|
As I said many many weeks ago when the media started playing 30 second loops of Jeremiah Wright, it's a bad case of Uppity Nigger Syndrome. Wright has done nothing bad except hold some controversial opinions that make a bunch of white people feel uncomfortable, but that's been taken as an excuse for people to project all sorts of nonsense onto him.
Yesterday I saw someone suggesting that Wright was literally responsible for the deaths of people from AIDS on the grounds that some faith-based organizations and some attitudes in the black community have inhibited wider use of condoms to prevent the spread of disease...even though Wright has had himself tested publicly (ie during sermons) for HIV going back years, and encouraged his congregation to get educated, get tested, and take an active role in their own healthcare - you can easily find video of this too with a simple Google search.
Do I believe Wright's suggestions that AIDS may be man-made? No; I regard it as one of those conspiracy theories like those swirling around 9/11 or suchlike. Some doctors have argued for it, but then some scientists claim there's a UFO conspiracy or that global warming is a worldwide scam. Yeah, I think Wright ought to know better, but then I've never had to pick up the paper and find that people of my ethnicity were considered suitable subjects for longitudinal studies of untreated syphilis. As I'm sure you know, there was a 'HIV is not the cause of AIDS' conspiracy theory that circulated in the gay community for a long time, and more recently a phenomenon of 'barebacking' by people with a fatalistic view of STD transmission: would it be appropriate to hold Obama or Clinton to task for this every time they speak up on gay issues or attend a fundraiser organized by someone in the gay community? I know quite well that this is very much a fringe view and that the gay community is actually very proactive about owning its own health issues, from reducing the spread of STDs to discouraging the use of meth and smoking, and rejecting the meme of gay self-destruction as the Old Testament scare story it really is.
Or consider threads started as forensic examinations of Louis Farrakhan's past utterances, with posters claiming they weren't able to find information that Wright referred to in his speech - despite it being instantly available on Google. Of course, when I posted said Google results, no response was forthcoming. I'm no especial fan of the Nation of Islam; they seem no better and no worse to me than a whole bunch of other identity-based organizations with a narrow focus. But Wright was quite correct in saying that when Farrakhan talks, most black Americans listen to hear what he has to say, even if they disagree afterwards. I have no problem with this.
So when I see threads like 'Obama is a friend of Wright...and Wright respects Farrakhan...I need to analyse a remark of Farrakhan's that has been controversial since he uttered it in 1984 because the implications are HUGH!' it looks like the cheapest kind of race-baiting to me.
Mantime, I don't approve of this 'resurrect Monica' thing either - not least because Monica Lewinsky has had to put up with enough bullshit in her life already, and should be allowed to get on with her professional career (she's earned a masters in jurisprudence or something like that over in London, probably because she doesn't want to hear whispers everywhere she goes on an American college campus). So yes, I share your opinion that reposting such is tasteless and unworthy, especially on a site like this. But I do think that it's a) a reflection of the tastelessness and unworthiness displayed by a few people in regards to Wright, and b) a reflection of the fact that if Clinton were the nominee, she would have her own awkward issues to deal with and the fall of 2008 would be depressingly reminiscent of fall 1988. As Republicans delight in reminding us, it's not so much about the clenis but the fact that Bill Clinton tried to wriggle away from the issue using weasel words, when it would have been much better to man up and say he had given into a selfish impulse.
It is NOT appropriate for Democrats to bash Hillary Clinton's candidacy with the specter of Bill's adultery and the resulting impeachment. But nor is it appropriate for Democrats to bash Barack Obama's candidacy with the specter of racial paranoia and divisive controversy. We should reject both and reject the manipulative psychological tactics which they are based on and which are the GOPs stock-in-trade.
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
