“The greatest hope that most Americans — including Republicans — had when Barack Obama was elected president was that the election of a black man as the country’s president would reduce, if not come close to eliminating, the racial tensions that have plagued America for generations.”
What strain of myopic lunkheadedness could have produced that appalling misunderstanding of racial politics? There is no one with a functioning brain who could ever have thought that just by electing an African-American president, racial tensions would be eliminated. That is such a shallow analysis of modern society that no amount of shame would be sufficient to heap on the author. The only explanation for expelling such an idiotic notion is that someone is looking for a contract with Fox News.
The quote above is the opening paragraph of uber-rightist Dennis Prager’s column in the National Review, and it demonstrates how acutely myopic conservatives are when attempting to grasp the complex issue of race. Prager is actually stunned that “The election, and even the reelection, of a black man as president, in a country that is 87 percent non-black — a first in human history — has had no impact on what are called ‘racial tensions.'” But where he got the idea that sending an African-American to the White House would weave some sort of magic spell over the country that would eliminate racism is simply incomprehensible.
What makes this even more dumbfounding is that the truth is readily apparent in so many aspects of our national profile. If anything, Barack Obama’s election exacerbated racial tensions in some constituencies. People who were predisposed to prejudice hardened their views. Borderline racists slipped across the line and succumbed to their latent bigotry. Amongst politicians and pundits, racial agendas became more aggressive and rhetorical attacks, both blatant and subliminal, multiplied. Shortly after Obama’s inauguration the FBI reported an unprecedented increase in the number of assassination threats. The most simple minded observer ought to have recognized that Obama did not win 100% of the vote, and that the nearly half of the electorate that voted against him contained the same amount of bigots as before the election.
Prager goes on to assert that “racial tensions,” which he dismissively puts in quotes, are actually the fault of African-Americans. He says that the notion is “a lie perpetrated by the Left.” He claims that the term is “a euphemism for a black animosity toward whites and a left-wing construct.” This effort to pretend that racism doesn’t exist, except in the minds of the victims, is commonly found among racists who seek to absolve themselves of any responsibility for the lingering hatred in American culture. According to Prager, blacks are just insufficiently grateful for the generosity shown them by the majority white population. After all, we let them have their president, didn’t we?
Prager has some company with Richard Cohen of the Washington Post whose column today made some equally lunkheaded assertions. His piece titled “Racism vs. reality,” was a defense of racism wherein he declared that he “can understand why [George] Zimmerman was suspicious and why he thought Martin was wearing a uniform we all recognize.” Cohen was referring to Martin’s hoodie, but he might as well have been referring to his skin, because Cohen’s premise was that there is justification for being suspicious of young black men.
Cohen berates politicians who fail to “acknowledge the widespread fear of crime committed by young black males,” noting that “We know them from the nightly news.” However, that widespread fear is largely a product of the distinctly biased representation of African-Americans on the nightly news (and all through the day as well on Fox News and other cable networks). Cohen’s argument relies on phony statistics that disparage blacks as being more prone to criminal activity when, for the most part, they are just more prone to being prosecuted and incarcerated.
Cohen closes by saying that “There’s no doubt in my mind that Zimmerman profiled Martin and, braced by a gun, set off in quest of heroism.” But then he adds that “The result was a quintessentially American tragedy — the death of a young man understandably suspected because he was black and tragically dead for the same reason.” Understandably suspected? Cohen is alleging that it’s perfectly OK, even understandable, to presume foul intentions just by the color of one’s skin. Isn’t that an outright admission of racism?
In a “Stand Your Ground,” “Racial Profiling” society, it is disheartening to see these kinds of opinions being expressed in mainstream media. The consequences of those combined concepts led directly to the tragedy in Sanford, Florida. And it proves that, contrary to Prager’s moronic rambling, there is much work to be done before racial tensions are eliminated. And it won’t happen because one person gets elected to office.
Fox News is already getting its money’s worth by re-hiring Sarah Palin. When the need came for an imbecile to provide an incoherent rhetorical jumble of nonsense in response to President’s Obama’s remarks about NSA leaker Edward Snowden, Fox was fortunate enough to have Palin back on the payroll. Who else could deliver a level of idiocy that so perfectly meshes with the bigoted leanings of the Fox audience?
For obvious reasons, the American conservative movement has long been dogged by accusations of racism and racial insensitivity. From their famed Southern strategy to their determined efforts to suppress minority voting via phony voter ID initiatives to their race-baiting Obama attacks, conservatives have made clear their opposition to a tolerant, multicultural America. In fact, much of their electoral strategy relies on scaring older, white voters about blacks and Hispanics taking over “their” country.
