.

I Just Started the Racism Debate

It's time for the media to apply the scrutiny of George Zimmerman to the GOP.

Maybe George Zimmerman shot Trayvon Martin because he’s a hate-speech shouting racist. 

And maybe Zimmerman was acting out of self-defense because he considers Skittles a deadly weapon.

I don’t know.

Maybe Rick Santorum was about to call President Obama something disgustingly racist when he halted himself after saying the letters “NI—“ in a speech a few weeks ago. 

And maybe Santorum was about to call President Obama a “NI-ckelback fan,” which is almost as disgusting in my book.

I don’t know.

Humor aside, and truth be told, those incidents are lone moments in time, where the context is muddied and the details may never be known.  And I know people want to use these incidents to have a discussion about racism, but I think we’re going to result at an impasse without the bi-product of actually learning anything.

We are trying to examine the complex forest of racism by looking at individual trees.

It’s possible I will never understand racism fully, because I’m a white man in his 30s.  I also would guess that I wouldn’t understand sexism fully; nor would I (currently) understand ageism. 

And, being a teacher, frankly I doubt I’ll ever truly understand capitalism, either.

I do think there are three types of racists when it comes to caucasians: There are the Absolute Racists, the Accidental Racists, and the Racists in Denial.

The Absolute Racists are racists who know it, and say so with pride.  And that’s disturbing, but at least you know who you’re dealing with.

I would think (or, at least, I hope) that a majority of racist caucasians in this day and age file under “Accidental Racists.”  They’re decent, empathetic people whose only fault is they secretly harbor a paranoia that they might one day be seen as racist in some awkward situation; and they err towards the cliché of professing, “But I have several black friends!” in their defense of their own cultural naivety.  It doesn’t really solve anything to say that-- but at heart, you know they mean well.

In order not to appear racist, people tend to overcompensate in a ridiculous manner to appear better people than they actually are.  It’s not a perfect solution, but at least its progress in the name of goodwill.

And then there are the people I am most concerned about:  The Racists in Denial.  These are people who act in an obviously racist manner, as they are unable to hide their subconscious, spontaneous indignity for people of color, but are also unable to swallow the label itself.  They simply don’t want to admit they are what they are at heart. They are both racist, and dishonest with themselves as people.

And, with that, I bring you to the Republican Party.

Now, let’s be careful here:  I am not saying the entire Republican Party is completely full of racists.  I am saying, however, there has been a pattern of both overt and subtle racism within their party, and we need to have a national discussion about that for a long, long time.

Take Joe Wilson (R-SC) yelling “YOU LIE!” at the President of the United States during a nationally-televised speech to Congress (something he admits was “spontaneous”). 

Take Arizona Governor Jan Brewer, famously photographed wagging a finger in Obama’s face and saying she “felt threatened by him.”

Take the birthers movement.  Or the Tea Party activist who photoshopped Obama’s face in a family photo of chimps.  Or the Republicans who referenced Obama as a “tar baby.”

Now add that Santorum line into the context I’ve provided, instead of treating it as an isolated incident.

Whatever you think about Barack Obama’s policies, he will (and should) go down in history as a Jackie Robinson/Martin Luther King-esque figure.  No matter what the political future holds, the man holds the distinction of being first.  And, like the men of the generation before him, he has had to endure a level of disrespect in being first, and handled that with absolute dignity.  The question—and the discussion we need to have—is to what degree and level (if any) racism has affected the way people treat him as opposed to every other President to hold that dignified office.  

This group of events deserves our attention; because one event is debatable, but if a pattern emerges-- among the elected representatives of one political party in the United States of America, mind you-- that is troubling for our nation.  If the representatives of the people are acting in a manner of disrespect for the President because of racism, their constituents will act in the same fashion.

This wealth of moments leads to times where one might ask himself, “Are they standing in the way of the President’s ideas—ones they have proposed in similar fashions themselves—because he’s a Democrat, or because he’s African American?”  And that is a question we should not be asking about the representatives in our democracy 65 years after Jackie Robinson and almost 50 years since Martin Luther King. 

So I call on the media to talk about this the way we have dissected the Trayvon Martin tragedy: ad nauseam.  And I don't want it whispered.  I want it out loud.  I want RNC Chairman Reince Priebus called to the carpet daily to explain why his party is not what it could appear to be on every channel, every hour.  The media holds no taboos anymore, anyway.  We have discussed women’s contraception, so we might as well ask if the Republican Party has a reputation—or a purposeful agenda—of racism.

We don’t need accusations; we just need discussion. And we need to have this discussion now, while he is President, around every water cooler in America; because if we’re not willing to examine an is-it-or-isn’t-it political racism on the grandest stage in the entire world, we will have more Trayvon Martin discussions again later.

These are not trees.  This is a forest now.  And it is on fire.  Help put it out.

My prediction, by the way, is that once we have ten days of mass media asking if Republicans defy Obama because of his party or his skin color, and whether or not everyone should legitimately associate them with being racists—once that discussion is in the mainstream—I bet we suddenly find our government working together; maybe even agreeing again.  I bet the bi-product of this discussion, if nothing else concretely positive, is that the Republicans start working in a friendly manner with the President a whole lot more.

In order not to appear racist, people tend to overcompensate in a ridiculous manner to appear better people than they actually are. 

It’s not a perfect solution, but at least its progress in the name of goodwill.

This post is contributed by a community member. The views expressed in this blog are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Patch Media Corporation. Everyone is welcome to submit a post to Patch. If you'd like to post a blog, go here to get started.

Brandon Scullion April 16, 2012 at 01:15 PM
Patrick, keep doing what you are doing. It's your right as an American.
James Thomas April 16, 2012 at 02:45 PM
Patrick, you are a coward. I have, as you requested, reread your article. You hide behind "plausible liberal deniability" when you say you never "explicitly said the Republicans were a party of racists" but that was the whole, uncut cloth of your article. Yes, you ARE calling for a McCarthy-esque, guilt by association response from the unquestioning liberal, lapdog media. If you do not recognize that fact then you are the problem.
James Thomas April 16, 2012 at 03:27 PM
Patrick, "I'm a little shocked at how mean-spirited some people are sometimes." Funny, coming from someone as mean-spirited as you are where Republicans are concerned.
Alexandra April 16, 2012 at 03:42 PM
People must drop the misconception that racism is a democrat or republican issue...racism comes from ALL walks of life....people have their own agendas in life or that affects their wallets, I am a struggling, anti racist republican. I dispise any abuses.
Chris (Kit) Myers May 25, 2012 at 09:18 PM
I have light skin. I do not look upon myself as a white man. I look upon myself as a man. If people started looking upon themselves as simply man or woman without the skin color baloney, this country would be far better off. A good man/woman is a good man/woman no matter the pigment in his/her skin. A louse is a louse no matter the pigment in his/her skin. A thug is a thug no matter pigment in his/her skin. I really resent people who state that all people with my pigment have racism in them. You know not of what you speak.

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »