Harris Perry did something unforgivable now.

[jpgray]

She has prompted Sirota, Walsh and others to engage in the unsettling and self-aggrandizing spectacle of absolving oneself from and denying one's racism. Out come the bona fides, which in this class of people is mostly writing something about racism or having friends who are of a different race. Now arrive the protestations of deep caring; a noisy separation of oneself from those truly racist whites; the admission of a personal obsession and endless struggle with one's own latent and inherent bigotry; etc. What deep and sensitive souls to admit, very loudly, that they are so far in front of the accusation that they have already tried and acquitted themselves a thousand times in their own minds.

Harris Perry's thesis (if you change it to make more sense) is that white liberals treat Obama differently than they would treat a white president in his situation. That is not falsifiable, as a president hasn't been in this situation for eighty years, and dead people's treatment of FDR and Hoover isn't exactly relevant. From the harshest to the most minor criticism, leftist whites can never be absolved of racist intent. Arguments explicitly based on belief in the superiority of whites to blacks will be found nowhere from a liberal pundit. One can only claim its influence is present rather than prove it is there. You can certainly never prove it is not there.

And because of this, these accusations of racism toward white liberal pundits, functionally, do very little. Should we now dismiss utterly harsh criticism from liberal whites as racist? Well, no--nobody is saying that. Do we want Sirota or Walsh or whomever to stop writing harsh criticism? To treat Obama differently than they would otherwise for fear of being called racist? Well, nobody really wants that either, even if their criticism has a racial component about which they are in denial. Why? Because you would see every criticism sugar-coated with a load of dutiful sympathy and enlightened, unfeeling acknowledgment that WEB DuBois might describe as "How does it feel to be a problem?"

Do we want people to think about how race affects people's views of Obama? Absolutely. But presumably not in the form of "Am I racist for criticizing Obama? Nope!" which is all Harris Perry's piece is likely to accomplish.

[ProSense]

1. Maybe

"Harris Perry's thesis (if you change it to make more sense) is that white liberals treat Obama differently than they would treat a white president in his situation."

...it's time to stop writing about "Harris Perry's thesis" since you clearly don't understand what she said, as indicated by the mischaracterization above.

[jpgray]

2. You know, I still don't believe you actually read her article.

Me:

"Harris Perry's thesis (if you change it to make more sense) is that white liberals treat Obama differently than they would treat a white president in his situation."

Her:

The 2012 election may be a test of another form of electoral racism: the tendency of white liberals to hold African-American leaders to a higher standard than their white counterparts. If old-fashioned electoral racism is the absolute unwillingness to vote for a black candidate, then liberal electoral racism is the willingness to abandon a black candidate when he is just as competent as his white predecessors

[brentspeak]

3. No, you're correct

You summed up Harris-Perry's toxic accusation correctly. God knows what other topic the previous poster thinks Harris-Perry was actually talking about.

[ProSense]

5. She

"You summed up Harris-Perry's toxic accusation correctly. God knows what other topic the previous poster thinks Harris-Perry was actually talking about."

...was likely talking about people who do nothing but attack and distort.

[ProSense]

4. You

Me:

"Harris Perry's thesis (if you change it to make more sense) is that white liberals treat Obama differently than they would treat a white president in his situation."

...could stop cherry picking her article to misrepresent her point, and provide a link to the article.

<...>

The relevant comparison here is with the last Democratic president, Bill Clinton. Today many progressives complain that Obama’s healthcare reform was inadequate because it did not include a public option; but Clinton failed to pass any kind of meaningful healthcare reform whatsoever. Others argue that Obama has been slow to push for equal rights for gay Americans; but it was Clinton who established the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy Obama helped repeal. Still others are angry about appalling unemployment rates for black Americans; but while overall unemployment was lower under Clinton, black unemployment was double that of whites during his term, as it is now. And, of course, Clinton supported and signed welfare “reform,” cutting off America’s neediest despite the nation’s economic growth.

Today, America’s continuing entanglements in Iraq and Afghanistan provoke anger, but while Clinton reduced defense spending, covert military operations were standard practice during his administration. In terms of criminal justice, Obama signed the Fair Sentencing Act, which decreased judicial disparities in punishment; by contrast, federal incarceration grew exponentially under Clinton. Many argue that Obama is an ineffective leader, but the legislative record for his first two years outpaces Clinton’s first two years. Both men came into power with a Democratically controlled Congress, but both saw a sharp decline in their ability to pass their own legislative agendas once GOP majorities took over one or both chambers.

<...>

[jpgray]

7. If you're right, and she isn't saying Obama is held to a different standard than a white president

What is she saying?

[ProSense]

16. Hmmm?

"If you're right, and she isn't saying Obama is held to a different standard than a white president... What is she saying?"

She's saying that there are "white liberals" who hold Obama to a double standard, not that all "white liberals" do.

Why is that so hard to understand? Some people do a lot of things that other people don't do. Do you hold the President to a double standard? No? Then she wasn't talking about you.

[brentspeak]

28. Ok, just so we're clear on this...

What you're really saying is that Harris-Perry isn't claiming that "white liberals hold Obama to a double standard" at all...but rather that, uh, Harris-Perry is claiming that "white liberals hold Obama to a double standard." (Even though absolutely no qualifiers of "some" or "just a few" were employed by Harris-Perry in her http://www.thenation.com/article/163544/black-president-double-standard-why-white-liberals-are-abandoning-obama">article.)

I just want to make sure we're clear on all this...

[Bake]

34. So there are SOME white liberals who do this, but not all of us?

So which ones are they? Or we, depending on the group you put me in.

If it's not a specific charge, what's the point? It just comes off as another excuse for a less-than-progressive President, in other words, race-baiting.

Bake

[Cali_Democrat]

17. LOL

[MNBrewer]

6. I didn't vote for Bill Clinton's re-election, so I guess I'm clean

being as I was willing to abandon his equally competent white predecessor.

[OswegoAtheist]

21. The first election I voted in was '96.

I voted against Clinton specifically for his failure to adopt any healthcare plan, and the (IIRC, September '96?) recent passing of welfare reform, as well as NAFTA. I think that we, as Liberals, "abandon" our leadership not because they're black or southern or left-handed or dog owners; we have personal standards that we expect our leaders to achieve. In opposition to that is the RightThink tribalism of modern Conservatism that emphasises group unity at all costs, with little to no regard for how that tribal leader actually performed or made accomplishments.

Think of it this way: in the 20th Century, there are two presidents that stand out as role models for each side of the spectrum. On the right, you have Reagan; on the left, F. Roosevelt. The two sides lionise their respective icons for completely different reasons, and attack the other sides icons in different manners.

From the perspective of the right, Reagan is held up as "All-American, the Great Communicator, The Gipper, etc., who stood up to Communism and made America great again." Their view of FDR is equally personal and ad hominem: he was a Socialist, he ruined America's character (important distinction there) with his social programs, etc. With us on the left, we emphasise the programs that FDR implemented not only because they were successful, but because he was successful in implementing them at all. And we criticise Reagan worship on the right by pointing out a laundry list of reasons that Reagan wouldn't cut it in today's Republican Party.

And I think where Harris Perry (whom I respect dearly, btw, and always look forward to her guest spots on TRMS) misses the mark is in assuming that Obama's white liberal problem stems from his being differentiated* from the previous Dem presidents by the colour of his skin. We, as Liberals, are more inclined to see the world in shades of grey (I don't think anyone would dispute this), whereas conservatives see black-and-white solutions to problems. Because of this, we judge the individual separately, whilst conservatives would make the distinction based on their leaders' fit within the group. We don't expect more from a Black Democratic president, we expect more from a Democratic president, full stop.

In other words, the right is always going to have a guaranteed base that votes Republican because to do otherwise is not acceptable to their tribe. The equivalent on the Liberal spectrum are those who will vote Democratic, hoping for better results than the previous term, because the alternative is an individual whom we know would be unthinkable. That said, I think that what is going to happen in the future is that Obama's campaign won't be setting any fundraising records this year, but we should see a 5% or less variation on vote percentages, and perhaps a few net seats in Congress.

Oswego "*Too tired to think about making this sentence better" Atheist

[treestar]

31. You abandon too easily

But then MHP was not talking about you.

If you judge every Democratic President that harshly, then you're golden. But also unreasonable and never likely to happy with any President. And throwing the vote away on third parties or no one.

[Empowerer]

8. What Melissa Harris-Perry did that was unforgivable

was to offend a small but vocal and hyper-sensitive group of white people by speaking her mind and speaking the truth and making them uncomfortable - and thus made herself "deserving" of any and all insults, smears, and attacks from the likes of Gene Lyons and similarly self-entitled, arrogant hypocrites.

[tblue]

11. What's racist is holding black people to a lower standard.

If Obama didn't eff up so much, you might have a point.

Yes. Let's call everybody racist. That solves everything. Shame on you!

[treestar]

30. Sounds just like right wingers

But that's not happening. Obama is being held to an impossible standard.

Called weak and compared to LBJ who was "not weak." In fact people who do this make LBJ sounds like a bully. And refuse to account for the different era and the bigger Democratic majority and the existence of reasonable and even liberal Republicans in that day.

[jpgray]

13. It's not truth, but innuendo. I'll prove it to you

Take this statement: "Harsh disagreement with Glenn Greenwald by liberals is a latent expression of their homophobia. They treat him more harshly than they would a straight pundit." If you are offended by this remark, I suppose we must say that you are hyper-sensitive and made uncomfortable by someone speaking her mind and speaking the truth? I would say instead that the remark is innuendo, and not particularly useful in determining a liberal's motive in harshly disagreeing with Glenn Greenwald.

Of course, either Harris-Perry's statement or the above one can be perfectly true in specific cases. But the more general accusation can cause only mutual resentment.

[OswegoAtheist]

22. I liked the article.

I didn't agree with her reasoning (read above), but I'm glad she wrote it, and I'm glad that those who've had such a kneejerk reaction are making total asses of themselves. Unfortunately, all the OMFGWTFROFLCOPTER responces tend to drown out those who want serious discussion on the matter, but c'est la vie.

Oswego "and I still have to remind myself that it's 'Harris Perry' now. Why am I so bad with names?" Athiest

[demgrrrll]

36. delete

[Ignis]

39. So we should just "speak the truth" and ignore "hyper-sensitive" types?

That sounds almost exactly like the RW attack on "political correctness" from the '90s.

[tblue]

9. My dad, who is black and grew up in depression-era rural Mississippi,

in a family of sharecroppers, told me two of the most important pieces of wisdom I ever heard:.

1) There are truly good white people. Don't let anyone tell you different.

2) it doesn't matter if someone is racist. Doesn't matter what they feel in their hearts. That is irrelevant and out of your control. All that matters is what they do. Period.

Did Joan Walsh and David Sirota prevent people from voting for President Obama? Did they campaign for John McCain? Did they sign a loyalty oath to anybody and then break it? Do they critique only black politicians and not white ones?

Sometimes Ms Melissa gets on my nerves, like when she snipped at Bill Maher for saying "girl" one time. He did it in jest and he really did not deserve her retort, and I was embarrrased for both of them.

I know she teaches AA Studies and that was my major too, so I get it that her radar is on alert. I understand. But it is just stupid, and really low and hurtful on her part, to accuse people of racism when they say things you don't want to hear. And to foment divisions based on race. That's what she is doing, not them. She really needs to chill because she is not helping anybody, least of all Obama. I seriously doubt our president would even want her to go there.

[Empowerer]

10. So I assume you are as unhappy about Gene Lyons comparing MHP to the KKK and Michelle Bahmann?

if so, now might be a good time to mention it.

[tblue]

12. Don't assume what I think. Who is he

and why should I care what he says? Sounds like an idiot but I'm just going by what you said.

[GeorgeGist]

14. I think Ms Harris-Perry ...

suffers from latent and inherent bigotry toward white people.

[jpgray]

15. More innuendo. Assuming bad faith so readily can only cause mutual resentment

Dismissing accusations of bigotry generally implies you don't care much for the concerns of its victims. Attributing to latent bigotry every action in which it could conceivably play a role will make suspects out of many who are innocent.

[Empowerer]

18. A black woman who calls out bigotry among whites MUST herself hate white people

How else to explain why a black woman could possibly think that any white liberal could be the least bit bigoted?


Never mind that her own mother is white ...

[tblue]

20. Why is everybody calling everybody a bigot?

What is the goal of this kind of accusation? Seriously. What good can come of it?

[ProSense]

23. Well,

"Why is everybody calling everybody a bigot? What is the goal of this kind of accusation? Seriously. What good can come of it? "

...it's not "calling everybody a bigot." It is saying that bigotry exists even on the left. The "good" that "can come of it" is the same good that comes from exposing bias wherever it exists. Why is it OK to call out bigots/racists on the right or accuse companies and some of their executives of discriminatory practices, but not to point to bias on the left. Obviously, Perry perceived a problem and decided to write about it. Maybe she believes that this was the right time to have this discussion, even an uneasy one.

[Tarheel_Dem]

27. Apparently, you weren't around here for the '08 primary fight? A lot of good

white "liberals" dropped their masks, so much so that some were shown the door. I was embarrassed for them, because they all thought they were so enlightened, until it looked like a black man could actually win. Melissa really touched a nerve, you can tell by the ones screaming the loudest. ;)

[Supersedeas]

29. Good questions all.

[provis99]

26. but since Harris-Perry is herself half-white,

is is her white self or black self which is doing the criticizing? And is she thereby prejudiced against herself? Sort of like how rush Limpballs thinks Obama is prejudiced against whites, despite being half-white himself?

This racial stuff is getting more confusing the more we talk about the topic.

[butterfly77]

37. Isn't one of her parents..

white? I thought she was biracial?

[ChiciB1]

19. I Like Harris Perry & Have Always Supported Most Of Her Views... BUT

I simply can't understand WHY she felt this so necessary. I'm a white female who has never actually felt "color" is an issue with me. Some have said WHITE isn't a color so what do I know, BUT white IS a color. Just another color in the box.

I suppose what she's said has it's validity, but not so much for me. I'm conflicted by her article because I can't lump myself into her observations. If I say I've never been racist I feel like I'm going to get attacked. But I'll say it anyway and I have reasons why I can say it. But any reason I give will only make SOMEONE think otherwise.

IT'S COMPLICATED!

[tblue]

24. You're just fine.

This whole thing is so ridiculous. I

[philly_bob]

25. This is one of those racial controversies.

Coverage should include race identifiers, like Harris Perry (B), Sirota (W), etc. It gets confusing without it. I've stopped paying attention.

I just note that Obama did not start the controversy, to my knowledge has not participated in it, and has not made Harris Perry's argument in his defense.

Let's move on, to issues like elections, jobs, wars, etc.

[Dr Fate]

32. "Make them Deny it." It's the perfect way to expose this Liberal racism.

Liberals deserved to be called racist for not supporting a politician.

Any liberals who says she got it wrong is in denial for sure.

They would be better off if they would just come out and ADMIT their hate for minorites and pledge to make up for it by supporting Obama, no matter what he does.

I really dont see any other way out of this for the Liberals.

I'm glad I'm a centrist, DLC type Democrat who only supports politicians with clean records on civil rights, helping the poor, etc.

[ProSense]

35. Well,

"'Make them Deny it.' It's the perfect way to expose this Liberal racism. Liberals deserved to be called racist for not supporting a politician. Any liberals who says she got it wrong is in denial for sure. They would be better off if they would just come out and ADMIT their hate for minorites and pledge to make up for it by supporting Obama, no matter what he does."

...lame snark aside, this is this kind of trivilization of a real issue that makes the discussion worth having.

Whether you like it or not, there is evidence of a double standard and there are people on the left who make despicable statements related to race.

[Dr Fate]

38. Yes- and we will shame them into fully supporting centrism by exposing Liberal hate for minorities.

Or -maybe it could attract centrist and moderate voted by proving that the far left is way too racist for them.

Hope so.

So no, this is not a trivilization of a real issue, but a strategy to guilt these errant liberal racists back into the fold or otherwise secure moderate votes.

If we can make them SEE just how racist they all are, then they will have no choice but support anything and everything Obama does. It's either that or be called a racist.

At the least, many will now think twice b/f disagreeing with Obama on all these racially charged issues like the war(s), tax cuts, wall street, off shoring, HCR, etc.

I think its gonna work too.

[ProSense]

40. Well

"Yes- and we will shame them into fully supporting centrism by exposing Liberal hate for minorities."

...are you implying that anyone who makes racist or racially insensitive statement shouldn't feel ashamed, shouldn't be called out?

"We" don't give a damn who they believe are "centrists" or who they eventually decide to support. Free country, one vote.

[Dr Fate]

43. I am saying that Obama's failing poll numbers indicate that many white liberals are racist.

"...are you implying that anyone who makes racist or racially insensitive statement shouldn't feel ashamed, shouldn't be called out?

No- I am saying that Obama's failing poll numbers indicate that many/most white liberals are racist. Just like Harris implied.

Of course we should call liberals who fail to support Obama something as awful and degrading as being a racist.

The liberal blogosphere gave Clinton, Carter, FDR etc. the benefit of the doubt. But since Obama is black, they wont support HIS wars or HIS economic plans or HIS tax cuts for off-shoring.

I agree with you about centrists and who they support as well, BTW.

[ProSense]

45. Reading

"No- I am saying that Obama's failing poll numbers indicate that many/most white liberals are racist. Just like Harris implied."

...comprehension isn't a strong suit, huh? Perry made no such ridiculous point.

[Dr Fate]

47. There's enough left-liberal racism to drive his poll numbers down, we all should agree on that much.

nt

[Ignis]

41. "Evidence of a double standard?" Correlation is not causation.

:banghead:

[ProSense]

42. Hmmmm?

"'Evidence of a double standard?' Correlation is not causation."

Evidence of a double standard isn't evidence, and racial insensitivity should be ignored and dismissed as irrelevant.

[Ignis]

44. Linking to one's own post as "evidence" is disingenuous.

And evidence does not a verdict make.

[ProSense]

46. Actually

"Linking to one's own post as "evidence" is disingenuous."

...linking to my own opinion, in which I cite evidence, saves me from reposting the information here, and my opinion is part of the discussion we're engaged in.

[Ignis]

49. Twisted logic.

:crazy:

[JVS]

33. So are you telling me that poisoning the well isn't helpful?

Fuck that bullshit!

[TheKentuckian]

48. Dr Fate has it. Failure to support "centrist" policies is racism. Not "centrist"=racist

Of course if you are a racist "centrist" ala Rothchild and many, many "Reagan Democrats" then it is an isolated issue that likely has been put behind forward looking centrists.

That is why I'm a Clayton Bixby/Uncle Ruckus/Uncle Tom. Just not "centrist" enough, hell us racists were so racists that we nominated Obama running from Clinton's "centrist" policies and DLC SOP.

Thanks Doc!