"I want my country back" = smokescreen for racism

[abelisle]

When racism masquerades as something else

Carlos Dews

is an author, a professor of English literature, and chairman of the Department of English Language and Literature at John Cabot University in Rome

'The [theN-word] show."

I first heard this expression used to describe the Obama administration during a visit to my hometown in East Texas during the early summer of 2009. I understood what the epithet meant: Our minds are made up, the president lacks legitimacy, and there is nothing he can do that we will support. I was not surprised to hear such a phrase.

I grew up in the 1960s during the ragged end of the Jim Crow era, where many of the books in my school library were stamped Colored School, meaning they had been brought to the white school when the town was forced to integrate the public school system. I recall my parents had instructed me, before my first day of elementary school, not to sit in a chair where a black child had sat. And I remember my sister joked that her yearbook, when it appeared at the end of her first year of integrated high school, was in "black and white."

The outward signs of racism of my home state have now disappeared, but racial hatred remains. My father and his friends still use the word [theN-word] to refer to all black people, and the people of my hometown don't hesitate to spout their racist rhetoric to my face, assuming I agree with them. I hold my tongue for the sake of having continued access to this kind of truth. I learned long ago how not to accept the hatred I was being taught and how to survive not having done so. More recently, I realized that I also learned another lesson: how to recognize racism when it masquerades as something else.

More than 40 years after my first experiences with racism, I am thousands of miles away in Rome, but surrounded by ghosts. Last year, I received a grant from the National Endowment for the Arts for a community program called the Big Read, which sponsors activities to encourage communities to come together to read and discuss a single book. I chose Harper Lee's To Kill a Mockingbird, in part because I thought that some of the most salient issues in the novel - racism, classism, xenophobia, the Jim Crow era - were perhaps relevant to an increasingly diverse, contemporary Italy.

That there is racism in Italy is obvious to anyone who pays attention to current affairs. In fact, during the first week of the Big Read Rome, a story in one of Italy's national newspapers detailed the experience of a Nigerian woman being called sporca nera (essentially, dirty [theN-word]) by two women she asked to stop smoking on a Roman bus.

But I never imagined that consideration of the novel would prove so relevant to a country that had just elected its first black president.

Ironically, until the election of Barack Obama, my discussions of racism in the United States seemed historical. I felt that with the passage of the civil rights legislation of the mid-1960s, the country had turned a corner, that the slow evaporation of overt racism was perhaps inevitable. Now, my personal experience of Southern racism feels current and all too familiar. A news story about the Big Read that appeared in La Repubblica on Sept. 20 (unaware that my grant was awarded during the Bush administration), presciently brought Rome, Obama, To Kill a Mockingbird, and racism together in its headline: "Obama brings antiracist book to Rome."

Jimmy Carter was lambasted for having recently explained that the vehemence with which many Americans resist Obama's presidency is an expression of racism. Carter was accused of fanning the flames of racial misunderstanding by labeling as "racist" what on the surface could be perceived as legitimate policy differences. Like Carter, as a white Southern man, I can see beyond the seemingly legitimate rhetoric to discern what is festering behind much of the opposition to Obama and to his administration's policy initiatives. I also have access, via the racist world from which I came, direct confirmation of the racial hatred toward Obama.

The veiled racism I sense in the United States today is couched, in public discourse at least, in terms that allow for plausible deniability of racist intent. And those who resist any policy initiative from the Obama administration engage in a scorched-earth policy that reminds me of the self-centered white flight, the abandonment of public schools, and the proliferation of private schools, that followed the 1954 Brown v. Board of Education decision to desegregate public schools. The very people, like my own rural, working-class family back in East Texas, who stand to gain from the efforts of the Obama administration and the Democratic Congress are, because of their racism, willing to oppose policies that would benefit them the most. Their racism outweighs their own self-interest.

Unfortunately, racists in the United States have learned one valuable lesson since the 1960s: They cannot express their racism directly. In public, they must veil their racial hatred behind policy differences. This obfuscation makes direct confrontation difficult. Anyone pointing out their racist motivations runs the risk of unfairly playing "the race card." But I know what members of my family mean when they say - as so many said during the town hall meetings in August - that they "want their country back." They want it back, safely, in the hands of someone like them, a white person. They feel that a black man has no right to be the president of their country.

During a phone conversation a few weeks after Obama's election, my father lamented that he and my mother might have to stop visiting the casinos in Shreveport, La.: Given Obama's election, "the niggers are already walking around like they own the place. They won't even give up their seats for white women anymore. I don't know what we're going to do with 'em."

My students often ask me how I managed to avoid accepting the lesson in racism offered by my family. From the time I was 4 or 5 years old - roughly the same age as Scout Finch, the narrator of To Kill a Mockingbird - I recall knowing that I didn't agree with racism. More important, my paternal grandmother provided me with the encouragement that I could ignore what I was being taught. She provided me with the courage to resist.

My grandmother hoped that my father and his father represented the last generations of the type of Southern man that had shaped her life - virulently racist, prone to violence, proud of their ignorance, and self-defeatingly stubborn. It was a type of Southern man that she hoped and prayed I could avoid becoming.

However, my father and his father were not the last of their kind; their racial hatred has been passed on. My grandmother, if she were alive, would recognize the same tendencies among many of the people who shout down politicians and bring guns to public rallies. She would also see how the only change they have made is to replace overt racist epithets with more euphemistic language.

Rather than seeing my home state and its racist attitudes, slowly, over time, pulled in the direction of more acceptance, the country as a whole has become more like the South, the racial or cultural equivalent of what is called the Walmartization of American retail.

It might be easy to see literature as impotent in the face of the persistence and adaptability of racism. But I continue to believe in the transformative potential of literature and its ability to provide an alternative view of the world. And for children who are not lucky enough to have grandmothers like mine, I believe that books like To Kill a Mockingbird can provide inoculation against the virus that is racism.

This article originally appeared in the December 2009 issue of Aspenia, the Italian journal published by the Aspen Foundation Italy.

Alex ( "I want my country forward")

[SivartM]

Very good article.

Of course, we all ought to know that it's not "my" country, it's "our" country, and everyone here is equal.

[karl]

'The [theN-word] show."

Our minds are made up, the president lacks legitimacy, and there is nothing he can do that we will support. I was not surprised to hear such a phrase.

Alex ( "I want my country forward")

I believe the majority of Americans were hoping for a real positive change from the Obama administration. That is why he got elected. When he came on gangbusters for huge increases in government and increases in control over our lives, these Americans who elected him changed their minds.

Has absolutely nothing to do with color.

Has everything to do with policy.

[SivartM]

I believe the majority of Americans were hoping for a real positive change from the Obama administration. That is why he got elected. When he came on gangbusters for huge increases in government and increases in control over our lives, these Americans who elected him changed their minds.

Has absolutely nothing to do with color.

Has everything to do with policy.

I highly doubt that the people who are crying for "their" country back are the ones who voted for Obama.

Did you even read the article? I wouldn't say that the people described are not racist.

[doug yowell]

That's right up there in the competition for one of the dumbest articles I've ever read.

[karl]

I highly doubt that the people who are crying for "their" country back are the ones who voted for Obama.

Did you even read the article? I wouldn't say that the people described are not racist.

I read it. I am actually responding to the article, Sivart, and your suggestion that I did not read it is INSULTING, in case you can't figure stuff like that out.

The article is not singling out those who did not vote for Obama. It is broadstroke painting America. It is suggesting that ANYONE who is unhappy with Obama is a racist, albeit a "veiled" racist. Responding negatively to any of Obama's policies gets you included in this article.

I disagree. Staunch Obama supporters have left the ranks of the "believers" and no longer support him. They want their country back, too. They can hardly be called racist.

This article is 95% liberal drivel. This man grew up in an unfortunate environment and he is painting the whole world with his backside. His living in Italy, while appealing to liberals, does not make his observations any closer to home, or to accuracy, for that matter.

[Kountzer]

I'm looking for a city whose builder and maker is God. Anyone looking for some sort of euphoria because some candidate or some party has been elected to power is delusional. Prophecy says the USA is headed down a dubious path. It doesn't matter who is in power. The outcome with basically be the same.

[SivartM]

Yes, I did realize after I posted that what I said could offend you, and I should have removed that part. But maybe you should refrain from saying things like, "in case you can't figure stuff like that out". That was rather insulting to me, "in case you can't figure stuff like that out".

The article is not talking about YOU, it's talking about people who veil racism with "disagreements". If you aren't racist, good for you. I doubt that anyone is happy with everything President Obama does.

[GreatLakesGramma]

From what I've heard, Texas is strongly Republican and Texans' opposition to any Democratic administration is the same as the article described for this one.

[Gerr]

Thanks, Alex, for what is to me a very moving article. I first felt the dehumanizing effect of segregation when I came east from CA and was going through Louisiana, seeing the the "White Only" and "Colored Only" signs.

I don't see the overt signs of racism here in NC anymore. I even see occasionally a black/white couple in public. But that lack of overt signs of racism is only skin deep. Before the presidential election of 2008, I was at a grocery store here in NC. I had my shorts on and a wide-brim hat, so my face could not be readily seen. (I'm Asian.) While I was browsing the magazine section looking at something about Obama, an elderly man came over and started talking. He said, "A black man should not be allowed to be president, don't you?" For all he knew, he was talking to a well-tanned white person.

I was so disgusted, I could not resist asking him if white people had the only right to screw up the country.

How truly sad it is when people find their virtue in the pigment of their skin or the lack thereof.

[doug yowell]

Thanks, Alex, for what is to me a very moving article. I first felt the dehumanizing effect of segregation when I came east from CA and was going through Louisiana, seeing the the "White Only" and "Colored Only" signs.

I don't see the overt signs of racism here in NC anymore. I even see occasionally a black/white couple in public. But that lack of overt signs of racism is only skin deep. Before the presidential election of 2008, I was at a grocery store here in NC. I had my shorts on and a wide-brim hat, so my face could not be readily seen. (I'm Asian.) While I was browsing the magazine section looking at something about Obama, an elderly man came over and started talking. He said, "A black man should not be allowed to be president, don't you?" For all he knew, he was talking to a well-tanned white person.

I was so disgusted, I could not resist asking him if white people had the only right to screw up the country.

How truly sad it is when people find their virtue in the pigment of their skin or the lack thereof.

The article doesn't suggest that racism exists in the U.S. it suggests that it dominates the ranks of those who oppose our current president, just disguised as "political opposition". Stupid (and they are stupid)people who make comments like the elderly man (that in and of itself might say something)in your example, Gerry,just give other deeply prejudiced people a platform to demonstrate their own forms of ignorance. Speaking of racism, what determines that Pres. Obama is black? I wish you would have asked that guy your question!

[lazarus]

]

Unfortunately, racists in the United States have learned one valuable lesson since the 1960s: They cannot express their racism directly. In public, they must veil their racial hatred behind policy differences. This obfuscation makes direct confrontation difficult. Anyone pointing out their racist motivations runs the risk of unfairly playing "the race card."

Some folks on CA have learned it too. Give me a skin head neo-nazi any day. A least they are aware of their racism and proud of it

[lazarus]

[John317]

Quote:

Gerry Cabalo: He said, "A black man should not be allowed to be president, don't you?" For all he knew, he was talking to a well-tanned white person.

I was so disgusted, I could not resist asking him if white people had the only right to screw up the country.

How truly sad it is when people find their virtue in the pigment of their skin or the lack thereof.

I agree completely. Color shouldn't have anything at all to do with it.

What you described does of course happen. If it happens once, it is too many times. But fortunately there are also many white Americans that would condemn such talk as fast and as angrily as any of the minorities. I know I would.

But what we don't want to do is let this kind of prejudice change us into bitter or angry people. There is racial prejudice everywhere and in all cultures and societies. It's a human problem, not a white problem. The same things happen in Mexico among lighter and darker skinned Mexicans. You even have the same problems in the former USSR and in China. It's one more thing Satan uses to divide people.

Those prejudiced people need one thing: love, the kind of love that Jesus has for them. If they really get a clear view of this love, and it gets inside them, they will be changed people, and will have only love for every individual irrespective of color or other differences.

[Woody]

I believe in a completely color blind society. Wouldn't it be great if never again would we have to be asked what color we are on governmental or institutional forms?

[lazarus]

Couldn't disagree more. The beauty of a flower arrangement comes from the ability to see and distinguish colors. The beauty of any society is ability to see and value it's diversity.

[Woody]

Couldn't disagree more. The beauty of a flower arrangement comes from the ability to see and distinguish colors. The beauty of any society is ability to see and value it's diversity.

It was MLK's phrase that I borrowed. Sorry. I forgot to give proper credit for 'color blind society'. :)

[Woody]

Good comments lazarus!!!

Agree!!!

Sometimes the majority can protest 'too' much their 'non prejudice'. Never quite understood the phrase,'take our country back' and its derivities as the last time I checked no one had taken it away! The persons useing the phrases never give a definition, just leave up to the crowd to supply thier own definition, so they can't be quoted on what they mean. It is one of those statements, seeking to be clever, has no substance.

"Take back our country" is referring to how BO has destroyed our country and put it on the wrong course. People want to have the direction of our country restored to what our founders intended. They want their rights restored.

This is the substance. And I think it is very important substance.

[Guest]

Amen Woody

[Guest]

Sounds like somebody has no idea what's going on, or what direction we're headed in.

"Everythings fine, what's the problem? Oh you're just paranoid...."

And it could be that they are clueless enough to have voted for.....

[Bravus]

I enjoyed the article. I don't think it was saying that racism is *everything* that's going in, but that it is *one of the things* that is going on.

I think it's pretty hard to deny that. I think it's pretty clear that there are some white supremacists who find it extremely problematic to have a non-white president.

But *of course* there are other things going on, including those who are not at all racist, but are 'rusted-on' Republicans who would vehemently oppose *any* Democrat president of any hue.

And it's true, perhaps the article was less nuanced than it could have been: it was an article about one topic, but some qualifications showing it recognised that there was more going on would have been helpful.

But rejecting the issue out of hand is just as blind as embracing it uncritically. There's a useful question to be asked: what proportion of the opposition to the President is based in racism, versus that based in many other issues.

[Tom Wetmore]

I appreciate and understand the reality that this article unmasks. Racism is so deeply embedded in many that they don't even recognize it. How widespread is it? Much more than most here are willing to admit. How close is it to each of us? Too close to see.

It is very much like an observation in a book I was just reading that was discussing anger. The author asked a large group for a show of hands of how many considered themselves angry. Not a single hand went up. But when asked how many knew someone that they considered to be an angry person, nearly every hand went up. Easily recognized in others, always overlooked in ourselves. Most people have some sort of impenetrable rationale for why they feel and react negatively to certain people.

While I am disturbed, I am not surprised at all at the immediate and ironically partisan responses to this article.

While I think this should be moved to the political poo pile, it may be a good thing to leave out here in the bright sunshine for all to see as people quickly line up to show their true colors.

[doug yowell]

I appreciate and understand the reality that this article unmasks. Racism is so deeply embedded in many that they don't even recognize it. How widespread is it? Much more than most here are willing to admit. How close is it to each of us? Too close to see.

It is very much like an observation in a book I was just reading that was discussing anger. The author asked a large group for a show of hands of how many considered themselves angry. Not a single hand went up. But when asked how many knew someone that they considered to be an angry person, nearly every hand went up. Easily recognized in others, always overlooked in ourselves. Most people have some sort of impenetrable rationale for why they feel and react negatively to certain people.

While I am disturbed, I am not surprised at all at the immediate and ironically partisan responses to this article.

While I think this should be moved to the political poo pile, it may be a good thing to leave out here in the bright sunshine for all to see as people quickly line up to show their true colors.

So Tom, If racism is that embedded in "many" that they can't recognize it but actually have deluded themselves into thinking they aren't racist, how would you (since you seem to recognize it in others)reveal to them why they are really racists? What objective evidence could you offer them that they would help them identify their problem? What does it take to be a racist? Can you identify anyone here at CA as a racist? Are the "true colors"(good pun!)evident to those who don't think they're racist but are?

[doug yowell]

Couldn't disagree more. The beauty of a flower arrangement comes from the ability to see and distinguish colors. The beauty of any society is ability to see and value it's diversity.

Laz, would that make both Woody and Dr. King racists? Does uncolored food taste better than it's plain counterpart? Should we place more value on color than character? The strength of any society is it's unity.

[Tom Wetmore]

Go to https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/

Click on the "Demonstration" button

Read next screen and then click on highlighted "Go to the Demonstration Tests"

Read next screen and click on "I wish to proceed"

Now take one or more of the listed IAT, but include the "Race IAT" regardless of which other ones you may chose.

Let us know how you do.