Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It’s fine that Democrats are cozy with, and even have photos taken with, racist antisemites like Farrakhan. No outcry there. But if a Republican is supported by David Duke, even if they disavow him, then he is a racist by association.
Briefly - because other Democrats get a presumption of goodwill and thus the benefit of the doubt. But since Republicans are 'evil' they get no such presumption. Of course the notion that we should maybe not be blacklisting people for off the cuff comments does not seem to occur to them, but then mobs are generally not very reflective.
Republicans need to stand up for the accused. Make a lot of noise to show support accused. Never back down or apologize. UNLESS you are truly guilty and you know it.
The left never feel guilty. This is their norm in private so they forget to hold it down in public. They will never admit that they are racist so they get pass from other Dems but the offended know who they are and will vote accordingly in 2020.
Probably for the same reason many Republicans aren't upset by racist remarks by Republican politicians. Loyalty to the political party comes first. This happens in BOTH sides. Both Democrats and Republicans to this.
* Hillary Clinton said that "they all look alike", when discussing two African-American men.
* Indiana Sen. Donnelly said that he has staff members who are people of color, BUT they do a good job.
* Florida Gov. candidate Gillum's staff member said that Florida is a "cracker" state.
All 3 remarks are clearly racist.
Why are Democrats silent about them? If Republicans said those things, Democrats would (rightfully) flip out.
Hillary's out of office. Hard to say her mistakes have been ignored considering that.
Donnelly is taking heat for it although it was pretty tame. Republicans seem enthralled with it and are making it an instance to promote their own racism as ok because "see the other side does it too".
If I was a black guy in Florida I would have probably used harsher language. As a cracker I don't know many crackers who are seriously offended by that moniker. And, at least the central and northern parts, are cracker nirvana.
Probably for the same reason many Republicans aren't upset by racist remarks by Republican politicians. Loyalty to the political party comes first. This happens in BOTH sides. Both Democrats and Republicans to this.
There's some truth here.
But there's also the fact that Liberals and Conservatives can sometimes have very different idea about what constitutes racism and what doesn't.
Liberals purport themselves to be the sole arbiters of what's racist.... And thus find it under every rock because their entire political philosophy depends on it.
When the Right makes or says a raciest remark the left calls them out on it and rightly so.
When the Left makes or says a raciest remark the left says both sides do it ,but you do it more.
* Hillary Clinton said that "they all look alike", when discussing two African-American men.
* Indiana Sen. Donnelly said that he has staff members who are people of color, BUT they do a good job.
* Florida Gov. candidate Gillum's staff member said that Florida is a "cracker" state.
All 3 remarks are clearly racist.
Why are Democrats silent about them? If Republicans said those things, Democrats would (rightfully) flip out.
I know why. The first two comments fall in the category of "subtle racism" or "microaggressions".
The last one is reverse racism - also common in Florida.
Subtle racism and microaggressions are generally not acknowledged by many whites among both Republicans and Democrats. The "definition" of racism that is most commonly used is the most extreme form - blatant racism. The use of such a very narrow definition conveniently filters out the majority of whites and removes feelings of guilt. But acknowledging subtle racism would be too disruptive of the view that we live mostly in a "post-racial" society.
But subtle racism is very common - even among Democrats. The most common example is in dating, assumptions on intelligence, assumptions on crime, promotions, etc. It's the type of racism that is enough for a minority to feel but not enough for whites to acknowledge - covert racism flying under the radar.
However, subtle racism is real. It's why Marcia Clark lost the OJ trial. Darden, the black lawyer on the prosecution team, was well aware of subtle racism and pleaded with Marcia to remove Mark Fuhrman as a witness long before the infamous "Fuhrman" tapes were found and played in court. Darden's meetings with Fuhrman had a "vibe" of subtle racism that he did not trust at all - a major red flag. Meanwhile, Marcia was absolutely naive about subtle racism. It was her downfall. The case should have been a slam dunk win for the prosecution. Go figure.
As for reverse racism, it's common. The use of slurs against whites is not unheard of. Hispanics have such a pejorative term that starts with a "gr". I've lived in the southwest long enough to know it has a context of "entitled, privileged, and immoral white person" when used with certain tones. Ironically, Hispanics often do not want to admit being part indigenous or black West African even though both can be found in the Hispanic genome of the colonies in Latin America from Mexico to South America and the Caribbean.
In Florida, a very common reverse racism is the concept of sprint speed - the "dual threat" quarterback is code for "we don't want a slow white guy running the offense". It's very common. You can see it on some of the blogs by black athletes. I've seen the blogs call the Super Bowl the "Black Bowl" implying that whites are too slow for elite levels of sprinting in sports.
The other category you overlooked is colorism. It's also common among Democrats. I alluded to it in the case of Hispanics who are light-skinned and may not want to acknowledge distant West African or indigenous ancestry. Spike Lee brought up colorism in his film "School Daze". Going back to elite black athletes in college sports, there is colorism with a pattern of preference for white women while rejecting darker black women.
If a white Republican wants to defend himself or herself when asserting a desire to build the "wall", all they have to do is point out the hypocrisy of colorism, slavery, and the Spanish Casta of the Latin American colonies. Mexico had a slave trade on Native Americans such that they were not fully emancipated as of the early 1900s. They were at the bottom of the Latin American Spanish "casta".
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
