Trump created yet another round of the racist/not racist game when he tweeted that four congresswomen should go back where they came from. Trump’s defenders, when they admit to knowing the content of the tweets, either simply deny that the tweets are racist or engage in semantic engineering to argue for that claim.
To concede the obvious, Trump did not use explicitly racist words in his tweets. For example, he did not refer to the women with standard racist slurs. As such, his defenders could argue that the tweets are not racist in that sense. This would, of course, require claiming ignorance of coding and how language works (such as inuendo and euphemisms). This fools no one but does allow for implausible denial that can be quite appealing. Because of this the use of coded language and avoiding explicitly racist words has become a standard tactic.
The first step in this tango is the use of such coded language or language that is racist, yet not explicitly racist in the way that using racial slurs. For example, saying “go back where you came from” contains no explicit racial slurs, yet is known to almost all users of American English to be racist. It is, in fact, recognized as the type of language that could count as harassment in the workplace. But since it contains no explicit racial slurs, it offers its users and defenders that implausible denial option, which leads to the next stage of the dance.
As would be expected, people who do not like racism (or are looking to score political or virtue points) will attack such statements. In the case of Trump’s infamous tweets, there was extensive criticism from the Democrats. This is presumably what Trump expected and hoped for, since this allows him and his defenders to make the next move in the dance.
The next step is to accuse the accusers of being racist. While this might seem odd, the tactic is to contend that since the critics were the first to bring up race explicitly, they are the ones who are racist. To use an analogy, this would be like a worker using sexual euphemisms in the workplace and, after being called out for sexual harassment, claiming that their critic is the sexual harasser since they were the first to explicitly use the word “sex.” This is obviously absurd, as it is absurd to say that a critic of racist remarks is thus a racist because they bring the issue of race into the open. This tactic does have considerable psychological force and is worth considering as a type of fallacy.
While a full analysis is needed, a common explanation of the effectiveness of this tactic rests with the fact that most Americans think that racism is bad and that they are not racists. Trump and others are, however, making racist remarks seem to be non-racist by using the coding tactics developed over the years. For example, immigration is presented in terms of crime and a threat to jobs, so it does not “feel” racist when one is worried about brown people committing crimes and taking one’s job. After all, the worry is not because they are brown, but because they are criminals and job stealers. If someone accepts that the coded racism of Trump and his ilk is racist, they must either accept that they are racists if they go along with the charade or reject the charade and accept it for what it is. It is easier to simply deny that it is racist, thus allowing a person to hold to their views that racism is bad, and they are not racists, while still giving in to the feelings of fear and anger that Trump and others have fed so well. Thus, good people can become ardent defenders of an evil they would reject if they saw its true face.
This racist tango can lock critics into the dance of racist or not racist, which distracts from the true concern—namely the racism. This tactic is thus very effective. First, it allows Trump and others to appeal to those who are racist. Second, it allows him to appeal to people who are not racist, but whose fear and anger influence them to accept the coded racism that scares and incites them as not being racist. Third, it gets the critics and media arguing about whether the racists or racism exploiters are really racist or not—thus wasting energy on a red herring. While this tactic serves Trump and his ilk well, it is doing considerable damage to the social fabric and moral fiber of the United States.
Two days ago Nancy Pelosi was a racist. Yawn.
Meanwhile, on the same day that Trump tweeted, Rep. Ayanna Pressley said: “We don’t need any more brown faces that don’t want to be a brown voice.”
So apparently she believes that one’s skin color should determine the way one thinks.
I have an aunt who is a devout Catholic. She believes with all of her heart in a living God, that Jesus personified is responsible in some way for everything that happens in her life. There really is no arguing with her – this is her profound truth.
I also have an uncle who is the opposite – his “faith” is in science. Everything he believes or understands is rooted in some kind of scientific truth. Even if unproven, he trusts that with better research or greater human understanding, it could be.
And then there is Trump. The “truth” here, held by so many, is that Trump is a racist, that he is the worst kind of white supremacist, fascistic Nazi the world has ever seen. This is a fundamental truth for these people – unshakable, “prima facie”, except that in their minds it can never be disproven. It is the basis for all further opinion or commentary.
“Trump’s defenders, when they admit to knowing the content of the tweets…”
I think that what you mean by “Trump’s Defenders” is “Critical Thinkers”, who don’t admit so much as they are compelled to go to the source, read the entire tweet, take it in context, and refuse to be swayed by the incessant biased headlines, “Trump’s Racist Tweets”. Trump’s detractors refuse to allow anyone to think for themselves on this issue. They have made up their minds; it is part of the narrative they believe with all their hearts, and want you to believe too – after all, there’s an election coming up and that’s about all they have to go on. But if anyone should refuse to believe as they do – why, they must be racists and white supremacists too.
There is a logical fallacy known as “Cum hoc, ergo propter hoc” – perhaps you have heard of it. This is the fallacy behind so many cries of racism; the fact that people actually believe it is astounding. Here’s an example:
Ilhan Omar has called Trump a fascist and a white supremacist at every turn. She has been relentless in her attacks on him and on the values that this country stands on. She refuses to acknowledge that the problems at the border are caused not by overcrowding, lack of foresight on the part of Congress, but rather states that it is all Trump’s fault – that he is a child abuser, who actually enjoys “ripping children from the arms of her parents” (a characterization which in itself is a bold face lie).
Omar is an avowed anti-Semite, supportive of Hamas, and a vocal critic of our major ally in the Middle East, who has supported policies that will by design bring about Israel’s demise.
One of the very first sentences spoken by Rashida Tlaib upon her election was “We’re going to impeach that motherfucker!”. Again, in demonstrated opposition to US policy with regard to our most loyal ally in the Middle East, Tlaib wrapped herself in the Palestinian flag, not the US flag, in celebration of her election – making it crystal clear where her loyalties lie.
Along with AOC and Pressly, they have ridiculously compared conditions at the border to Nazi concentration camps – while at the same time holding Donald Trump personally responsible for it. At the same time, they have opposed every single one of his efforts to mitigate that problem – from working with the Mexican government to prevent the illegal border crossings to trying to pass funding to expand the facilities to handle the overcrowding.
There are dozens of examples of why Trump would want these people to shut up and go away. But it’s too hard to think about that, isn’t it? Why would anyone want to discuss Omar’s and Tlaib’s real loyalties, anti-semitism, or exaggerated criticism of Trump with any kind of open mind?
Trump is correct, that these four women have mixed loyalties – they wear their anti-semitism on their sleeves, they are critical of the United States and our most fundamental values; they are critical of the Constitution, and rail against what they perceive as US policy, and most of the time, the criticism has little basis in truth or even a cursory understanding of any underlying rationale. They ignore history and simply blame Trump for everything, and hide behind cries of “racism” whenever challenged.
Fortunately for the loyal opposition, all four of these “Squad” members are non-white, so the answer is easy. Trump is a racist.
Nevermind content. Nevermind character. We don’t have to consider who may be right or wrong, or if either side has any merit.
Should Israel cease to exist? We don’t have to discuss that. Trump is a racist.
Is it really true that our border is like a concentration camp? Who cares? Trump is a racist.
Who is really responsible for conditions at the border? Could it be because of Democrat immigration policies? Could it be because we refused to see this coming, even though it was brought up months ago? None of that matters. Trump is a racist.
The fact is (and this is where “cum hoc” figures in), that there can be a slew of reasons for being critical of others, or for reacting to their criticism of you. But in this country, if the target of your criticism happens to be “brown”, there can only be one reason.
And those versed in logic and discourse, who are skilled practitioners of wordsmithing, can twist any statement into one that fits their own fundamental truth, as is shown by this post.
Well stated. Though I’d quibble with “those versed in logic and discourse, who are skilled practitioners of wordsmithing, can twist any statement into one that fits their own fundamental truth, as is shown by this post.” Well, the “skilled practitioners” part. Not much skill here. I could probably do a better job arguing the leftist position.
Pity your comments will be substantially ignored. Because you’re racist. See how easy that is?
Well, I don’t really expect anyone from the left to read my words and say, “Oh … gee… I guess there’s something to that!” Which is why I brought up my devout Aunt. How can you argue a deep-seated visceral belief with mere logic?
Nevertheless, it astounds me how transparent the hypocrisy can be. Ilhan Omar can make blatant antisemitic remarks like “It’s all about the Benjamins!”, and Congress waters down the censure. She then publicly states that she does not regret her words but has “learned” from all the people who were offended by them – even though “she certainly didn’t mean them that way” and all is forgiven.
How many people on the right have unknowingly used words that have, in other contexts, been used as racial slurs (or, as in the case of David Howard, used a word that merely sounds like a racial slur, for which there is no retreat, no apology, no explanation?
But Ilhan Omar is a Muslim, a woman, and a person of color – there’s the triple play right there. Dare to criticize and you will wear the scarlet “R” for the rest of your days. If not the “R”, then the “X” or “I”, and if not that, there’s the “M”.
Content, Schmontent. We’re on a roll here! And our feckless elected officials are scrambling for cover. Among the rest of us, the great unwashed, we must guard our anonymity and dare not speak out in public, lest we suffer the wrath of the 21st Century Inquisition.
Here ya go – just substitute “Racist” for “Witch”, and you’ll get a good handle on the logic being used.
https://youtu.be/zrzMhU_4m-g
https://pjmedia.com/trending/flashback-governor-cuomo-told-conservatives-they-werent-welcome-in-new-york/
Hey, you know how Mike teaches ethics and thinkology? Well this smarty, smart smart law professor teaches “Judgement and Decision-making”…at Harvard.
https://www.thecut.com/2019/07/bruce-hay-paternity-trap-maria-pia-shuman-mischa-haider.html
What a putz.
“Sorry, I’m married,” he responded impulsively. It wasn’t exactly true — Hay has been legally divorced since 1999, but he lives with his ex-wife, Jennifer Zacks, an assistant U.S. Attorney in Boston, and their two young children.
Moar on “Go back where you came from”
http://ace.mu.nu/archives/382450.php
One of the challenging things about thinking critically or creatively is the whole “out of the box” thing. What if everything we know is wrong? Could there be an aspect to this whole situation that we haven’t considered?
Donald Trump, whether or not he is a racist, is widely thought to be a kind of “loose cannon”, who stirs up a lot of trouble by going off script, saying things that cause much controversy – causing his supporters to wring their hands and wish someone would take away his smartphone, and causing his detractors to redouble their efforts to (as one so delicately put it), “Impeach the MF”. And then there’s the whole white supremacy, xenophobe, racist thing.
And no one can deny that Trump is very skilled at leveraging the whole “We don’t know what he’ll do next!” thing.
But what if it’s all part of the plan? Anyone familiar with Sun Tzu or the basics of game theory should find this maneuvering at least rational and understandable; some might even consider it “well played”.
On the one hand, we have these four freshmen representatives; brash, vocal, and very much “in your face”. These four represent the core of the far-left wing of the Democrat party who seem to be deeply invested in identity politics, entitlements, demonizing private enterprise and looking to government as a kind of “benevolent Big Brother”. Somehow, this sizable sibling can defy the basic laws of economics and open our borders to anyone who wants to come in, offer them (and everyone else in the country) free health care, a $20/hr minimum wage, a basic income for everyone whether or not they choose to work, He can set about the rapid dismantling of the core of our economy, the energy sector. (Gee, when you put it like that …).
And the only ones who will be hurt by this will be the rich – who either (A) damn well deserve to be hurt, and it’s about time!, or (B) are so rich they won’t feel it anyway.
Theirs is a world where racism is to be called out and met with outrage wherever it appears – in reality or in their imagination – but government-sponsored antisemitism as a foundation of foreign policy is OK. Oh, and it all starts with impeachment.
On the other hand, we have Nancy Pelosi, who, by comparison actually looks pretty conservative. These four, along with the group of Congressional followers they’ve been able to collect, are a real thorn in Pelosi’s side. She understands the realities of economics enough to temper her liberalism, she understands when to compromise and when to hit back; she knows the kind of scorched-earth an impeachment process (especially on the basis of “We hate you”) would leave behind. And she definitely understands the value and necessity of party loyalty, and a united front.
But suddenly, as she herself was falling victim to these absurd cries of “Racism”, a fault-line was beginning to show in the Democrat party. And this fissure was starting to elevate Pelosi and the moderate Democrats, showing America that Liberalism was NOT centered around “The Squad”, No, they were distancing themselves from the real liberal Democrats – the old-school team of Pelosi, Schumer, Biden, and the rest. Hell, for a moment there, even Donald Trump himself was sticking up for Pelosi, telling America that the Squad had gone too far, that Pelosi was absolutely not a racist.
But … what if that was the blunder?
If the members of “The Squad” were isolating themselves from the rest of the party and being mostly perceived as not only quite left-of-center but decidedly off-center as well – wouldn’t the political move from the right be to allow that to grow as the true narrative of the Democrats, and give the old-school moderates no choice but to unify around them?
Trump and the rest of the Republicans and Conservatives are well aware that Pelosi cannot rein them in, but they also know that she is totally committed to party unity and party loyalty. So if she can’t get them to tone it down and come back to the fold, she will have to take some other steps – steps that involve starting out on her left foot.
So Trump gives her the rope. He tweets, “Send them back” with enough ambiguity to occupy the small minds of the hoi-palloi, but with enough clarity to unite the Democrats once again against a common enemy. But in order to accomplish that, Pelosi has to kiss and make up with the Squad; she and Schumer must move to the left and accept the vitriol, the inexperience, the ideology of emotion, and even defend it.
How difficult do you think it is for Nancy Pelosi to publicly say that “There is no tinge of antisemitism in the Democrat Party”, and that “Trump completely misunderstands Omar’s words”?
Trump has fixed the fissure by giving them a common enemy – but the old-school Moderate Democrats can no longer be old-school or moderate like the good old days.
And by giving them the raw meat they wanted, Trump has put them all in the same boat – with Ilhan Omar and AOC as the captain and the first-mate. And it didn’t cost him a thing. He’s never going to convince the never-Trumpers that he’s not a racist, and he has a tremendous loyalty among his base – so he was in a no-lose situation.
He sacrificed his queen, but at a stage in the game where it matters very little.
Because suddenly, in the midst of all this anger and hatred and identity politics, conservatism starts to not look so bad – at least not to the issues-based voters in the swing states.
If that was not the plan, it certainly was a brilliant accident.
The problem with left-wing politics is that there is no limiting principle. The Dems went to the barricades to pass Obamacare, but now they aren’t happy with it. When I talk to my Dem friends, they sound just as unhappy about healthcare as they always have. There is no recognition that we are living under the system that they voted for and embraced.
C’mon TJ, you know the standard socialist answer to why socialism didn’t work in any of its numerous incarnations.
The truly frightening aspect to that is the exodus from heavily blue states like California, New Jersey and New York, and the subsequent migration to red states like Texas. They don’t seem to realize that the governments & policies they have helped to enact are what contribute to the undesirability of the states that they are leaving – and that the more conservative policies are what make places like Texas & others more attractive.
The migration of dissatisfied Democrats threaten to swing the red states, and may affect the outcomes of national elections and congressional representation for years to come.
I suppose I shouldn’t worry too much, though. The pendulum swings; sometimes it takes some extreme conditions to get it to reverse, but it will reverse.
The City of Baltimore’s murder rate is higher than in any other large city in the country. The rate of violent crime in the city continues to buck national trends; there is a history of investigations into the political motivation of some of the police commissioner’s reports.
In 2015, the death of Freddie Gray while in police custody touched off protests and riots that Barack Obama publicly supported, “as long as they were peaceful”. Rocks were thrown, fires were set, businesses were looted, police officers and civilians alike were injured. Alan Dershowitz offered the opinion that the police officers were “over-charged”, in an effort to appease the rioters.
Meanwhile, the pest control company “Orkin” keeps statistics on rat-infestation in various cities based on the number of calls they get. Baltimore is always in the top ten in this category, most recently coming in at #9.
On July 18, Homeland Security Secretary Kevin McAleenan testified before the House Oversight Committee. I say “testified”, but when it came time for Elijah Cummings to question him, he instead decided to deliver a well-rehearsed vituperative monologue directed at McAleenan, citing false or exaggerated conditions (“children sitting in their own feces”) and accusing the border patrol of suffering from a systemic lack of empathy. To this, McAleenan said,
“I just wonder why would an agency if they have a deficiency of empathy, create a Border Search Trauma and Rescue team to try to protect people that are making this dangerous crossing and make over 4,000 rescues a year, on their own time with the collateral duty apply to be emergency medical technicians so they can help people in dangerous conditions,”
The diatribe was over-the-top enough to draw an official rebuke by Rep. Jim Jordan, the ranking Republican on the committee. After showing images of border agents helping injured children, he then called to everyone’s attention the big elephant in the room, the Democrats’ politicization of the issue –
“The most damning fact that Jordan highlighted as he castigated the Democrats for “choosing to play politics” with the border and “fabricating stories of cruelty and besmirching the hard-working civil servants protecting the border”: Most of the Border Patrol agents are Latino. There goes that whole argument on how racism leads to a lack of empathy.”
Then he asked the question of McAleenan that no one wanted to hear – that no media reports, that lies at the heart of this problem –
” “Mr. Secretary, would it have helped to get the resources when you asked for them?”
“Of course,” McAleenan said.”
And so Donald Trump, consistent with his unleashing of anger at anyone and everyone, regardless of race, cited the conditions in Baltimore, referenced Cummings’ bullying of McAleenan, and said essentially, “Who the hell are you to come down like this, with exaggerated claims and outright falsehoods, on people who are working their asses off to fix a problem that you and your party have caused, when the conditions in your own district are far worse – and have been for years?
Conclusion?
Trump is a racist.
If anyone does not think that this is an official strategy – to promote the “Racist” narrative at every turn, to twist every word into a racist comment, a “code” or a “dogwhistle”, and keep the word in the headlines every single day … they must have their heads buried in the sand.
The sad thing is that there really is a crisis at the border, and people are suffering – but the Democrats don’t care – wait, they do care – but not about the “children” or the “migrants”. They care because the worse it gets, the more they can unleash tirades like that of Elijah Cummings – watching with wringing hands and just a little trickle of drool at the corner of their mouths, knowing that if Trump dares criticize a person of color, they can downplay the actual content and continue the “Racist” trope.
Conclusion?
Trump is a racist.
Close. Everyone is a racist. Or more accurately, everyone who fails to conform to the current Narrative, and it changes every few years/months/days so do try and keep up, is a racist. Even short of politics, common everyday ideas, perceptions, thoughts that were perfectly acceptable, anti-racist even, are today racist. Nothing matters except what whoever momentarily holds power says matters. We are transitioning to a post-meaning society which if not arrested will slowly start to cannibalize itself. Some people actually view the French Revolution in a positive light. In spite of how it turned on itself. What they fail to understand is when the Gods of the Copybook Headings show up, the terrors and slaughter return.
BTW, did you know that there is a Jacobin Magazine? Here’s a link to one op-ed there that you might find interesting. Well, interesting isn’t the word to describe it really but ..meh…
https://www.jacobinmag.com/2019/07/howard-buffett-gates-foundation-bernie-sanders
I don’t disagree, but in the context of this thread, “The Racist Tango” the specific point is about Trump – and the often extreme mental gymnastics the left attempts in order to take whatever comes out of his mouth, throw away any context, accuracy, or intent, and highlight the racist attribute.
Mike puts it very well in his original essay …
“Trump did not use explicitly racist words in his tweets. For example, he did not refer to the women with standard racist slurs. As such, his defenders could argue that the tweets are not racist in that sense. This would, of course, require claiming ignorance of coding…”
And what is this “coding”? Why, it’s whatever they say it is! (I never got the handbook, did you?)
“everyone who fails to conform to the current Narrative, and it changes every few years/months/days so do try and keep up, is a racist.”
I don’t think it’s possible to “keep up” with the narrative; I believe the narrative changes based on what certain people say. Hence when Trump says “rat infested”, the narrative changes to identify the word “infested” as a code-word for racism. I never heard that before, did you?
When he says “No human being would want to live there …” the narrative changes. Rather than being a colloquialism we are all familiar with, the narrative changes to mean “Well, it’s primarily a black community, therefore Trump is saying that African Americans don’t count as human beings”.
They know this because apparently they have gotten hold of the right-wing Enigma machine, and have it all figured out.
Sometimes I wonder how they can say this stuff with a straight face.
Does anyone remember when Trump decried the corruption in the government of Puerto Rico when the US was funneling money to them for hurricane relief? The facts were there – there were accurate reports of specific ways in which the Puerto Rican government was redirecting relief money to themselves, their friends & family – and that the corrupt government was directly responsible for the money not getting to where it needed to be.
Hmmm … Puerto Rican people are technically “Hispanic”, right? “Brown”, correct?
Conclusion: Trump is a racist
And today, with the corruption exposed, the governor stepping down, and indictments flying all over the island, no one remembers what Trump said, no one realizes that the US did nothing to circumvent this corruption and make sure the money got where it was needed, because that was not important! What was important then was that Trump was perceived as a racist, and what’s important today is that the perception continue above all else.
Regardless of any facts that later come to light, no one should think, “Hmmm, maybe Trump was right after all!”. That would be a disaster. Better to downplay what he said, and just remember the take-away.
But you’re right, in the bigger picture. Right now the focus is on Trump, because the “Trump/Racist” trope is a lynchpin (oops – is that a code-word?) of the Democrat presidential campaign. But as my most recent verbal stumble would indicate, we all need to watch what we say, because as long as they have that Enigma machine, we must be very careful of what we say.
but in the context of this thread, “The Racist Tango” the specific point is about Trump –
Sure, specific to this thread. But it’s been said time and time again about any prominent Republican going back to at least Reagan. I’m tempted to say Goldwater but there were enough true, dyed-in-the-wool racists on the D side back then as to make the claim awkward. Though in later years this became easier as memory of D’s and Dixiecrats faded. You can certainly find google hits tying BG to racism. Two differences that make this Tango about Trump and they have little to do with Trump. One, this idea that anyone conservative is a racist has been a drum beaten by the media and academics for decades now, slowly growing in volume and intensity, and is pretty much at its peak. And two, anyone with the backbone to fight back like Trump does (OK, a little about Trump but he’s just the only one out there with a backbone) would inevitably draw the concerted attacks from the D’s, the media, academia such that the Cuckisphere of NeverTrumpers would feel the heat to join in.
Agree with everything but your summary conclusion, a bit tongue-in-cheek I hope. If we become so careful in what we say that we fail to communicate effectively, such that we censor ourselves, or that we continue to permit ourselves to be drowned out by the hysterical rhetoric of the left, and remember this is an uphill battle as the media & academics have much larger megaphones, we may very well find ourselves in that Jacobin environment of trial by accusation. Though it will be interesting to watch the likes of Mike be persecuted by their own kind.
Unless and until everyone defines exactly what we mean by “racist”, this whole discussion is gibberish.
I see Cummings called Trump a racist, and then trump called Cummings a racist in reply.
I can unironically and unapologetically admire Trump for that.If it were me, I’d be asking everyone to define their terms. His way is much more effective.
Trump drives the news cycle. The press talks about what he wants them to talk about.
Trump has the Dems defending immigrants who hate the U.S. and the rats infesting Baltimore.
Their hatred for trump has made them stupid.
Their hatred for trump has made them stupid.
Chicken/egg. Are you sure their stupid hasn’t to some degree driven their hatred, or at the very least the amplitude of their hatred for Trump? Fortunately, I think, there seems to be an inability on their part to step back, analyze, and then channel their energies in a more effective manner. I see more of a fundamental stupidity there that has gone unexposed, unaccounted for for decades. Trump has just found the nerve that jerks the knee.
Lots of stories are coming out now; I’ve done a little noodling around the Internet, and have to say that the result, although not unexpected, is pretty disheartening and quite depressing. I made the comment earlier that “racism” is a problem that the left does not want to solve; it is what gives them power.
I heard Al Sharpton in an interview, and it is clear that it is his self-appointed mission to not only root out racism wherever it exists (a noble enough gesture), but to create it where it does not – a kind of racial Munchausen-by-Proxy social syndrome from which he can emerge as the conquering hero; all the while making his poisoned child sicker and sicker in the process. Given his increased stature, his public standing, and his accumulated wealth, it makes sense that he himself knows that to eliminate racism in our time would be the worst that could happen to him.
And then comes the quote from Bernie Sanders –
“”Anyone who took the walk that we took around this neighborhood would not think you’re in a wealthy nation,” Sanders said. “You would think that you were in a Third World country.”
“But today what we’re talking about is a community in which half of the people don’t have jobs,” he added. “We’re talking about a community in which there are hundreds of buildings that are uninhabitable.”
And a year later,
“”Residents of Baltimore’s poorest boroughs have lifespans shorter than people living under dictatorship in North Korea. That is a disgrace.”
No doubt had Trump said the exact same words that “Third World Country” would have been taken as synonymous with “brown people”, and “uninhabitable” would have been taken as some kind of “code” for “uninhabitable by white people” (because clearly there are black people living in them).
A very uncomfortable video has emerged, of a September, 2018 (now viral) video of Catherine Pugh, the Democratic mayor of Baltimore walking through certain areas of the city – decrying the state of parts of her city, specifically the smell of “rats” and “dead animals.”
“What the hell? We should just take all this sh*t down. … Whoa, you can smell the rats. … Whew, Jesus. … Oh, my God, you can smell the dead animals.”
The point is that Trump’s comments are nothing if not accurate. And Cummings really ought to be taken to task for the conditions in his district that have been fixed at least sometime over the last two dozen years.
And as inelegant as he may be in expressing his views, it is patently obvious to anyone with a brain that he is not a racist, he is not an idiot – he is merely saying (in the face of constant, often unfounded or made-up criticism for which the Democrats carry much responsibility),
“If all you want to do is stand there and criticize, STFU. It’s not helpful. Look at your own homes, your own districts, your own countries of origin – and do something positive for a change! When I look at the corruption in Puerto Rico, it disgusts me that you ignore that poverty and corruption while at the same time wear your heritage on your sleeve as though it gives you the right to call me a racist. Why is it that a US Representative, who has benefited more than anyone else from American largess, would turn her back on her native Somalia where there is so much poverty, violence, human suffering and political corruption, and focus on trying to make the false claim that our border problem is like the Nazi Concentration camps? And how dare you accuse me of colluding with Russia, crying “Impeach the MF” while wearing the Palestinian flag on your shoulders during your LEGAL ELECTION TO THE UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES!”
What is truly shameful is that the more mainstream Democrats – Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, and others, prefer to jump on this racist bandwagon instead of fighting ideology with ideology. It’s the low-hanging fruit, the easy path (as they see it) to power.
The most recent Baltimore issue is an opportunity – an opportunity to educate both sides as to what is actually going on at the border, to actually address the deplorable conditions where they exist, and note the clean, uncrowded, and efficiently run facilities where they exist (and they do exist), and to work together to focus on the problem – but that’s not what our government does.
Further, it is yet another opportunity to address the deplorable situation in Baltimore, and work together to fix what is wrong there.
But the opportunity to call Trump a racist one more time is far too juicy, and can really help in developing the only narrative that can possibly put a Democrat in the White House in 2020, so screw the border, screw Baltimore, let’s get Al Sharpton down her to make a few speeches …
Sharpton called Trump a racist and a bigot, which is nothing new – and Trump responded by calling Sharpton a race-baiter and a con-man, which is also nothing new. And the beat goes on.
But Sharpton and Michael Steele also invited Trump to Baltimore to engage in some conversation – and that’s what Trump ought to do with Cummings.
“Let’s work together, I’ll wash your back, you wash mine. Lead your Democrat colleagues toward an actual solution to fixing the problem at the border, and I will help you in whatever way I can to clean up Baltimore”.
That would go far in bolstering confidence in our government, but it’ll never happen. The Democrats are “all-in” with the racist narrative; they will never let that go.
Oh, going back to the Bernie Sanders quotes – the piece on CNN that showed the video resulted in the commentary, “Oh, well, that’s different” followed by the verbal gymnastics and “Racist Tango” gyrations that always follow this kind of hypocrisy.
The economy is doing great. Unemployment is at an all-time low. Unemployment among African Americans and Hispanics is at an all time low. Companies have voluntarily raised their minimum wage because profits are high and they are following free-market principles to attract and keep workers.
The stock market is at an all time high. Interest rates are low; housing starts and refinances are surging. Trump’s threats about NAFTA and trade with China are on the way to being resolved in the US favor. Talks, although unsuccessful to this point, have at least been begun with North Korea.
Politically, this is a nearly unbeatable combination when going up against an incumbent. The issues brought up in the Democrat debates are extremely weak – medicare for all, free tuition for all, open borders, healthcare for illegal immigrants, mandatory minimum wage, income & wealth gap … why fix what isn’t broken? Americans are struggling here .. “gee, I know he’s a racist and an asshole and unfit to run this country, but it’s getting kinda hard to see that …
Mainstream America is complacent – regardless of how we might feel about Trump as a person, if our lot is good – why change it? My 401K is doing great, I just refinanced my house, I don’t see a lot of sad, unemployed people camping out on the streets in my city – why should I change?
So the biggest hope for the Left is the “Racist” narrative, and maybe the “Impeachment” narrative.
And as I said before, what is truly sad is that this racist thing is far more important to them than trying to work together to solve problems where people are truly suffering. Forget Baltimore – those people are just pawns. There’s a bigger issue – Trump criticized a Black Man, and he’s a Racist. Forget the border – forget any efforts to fund the facilities or deter dangerous illegal border crossings – Trump is a bigot and a racist and doesn’t care about children if they’re brown …
Trump has been very clear about his motives – he outlined them in “The Art of the Deal” and in later interviews and articles. “What I say publicly”, he says, “Is groundwork. It is setting the stage for a negotiation or for a fight. It has nothing to do with my ultimate goal, or with the resolution I seek. Judge me not by what I say, which is entirely contrived, but with the results of my actions.”
So the narrative in the US is that Trump has colluded with Russia (for whatever benefit to Putin remains a mystery), and that Trump is Anti-Muslim because he wanted to restrict travel from terrorist-supporting countries to the US “until we can figure out what’s going on”. That’s what everyone knows, right? “Collusion, In Bed With Putin, Bigot, Xenophobe, Anti-Muslim”
So who remembers that in the Spring of 2018, acting upon credible intelligence that the Assad government of Syria was using chemical weapons against its own people, Trump ordered targeted military strikes against specific targets in Syria and vowed to continue them “until the use of chemical weapons stopped”. He further publicly called out Russia for their support of the Assad Government, and Iran for their backing of the government in Damascus.
Hmm. Here’s a guy “in bed” with Putin, an anti-Muslim, saving tens of thousands of Muslim lives from the gassing at the hand of their own government, and allowing US/Russia relations to slip to an all-time low.
Watch what he does, not what he says …
But, that’ll never fly in an election. Best to downplay it, make him out to be a racist – foment personal hatred and anger toward the man – because you certainly cannot fight him on domestic or foreign policy success.
As I said at the beginning of this little diatribe, it’s really very, very depressing – that our government factions are so at odds with each other that we cannot agree on what’s right for America, what is working within one administration that can be built upon for the next; it’s only about power, regardless of whether or not that power is built upon lies and hypocrisy.
And to WTP:
“Agree with everything but your summary conclusion, a bit tongue-in-cheek I hope. If we become so careful in what we say that we fail to communicate effectively, such that we censor ourselves, or that we continue to permit ourselves to be drowned out by the hysterical rhetoric of the left, and remember this is an uphill battle as the media & academics have much larger megaphones, we may very well find ourselves in that Jacobin environment of trial by accusation.”
I wish I could say that it was entirely tongue-in-cheek, but I’m afraid it’s not. Like Mike, I’m a professor at a university, but I know that to speak my mind will at best make me an outcast among students and colleagues – but the more likely scenario is that some snowflake will be “uncomfortable” in my class for what he or she “knows” to be my ideology, and I’ll find myself in front of an HR tribunal.
While I was growing up, I was inwardly critical of my Jewish ancestors & relatives in pre-Holocaust Poland and Germany:
“Why didn’t they resist? Why couldn’t they speak up for themselves?” but now I understand their complacency. “Maybe it will go away” they thought. “I have so much to lose if I make trouble … I should just keep my mouth shut and worry about my own family”.
How bad can this get in this country? No one in their wildest imagination believed it could get as bad as it did back then. Can it happen again? I’m a few years from retirement – why should I take this kind of risk? Trust me, I lose sleep over this every night, but despite what I see and listen to on my campus every day, “the right time” never seems to be apparent. Which is the hill upon which I would choose to die? I think I’ll wait at least until I can get my full Social Security. And history will judge me, I’m sure.
But honestly, I think that the people in this country will reach their saturation point with all this insanity. And if not, we’ll elect the Ilhan Omars and the AOCs again, and put someone like Elizabeth Warren or Kamala Harris in the White House on the basis of “Trump Is A Racist” instead of meaningful policy initiatives, and we will get what we deserve. And when the economy fails, and when foreign interests prevail, and when unemployment reaches new highs, the pendulum will swing again.
Or maybe they’re right and I’m wrong, and the US will reinvent itself and be the shining beacon of diversity, inclusion, and unlimited government largess by which the rest of the world sets their standard.
Companies have voluntarily raised their minimum wage because profits are high and they are following free-market principles to attract and keep workers.
Almost. Companies have raised their wages because unemployment is high and it is easy for low wage scale workers, those that keep their noses clean and show up for work and do their jobs, to find other employment. Companies with openings want to attract more of such workers by raising wages. In order for companies who are not necessarily hiring to keep the workers they have, they need wage wages or do other things to keep those employees. Society flourishes when people and by extension corporations, have economic freedom. And yet, in spite of success after success after success as you note, the mantra from the media and such, including the NeverTrump nominal “conservatives” is that Trumps policies are a failure. That he’s colluding with a failed Russian state. That Trump is racist. That the world is literally coming to an end. Sad.
The issues brought up in the Democrat debates are extremely weak – medicare for all, free tuition for all, open borders, healthcare for illegal immigrants, mandatory minimum wage, income & wealth gap
I’ve said it before and will say it again and again and again, Socialism is a cargo cult.
Like Mike, I’m a professor at a university, but I know that to speak my mind will at best make me an outcast among students and colleagues – but the more likely scenario is that some snowflake will be “uncomfortable” in my class for what he or she “knows” to be my ideology, and I’ll find myself in front of an HR tribunal.
I understand what you are saying completely. And it’s a hard thing to accept, but to my mind, it’s that very fear of speaking up, of speaking the truth or at least questioning the narrative, that perpetuates the problem. We like to believe that the world is changed by ideas. There is some truth to that. Some. But ideas themselves rarely, if ever, change things. Even if enough people believe the ideas, unless they communicate with each other or at the very least in some form let those who think “I can’t possibly be the only one seeing this” know that they are not alone, those ideas will have no effect. The greatest ideas sit on the shelf, sometimes for centuries, until a critical mass of people who believe in those ideas develop the courage, the backbone, the confidence to break through the established narrative.
Dope…In that first paragraph I realize I pretty much repeated your point with emphasis on market driven aspects, but of course “have raised their wages because unemployment is high” should be “have raised their wages because employment is high”. What I was getting at was that it really isn’t very “voluntary” on the companies’ side as it is mandatory in order for them to survive. What I was getting at was that when the economy is running as well as this, it is the employees who are in the driver’s seat.
Yes, I got that. 🙂
” it really isn’t very “voluntary” on the companies’ side as it is mandatory in order for them to survive.”
No doubt that employees generally get treated better during periods of low unemployment; competition for better workers intensifies as they become more scarce. Wages can quickly max out, leading to more creative ways in which companies will compete – benefits, time off, box-seats at a sports arena, EAP’s, on-site gyms, and more.
I’m not ready to paint all companies with such a broad (“mandatory for survival”) brush, though. There are some companies that start out with competitive wages, great benefits, and a heavy focus on quality-of-life for employees. These companies realize that measures like this will attract the best employees regardless of how competitive the market might be, it will foster loyalty, productivity, and quality work.
I was fortunate recently to have a strong relationship with an extremely talented, highly competitive, driven student. His work was consistently at the top of the class, yet he was often the only one who would take critiques as seriously as he did – and even after the final grades were given he’d go back and re-work and re-work and re-work. He took himself and his work very, very seriously.
This guy earned a real “plum” after his Junior year – he was accepted into an internship program at Pixar.
The next fall, everyone wanted to talk to him, to hear of his experience, to have some of that special sauce rub off on them. He accepted his accolades politely and with smiles – but came to meet me in my office privately at his first opportunity.
“I have to re-think my entire life”, he said. He was very depressed, very anxious.
“I never knew that a company like Pixar would be like that. They make you go home at 5:30! They don’t let you spend 100 hours on a project – they come and help. They buy you lunch, have ping-pong tables in the studio, and there’s no sense of “compete or die”. They foster friendships and collaboration – and if you’re not a good fit in your department they find a better place for you. When they hire you, they commit to you, and they support your career.
I don’t know how to handle that!” he said.
Pixar is far from alone in this. DreamWorks, Sony, Disney, Blizzard – the list goes on (at least in this industry) of companies that place employees first; they pay high wages, offer great benefits, focus on maximizing quality of life because they know that that investment will be returned to them in the form of hard work, company loyalty, and most of all, creative thinking.
Google and Amazon are like that, too. (Apple, on the other hand, is very hush-hush; whatever goes on behind their doors is little known, but I do know that there is a high level of outright paranoia among employees, contractors, and even applicants).
Of course, one could take that a step further, which would be a point more salient to this conversation. Google “Palmer Luckey”, the inventor/developer of the Oculus Rift Virtual Reality system. In 2014, the Oculus VR was aquired by Facebook for $3 billion, which included bringing Luckey on as part of the team.
In 2016, however, the Daily Beast published a story that claimed that Luckey had donated $10,000 and otherwise supported a company that was trying to boost the campaign of Donald Trump. Although the “Beast” article contained some factual errors, Luckey was “outed” as a Trump supporter!
According to the book “The History of the Future”,
“Facebook allegedly forced Luckey to issue a written statement in clarification, saying he planned to vote for third-party candidate Gary Johnson. But Luckey alleged that he was forced to make that statement, on threat of losing his job.
Luckey was eventually fired six months later, after being exiled from Facebook’s campus.”
So there it is. It’s not all one thing, is it? Some companies step up because they have to, others step up because they understand the nuance of free market economics at all levels. And still others take “political correctness” to such an extreme that they will let their abject hatred and devotion to political correctness prevent them from retaining and supporting a visionary genius like Palmer Luckey, who clearly has a whole store of new ideas percolating in his brain.
I guess Facebook places more value on its “brand” of being left-wing, anti-Trump than they do on emerging technology that can change the world. And, as stupid as you or I might think that is, they can certainly afford to think that way. They will continue to make money – and maybe they’re right – perhaps they’ll make even more money this way.
Palmer Luckey could afford to leave Facebook, and have a book written about his experiences – calling out the Left for who they are. And if the book sales didn’t materialize, well, there’s that billion or two sitting in the bank as back-up.
Others of us have no backup – and while the politics of our potential firing would be exactly the same, we lack the high-profile of something like Oculus to draw attention to our plight – leaving our book sales doomed at the outset.
It’s an ongoing struggle for me – the question of which hill I will ultimately choose as the one upon which I will die.