Sunday, October 5, 2008

Race, Age, Gender and an ugly American culture

I'd really like it if you would comment on prejudice in the current political discourse. How is it underlying what is going on right now? What are the implications? I'm more interested in the academic implications here. It may or may not be strategic, it may or may not help win elections, but what are the more important conclusions to be drawn about the American public culture? Do those who speak to us and for us appeal to the worst in us? If this campaign starts looking ugly is it reflecting an ugly part of America that we don't want to acknowledge? Can those who speak to us and for us make America more ugly with these base appeals or are they merely taking advantage of what is already there?

Get a load of what a Democratic strategist said about Palin's new attacks on Obama:
"It's a giant changing of the subject," said Jenny Backus, a Democratic strategist. "The problem is the messenger. If you want to start throwing fire bombs, you don't send out the fluffy bunny to do it. I think people don't take Sarah Palin seriously."'
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hLxEMDD-UlNa6HUrozE6ZkGYPTqAD93KFB700
When someone calls an argument sexist the typical response is to disprove with counter-example. One might say that Palin is a unique case and nobody would call Clinton a fluffy bunny that is not to be taken seriously. This may be true, but gender is still being used here as a smear in the unique instance of Palin. She is being demeaned and discounted and gender is part of the strategy.

Also check out this ad that calls McCain "erratic."

Is erratic a jab at his age? I think the argument that McCain is unstable or erratic can be read outside of the context of his age and i don't think it is obvious agism like the little bunny comment is sexism, but I do think it trades in the currency of prejudice against the elderly. Agism is one of the most ignored forms of discrimination going today. People treat older Americans very poorly and it often isn't even viewed as off color or inappropriate.

Finally, I believe the strategy to portray Obama as "too risky," "not one of us" and "among terrorists" is a play on the latent feelings of prejudice many American's have about Obama. As Strother said, "I just don't know enough about him" is probably a code for "I don't trust a black man to run the country." I know most of the class agrees with my fierce partisanship and probably doesn't have much problem calling McCain's campaign racist. Step outside of the partisanship for a moment though and ask yourself, as an academic, do you think calling Obama "too risky" and "radical" is an attempt to trade in the currency of latent prejudice?
Here is more from the AP article cited above:
"Palin's words avoid repulsing voters with overt racism. But is there another subtext for creating the false image of a black presidential nominee "palling around" with terrorists while assuring a predominantly white audience that he doesn't see their America?
In a post-Sept. 11 America, terrorists are envisioned as dark-skinned radical Muslims, not the homegrown anarchists of Ayers' day 40 years ago. With Obama a relative unknown when he began his campaign, the Internet hummed with false e-mails about ties to radical Islam of a foreign-born candidate.
Whether intended or not by the McCain campaign, portraying Obama as "not like us" is another potential appeal to racism. It suggests that the Hawaiian-born Christian is, at heart, un-American.
The fact is that when racism creeps into the discussion serves a purpose for McCain. As the fallout from Wright's sermons showed earlier this year, forcing Obama to abandon issues to talk about race leads to unresolved arguments about America's promise to treat all people equally.
John McCain occasionally says he looks back on decisions with regret. He has apologized for opposing a holiday to honor Martin Luther King Jr. He has apologized for refusing to call for the removal of a Confederate flag from South Carolina's Capitol.
When the 2008 campaign is over will McCain say he regrets appeals such as Palin's?"

1 comment:

Lacey said...

This is a good point. Here is an article on CNN.com about whether presidential candidates should have to release their full health records:

http://www.cnn.com/2008/HEALTH/10/08/ftl.mccain.health
/index.html

However, you'll notice in the article that a lot of people demand for McCain's records to be released, but fewer demand for Obama's. I think this is a case of clear age prejudice. Yes, McCain had cancer and could be the oldest elected president...but Obama could just as easily drop dead of a medical problem as well (but...for clarity's sake let me emphasize that I hope that nothing like that EVER happens to a president or candidate). If you are going to demand for one candidate's health records, shouldn't you demand for both?