Don't confuse "racist" and "right wing".

[Donald Ian Rankin]

There have been two recent big arguments on DU: one about whether or not the cartoon suggesting that the stimulus bill had been written by a berserk chimpanzee was racist, and the other about whether drawing attention to the fact that Bobby Jindal was born "Piyush" was racist.

I think that the former fairly clearly isn't racist, while the latter fairly clearly is.

The test I apply in both cases is "would this happen if all the participants were the same race", and I think it very likely indeed that Republican columnists would have used a berserk chimpanzee being shot as an opportunity to criticise Democratic policies if the president were a white Democrat (after all, they use everything else that way...), while I'm quite sure that far fewer DUers would give a damn about what Jindal's given name was if it weren't for the racial angle.

All of which makes me suspect that a lot of opposition to racist is based more on factionalism than on actual principle - when something rightwing can be labelled racist, that's a good way to attack it, but it probably doesn't go deeper than that.

[Uzybone]

1. totally wrong on both fronts

in my opinion. Some folks agree with 1 or 2 of your arguments but I think both are completely wrong.

[tom_paine]

5. Yep. I agree, Uzybone. Totally wrong. I posted on this elsewhere.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=5129997&mesg_id=5132388

[ret5hd]

2. uh huh. sure you do.

[marmar]

3. Sorry, but I've got to call a mound of bullshit....

The monkey cartoon was racist with intent, and drawing attention to "Piyush" is racist.

And right-wing and racist in America are ususally synonymous, n'est-ce pas?

[Donald Ian Rankin]

46. Depends what you mean by "usually".

There is certainly a strong positive correlation between racism and right-wing political views, but there are both a great-many right-wingers who are not racist and a great many left-wingers who are either genuinely racist or happy to indulge in racism when it suits them.

[EFerrari]

4. Your first example is from a long tradition of racist cartoons

and your second example is from another long tradition of ridiculing non-Western names as a way to keep foreigners "in their place".

Both are bigoted.. That they are also right wing tactics is secondary.

[Name removed]

7. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[EFerrari]

9. I've heard the same argument used by people you don't even want to know.

Or, whom you may know very well.

I don't have a problem calling out bullshit. None at all.

[Name removed]

12. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[EFerrari]

13. If the several hundred posts on this topic have gone over your head

I have little hope of getting the point across. :)

[Name removed]

17. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[EFerrari]

19. Please don't hold back. This is just getting good.

[TWiley]

24. hold back from what? You have said nothing

so what could I possibly respond to?

[EFerrari]

26. This subthread is your nonresponse to what I said to the OP.

In case you are confused. :)

/oops

[ret5hd]

21. Amen.

[TroglodyteScholar]

16. Who are you trying to kid?

Just what the fuck do you recommend that we call him anyway? Why is it racist to simply say someones name?

I'd recommend calling him Bobby Jindal or Governor Jindal. It's obvious that calling him "Piyush" when he goes by Bobby is appealing to people's xenophobia. I'd be interested in your explanation for why it's appropriate to make a point of calling him something other than the name he goes by.

If you are being honest in your evaluation of this issue, is it safe for me to assume that you also call President Obama "Hussein Obama" rather than "Barack Obama?" It's simply his name, and if you call him Barack Obama, you clearly have a problem with reality. :sarcasm:

[TWiley]

18. so, did you register the same outrage when we insulted bush?

Or is this a special case for you?

[TroglodyteScholar]

22. Outrage? Are you sure you read my post?

I don't recall expressing any outrage. I was just pointing out the flawed logic in your position.

I've been reading DU for a long time, and I'm pretty sure I never saw any racial taunting directed at Bush--and even if there WERE racial taunting directed at him, it doesn't have anywhere near the same power when directed at a privileged white guy. If you're an idiot or criminal, no matter what your background, that is fair game.

That's cool, go on being intellectually dishonest. You're not fooling anyone but yourself.

[TWiley]

23. oh, well, I have been reading DU for a long time as well

what does that prove?

I am curious about your position that it is appropriate to heckle a moron or retard for their physical conditon, but when it comes to pigment, then suddenly you are offended.

thats pretty selective outrage dont you think?

[TroglodyteScholar]

29. Are you being obtuse on purpose?

It's all too obvious that I didn't refer to my time spent on DU as an indicator of credibility--I was setting up my point about Bush never being attacked with appeals to racism/xenophobia. I suspect you realize this, but prefer to oversimplify my post since I rightfully called you on your prejudice.

Also, I think everyone would prefer if you didn't put words into people's mouths. Calling attention to Bush's lack of intellectual curiosity is a VERY different scenario from mocking the disabled, and you know it.

And once again, since you continue your charade for fear of facing reality (and here we thought you were a fan), I never showed the slightest sign of any outrage--I merely pointed out that you were making an illogical argument. Clearly I've hit a nerve with your inner bigot that you deny exists. Sorry.

On edit: Grammar

[TWiley]

31. Well, thank you for the thoughtful reply

However, I feel that there is little difference between criticizing someone for being a "moron" and registering a similar attack based on different physical charisteristic.

My fundamental question is why are we spending so much time attacking our own in defense of someone like him? I would expect this on the free republic blog, but DU also has a long, rich, and creative history when it comes to lambasting the republicans.

While I do understand the racism/xenophobia aspect of your argument, it is difficult for me to differentiate between that, and a similar hatred of republicans, fundamentalists, freepers, and conservative media.

oops, guess what ....... Jinga is all of the above. Excuse me if I do not like the man.

[TroglodyteScholar]

34. I'm not defending the man. I don't like him.

I won't defend the actions of violent criminals, either, but I believe in protecting their civil rights like anyone else's.

What I and many other DUers are trying to point out is that we should be above this tactic that is being used here against this man. I would expect a line of attack that highlights someone's foreign-sounding name on Free Republic, but not here. There are enough things wrong with this a-hole that we don't need to compromise our Democratic values and resort to thinly-veiled racism.

Edit: clarification

[TWiley]

36. well, I firmly believe that "political correctness" cost us two elections

and we therefore became complicate in the crimes of the bushtapo. The hard right has declared war on the liberals. They have been waging war on us for years. Myself, I see absolutly nothing wrong with pushing back against the stupidity instead of letting it stand.

If Al Gore would not have been so politically correct as to roll over, if John Kerry would have responded to the swift boats ..... we would be living in an entirely different world today.

[EFerrari]

42. Both elections were stolen on the backs of black voters.

They stopped the counting of black votes in Florida in 2000 and in 2004, they sat back and let black voters be ripped off in Ohio.

How "politically correct" can you be when you refuse to stand with the Black Caucus and object to the ripping off of hundreds of thousands of black voters?

That wasn't about "political correctness" at all. On the contrary, it was about letting black voters be ripped off AGAIN.

It's a funny thing. Most cowards aren't "politically correct" at all. They're just cowards.

[TroglodyteScholar]

43. Gore and Kerry's failures weren't due to PC

Gore and Kerry had two shortcomings: they credited their adversaries with having more decency than they actually had, and, at the end of the day, Gore and Kerry simply lacked spine when it was time to stand up. Political correctness didn't have anything to do with it--maybe taking the high road did, but there's still a distinction to be drawn there.

I agree that we need to "push back against the stupidity," but I don't think there's any question that doing so requires, by definition, refusing to engage in that same brand of stupidity. Wouldn't you agree?

Edit: Clarity again.

[TWiley]

48. I think I understand, but I have to disagree

I understand what your thought is, but I largely disagree. The compromise would be that I think we should not strike first, but when it comes to self-defense, we should give what we get.

There is a huge republican media machine out there, and it will run right over the top of us if we simply stand by and let it do just that. Those like Limbaugh have to be met with an equal amount of tenacity and rigor. To do otherwise is to let the opposition define our party and motives. We need to draw clear distinctions, and seize each opportunity to do so.

Aspects of the “politically correct” argument are little more than elitism and represent intellectual pride more than anything of substance. It gives those who hurl it the opportunity to polish their halo with the tears of other people. While not directly feeling the brunt of any attack, they sideline and pontificate on the “moral and appropriate” response.

I say, bring a gun to a gun fight, bring a knife to a knife fight, and bring boxing gloves to a boxing match. To do anything less betrays the party, the constituency, and those who donate time and money in support of a candidate.

John Kerry was a good example of giving it to his supporter’s right up the ass after they worked so very hard for him. Bush was beatable, Kerry had tons of money and activists, and yet he betrayed every one of us when push came to shove.

Don’t start it, but bury the fucker if they do. I resigned myself from the tweed coat and hat crowd in 2004.

Attacking your own in support of the opposition is not a brilliant strategy by the way.

[TWiley]

6. Another Republican Troll no doubt.

You can kiss my ass dude

[Bonn1997]

10. A Republican Troll Who Has Donated to DU and Has 1000 Posts Here?

[TWiley]

15. so enlightened one, which part of the O.P. does not scream troll?

[EFerrari]

20. You are the only one screaming troll on this thread.

:popcorn:

[TWiley]

25. well, try real hard now

Quote: There have been two recent big arguments on DU: one about whether or not the cartoon suggesting that the stimulus bill had been written by a berserk chimpanzee was racist, and the other about whether drawing attention to the fact that Bobby Jindal was born "Piyush" was racist.

I think that the former fairly clearly isn't racist, while the latter fairly clearly is. End Quote


which part of this does not scream troll? do you even know what a troll is?

[EFerrari]

27. What you're doing requires no effort on my part at all.

And while I often disagree with Donald, I object to you calling him a troll. Which, as you know, also violates DU tos.

[Political Heretic]

38. The part where the OP at least partly right.

[BlooInBloo]

8. lolol!

:popcorn:

[MrModerate]

11. Naaah. Your test of "if everybody was the same race . . ."

Falls apart because everybody *isn't* of the same race, and some people are living with a history of ape-insults that others aren't.

And, not to get too pedantic, but "Asian" as in Jindal's ancestry isn't generally considered a race, and chauvinistic attacks against Americans of Indian extraction are rather a bit different than classic racism as practiced in the United States. But the heck with those distinctions -- by any common standard, the smarmy references to Bobby/Piyush are, indeed, racist.

[ismnotwasm]

14. Don't know dude

Turn it around a little bit. You really think they'd use a violent image with police and a dead chimpanzee with a white politician? The police even looked a little bit 1960's in the cartoon. It was Fucked. Up.
One of the most blatantly racist things I've seen in a while.

I think there is probably a racist angle to the who Piyush bullshit, but white Americans don't really know what to do with an Insanely right winged, brown skinned Indian (Not Native)Governor of fucking Louisiana of all states, now do they?

Personally I think he should be called by what he wants, as a personal name anyway. I also think it's sad he doesn't use his given name, but in a racist country, understandable. (Makes me think of that cop scene in Harold and Kumar go to White Castle)

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

28. You have such interesting theories about race and racism.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=4468947#4470157

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=3053233#3058340

:popcorn:

[ismnotwasm]

30. Now that *is* interesting.

In that compeltely debunked "Bell Curve" and only racist assholes still believe it" kind of way.

Jesus.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

32. Isn't it?"

"The analogy with the Nazis fails because the scientists the Nazis were paying attention to were *wrong* (and for lots of other, more important reasons too, involving how they reacted to the observations). That's not an argument for ignoring *valid* scientific evidence of correlation between race and the functioning of the mind, any more than there's anything wrong with my mother getting special attention from breast cancer specialists as a result of being an Ashkenazi Jew."

Emphasis his.

Oh my.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

45. Try putting in the whole quote next time.

Specifically, the very first paragraph:

"So far as I know, the balance of evidence does not currently reliably show and correlation between race and the inherent properties of the mind."

(Where for "and", read "any", in case it's not clear).

[Uzybone]

33. Wow. no wonder he finds the cartoon not racist.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

35. One would think.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=4290018#4290460

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=3804989#3805562

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=2892385

[Political Heretic]

40. The first link you list is totally fine, and common sense. The second link is interesting

...and he gives enough disclaimers about his own uncertainty and questioning about the subject that to try to demean him because he dared to talk about it is childish and unbecoming.

What I would say to the original author of the post in the second link though, is that he is at point using "race" and culture interchangably, and sometimes using race when I think he'd be better served to use the term "ethnicity"

There are all kinds of links between culture/ethnicity and many kinds of indicators, including intelligence or aptitude. But by the very point of using terms "culture" or "ethnicity" you're moving away from implying a genetic correlation (which as far as I know there is no evidence for) while pointing out that culture and context can certainly create correlations for groups of people.

This should help avoid some of the flame war due to an imprecision of terms.

[Political Heretic]

37. You're very right, but its going to make you very unpopular here.

Good luck :hi:

[KamaAina]

39. The Jindal thing started over a year ago, with a press release from the La. Dem party

that used the repuke candidate's given name.

Irony of all ironies, they were then branded "racists" -- by a repuke newspaper publisher from a small town in North La.!

http://www.ouachitacitizen.com/news.php?id=1191

"Issuing a news release pointing out that Jindal's first name is Piyush, which the state Democratic Party did last week, removed the racist label from the Republican Party and placed it clearly on the backs of the Democrats."

I could never have imagined what a hornet's (Hornets?) nest I would be stirring up by bringing it here. Sorry.

[Political Heretic]

41. I agree completely.

It wasn't a bright day for La. Democrats.

Issuing a PRESS RELEASE for no other reason than to say "OMG OMG OMG!! DID YOU KNOW HIS REAL NAME IS ALL FERIN SOUNDIN??!?!?!"

Pretty disgusting.

And not too dissimilar from what's happening here.

[ProgressIn2008]

44. I think you're right -- I see more factionalism than opposition to racism, all too often

Using racism to score points against the other side doesn't mean you give a shit about racism. Running to appropriate racial enlightenment to score points for your side doesn't mean you give a shit about racism, either.

Also, I see some of the crap about Jindal downgraded to what's called "ethnic slur." No, it's racism. It was intolerable when directed at Obama. It's intolerable when it's directed at Jindal. Full stop. No qualifiers. I've seen some people claiming to be "Democrats" and "progressives" say racist crap about Micheal Steele, too (though I'm not talking about any DU threads here, because I have no idea if that happened here). "Uncle Tom" racist remarks, lot of them. Nice.

[Spazito]

47. Both are racist n/t

[lumberjack_jeff]

49. Michael Savage was born Michael Wiener. Is it racist to ridicule his name?

It may very well be childish and rude, but that's not the question.

There are plenty of ways to express my "factionalism" without subverting my basic principles of equality and egalitarianism.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

50. No, of course not.

Drawing attention to the fact that Michael Savage was born with a name that is faintly ridiculous in order to oppose him is not racist (not terribly productive, but certainly not racist).

Drawing attention to the fact that Bobby Jindal was born with an Indian (I think?) name in order to oppose him is racist.

[Occam Bandage]

51. I agree with this.

Yet I doubt that any good will come of it by this point. Battle lines are drawn.