with the guy who drew the comic. Jokes on you. That what comics do.

[tekisui]

51. I never called b*sh a monkey because of his facial features.

I called him chimpy because of his lacking mental capabilities. It isn't racist to call an idiot chimp-like. To base it on ones race is racist. See the difference?

[captainjack08]

53. google bush chimp

and you will see nothing but page after page of Bush being physically compared to monkeys. Give it a rest. This whole thread is a fucking embarrassment. Do we really need all these pictures of this KKK trash to prove this cartoonish is a racist? He's a provocateur. He didn't name Obama as the chimp. He named the authors of the Stimulus bill as the chimp. OBAMA DIDN'T WRITE IT. HE ONLY SIGNED IT. Other politicians in the Senate and House wrote it. Give it a rest. The guy was fucking with people minds and based on the knee jerk response he gets an A+.

[tekisui]

55. Congrats on your defense of racism.

The cartoon is blatant racism, you defend and deny it. You are part of the problem.

And, you defend bush. You may be in the wrong place.:hi:

[AspenRose]

50. Yes, because white people are called monkeys and chimps all the time.

We all know it's code. It's racist against white people to call them chimps too. After all there's been a very long and illustrated history of that....yes Virginia, Democrats have been calling white republicans monkeys and chimps since the inception of this country.

Oh, wait.... :dunce:

[captainjack08]

54. it's racist to go around calling people monkeys...

it's something white people tend to do. not black people... so let's all just stop calling people monkeys

[namahage]

61. "Racist."

[Cha]

63. It's an ugly violent racist message and sean

delanas is going to be held accountable..freak thought he could just skate.

[urgk]

64. I've had a hard term seeing it as racist...

I mean, I *get* the connection between the actual crazed chimp and a conservative's view of the stimulus bill, but I guess the lack of any real physical resemblance (historic racist monkey images aside) between the chimp and President Obama threw me a bit. I mean, the monkey just doesn't say "Barack."

That and the fact that I see the bill as the President's people's work, backed by the President rather than authored by the man himself, just doesn't *convince* me that it's racist.

So, given the cartoon itself, I'd accept the possibility of the monkey as crazed-stimulus-author-who-isn't-Obama-but-just-a-crazed-stimulus-bill-writing-monkey. But, the cartoonist is a bit of a jackass as evidenced here: http://gawker.com/5155855/ten-masterpieces-from-sean-delonas.

Those could make me re-consider the cartoonist's intentions. In a court of law, I'm not sure I could prove he had racist intentions, but if somebody else proved it, I wouldn't necessarily be surprised.

[noiretextatique]

69. a big thanks to you for this post

i am shocked by the people who admonished you for posting these images. perhaps they haven't seen them before or perhaps they would like to forget they exist, but i don't forget them. i imagine what life was like for the people these images dehumanize. some of us will never forget...we don't have the luxury of forgetting.

[bluedawg12]

72. They are cowards, they should admit their racist slur and apologize.

Because there sure was a chance that some would see it that way and be deeply offended, and some on the right would snicker.

They need to be called out on that ugly, racist cartoon.