The American Spectator : The Spectacle Blog : Reid, Gibbs, and Race

Text Size

"I would suggest they spend about 20 seconds reading a little history…"
-- White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs yesterday, answering critics who have charged Democratic Majority Leader Senator Harry Reid with racism

Well. Good point, Mr. Gibbs. Consider it done.

And having done so, one can say easily that in terms of Mr. Reid, well, no.

No, this was not some off-hand mistake.

Harry Reid is a leading figure in a political party that has made its bones by judging others on race. This is the oldest of liberalism's building blocks. As noted here (it takes at least 20 seconds), Senator Reid is the latest descendant of a political philosophy that was a fervent supporter of slavery, of segregation, of lynching, of modern racial quotas. There is nothing he said that has contradicted the fundamental core beliefs of liberals, whether they were busy running the slave trade, founding the Ku Klux Klan or passing Social Security with the stellar support of world-class champion racists like Mississippi's longtime Democratic stalwart and FDR supporter Senator Theodore Bilbo.

This is reflexive. The concept of judging people by skin color is married to concepts of "social justice," a phrase that President Obama dutifully noted when defending Reid. Did you notice how quickly Reid noted that he had received phone calls of support from Julian Bond and others? All he named were…black. Why not cite support from non-blacks? Because, of course, if you view the world through a racial prism, where your main focus is judging others by race, support in this instance from blacks is valued more than whites or Latinos or Asians etc.

The unfairness here is to think this slip of the lip is either a slip or a way of thinking that belongs just to Harry Reid.

Here's a revealing look at this racial nonsense from somewhere else altogether. Sad to say, it comes from the hierarchy of my own national church, the United Church of Christ. It lists its employees -- children of God one and all -- in this fashion: Employees are reported by an "affirmative action officer" to be X number "Euro-American, persons of color, females and males." This is racial profiling employment style, just as Harry Reid briskly racially profiled Barack Obama in political fashion.

The conceit here is that all of this is in service of "civil rights," when in fact it is a wholesale abandonment of Martin Luther King's famous dream that some day his children would be judged by the content of their character and not the color of their skin. It ensures on a perpetual basis that America will be the kind of race-driven society that liberals and progressives have historically tried to structure for political profit, whether in the all-white South or seeking heavily black congressional districts, etc.

Is what Harry Reid said shameful? Yes, but it's worse than that. If you are a liberal, it is, disturbingly, typical. Liberalism genuinely thinks this way. It is a philosophy that believes now and has always believed in judging others by race -- whether it's Harry Reid and his "light skinned Negroes" or my own national church judging its employees by color or so on and on and on back into the mists at the dawn of this country. It is the central building block of liberalism today, as it has always been.

And it is morally wrong.

Should Harry Reid resign? No, let him stay as the symbol he is of the party he quite accurately represents.

We don't need even 20 seconds to know the history of that party. Past -- and, sadly, present.

View all comments (21) | Leave a comment

ncatty| 1.12.10 @ 4:16PM

And I would add "should Robert Gibbs resign?" No, let him continue to be the condescending, contemptuous face of this adminstration.

Liberal Reader| 1.12.10 @ 4:52PM

Mr Lord,

I don't know about this analysis. For months we've been treated to fairly regular stories about small-time (I emphasize "small time") Republicans -- often functionaries or state representatives -- who circulate offensive emails about Obama. Consider the one in which the White House was shown with a large watermelon patch planted in back.

Now Reid (the first senator to encourage Obama to run for president) is a much larger figure than the idiots who have circulated the offensive emails I refer to, but Reid also clearly meant to celebrate Obama's candidacy. His language was clumsily chosen and unfortunate, but to follow Liz Cheney and refer to it as "racist" seems to go too far.

Racism -- in America -- means, effectively, being white supremacist. It is a body of beliefs that are meant to legitimate and foster white privilege.

Clearly Reid's use of language -- offensive or insulting as it may be -- is not racist, in this more precise and historically accurate use of the term.

Red Phillips| 1.12.10 @ 7:33PM

"Racism -- in America -- means, effectively, being white supremacist. It is a body of beliefs that are meant to legitimate and foster white privilege."

No Liberal Reader, if our language means anything then racism (a Marxist term) should be confined to hate or ill-will of some sort based on race. Your definition allows only whites to be guilty of racism. There is indeed a name for what you described, but it is not racism. It is called Cultural Marxism. Did you graduate from the Frankfurt School? Marcuse would be very proud of you.

Margie| 1.12.10 @ 9:18PM

So white supremacists to you are just "cultural Marxists?" Not racists.

And according to Liberal Reader Racism in America is only on the white side.

Study both of these people.

Red Phillips| 1.13.10 @ 8:57AM

No Margie, LR implication that only whites can be racist is Cultural Marxism.

Margie| 1.13.10 @ 12:33PM

Right. And according to you, Harry Reid isn't a bigot and a racsist, and the Republicans are wrong for calling him on it. After all, according to you and Harry, lets face it, we're ALL racsists.

Liberal Reader| 1.13.10 @ 12:17AM

I don't know what you mean by "cultural marxism," although I guess it's not beyond all surmise.

But I'd like to speak to the more substantive part of your response to my post.

The dictionary definition of "racism" is not helpful unless the concept is then understood in its historical context. Perhaps this tendency in my thinking is why you choose to fling accusations of marxism at me; know that thinking about historical context is simply what informed people do when considering these kinds of topics.

Racism in America is especially relevant and important when considered as a body of beliefs, laws, narratives, practices, and even institutions that were designed with the intention of enforcing white privilege.

When in our history have whites been a minority consigned to menial labor and denied basic civil rights?

When in our history have whites been beaten, raped, lynched for demanding their right to vote when it has been denied them on the basis of their race alone and for no other reason?

Can a black man be a racist? Sure, I suppose so. But for any minute you spend talking about that instance of racism, you'd have to spend 24 hours speaking about the historical context in which it occurs, a context in which white supremacy in the primary goal of racist ideology.

Justice is proportion. That's not Marx; it's Plato, bud. The only Frankfurt School I go to serves 'em with chili and mustard.

Red Phillips| 1.13.10 @ 9:17AM

"I don't know what you mean by "cultural marxism," although I guess it's not beyond all surmise."

That's why they make books and the internet. Let me help you out.

http://www.marylandthursdaymee.....arxism.htm

http://www.wnd.com/news/articl.....E_ID=55833

Margie, it would benefit you to read them as well.

Liberal Reader| 1.13.10 @ 11:28AM

Phillips:

O.K. So William Lind uses the term "cultural marxism." It's not a term of wide circulation or particular significance in the history of modern cultural analysis, nor is it historically important by virtue of wide usage. It has no heuristic value I can see, and generally I'm just not interested. I'm not a marxist; I didn't make a marxist point above; and, I reject the notion that any idea that is not touted by Glenn Beck is somehow marxist. In short, I just reject your whole response and would prefer that you respond to the points I actually make without characterizing them with lame labels. Nice talking to you though.

Red Phillips| 1.13.10 @ 1:15PM

LR, it is in wide enough usage that the PC Enforcers in Chief, the SPLC, felt the need to respond to it. This whole Reid hysteria is a fruit of it.

Red Phillips| 1.13.10 @ 2:17PM

Also, read this book:

http://www.amazon.com/Multicul.....amp;sr=1-3

SoCon| 1.13.10 @ 3:24PM

Red is right: Liberals use "cultural marxism" as a weapon to keep dissenters in line. Identity politics/Plantation politics are both examples of cultural marxism.

Lib Reader will never cop to it because liberals' power and control over free speech would be threatened.

Yes, I'm sure Lib Reader is a big fan of Marcuse; commies both.

Dixie Pixie| 1.12.10 @ 7:49PM

To: Liberal Reader

That bunker you are in must be incredibly deep and the structure exceptionally thick. Just where have you been for the last 30 years. The Civil Rights groups have been a dominant political force for so long they have grown politically senile and corrupt.

White Supremacy has been dead as a political force for nearly 30 years. For example, the NAACP endorsed George Wallace for Alabama Governor in 1982. The only fossilized remnants are in the Democratic Party like Senator Robert Byrd.

The only people supporting social privileges for the few, are the Leftist Academics and Democrats. Why do you think the conservatives keep complaining about Leftist double standards. It is the conservatives who are leading the charge for equality under law. The Democrats and the Left have always been for social privileges dispensed for political support.

Sir, You are so befuddled by Leftest propaganda you have lost contact with political reality. If you think a few funny emails about Obama are an indication are a confirmation of racism, you have lost your political sanity. What you think of the political cartoons of Michael Ramirez, Glenn McCoy and Terry Holbert I can only guess.

Hopefully your political sanity will return if you keep reading TAS and TAS Online. Best of luck.

Mary Louise| 1.12.10 @ 4:55PM

The MLK argument is true, but it's grown so repetitive and stale.

Malcolm X would be a much better source to draw from, being that he seemed to have Libertarian leanings, and that he so wanted to see his people economically independent and free. If I were running for office. I'd go into the 'hood and read from his works.

Here's where the Dems have an edge. It's also the party where Harold Ickes lost a kidney in the fight for Civil Rights. That gains them a lot of street cred. The kind that can't be bought or sought via rhetoric on liberty and equality.

Reid and Lott are of a generation, and so is Bill Clinton. I never bought his 'brotherhood' act for a minute. And if Game Change is accurate, his comment to Ted Kennedy about Obama being a coffee server 20 years ago, surprises me not at all.

Contrast Bill with Bobby Kennedy. He may have liked Camus, but I don't think he imagined the American Black as Sisyphus Happy.

Roy| 1.12.10 @ 6:01PM

The problem, I guess, is if MLK is "repetitive" and "stale" - meaning, I guess, that it no longer moves anybody - then it's only fair that whites drop this principle as well.

Want to live in that world? Me either.

Mary Louise| 1.12.10 @ 6:34PM

What world would that be? The one you just pulled out of the air? The one where varying language equals dropped principles?

AG Holder did have a point. Not that we're cowards, but that we don't know how to talk to one another.

If you live in a City, even a small one like the one I live in, that distance between the Races is there. It's a lot better than it was, but it's still there. Maybe you can't ever close it, and I'm not against benign neglect, but it would be refreshing to read something deeper, something more profound.

One day at work a co-worker and I were talking and I had just read, and never knew before, that certain Ethiopians could be considered Caucasian, though having very dark skin, if certain parts of physiognomy met quals. I think it's nose and mouth. She was thrilled because she liked the conversation. We parted with her wryly asking me why black could be white, but white never be black? She won, and she knew it. And I really respect that.

I realize you can't approach politics in the same way. But almost all the writing on either side is stale and flat, and IMO, not able to reach and advance. Had we a Harold Ickes combined with a Jack Kemp, maybe.

Ken (Old Texican)| 1.12.10 @ 5:38PM

"...Judge a man by the content of his character...rather than by the color of his skin."

I loved that sentence by Reverend King.

I live by it.

Nothing else is Christian.

NavyBrat| 1.12.10 @ 9:54PM

Ken. I agree wholehearteldy with what you say. These people in the "civil rights industry" these days are charlatans to Dr. King's memory & works. Mr. Lord is dead on on 2 counts when he says:

"The conceit here is that all of this is in service of "civil rights," when in fact it is a wholesale abandonment of Martin Luther King's famous dream that some day his children would be judged by the content of their character and not the color of their skin"

He was also dead on in what he wrote in the earlier article he linked to in this piece.

The argument for Malcom X is also a good one. He came to realize the error of his earlier teachings. He was assassinated for it. Those who felt the same way as the assassins who killed him are cut from the same cloth as those who now blindly forgive Reid for his idiotic statement.

These people (the assassins of Malcom X & betrayers of King) MUST keep the "race war" going. How else will they bring about their socialist utopia & continue to enrich themselves? If everyone sees each other " the content of their character, & not the color of their skin," then how can these hucksters, A: Continue to bring home wealth distribution to those they've duped into thinking they've been "wronged" by the evil white/Jewish/Christian man, & B: Continue to get large fees for showing up with their little rent-a-mobs every time they percieve a "racial injustice" has occured.

besthdsoft| 1.12.10 @ 10:23PM

Thank you so much for this post. How to convert Blu-ray dvd? Try this software.

Blu Ray DVD Converter is a powerful Blu-ray disc ripper tool, The real Blu-ray converter can help you rip Blu-ray DVD movie and save as all popular video formats. If you are looking for a Blu-ray ripper with the functions of Blu-ray ripping and converting, this is the ideal one.

More Related Products : * Blu-ray DVD Ripper

Sheila| 1.13.10 @ 2:26PM

Red Phillips, watch out, Margie has just branded you a white supremacist. Welcome to the club. This is all a tempest in a teapot. Personally, I subscribe to the "sticks and stones" theory. Go ahead, call me whatever name you want (racist, sexist, homophobe, unchristian) - I don't play that game. Negro, Black, African American - the ever-aggrieved minority that keeps changing the rules, trying to keep those racial apologists perpetually in guilt and in line. Sorry, I don't play that game either. This holier-than-thou crap from Republicans isn't unexpected, just disgustingly typical.