Define "racist."

[lib_wit_it]

I ask in response to the current "Tweety" controversy, but it's a good idea, nevertheless. At least, I'm very curious to see any and all sincere efforts to do so.

[Thrill]

1. Republican

[lib_wit_it]

8. True, but too easy. I'd really love to see DUers attempts define it.

[treestar]

2. Believes the race they belong to is inherently superior

Has superior genes, brains, and a better culture than others, for no reason except their blood.

[lib_wit_it]

9. So, based on his "forgot" comment, is Tweety a racist?

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

29. Is Tweety a racist?

I don't know. I don't know his heart.

I suspect that what he said was a botched attempt at a compliment. Put charitably, I think his logic would go something like this:

"Obama is Black. America is a country that has NEVER allowed a Black Man to be in charge, much less to be President. Obama's speech was so masterful that for an hour, I forgot that America was this kind of country."

I think (I hope) that the phrase "I forgot he was black" was a clever attempt at saying, "I forgot that America has a long history of prejudice."

[AlinPA]

63. I heard it this way: "His speech was so good that I forgot for awhile that he was Black"

"I forgot", i.e. "Chris Matthews forgot" were two important words. As if to say "I can't believe a black man can give a good speech". IMO, it is a stretch to project the phrase onto America. I don't know if he is racist or not, like you say we don't know his heart. All I can go by are his words.

Sorry, but to me it's like saying "I watched Tiger Woods play golf and for awhile, I forgot he was black".

[lib_wit_it]

70. Not the same. The fact of Obama being black has been *huge* in terms of his election and his

presidency. Matthews' comment was in relation to this fact.

[treestar]

30. I don't know

Tweety's comment shows he thinks there is a difference, and though many have said it and perhaps been racists, I don't think a true racist would "forget" the difference. IMO Tweety's comment does not prove his thinks the white race is inherently superior by blood. That comment if misguided means "there have been centuries of people who thought blacks were inferior to whites, now it's proven they are equal."

[Raineyb]

35. It's just the opposite.

Anytime you get one of those "you're not REALLY black" or "I don't think of you as black" so-called compliments it is a comment that presupposes white supremacy in the first place. People "forget" you're black when they think you're too talented, smart (fill in the compliment) to really be black because all of those positive adjectives are not ones they associate with black people. By default they see black people as less intelligent (fill in the compliment) than white people and when that black person proves to be equally if not more intelligent (fill in the compliment) than white people they know they have to find a way to separate that positive attribute from their blackness because those words just aren't ones they use to describe black people. Then they "forget" you're black. But the second you do something they don't like they will and very quickly at that, remember just how black you really are. (Ask Tiger Woods) So this "compliment" is really based on your inherent inferiority in the first place.

And I do not accept such a "compliment" as given. That's the type of shit that needs to be set straight right away.

[treestar]

38. that's one way of looking at it

I submit that perhaps it is not required to take it in the most negative light.

But then how can there a society in which there is no racism? How would the white people act in such an ideal society? Never mention it at all? Would the black people ever refer to another person as "white?" (And all other races, too.)

[Raineyb]

39. Why would they have to mention it at all? You can compliment someone without

bringing their race into it at all. There's no need to say you forgot anyone was of any race to begin with. You could just say, "that was a great speech. I like what you said and how you said it." Or "Damn you're really good at computers" (without mentioning how surprised you are at the fact) Or "Wow that painting you did is really pretty. I really like it." None of these compliments brought up race. Why? Because a true compliment doesn't need one. When you say something like "I forgot you were black" you're really saying "You're pretty (fill in the compliment) for a black person and that's no compliment.

[treestar]

46. OK

Fair enough.

[Fire1]

51. Right. It's a back handed compliment. n/t

[lib_wit_it]

76. I know exactly what you mean, however, as I continue to attempt to point out, Matthews was

commenting as a journalist about a president whose "blackness" has been seen by Americans as extremely important in various aspects. I think Matthews meant that he forgot *that* fact.

[Raineyb]

81. Really? How was his blackness so important that its considered a sign of praise that

Tweety "forgot" it?

Is he saying that he forgot the historical precedent sent by the election of a black man to the highest office in the land? That's not bloody likely. So what exactly about his "blackness" is it a positive to "forget?" What he can't be a good speaker, a competent executive, a good politician who represents an area larger than some black enclave of a major city AND be black?

There is no way to make this statement less offensive than it is. It's a backhanded compliment no matter how you slice it. I'm not buying that explanation AT ALL.

[lib_wit_it]

84. "I forgot that (so very much has been made of the fact that) he is a member of a group of Americans

who have never, until Obama, been the least bit like to have become president. I forgot that the president's "blackness" may have been on the minds of many others watching this speech. I forgot that when I was born, in 1945, it was unlikely that anyone seeing or interacting with a black person would fail to be very aware of that person's race. Etc. And I think it's so great that things aren't like that anymore!

That's what I believe he was saying.

There are plenty of of Americans who are most definitely *not* thinking it's great that things have changed. They're the real racists.

So, obviously we disagree.

[lib_wit_it]

86. I also should say that the praise was not for Obama, but for the fact that it is now, in contrast to

during the last 200+ years, possible to watch a black president making his SOTU and not have the fact of his blackness come to mind. The great majority of Americans do notice people's races. That's how our society has raised us. So if you consider the overwhelming majority of Americans as racists because we are aware of race and its history in this country, then that's your right. I just disagree.

But then I'm not sure my idea of racism is clearly defined. Hence, my interest in what others think about it, in discussing the issue in terms of the definitions and how Chris Matthews lines up within or without them. To say someone or some comment is racist without saying how you define racism, is lacking in clarity.

[Raineyb]

89. I'm not saying that noticing race makes you a bigot. I'm saying that

if your basis is that the race to which you belong to is superior and that others have to work to get up to your level it is certainly a bigoted notion. A notion you've not bothered to address.

Tweety has already outed himself as to having this mindset by his comment about having "forgotten" that Obama was black. The fact that Tweety's comment helps the institutional racism that's ingrained in this country by further entrenching this attitude among the populace via the mass media just makes it worse.

I'm not sure what difference parsing the meaning of the word "racist" makes in this situation by any stretch of the definition what Tweety said was racist. So why the hoop jumping to try to make it seem less so?

Any way you slice it there's really no excuse for what Tweety said.

[lib_wit_it]

90. I disagree with the notion that Matthews believes that the race to which he belongs is superior, nor

the rest of your statement. And I've already explained how that could be true, despite his comment.

And if you can't understand the the value of defining one's terms in an argument, then you're perfectly happy to accept intellectually sloppy discussion.

I still think you're wrong with your absolutist statements concerning undefined concepts. And I'd venture a guess that Obama would agree with me.

You think I'm wrong. So be it.

Peace out.

[Raineyb]

92. Considering the unconscious negative views white people have of black people in this country

your argument is neither persuasive nor in my opinion correct.

And flinging Obama into this discussion doesn't make your argument any more correct. In fact it only shows its weakness as you don't have anything actually substantial to add to your argument.

Just because you refuse to acknowledge the definition of a word doesn't mean that it is in fact undefined. What it looks like is that you're looking for people who agree with you on the definition and can therefore give Tweety the break you're so desperate to give him.

I'm not not buying what you're selling.

[lib_wit_it]

96. And vice versa. No sale. None of it. Believe me, you're a hell of a lot more desperate to have

people agree with you. You appear to be freaking the hell out because I disagree with you.

A great many definitions of "Racist" have been expressed here. I happen to agree with quite a few of them. The fact that I don't agree with you is one you'll just have to learn to live with.

[lib_wit_it]

99. You can help me (kar4ken) convince the commenter of the racist nature of this scene from an old

movie with a black-face routine: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tAHSTbD4A5M. That is, if you agree with me that it is racist. Maybe you can even call me a hypocrite due to what I say there vs. what I've said on the Matthews comment. Oh, and the fact that I don't find all black-face racist.

[Raineyb]

100. I could give a shit if you agree with me. I've already have you pegged.

Your need to respond to your own posts notwithstanding you're still making a really poor argument. Tweety's comments were based in white supremacy and there's nothing non-racist about that. So sorry that I can't feed your delusion and agree with you so you can feel good about defending poor Tweety.

Actually, I'm not sorry at all.

[lib_wit_it]

102. Yeah, right. That's why you became apoplectic in your need to check frequently and respond to every

reply I made to you. Yeah, that's how folks who don't give a shit act. LOL! You're funny!

You know, you might want to consider joining up with the Reich Wingers. You may have come to different conclusions, but your (low level) thinking process and listening skills along with your deep-seated anger are exactly the same.

Oh, and btw, I obviously wasn't "replying" to my own post, I was adding information that I was too late to add upon edit. As is your habit, you don't bother to consider the facts. Probably doing the best you can, though. Be patient, you could improve over time.

Rage away, Sparky. I'll be ignoring you now. Over and out.

[Raineyb]

111. Actually I didn't reply to every one just the most egregious.

I simply don't have the time to reply to every ass backwards and wrong reply you've put out there. And your inability to actually read what you comprehend does seem to make the number of posts that you put out there that are simply erroneous rather numerous.

Ignore me? Good stick you head in the sand and continue believing in your fantasy world. The rest of us will continue in the real world.

BTW, I really don't like it when white people dare deign to try to tell me what is and is not racism when as one who has been on the receiving end of it. Such paternalistic bullshit is yet another form of bigotry that I don't have the time nor the inclination to deal with. And frankly such paternalism is in and of itself a form a racism. Of course you don't seem to know what the hell racism is so I'm sure you'd find an excuse as to why it isn't if you weren't such a pissy little coward looking for a sycophant to validate his own erroneous views.

Fuck you very much.

[lib_wit_it]

71. Obama *is* black. And to many Americans it is an important fact in both negative and positive ways.

As a journalist, his comment was about this fact, not a comment that show Chris Matthews as a racist.

[rocktivity]

109. Based on his "forgot" comment, Tweety certainly SAID something racist.

But it's possible to be prejudiced (discriminatory in thought) without being discriminatory in deed. This was spelled out for me in college:

Prejudiced Discriminator: These are the true racists/homophobes/sexists, because they practice discrimination in word AND deed. What Whe Should All Abhor.

Non-prejudiced Discriminator: Someone who honestly doesn't mind in the least that his daughter's dating a black guy, but wouldn't dare invite them to dine at his country club.

Prejudiced Non-Discriminator: Tweety. He may believe that "forgetting" that Obama is black was a backhanded compliment, but he's actually implying that there's something improper or unnatural about a black man doing what a white can do. Besides, what happened after that hour? I'll bet his memory returned!

Non-Prejduced Non-Discriminator: What We Should All Shoot For.


rocktivity

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

28. Prejudice based upon Race?

Would that be another way of saying that you said?

You can be prejudiced without being necessarily racist. Prejudice is a positive or negative reation to another person or group based upon that person's being perceived to be part of a group.

I might be prejudiced against people from Michigan (I went to Ohio State), but that doesn't necessarily make me a racist.

So racism would be a specialized form of prejudice.

[treestar]

31. Didn't think of that

If one admitted people from Michigan were equal, one just did not like them because they were from Michigan, perhaps that would be racist, too.

Separate but equal and all that jazz.

Yet I think there is a special place in hell for whoever thinks even that separation is not even necessary, but that the race the person was born into is superior.

[bluestateguy]

3. What response #2 said

And I reject the notion that you have to have power to be a racist.

Having said that, it is much more dangerous when racists occupy positions of power, as opposed to racists who do not.

[lib_wit_it]

10. So, based on his "forgot" comment, is Tweety a racist?

[Bill McBlueState]

4. racist:

supports the social structures that allow the invented idea of "race" to be used as a tool to keep people down.

[lib_wit_it]

11. So, based on his "forgot" comment, is Tweety a racist?

[Phx_Dem]

5. Dislikes and/or feels superior to a certain race or races.

[lib_wit_it]

12. So, based on his "forgot" comment, is Tweety a racist?

[vaberella]

19. He's not. End of story. n/t

[lib_wit_it]

23. I get that you think that, and I agree, but what does Phx_Dem think?

There's a lot of "yes he is" and "no he's not" going on around here without definition of terms. I'm curious as to what both the yes and no voters are basing their "yes" or "no" decisions on.

[vaberella]

27. Understood..well you read my explanation of why not. n/t

[lib_wit_it]

103. Yes, and thanks for your explanation.

[Phx_Dem]

50. Based on his entire comments and what I believe he was trying to say,

he should have simply said something like, "As we watch our country's first AA President give his SOTU address, it's interesting to note that race does not come to mind." I think that is more what he meant, based on his rambling remarks below. He's such a horrible speaker.

Here's his full comment:

I was trying to think about who he was tonight. It's interesting: he is post-racial, by all appearances. I forgot he was black tonight for an hour. You know, he's gone a long way to become a leader of this country, and past so much history, in just a year or two. I mean, it's something we don't even think about. I was watching, I said, wait a minute, he's an African American guy in front of a bunch of other white people. And here he is president of the United States and we've completely forgotten that tonight -- completely forgotten it. I think it was in the scope of his discussion. It was so broad-ranging, so in tune with so many problems, of aspects, and aspects of American life that you don't think in terms of the old tribalism, the old ethnicity. It was astounding in that regard. A very subtle fact. It's so hard to talk about. Maybe I shouldn't talk about it, but I am. I thought it was profound that way.

[lib_wit_it]

69. Not racist. Again, it is frequently said, and was said by Obama himself, that we need to discuss

racism. I think Matthews' comment, taken in the context of the whole of his comment, was a part of a discussion on racism. He said maybe he shouldn't talk about it because it's a minefield and not using the correct words can get you a lot of flack, despite your intent and despite you not believing what one would believe if one were, in fact, a racist.

[olegramps]

107. I don't believe that he is being racist. He is in all reality stating a fact.

I was raised in the South in which racism was and still is rampant and a person's racial heritage continues to be a predominate feature in any interaction. Speaking in the third person, a person would say, "I saw a Black guy on the corner"...but in the case of a white person they would say, "I saw a guy on the corner..." not I saw a White guy...

I can identify with Matthews and his observation that perhaps we are actually moving, albeit slowing, toward not even noticing a person's racial heritage and just seeing them as a fellow human being. Unfortunately, it is so damn ingrained in some of us that it is difficult for many of us to overcome it. If you don't believe that many Southern are staunch racists then you are denying reality. President Johnson remarked when he signed the civil rights legislation that he had just signed the death warrant for the Democratic Party for years to come in the South. I remember full well how my relatives and neighbors without exception condemned him and immediately switched parties. They held Judas Iscariot in higher esteem than Johnson. We have come a long way, but the road is long and steep. I feel like Moses, I can just barely see the Promised Land, but am doomed to never live there. Well, that's my two cents worth.

[Phx_Dem]

48. No. It was a racist comment, but based on everything I know of Tweety,

I do not believe he dislikes or looks down on African Americans. And he speaks very highly of President Obama as a person even if he disagrees with him on policy or job performance. I certainly wouldn't blame anyone for thinking he is a racist though -- if they don't know much about him and then here this kind of remark, what else are they gonna think? That's Tweety's fault for being an idiot. I don't feel sorry for him.

[Phx_Dem]

49. Based on his entire comment and what I think he was trying to say

he should have simply said something like, "As we watch our country's first AA President give his SOTU address, it's interesting to note that race does not come to mind."

Here's his full comment:

I was trying to think about who he was tonight. It's interesting: he is post-racial, by all appearances. I forgot he was black tonight for an hour. You know, he's gone a long way to become a leader of this country, and past so much history, in just a year or two. I mean, it's something we don't even think about. I was watching, I said, wait a minute, he's an African American guy in front of a bunch of other white people. And here he is president of the United States and we've completely forgotten that tonight -- completely forgotten it. I think it was in the scope of his discussion. It was so broad-ranging, so in tune with so many problems, of aspects, and aspects of American life that you don't think in terms of the old tribalism, the old ethnicity. It was astounding in that regard. A very subtle fact. It's so hard to talk about. Maybe I shouldn't talk about it, but I am. I thought it was profound that way.

[gateley]

6. In addition to "feeling superior", I'd add dismissing "inferior" races as being

sub-human.

[lib_wit_it]

13. So, based on his "forgot" comment, is Tweety a racist?

[gateley]

42. Not in my mind. I'm one of the ones who was defending Tweety. My real sense

of him is that he's NOT racist. I don't think he feels superior to Obama, conversely, he's enamored and respectful.

[lib_wit_it]

73. If this is part of the definition of racism, then most here would have to agree that Matthews isn't

racist.

[Raineyb]

82. His comment belies your assertion.

The whole premise of his statement is steeped in a belief that blacks are not going to be as good as white people at doing things like lead the country.

Why did you even start this OP anyway? It looks as though you have already determined what answer to your question before you even put it out there. So what is your point? Looking for another reason to tell groups of us that what we don't know what we saw and heard?

[lib_wit_it]

85. As I said, there's been a great deal of discussion as to whether the comment was racist or not. It

means nothing to say it was or wasn't unless it is clear what one thinks constitutes racism. I do have my opinion, but I'm also interested in knowing that of others. Also, I am open to having my mind changed, and I find the discussion very interesting and important. Sorry you don't see the value in those things. You're welcome to ignore the thread.

[daleanime]

7. There are two kinds of people...

those who think there are two kinds of people and those who are not racist.:silly:

[rocktivity]

112. Actually, there are three kinds of people

Those who can count, and those who can't.

:crazy:
rocktivity

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

14. Bigotry based on race.

And yes, to answer your question, Matthews is a racist because of his "forgot" comments.

And the full context isn't any better. This "post racial" shit is almost always a racist dog whistle.

[lib_wit_it]

16. Would you please define bigotry and briefly explain how his comment proves his bigotry?

[boppers]

15. A belief in a non-scientific form of value-laden differences between people.

In tweety's example, he thought Obama was "black" (or rather, he "forgot" that Obama was "black"), which is a non-scientific determination. There isn't a "black" gene, or even a set of genes that determines that someone is "black".

[vaberella]

18. I agree with your definition but I don't think Tweety's point was that.

The world and even Obama himself defines himself as a Black man and there for as President of the United States--he would be the first Black president. Your explanation would therefore make Obama a racist against himself...this is the problem with where you're going with your statement.

The case I find Tweety was making was that the idea of him being a "Black" President before he's President was wiped off when he heard Obama speak. The idea of Obama being the first Black Presidet puts a stress on Black and ignores the fact that he is a man who is President and end of story. This would be the same problem HRC would face if she was the first Woman President----and if let's say someone like bell hooks became the First Black Woman President. Gender and Race will be used in conjunction with the Presidency. But if it was any other white Male President--rarely do you hear The First Catholic President, First Jewish President, First Protestant President---he would just be President. But Obama's race and his Presidency are not separate.

What Tweety I find was getting at, was that in that moment race was not a factor and we saw The President speaking to his people. He is not A Black President, he's not a racialized President----now he's the President of the people----That's not racist. It makes sense and I find it to be an intriguing comment.

[lib_wit_it]

22. Whew, thanks for that. That general idea was rattling around in my brain, but it would not come

together into a comprehensible group of words.

Personally, I believe most humans are somewhat racist or bigoted or some variation of the theme. Science tells us that it was/is a necessary, self-protective characteristic. Like many other inherent thoughts, emotions, and reactions, progress in civilization depends upon our ability to resist the primitive tendency in order to reevaluate the situation and reconsider our automatic responses.

The difference between righties and lefties is not the lack of any sort of prejudice in lefties, but their willingness to question and possibly alter their primitive reactions.

[vaberella]

26. Well that's false. We aren't inherently racist or bigoted.

We're inherently curious. But not racist or bigoted. Again, racism and bigotry or hatred of people because of differences is only through social ideologies. Remember in the US, racism was a function not really the ideal.

That is to say, Governmental powers wanted a way to control the masses and the best way is to create this idea of social unification through race. The Brits (who were in the US) did the same thing in India. The caste system as we know it was not the original caste system in India. The Brits did that to control the people By creating this sort of unity based on skin color they got free labor and they would lower the amount of people who would get together to revolt. If Blacks united with Whites who were originally as oppressed as somes Whites in the New World---the proletariat that they were would over throw the Bourgeoisie that existed. So to ensure that wouldn't happen the way it was starting to happen they created this idea of White superiority. And it took root in America.

The French didn't do such things. Hence the reason the French lost so much land around the world. Haiti being the first. Because the mulattes, persecuted Whites and Black slaves revolted together. The French never went in on the race thing---they married the natives to keep control.

In any event, it's not a norm and I find that scientific evidence to be a crock. Most "primitive" and/or indigenous societies of antiquity didn't have any form of racism or bigotry.

[boppers]

36. I'm going to try to use my words very carefully, to make sure I don't mis-represent the science:

In animals:
Fruit flies that were genetically compatible with each other were isolated into separate groups, and bred to have different color characteristics. When the two groups (now looking different) were brought back together, both groups tended to mate with others that had similar markings to themselves.

This has been repeated in a great number of animal models, but it's also been repudiated (somewhat) with other models, where all else being equal, certain characteristics tended to be more "desired" and sought out for breeding. Then again, that could be considered a form of "racism" in and of itself, where the "better breeding signals" animal group (race?) is being preferred.

In plants:
Plants generally don't self select breeding partners, and thus, do not have a "preference" for breeding partners.

So, is "racism" scientific? It depends on how one constructs racism. Viewed though a lens of social structures, where racism is defined as a means and motive to oppress others in a society, an animal society has to be complex enough to have means of oppression and dominance, and use mechanisms to enforce it.

Viewed from the lens of individual sex selection, animals tend to seek out other animals which are "desirable" to them, regardless of (and sometimes in spite of) genetic compatibility. Mating selection could be racism, in that sense, or genetic self-preservation, or (put another way) simply what we call vanity.

Where this gets *very* tricky, of course, is when constructs such as "individual mating preferences" start getting applied on larger scales to small family groups, and then larger tribal groups, and ultimately to a global species level.

[lib_wit_it]

59. Behold the Medial Pre-frontal Cortex:

The source of many of the world's woes might be tracked to a specific brain area responsible for identifying people that are not of our ilk. If so, a study on the neural bases of prejudice and its modulation (read abstract or download the pdf), by Jason Mitchell and Mahzarin R. Banaji, of Harvard University, and C Neil Macrae, at the University of Aberdeen in Scotland, published in Neuron in May 2006, could be as important to the burgeoning field of social cognitive neuroscience as Martin Luther King Jr.'s "I have a dream" speech was to the American civil rights movement.

Like-minded

How does the brain differentiate those who are similar to us from those who are different? Does it analyze differences in skin color, language, religion, height, eye color, foot size? Does it discriminate cat versus dog lovers, Pepsi versus Coke drinkers, Shiite versus Sunni, Crips versus Bloods? In a way, the brain does all this and more by simply distinguishing those who don't meet various definitions of who we are.

Specifically, a forebrain area called the dorsal medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC) appears to predict the behavior of members of outgroups by employing prejudices about their presumed background -- assumptions we make, in other words, based on what groups their various traits and contexts seem to put them in or out of. In this sense, outsiders, or those in outgroups, include humans of dissimilar cultural or ethnic identities or any other perceived stereotyped dissimilarity from your own self-identified groups, as well as non-human agents such as cartoons and animals and even inanimate moving objects.

We distinguish otherness by all sorts of indicators, from the seemingly obviously, like sex or race, to the more obviously cultural, such as whether a person is wearing, say, a Yankees cap, a Dodgers cap, or a tee-shirt that says Baseball Sucks. The focus of the paper under review here focuses less on the cues than on the brain areas that respond to them.

Continued: http://www.scientificamerican.com/blog/60-second-science/post.cfm?id=how-harvard-students-perceive-redne

[boppers]

32. I somewhat agree, but a few nits:

"Your explanation would therefore make Obama a racist against himself."

If Obama is using racist terminology, and inherently racist frameworks, to identify himself, that's his choice. You make a compelling point about Tweety seeing him as president not as "President, Black", and as simply "President", but if Obama was also doing the same, and thinking from the same frame of reference, it would be intellectually dishonest to apply a double standard.

One way of resolving it, I suppose, is to claim that neither are being racist, in spite of their language. For consideration and argument's sake, however, I'd submit that both are possibly being racist, in that they still consider Obama to be "Black". The degree of racism (if extant) may be less profound, but in both cases, they're alternating between "President, Black" and simply "President".

Of course, there's also whole other dimension to this, one of culture, and whether or not its discriminatory to request, or require, people to view others *without* qualifiers or enhancements that people would prefer to be known by. "President, Black" can be both a form of racism, and a form of cultural pride, depending on usage.

In that context, what if Tweety had said "I forgot he was Irish"?

[lib_wit_it]

75. Nice post. My point about this is that Obama is black, and he is president. He is a male and a

Christian as well. It is not nececarily racist to use any of these descriptors regarding a person. And, again, it is crucial to note that Obama's membership in the set *black* (in a mathematic way, if nothing else) has been very much an issue related to his election and presidency. Matthews' comment was in regards that fact, the pervasive notice given to the black factor related to Obama's presidency in our society, and therefore in the media, and therefore perfectly acceptable on a tv program covering the president.

Somewhat climsily stated (my post, that is), but it can be difficult to discuss matters that are somewhat in the abstract.

[lib_wit_it]

78. Regardless of that. a news commenter cannot pretend that the president and the citizens have

noted the "racial" aspect of his candidacy, his campaign, his election, and his presidency. Many newsworthy items are related to the fact that race is an accepted construct in this country and many issues arise related to it. I think Matthews comment was in light of that. That despite all the fuss over Obama being identified as black, and despite how important it has been considered by just about everyone in the country, the negated the idea that all the fuss over his race was irrelevant during the speech.

[vaberella]

17. In the case of Tweey---he is not a racist nor was what he said racist.

Racism is a social construction that has one race or culture deem themselves superior;they also wield power to oppress others who do not fit their culture or race. It is not defined solely towards---although in the US race is the percursor. Further more, a racist is someone who acts out in ways that oppress others----ie acting out racist agendas which can be seen in terrorizing another person do their religion, colour of the their skin and so one and so forth.

[Fire1]

53. What he said was ABSOLUTLEY racist. No two ways about it.

Now, HE may not be racist but what he said is undeniably racist.

[lib_wit_it]

79. Not if taken in the context that Obama's race has been very notable simply due to the undeniable

fact that it matters in America. It has been the cause of much news and commentary, and therefore it makes sense that Matthews would note that all of that fuss did not come to mind as he listened to the speech. He didn't anticipate any of the "he's black" business to come up in reactions to the speech. That is a relevant and valid point.

And I believe that's clear when we consider the entire paragraph-long comment of which the "forgot" bit was but a part.

[Raineyb]

93. In this context IT IS RACIST. That's the argument that's being made.

You seem rather insistent in declaring that Tweety isn't a racist by coming up with all kinds of reasons as to why it's not so. And it's been explained why the comment IS racist and you just refuse to see it. You assume that people haven't taken the entire comment into consideration when they've declared the statement racist. What you're missing is that people HAVE taken the context into consideration and that the statement is STILL racist.

[lib_wit_it]

95. Some say so, some say no. I just happen to disagree with one of the sides. I don't think you've

taken the other side's view into consideration.

[Raineyb]

101. I've given the other side exactly the consideration that any apologist for racism deserves. n/t

[lib_wit_it]

105. And I've given you way more attention than one who labels and dismisses others without open-minded

consideration deserves. Buh-bye, now. It's off to Ignoreville with you...

[Eric Condon]

20. Prejudice plus privilege

"Racism" is different than just racial prejudice. It inherently implies that it's coming from a group capable of "dominating" another, in terms of numbers, political power and agency, etc.

So for instance, a hypothetical minority person who "hates" white people would not be "racist." Prejudiced, yes, but not racist in the classical sense. However, a white person in the US who is prejudiced against any group is inherently racist. It's a slippery concept, since so much depends on context.

Tweety's comment could maybe be defined as "racist" if you want to look at it as an example of white privilege, but it was hardly on par with Beck or Limbaugh's toxic hate speech. It was just one of those stupid, facepalm-inducing gaffes from people who know better, but who aren't necessarily experts in critical race theory. I mean, not to beat a cliche, but let's be honest, I don't think it's too hard to imagine Biden saying something pretty similar.

In the end though, if anyone brings up racism, you can always just say, "I'm not a racist, that's what's so insane about all this."

[lib_wit_it]

24. I didn't see it as a gaffe, but a comment related to the actuality of racism in this country. It's

frequently said that we need to discuss racism more and more honestly in the US, but I think the attacks on Matthews, as a result of his comment, are a great example of why we avoid such discussion.

Also, a lot of the the "it was racist" comments here are from folks who dislike him for other reasons, and to me that's to be expected, understandable, whatever, but what I'm interested in are comments that will be helpful to me in my personal contemplation of the issue of racism.

[Bucky]

21. I saw a protest sign once that summed it up for me: "Bigotry + Power = Racism"

Tweets comes off caddish and shallow, but he's no bigot. There's no anger or hatred behind his prejudices. He's prejudiced, as we all are, but unlike most thinking people, he doesn't seem to be in any hurry to cure himself of his prejudices. Maybe in his world, that's how you "keep it real". I dunno, I haven't walked a mile in his moccasins. But I've watched him interact with enough of a diversity of people to know he lacks the hatred to be a bigot and he lacks the intellectual discipline to sustain any 'ism'. I know of no case of him using his power, the way that say a bank or a corporation does, to shut off opportunities for others in his field because of race.

He's a dillweed, but he's no Andy Rooney.

[SpencerS]

25. He's A Racist, Alright.

You can call people homophobic, you can call people sexist, but don’t dare call anyone, (particularly a white person) a racist, because if you do you are overly sensitive, and playing the race-card. Barney Frank can call people homophobic. $arah Palin can call people sexist. No big deal. Barack Obama says a bunch of cops “acted stupidly” and he’s called a racist with a deep seeded hatred for white people. The shit hits the fan. The republicans and the media don’t want to let it go. Barack Obama has a “beer summit” at the White House. Barack Obama can’t call anyone a racist. But Jimmy Carter can. It’s only racism if white people say it is. Jimmy Carter says some of the hostility toward Barack Obama is based on racism, and the media goes postal, the republicans demand Barack Obama denounce Jimmy Carter’s comments. The republicans demand an apology from Jimmy Carter. Barack Obama tries to distance himself from Jimmy Carter’s comments. The republicans, and the media try to paint Barack Obama and Jimmy Carter as the bad guys. People publicly say racist shit about Barack Obama and his family all the time, and he can’t say a word. He has to just suck it up, and take it. No one ever apologizes to Barack Obama and his family, nor do they ask for an apology.

People who keep defending Chris Matthews or any other idiot, are the types of people who get irritated at any kind of mention of racism mostly toward minorities. They consider it “whining.” But they are so quick to call someone a racist and threaten to report a poster to the moderators because they used the term “Great White Hope,” as one poster did the other day. These are the kind of people who use the made up term “reverse racism.” There is no such thing as “reverse racism” Racism is racism, no matter where it comes from. Period. Some people think Chris Matthews comment was racist, some didn’t. I think he is a racist. He has specifically said stuff in the past about Barack Obama’s complexion, and about Barack Obama not acting very “ethnic,” or whatever he said, after one of the presidential debates. Gosh, how does one act ethnic? I don’t see why Chris Matthews even had to bring up his race. Obviously it’s on his mind. And plus, I just don’t like Chris Matthews, anyway. He’s gross. Just my two worthless cents.

[hileeopnyn8d]

33. Welcome to DU, SpencerS

I agree with you.

[RedRoses323]

34. I agree Spencer.....

Your comment expresses my thoughts as well. Except for Chris Matthews being "gross." LOL

Chris Matthews reminds me of a couple of close friends I have - they desperately want to erase the negative, racist,
parental beliefs that have impacted their thinking; however, sometimes they slip - and I call them out on it (in a positive manner).

By the way, nothing is "worthless" about your comment.
;-) ;)

[These Eyes]

43. You're right, Spencer…

If a Republican had said this, there would be no question it was racist. But because the person who said it has left of center leanings his comments are considered clumsy, well-meaning, etc. Out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks. You can't hide what's really in your heart. It will fall out of your mouth every now and then. Chris Matthews' comments about Irish firefighters being a tradition, white people being 'regular' people, etc. shows that he has a racist mindset. What he said was racist. Is he one of those virulent racists like Beck and his ilk? Probably not. But he clearly thinks there is a difference between blacks and whites. He clearly buys into the stereotypes and sees Obama doesn't fit the stereotypes -- Matthews sees him as being as good as a white man. That's no compliment.

[Number23]

58. "Matthews sees him as being as good as a white man. That's no compliment."

+ 2 bazillion
:thumbsup:

[lib_wit_it]

104. He clearly thinks there's a difference because in all of America's history, and even now, there has

been a culturally imposed difference. One not ignored by Obama himself. I'll bet that about 99% of People who claim not to notice the ethnicity of other people are not being truthful, perhaps not even with themselves. But if they went into a job interview and came home and were asked specifically what race the interviewer was, they would definitely be able to say or to make a guess based on what they observed. We Americans, and people around the world *do* notice it,and it's disingenuous to pretend we don't.

For one thing, few of us have forgotten our revolting history of slavery and segregation. And even now we see that we still have among us the KKK and other white supremacy groups. These unfortunate facts make it pretty unlikely that a future will soon arrive in which we don't notice the race or ethnicity of those we meet. It does little good to insist that we don't notice lest we be vilified as racists, no different than the neo-nazis or KKK members. And it may very well be counterproductive.

To insist that Matthews' "forgot" comment "shows what's in his heart" and that in his heart is a belief that whites are superior to blacks is simply not supported by fact or reason. It just not that cut and dry. He may believe that, but I don't think he does.

At any rate, we have no way of knowing for sure.

However, one good thing about insisting that Matthews is a racist, though, is that it proves the reich wingers wrong: http://www.politico.com/blogs/michaelcalderone/0110/Matthews_I_forgot_he_was_black_tonight_for_an_hour.html And that can't be all bad.

[Raineyb]

45. +1

:applause:

No so useless that two cents.

[timeforpeace]

47. Yep, he's obsessed with skin color.

[Fire1]

55. No doubt about it, SpencerS! n/t

[Number23]

57. Your two cents are anything but worthless. Spectacularly well said

and I agree with every word that you've written.

It’s only racism if white people say it is.

People publicly say racist shit about Barack Obama and his family all the time, and he can’t say a word. He has to just suck it up, and take it.

The truth. And it's enough to make you want to scream and weep.

[AlinPA]

64. Yes! Well said. And welcome Spencer. nt

[lib_wit_it]

80. Calling homophobes homophobic, or sexists sexist, doesn't justify calling a guy a racist when he's

not. According to the majority of definitions given here, Matthews is not a racist.

Now, as far as the who calls who what, I am with you. Especially all the racism against Obama and his family. It's revolting. And anyone calling Obama a racist is a complete imbecile and almost certainly a racist themselves. There is still a large group of extremely hateful racists out there, and Chris Matthews doesn't deserve to be lumped in with those vile creatures.

[Kind of Blue]

98. Whew! That was great! And welcome to DU, SpencerS.

There's nothing quite like carrying on as a human being when all of a sudden "the compliment" pops up out of nowhere. But don't dare say it's racist. Instead cheers and kudos for your "admirer" is evolving by seeing you as fully human, for now.

I just wish those who do not see his comment as racist will be wise enough to keep such "compliments" to themselves.

[Skittles]

106. WOOO!

WORTHY OF ITS OWN THREAD, SpencerS! :hi:

[AspenRose]

110. Man, is THAT ever true

"It’s only racism if white people say it is."

Welcome to DU

[Raineyb]

37. You don't know that. You have no idea what goes on on that show behind the scenes.

He could be a flaming racist behind the scenes but he puts on this persona in front of the camera of a boy from Philly done good and you eat that shit up. You really have no idea what he's like at all.

I'm not saying I know what he's like but you can get hints as to his thought processes based on things he does and say and his little chats with Pat Buchanan on race (and why the hell do you have a discussion on race and have NO black people on the panel and bring Pat KKK Buchanan on in the first place is another story altogether.) He slips. And he does it quite often. This "I forgot he was black" was only the latest one. And it happened live so someone must have told him to get his ass back on the air and clean up the mess he made.

I forgot you were black is no bloody compliment. It never has been.

[mkultra]

40. anything that forwards negative sterotypes against blacks

point out someone is black isn't racist, pointing it out as meaningful because of circumstance can be.

[Freddie Stubbs]

41. Someone who judges people based on the color of their skin rather than the character of their souls

[timeforpeace]

44. Leading with skin color, no matter if the comment is positive or negative.

[cherokeeprogressive]

52. "Is Tweety a Racist"?

Would have been a much simpler way of finding out what you wanted to know.

Ya think?

[lib_wit_it]

68. Not if I wanted to know what people mean when they use the term racist, which I did. I don't see any

value in someone saying someone else is racist unlesswe know what is meant by the word racist.

[CreekDog]

54. anyone who uses the term "moonwalking"

:eyes:

[Dr. Strange]

67. Stop squaredancing around the truth!

:hide:

[SimonPhoenix]

56. Someone who disagrees with you politically

eom

[LatteLibertine]

60. Honestly

from a purely practical standpoint I'm more concerned with how folks actually live out their lives. What is it that they choose to do. What do they choose to sacrifice for and to champion.

Naturally, I want to see bigotry and prejudice reduced. I'm not going to throw folks under the bus when they have a record of consistent action championing racial, social and economic justice throughout their lives.

So what's more offensive to me, from Republicans, is their policy choices and causes that crush poor people, middle-class people and folks who often happen to be minorities.

The white supremacist mindset has infected the United States for a long time and it's deeply rooted in our history. We aren't going to wave a wand and cause it to disappear from all people fair or foul.

[Raineyb]

62. And yet you seem to downplay the significance of such "unconscious" racism from our media.

You think that these types of slips don't have an effect on the greater society? As it is we've got people who think that racism is something other people are steeped in while not bothering to look into their own thought processes. As it is, there are people here who after hearing why "I forgot he was black" is an insult STILL insist that Tweety didn't mean anything by it as though that's supposed to make it okay.

[Liberation Angel]

61. The term "racism" is itself "racist" BECAUSE there are no distinct races according to geneticists

So the idea of "race" is a false idea and perpetuates bigotry and hate and discrimination.

According to most science there is only one "race" - the human race.

There is no distinct "white" race or "black" race and in fact even the concept of "white" and "black" is a false notion.

As all modern humanity apparently began/evolved in Africa it appears that we are ALL of African descent and thus all Americans are "African-Americans" (unless you go strictly by nation of RECENT ethnic origin.

USING the term "Racism" reinforces a negative and scientifically false concept: a lie used historically to convince people that there were superior "races" and inferior ones. But that is a lie.

There is neither any reality to the concept that there are white or black people. White and Black is a state of mind and self definition. But MILK is white and Tar is Black and there are NO human beings the color of milk or the color of tar. Even albinos are essentially pretty much pale pink.

So I think it needs to be said and repeated to get us to throw off the concept that the terms "race" and "racism" have any validity or that they are not based on scientifically valid concepts but instead on totally artificial social constructs.

ETHNIC hatred and bigotry and discrimination based on skin color, ethnicity, national origin etc are still very real and harmful and rampant in our society.

But there really is no such thing as "White" people or "Black" people. It is a state of mind and if you choose to DEFINE yourself that way or embrace that concept then it should be with the understanding that it is self-labelling AND that it is really as false as self-identifying your entire identity by the color of your hair, or the size/character of your genitalia, or any other physical attribute that has NOTHING to do with the content of your character.

All that said - I UNDERSTAND that people who are oppressed WANT to embrace their "Blackness" or that some European-Americans WANT to keep alive the notion of "White Rights" and "Racial Supremacy" (to get advantages of one sort or another)--- but the idea of "RACE" and "Racism" based on skin colors are TOTALLY artificial and false constructs that should be abandoned if we are ever to move to a more enlightened society. That is NOT to say one cannot have ethnic pride and appreciation of culture (or even be uncomfortable with the practices of other cultures, such as mandating that women wear burkas, genital mutilation, eating entrails or cats or dogs, etc -which is just an ad hoc sampling of things people freak out about in other cultures),

But to use the concept of "Race" as a foundation for that discomfort or even distaste or negativity reinforces the bigotry and prejudice and discrimination that we need to move beyond.

We could start by jettisoning the use of the term "race" and "racism". We are one human race. Obama is not "Black" he is of mixed ethnicity: European and African:

So Tweety's statement is inherently stupid and biased and inaccurate and bigoted sounding. But racism is a piss poor way of describing it.

But too he identified something which I think is a valid point: Americans ARE exceptionally sensitive to ethnicity and skin color and Obama DOES tend to make one focus on him as a man and a leader and NOT as a bundle of melanin and a history of oppression. We KNOW he is a man whose skin is a little browner than most people of 100% recent European extraction - but that does not become the primary thing that we are aware of when he speaks as it often is for many if not most of us when we hear someone like Al Sharpton or Jesse Jackson or Kanye West. I do not think most African-Americans (those of recenter African extraction) would not consider that assholes like Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity are "white" and "acting white" when they bluster with their idiocy - but they might not be so concsious of it when Bill Clinton speaks. I think certain African American actors have this ability to take roles and to make one forget about their ethnicity (Will Smith and Denzel washington, for example). So the observation that you "forget" the ethnicity when they talk is not necessarily a "bad" thing.

It means that these folks have, to some degree, been able to transcend or help others transcend the bigotry and ethnic consciousness which causes so much hell and misery for the rest of us. And that is a good thing. So I do not think we should judge tweety TOO hard: he is just reflecting what is so fucked up about our society: we are stuck in our bigotry USUALLY, and Obama is able to make us rise above that (at least for him) and make Tweety NOT be stuck in his "racism" or prejudice or bias.

It reflects that Tweety IS biased as most of us are BECAUSE we see color as the primary signifier of someone's identity and character and nature. But his reflection that Obama makes us get OUT of that bias and bigotry is not a negative thing. We ALL should rise to this level.

Finally: there is one really important factor which is uncomfortable: Obama IS, in fact, essentially a person of color (meaning he is not pale-skinned) BUT he was raised primarily in a European-Anglo culture and society (altho his experience was mulitcultural it was not essentially the typical "African American" experience and culture that he was raised in). He speaks like a Harvard educated intellectual and academic from a hip and cool background but does not flaunt his easy identification with the vernacular of the African American community (learned and adopted presumably in his post academic years in Chicago and perhaps in college as it was not part of his early childhood experience) the way, for example, that Cornel West occasionally does (altho, too, Cornel West is a dynamic ethnic/intellectual universe of his own). I think that too, for example, Oprah Winfrey has this quality of making "white" people (really "Anglo-or European-Americans) forget her ethnicity (she does not wear it on her sleeve altho we all know her backstory, we do not think of it all FIRST when she is speaking unless she is talking ABOUT that background.

I do not think that identifying that as a very real phenomena is bigotry (altho Matthews himself may be totally bigotted and his comment reflects that possibility).

I think it is a useful opportunity to discuss these important and still troubling dynamics in our society and culture.

[LatteLibertine]

66. One human race with many different cultures

Yes.

[lib_wit_it]

83. Nice post. As I've tried to say repeatedly in this thread, talking about the racism in this

does not make a person racist. I still say that his entire comment shows that the "I forgot" statement meant something more like, "I forgot that so much has been made of Obama being a "black" man, and yet in this speech, he was simply the president and all the fuss about his "race" did not even come to mind."

There's a great of "racism" is this country, even a lot of folks who are proud of and open about their "racially" based hatred. Matthews grew up in a time (born 1945) in which this attitude was even more prevalent and passive "racism" was extremely common, so it may be particularly impressive to him, in a cultural sense, that the "blackness" of the president was simply not note-worthy as he delivered this speech. Ans I believe that he finds that to be a good thing.

[lunatica]

65. Racist is hatred directed towards anyone who is 'other' than they are...

based on ignorance and self-loathing. I could go on but I'm hoping to capture a lot in few words.

Tweety is not a racist. He would have to hate Obama purely on the basis of his color. Tweety doesn't hate Obama and I don't think he hates any race.

[slackmaster]

72. The average racist has one ball and one tit

:nuke:

[Arkana]

74. Belief that one's race is superior in whatever way to other races, colors, or creeds.

[MadMaddie]

77. Racist/Homophobic (fill in other here)

An individual who is not comfortable in their own skin or with themselves. They feel inferior to whomever they are projecting their hate towards. The response though is to be a bully and try to intimidate those they hate.

"Coward" = Racist

[Manifestor_of_Light]

87. I call white racists "rednecks" and "crackers".

I am surrounded by them. They hate Obama and Democrats in general.
I'm white too, about as white anglo-saxon protestant stock as you can get.

However, on DU I get called a racist for calling them what they are.

:wtf:

:wtf:

:wtf:

:wtf:

[dkf]

88. Instant hatred/dislike based on Ethnicity.

[Greyhound]

91. Someone that believes in the inherent inferiority or superiority of a person due solely to race. n/t

[Dinger]

94. faux "news" and Their followers (nt)

[lib_wit_it]

97. No argument here!

[rocktivity]

108. Discrimination AND prejudice based on race. That's all.

His "forgetting" that Obama was black because he was so effective was racist because it suggests that blacks aren't capbable of being effective. Besides, I dare say that he got his memory back afterwards!


rocktivity