John Lacny wrote:
> Bro. Munson, however, is kidding himself.
Sorry, Lackny-ass, but I am expressing my opinion. You think that I am kidding myself because you just don't like me. It's pretty simple. I post something, Lacny attacks me, by belittling my arguments and insulting my intelligence.
Race
> rarely has to "come up" explicitly, because
> racism is in the very fabric of this society.
No fucking shit, Sherlock! We're not talking here about racism being an integral part of this society. The issue here are the tropes that backlash conservatives use to motivate their forces.
Let me challenge you with this reality check: can you name for us any of Rush Limbaugh's themes from the past one or two weeks, without searching his website. No fair if you cheat. Or, when was the last time you had a conversation with a Dittohead?
The
> default mode for racists these days is the "I'm
> not a racist, but . . . " style of argument -- no, not
> even that, the fiery indignation that whites
> have immediately when the subject of race even
> comes up.
Really? Which racists have you talked to lately? Or does the esteemed list-know-it-all read the minds of racists?
Read the papers: which topic produces
> the most indignant letters to the editor from the
> rank-and-file right wing?
I read the papers and can answer that question.
The rank-and-file right wing is upset about LIBERALS.
OK, checking today's Kansas City Star Letter's to the Editor page:
* Letter celebrating the legacy of Ray Charles * Liberal letter attacking pro-life column * Letter about definitions of "prisoners of war" (right wing) * Letter about pollution caused by coal-fired plants (environmentalist) * Letter on gay marriage in Kansas (right wing) * Letter about "positive news" in Iraq (probably right wing) * Anti-war letter (possibly liberal) * Bizarre letter about Ronald Reagan and Walt Disney (Martian) * Anti-immigration letter by Arlington, VA-based nonprofit * Voices: Joke about Ray Charles and state funerals * Voices: Comment asking if Bill Clinton writes about Vietnam in his book (right wing)
So, after looking through a newspaper published in the heart of Red State country, we find that the right wingers are writing letters to the editor about topics promoted by the right wing media: Clinton, support the U.S. in Iraq, gay marriage, and media coverage of the war.
That's just from today's paper. It's pretty much the same everyday. The major bogeyman for the conservatives are the liberals and anything that can be linked to liberals.
> Which topic attracts the
> creepiest codeword-laden bile from both right-
> wing shock jocks AND their listeners? They're
> insulted at the very idea that racism is even
> brought up. "How dare you say I'm a racist!"
That may have been the case ten years ago, but right wing radio jocks have shifted to new bogeymen.
> I'm reading Frank's book these nights, and I'm
> about midway through. It's entertaining and
> has a lot of insights, particularly about Kansas
> where Frank presents some compelling concrete
> information (e.g., about how electoral statistics
> show the fight within the Kansas Republican Party
> mapping onto class divisions, with the country-
> clubbers favoring the "moderates" and the
> less-affluent areas favoring the bible-thumpers).
> But the fact is that Kansas is NOT typical of the
> US. It is far too white.
Kansas is, in fact, very typical of most Midwestern states, which is the
focus of Frank's argument. He's not writing about New York City, he's writing about working class folks in "red states." I haven't seen the stats, but I suspect that Kansas is more diverse than states like Nebraska, Iowa, Minnesota, and the Dakotas.
Therefore the backlash
> in Kansas may indeed emphasize the "cultural"
> elements that Frank talks about moreso than
> elsewhere in the country. But the rank-and-file
> right in most other states -- certainly in the
> South -- is motivated by race and racism, and
> it's in places where white supremacy needs to
> be defended directly, from the PRESENCE of
> people of color, where this is most obvious
> in political fights over crime, housing, property
> taxes, schools, etc. Of course racists these
> days don't dress up in Klan robes and rant
> about preserving white womanhood, but only
> an idiot -- or a racist -- would deny that race
> is present in these political fights. In most
> cases, in fact, they're pretty much all about
> race.
Yes, race is present in these fights, but not on the basis that your outdated leftist analysis argues. I know that it is fashionable to wear your anti-racism on your sleeve in sectarian left circles, but if you want to understand how the right wing is operating these days you need to shut up more and listen and watch.
> Kansas is peculiar in that -- as Frank points
> out -- it actually has a rebel heritage, even a
> rebel anti-racist one, as exemplified by
> abolitionists up to and including John Brown,
> who fought the racist invaders from Missouri
> in "bleeding Kansas." Despite the relative
> absence of people of color, however, it's still
> delusional to imagine that the white supremacist
> political economy of the country AS A WHOLE
> has no impact on Kansan voting patterns and
> political behavior generally. Race may not be
> uppermost in their MINDS, but Kansas voters
> are FUNCTIONAL racists when they support the
> Republican party. This is the way the world --
> and particularly this country -- works.
Oh brother. So the Democrats are not racist because they support the left wing of capital?
I suspect that Lacny thinks that Kansas is a state without people of color. We do have people of color living here in Kansas, Lacny. And Kansans aren't some kind of cartoon racists like you are suggesting here.
> Like I said, I'm halfway through the book, and
> Frank has yet to talk much about the details
> of the political struggles in the western Kansas
> towns where large numbers of immigrants
> from Latin America work in places like the
> meatpacking plants. (Maybe he does later in
> the book?)
In places like the meatpacking plants? Is that the only place where you will find immigrants from Latin America in Kansas?
Here is where the incipient racism of
> rural whites who have never had much contact
> with people of color will face the test of actual
> proximity to nonwhite people.
When did you talk to these people? Does Mr. List-know-it-all have some kind of way to instantly survey these people?
>Using my own
> frame of reference, I would say this is the
> place where the kind of racism that's prominent
> in central Pennsylvania (crude and ignorant,
> manifesting itself politically in rural resentment
> against Pittsburgh and especially Philadelphia)
> will morph into the kind of racism that's more
> prominent in Pennsylvania suburbs and cities
> (usually less crude but -- in my experience --
> even more vicious, since it's heightened by
> the proximity of a perceived nonwhite threat).
Whatever, Lacny. You need to get out more often and talk to people who don't think like you.
Chuck0