June 30th, 2008
The problem isn’t “race,” it’s racism.
The NYT’s rehash of Democrats’ “southern problem” is a pretty remarkable accomplishment. 1,300 words on the first African-American nominee’s ability to compete in the historic site of slavery and Jim Crow without the words “racism” or “prejudice” or any other phrase that put the trends both current and historic in proper context.
Instead, the “paper of record” chose to whitewash history with polite euphemisms. On why white Southerners left the Democratic Party:
But voters’ allegiance was rocked in the 1960s by the Democrats’ leadership in passing civil rights legislation, and whites began to move to what Republicans asserted was their more natural ideological home. [emphasis added]
Yes, and that ideology was, um, white supremacy.And this is good, apparently there could be a “Republican” backlash if Obama registers too many “new voters”:
Some Democrats say the Obama registration drive could have unintended consequences, spurring a higher turnout among whites planning to vote Republican. But Charles Bullock, a political scientist at the University of Georgia, said he considered that unlikely.”Older whites who are most likely to have traditional racial attitudes are probably already registered and may have records of consistent participation,” Dr. Bullock said.
As Mr. Mabus put it, “I’m sure some won’t vote for him because he’s African-American, but I’m pretty sure those people wouldn’t vote for any Democrat.”
Again, those “traditional racial attitudes” are racist attitudes. Say it with me New York Times: r-a-c-i-s-m.The problem is not that Barack Obama is an African-American. And it’s not “traditional racial attitudes,” and it’s not “Republican backlash,” and it’s not that the GOP is a “more natural ideological home” for Southerners.
The problem is that many older voters (not all, of course) in the South are racist. They are the problem. So rather than pointing at Barack Obama, or Northern Democrats, or the “issue of race,” let’s point at racism and racists.