Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Bolo Boffin

(23,796 posts)
Fri Jan 13, 2012, 05:35 AM Jan 2012

Tim Wise: Of Broken Clocks, Presidential Candidates, and the Confusion of Certain White Liberals

http://www.timwise.org/2012/01/of-broken-clocks-presidential-candidates-and-the-confusion-of-certain-white-liberals/

I want those of you who are seriously singing Paul’s praises, while calling yourself progressive or left to ask what it signifies — not about Ron Paul, but about you — that you can look the rest of us in the eye, your political colleagues and allies, and say, in effect, “Well, he might be a little racist, but…

How do you think that sounds to black people, without whom no remotely progressive candidate stands a chance of winning shit in this country at a national level? How does it sound to them — a group that has been more loyal to progressive and left politics than any group in this country — when you praise a man who opposes probably the single most important piece of legislation ever passed in this country, and whose position on the right of businesses to discriminate, places him on the side of the segregated lunchcounter owners? And how do you think they take it that you praise this man, or possibly even support him for president, all so as to teach the black guy currently in the office a lesson for failing to live up to your expectations?

How do you think it sounds to them, right now, this week, as we prepare to mark the Martin Luther King Jr. holiday, that you claim to be progressive, and yet you are praising or even encouraging support for a man who voted against that holiday, who opposes almost every aspect of King’s public policy agenda, and the crowning achievements of the movement he helped lead?

...When you support or give credence to a candidate, you indirectly empower that candidate’s worldview and others who hold fast to it. So when you support or even substantively praise Ron Paul, you are empowering libertarianism, and its offshoots like Ayn Rand’s “greed is good” objectivism, and all those who believe in it. You are empowering the fans of The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged, in which books they learn that altruism is immoral, and that only the self matters. You are empowering the reactionary, white supremacist, Social Darwinists of this culture, who believe — as does Ron Paul — that that Greensboro Woolworth’s was right, and that the police who dragged sit-in protesters off soda fountain stools for trespassing on a white man’s property were justified in doing so, and that the freedom of department store owners to refuse to let black people try on clothes in their dressing rooms was more sacrosanct than the right of black people to be treated like human beings.


There is more, a lot more. It's a no-holds-barred righteous rant and anyone who thinks Glenn Greenwald has a point about Ron Paul (yes, GG gets his fair share of the dressing down) needs to sit down with a cuppa and read and think about every word of it.
11 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Tim Wise: Of Broken Clocks, Presidential Candidates, and the Confusion of Certain White Liberals (Original Post) Bolo Boffin Jan 2012 OP
Ron Paul a white privilege candidate if I ever saw one. TigerToMany Jan 2012 #1
Who does he think bears the brunt of the War Against Some Drugs? eridani Jan 2012 #2
Who do you think would bear the brunt of the War By 49 States Against Some Drugs? Bolo Boffin Jan 2012 #3
Quite a few states are quite a bit more lenient than the Feds on MJ eridani Jan 2012 #4
Yes, 16 states and D.C. have subtracted medical marijuana from the War on Some Drugs Bolo Boffin Jan 2012 #5
Not as good, obviously eridani Jan 2012 #10
last paragraph... handmade34 Jan 2012 #6
how long are they going to beat this dead horse? yurbud Jan 2012 #7
So tiring MFrohike Jan 2012 #8
Really? Bolo Boffin Jan 2012 #9
Thanks for proving me right MFrohike Jan 2012 #11
 

TigerToMany

(124 posts)
1. Ron Paul a white privilege candidate if I ever saw one.
Fri Jan 13, 2012, 06:28 AM
Jan 2012

Think about it. His supporters are overwhelmingly white, rich or upper-middle class, Christian and male. Right away if that doesn't raise a huge red flag, it should because someone who draws on that kind of power-base is likely to be very, very bad for the rest of us.

The fact that he is even coming in second or third place among Republicans shows just how desperate they are and the extent of white privilege in our country. Which just goes to show why Obama needs to win more than ever in 2012.

eridani

(51,907 posts)
2. Who does he think bears the brunt of the War Against Some Drugs?
Fri Jan 13, 2012, 08:03 AM
Jan 2012

It sure isn't white people. That said, Wise is absolutely right about an aroused public being the real agents of change, and we haven't done all that well recently until OWS came along.

Bolo Boffin

(23,796 posts)
3. Who do you think would bear the brunt of the War By 49 States Against Some Drugs?
Fri Jan 13, 2012, 08:08 AM
Jan 2012

Tim Wise understands the racist underpinnings of the War Against Drugs. But Ron Paul, as Wise points out in this article, would leave that up to the states, and the states have more often than not proved to be havens for unjust crackdowns on minorities more than they have ever been laboratories of democracy.

That said, you're right about OWS. But there's nothing stopping us from doing exactly the same thing with the Democratic Party from the ground up.

eridani

(51,907 posts)
4. Quite a few states are quite a bit more lenient than the Feds on MJ
Fri Jan 13, 2012, 09:32 AM
Jan 2012

It isn't states that are busting medical MJ clinics.

Bolo Boffin

(23,796 posts)
5. Yes, 16 states and D.C. have subtracted medical marijuana from the War on Some Drugs
Fri Jan 13, 2012, 10:50 AM
Jan 2012

How are they on crack cocaine in African-American neighborhoods?

eridani

(51,907 posts)
10. Not as good, obviously
Sun Jan 15, 2012, 05:53 AM
Jan 2012

But whenever there is a reduction in punitive attitudes towards any drug, that has a knock-on effect.

handmade34

(22,756 posts)
6. last paragraph...
Fri Jan 13, 2012, 11:12 AM
Jan 2012

"...In short,

if you’re still disappointed in Barack Obama, it’s only because you never understood whose job it was to produce change in the first place. But don’t take out your own failings in this regard on the rest of us
by giving ideological cover and assorted journalistic love taps to a guy who believes the poor should rely on the charitable impulses of doctors to provide for their medical needs, including, one presumes, chemotherapy; or that America was meant to be a “robustly Christian” nation, but is being currently undermined by “secularists;” or who puts the term gay rights in quotation marks when he writes it, and believes states should be free to criminalize homosexual intercourse, and who is such a homophobe that he won’t even use the bathroom in a gay man’s house; or who has all but said that he would like to take America back to the early 1800s, in terms of the scope of government: a truly glorious time to be sure, if you were white, male and owned property."

Yes!

MFrohike

(1,980 posts)
8. So tiring
Sun Jan 15, 2012, 05:39 AM
Jan 2012

All this "liberals are supporting Ron Paul" shit is so boring. Substitute socialism for Ron Paul and it might as well come from Fox News.

Bolo Boffin

(23,796 posts)
9. Really?
Sun Jan 15, 2012, 05:49 AM
Jan 2012

Socialism is warning us about the coming race war? Socialism is anti-choice, anti-women, anti-what-minority-you-got?

Get real.

MFrohike

(1,980 posts)
11. Thanks for proving me right
Sun Jan 15, 2012, 07:50 PM
Jan 2012

The hysteria over Ron Paul is no different from the tired accusations of Obama's "socialism." It's all conclusory character attacks with barely any substance.

Highlighting Ron Paul's bizarre and archaic social views is exactly the wrong way to deal with him and his supporters. Sure, it will help reduce his share of the primary votes from 22% to some miniscule portion, but we will still be left with his atrocious economic/monetary legacy and that is far, far more dangerous than his fever-swamp bullshit. This is very reminiscent of Barry Goldwater. Sure, he lost in a landslide, but we got stuck with Reagan, Bush, and the tea party. Either liberals deal with his substantive challenges, which are not social issues, or they will continue to grow in influence.

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Editorials & Other Articles»Tim Wise: Of Broken Clock...