LJWorld.com weblogs Angell at My Table

Race In The Race


In the last few days, past copies of The Ron Paul Newsletter revealed ethnically biased political rants and the Clintons made comments that many find disrespectful toward African Americans. But do these incidents represent real evidence of racial bigotry, or are they trumped up allegations intended to sway voters as the focus turns on the South Carolina primary?Personally, I think it's pretty hard to let Ron Paul off the hook for the racial biases in his newsletter. He denies writing the inflammatory passages in question, but is it believable that he had no knowledge of their contents? Some of the statements about whites fearing blacks were so extreme I have a hard time believing he did not get a reaction from the readers. The only way a readership would not react to comments like these would be if they were in agreement with these sentiments. Then, you have to wonder, who are his readers?The Clintons have been under fire for Bill's use of the term "fairy tale" in regards to Barack Obama, and Hillary's statement that "Dr. King's dream began to be realized when President Lyndon Johnson passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964. It took a president to get it done." In Bill's defense, when you look at the context of the "fairy tale" analogy, it seems clear he meant it to refer to Obama's stance on the war, not his rise up to becoming presidential candidate.Now, Hillary's statement, on the other hand, can't be dismissed so easily. Overshadowing MLK's heroic actions by giving the credit to Johnson seems pretty condescending. Isn't she basically saying the black man had the dream, but it took the white man to get it done? And perhaps even more disturbing than Hillary's remarks are the comments made by Clinton supporter, NY Attorney General Andrew Cuomo, that you just can't "shuck and jive" your way through a press conference. So, they made some insensitive comments, does that mean they're racists? Who knows. I just think it is only fair to expect the future president of our country to have an intrinsic respect for the cultures and ethnicities he or she is representing. Maybe someday the word "race" in an election will only refer to the competitive nature of democracy and ethnic biases won't be an inevitable part of presidential discourse.


Linda Hanney 10 years, 4 months ago

Marlo--keep up your posts about the election. I appreciate your insights.

Mayberry 10 years, 4 months ago

You are pandering - it shows the shallowness of your thinking.

Here is what Ron Paul wrote about:

It is the federal government that most divides us by race, class, religion, and gender. Through its taxes, restrictive regulations, corporate subsidies, racial set-asides, and welfare programs, government plays far too large a role in determining who succeeds and who fails. Government "benevolence" crowds out genuine goodwill by institutionalizing group thinking, thus making each group suspicious that others are receiving more of the government loot. This leads to resentment and hostility among us. Racism is simply an ugly form of collectivism, the mindset that views humans strictly as members of groups rather than as individuals. Racists believe that all individuals who share superficial physical characteristics are alike: as collectivists, racists think only in terms of groups. By encouraging Americans to adopt a group mentality, the advocates of so-called "diversity" actually perpetuate racism. The true antidote to racism is liberty. Liberty means having a limited, constitutional government devoted to the protection of individual rights rather than group claims. Liberty means free-market capitalism, which rewards individual achievement and competence - not skin color, gender, or ethnicity. In a free society, every citizen gains a sense of himself as an individual, rather than developing a group or victim mentality. This leads to a sense of individual responsibility and personal pride, making skin color irrelevant. Racism will endure until we stop thinking in terms of groups and begin thinking in terms of individual liberty.

vote for Ron Paul!

Paul Decelles 10 years, 4 months ago


You are right as far as you go. We should think of individual liberty. Unfortunately it is not just individuals who put themselves into groups-but other individuals who box each other into groups. Somehow I don't think is was African Americans who wanted to use separate drinking fountains than whites or sit in the back of the bus.

Groups can be maintained from within or be enforced from without. I don't think Marlo is pandering; if you want pandering, just look at how the candidates are scrambling to curry favor among the religious right.

Keith 10 years, 4 months ago

Of course, in Kansas, voting for anyone but the republican candidate is an exercise in futility.

antney 10 years, 4 months ago

Its blogs like Marlo's that is going to change the mindset of this red state. Thank you Marlo for your insights.

Commenting has been disabled for this item.