Mallick Column part 2

Stargazer is quoting Ktown. Since I closed the previous thread, without comment to Ktown's remarks, here is my comment now, as a moderator.

Ktown, you're 0 for 2. Not so good. If you don't like rabble, babble or Heather M, then you don't have to read them.

(Ha, I should take my own advice. See [url=http://www.rabble.ca/babble/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic&f=3&t=002626]this thread[/url].

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ghislaine:
[b]Could someone define when it is acceptable to call a large group of people "white trash" or babble and when it is not?[/b]

---

When the group does not adopt the Correct™ political view.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stargazer:
[b]Touching to see such a display of solidarity here. Funny how most white people can't even figure out when they are offensive toward FN people or POC but as soon as the "white trash" label is posted, you all seem to be deeply offended.

Funny how that works.[/b]

---

The reason white trash is offensive is that it has its roots as a term directed at whites who associated with black people or who because all other racial groups were assumed to be trash already, wo white trash needed the qualifier (as Michelle has already so aptly explained).

"White trash" is an offensive term that comes out of the marginalized world of the boonies - I'd really like to know its time and place of origin (thanks for nothin', google) - but is, hopefully, used around this place as a term which helps us to understand the culture of that marginalized world.

It is too crude a construct to be acceptable in sociological analysis, since it is too broad, takes in too many assorted bits of humanity who have wound up in dire straits for too many reasons.

I once came close to living in a trailer myself. Problem around here is, local governments want to get their pound of flesh (taxes) out of all residents, so you don't get the large congregations of easily labelled people in trailer parks of U.S.infamy. The poor are more spread out. The kids from impoverished homes are smaller groupings in the classrooms; still hungry and still needing that lunchtime help, but in smaller numbers.

I still hope that Heather takes up Deer Hunting With Jesus and refines her analysis. But that is the only criticism I have of her piece - for which she has paid dearly, even with a vicious piece of work from the bowels of babble itself.

[ 11 September 2008: Message edited by: George Victor ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Caissa:
[b]Heather is a provocative, enetertaining columnist who often uses hyperbole as it is meant to be used. I was provoked to think and entertained by this column. And yeah, many Republican supporters are white trash...[/b]

---

Again, the term is not only offense, both in terms of class and of race, but, for reasons pointed out in the prior thread, is counterproductive. It also highlights an unfortunate double standard on babble.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Scout:
[b]You may have a point regarding class but as far as racism goes you can forget it. White folks are the dominant race in the US and here, racism my ass.

White folks who are proud to be ignorant and intolerant are white trash and it's all over the US - truckers hats and Kid Rock baby. White trash is in today's society a culture of willful prideful ignorance and they are laughing at the lefties "weeping and gnashing of teeth" over the "insult" white trash. Suckers.

Forest for the trees lefites, forest for the trees.[/b]

---

Mallick is well-off, obviously, and denigrating people who are poor as dumb and trash.

Here is what
[url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_trash]wiki[/url] says:

quote:

---

The term white trash originated in the Baltimore and Washington, DC area during the 1820s post-revolutionary war reconstruction boom. During that period, many poor people migrated to the area, and white and black semi-skilled workers were competing for the same jobs, resources and marriage partners.[1] The term white trash first came into common use in the 1830s as a pejorative used by upper-class United States southerners of all races against poor whites.[citation needed] It was synonymous with the slurs sand hiller and clay eater. White trash were hyperbolically assumed to farm ineptly on poor land, and therefore resort to eating clay in order to survive.[citation needed]

In 1854 Harriet Beecher Stowe wrote the chapter "Poor White Trash" in her book A Key to Uncle Tom's Cabin. Stowe tells the reader that slavery not only produces "degraded, miserable slaves", but also poor whites who are even more degraded and miserable. The plantation system forced those whites to struggle for subsistence. Beyond economic factors, Stowe traces this class to the shortage of schools and churches in their community, and says that both blacks and whites in the area look down on these "poor white trash".[1] Sociologist Max Weber described white trash as "[those] not owning slaves

---

She writes as if she knows better than those uneducated poor trash what is good for them.

White trash is not as racist as it is contemptuous of people in general. It's regressive. It's like carving out huge swathes of the map and saying "these people don't matter".
This is the opposite of progressive.

By the same token, i think she went way too far in attacking Sarah Palin's family. Totally classless. Calling Bristol a pramface? This is totally classless garbage. This has nothing to do with conservativism or republicanism or any issue at all. Some people say that Heather Mallick makes them think. Think about what? There is not one identifiable political or liberal issue in her article.

For a classy dressdown of the candidate by a well-known feminist progressive, look no further than [url=http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/10/opinion/10dowd.html?_r=1&oref=slogin]M... Dowd.[/url] She's a woman who knows how to write, and make people think.

Funny, I've always associated the name "Scout" with the little girl opposite Gregory Peck in "To Kill a Mockingbird".

I cling to such U.S. and Canadian ideals, and to hell with descending to redneck or white trash levels in my daily life.

But to see reactions emerging like this at a time when, in fact, that brief interval of time when "liberal" meant acceptable tolerance and not the position of a "sucker"...it's hard.

Joe Bageant's whole purpose of writing Deer Hunting was to contrast the social decency of his youth (mind you, with many battles to be won for racial equality) and the current viciousness across cultures and class ("Dispatches from America's Class War") . He despairs, and frankly, so do I. But I know, also, how easy it is to sneer - and worse - from the shadows. And I put it down to the venting of frustration by a few. Hopefully, nothing worse than that.

And, then, maybe we're looking at another 1920s Germany, not long before der Fuhrer took up the reins?

I just might go out and get that skeet gun yet. [img]wink.gif" border="0[/img] Bageant says we might need to do that.

Hey, here's a thread I started called "Terminology: Redneck, Mullet, White Trash" two years ago: [url=http://www.rabble.ca/babble/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=38&t=000366&p... it here.[/url]

The more things change....

And as a moderator, I request that Caissa change the thread title, since this is not, in fact, about Mallick's column at all. Then when Caissa's changed it, I'll move it to.....banter? Culture? I'll figure it out.

quote:

---

Originally posted by George Victor:
[b]Joe Bageant's whole purpose of writing Deer Hunting was to contrast the social decency of his youth (mind you, with many battles to be won for racial equality) and the current viciousness across cultures and class ("Dispatches from America's Class War") . He despairs, and frankly, so do I. But I know, also, how easy it is to sneer - and worse - from the shadows. And I put it down to the venting of frustration by a few. Hopefully, nothing worse than that.[/b]

---

I flipped over to Amazon.com to check out "Deer Hunting for Jesus". One reader’s review included the following:

quote:

---

[b]The authors of most books on working class America are like scientists looking at some bizarre pathogen through a microscope; Bageant doesn't approach working class people as specimens to be studied, he actually sits down and talks (a lot) and drinks (a whole lot) with them.[/b]

---

That's how a lot of working class people think of progressive politicians’ and activists’ views about working class people—as pointed-headed intellectuals staring at “some bizarre pathogen through a microscope”. Many who claim to be champions of the working class don’t know bumpkiss about working class culture (not so much the economic matters but the social views). Barack Obama is a good example of such a progressive. He’s totally out of his element with Palin—doesn’t understand her or the millions of working class people who identify with her. It’s also the reason he may lose this race.

babble hearts Heather Mallick.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Scout:
[b]You may have a point regarding class but as far as racism goes you can forget it. White folks are the dominant race in the US and here, racism my ass.

White folks who are proud to be ignorant and intolerant are white trash and it's all over the US - truckers hats and Kid Rock baby. White trash is in today's society a culture of willful prideful ignorance and they are laughing at the lefties "weeping and gnashing of teeth" over the "insult" white trash. Suckers.

Forest for the trees lefites, forest for the trees.[/b]

---

That's part of what I was trying to get at in the previous thread but couldn't quite get my tired brain to work. Regardless of the terms origins or use, racist, classist or other wise, if in using it in a way that's meant to expose people for who they are true or not, it doesn't. Except to those that already know or are on board. So it might be cathartic or entertaining and 'true' to say it like it is, but a way to get people to 'see the light' um no.
I know people who wear that moniker with pride, same with 'redneck.' and various other incarnations. In the US instance, the repub strategy is to enforce that pride. Has been for years. So broadly imo that people who we on the left would never consider as white trash do associate with that group. So the guy writing from New York, considers that part of his 'group' and reacts accordingly.

Someone calls them 'white trash' and it's not an insult in the sense that it's exposing some enlightened truth about who they are and they get all upset. The reaction, "Yep I am. Suck it up. That's just another typical, liberal, leftie *insert various incarnations of elitist description* yapping and whining from people who just don't get it or get how awesome we are. fuck em and *insert tirade and threats here*

So yeah it is an insult but in the political climate today it doesn't mean what it seems people think it means and I somewhat agree with Scout.

[ 11 September 2008: Message edited by: ElizaQ ]

[ 11 September 2008: Message edited by: ElizaQ ]

I agree with M. Spector. Not only is it bad writing, in that it doesn't adhere to standards of reasonable argument, but it's simply in bad taste.

Is there any other reputable progressive news organization that would have let that get by the editors desk?

quote:

---

Originally posted by N.R.KISSED:

You certainly buy into the media discourse pretty easily.

Barack Obama actually worked as a community organizer in working class neighbourhoods in Chicago work that has attracted derision from the likes of McCain and Palin.

What does Palin know of the working class she is not working class her background is middle class, just because she appeals to a virulently reactionary element within the working class does not mean she understands the working class, with all likelihood she holds them in contempt.

You also make the mistake that all members of the working class are virulently reactionary, you also seem to be speaking only of the white working class.

---

I agree with the comments about Obama, he likely does more then any of them.

Palin doesn't need to understand the working class. She only has to understand how to work the narrative or the grouping that the Repubs have created around it.

Obama may lose the race not because he doesn't actually doesn't understand it or them but if he can't manage to counteract that narrative and how Palin fits in and is working it for all she's worth.

I'm just sayin', Scout, there's a reason why Maureen Dowd makes a difference -- because like all good columnists she argues actual points and does it well.

"[url=http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/classy]Classy[/url]"? I use it as definition C, "admirably skillful and graceful".

Contrast that to Heather. No argument, just angry ad hominem. Like i said, regressive. As in, not a credit to her cause.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Scout:
[b]Most “white trash” are comfortable middleclass. They just are ignorant and intolerant on purpose and made trucker hats high fashion.[/b]

---

And many progressives wonder why their message doesn’t resonate with a large percentage of the vast middle.

quote:

---

lso, i don't know why you called me sexist because i used the word classy. that's reaching a bit, i'd say.

---

Well then re-read my post as I explained it.

quote:

---

As soon as someone says “classy” alarm bells go off for me. In this scenario it’s suggesting women who say things with a snarl and aren’t offended by the word cunt aren’t doing it right. We aren’t “classy” and that’s as sexist as it gets. It dictates a code of acceptable behaviour we have follow to communicate to be taken seriously, that’s also classist.

---

What is it your missing?

my main thesis is that the progressive movement could use a better mascot.

You see sexism where it's not. I read Antonia Zerbisias, Maureen Dowd, Gail Collins, Chantal Hebert, Christie Blatchford, Diane Francis, Barbara Kay and Caroline Glick religiously. All of them make me think.

Heather Mallick makes me shake my head.

quote:

---

You see sexism where it's not. I read Antonia Zerbisias, Maureen Dowd, Gail Collins, Chantal Hebert, Christie Blatchford, Diane Francis, Barbara Kay and Caroline Glick religiously. All of them make me think.
Heather Mallick makes me shake my head.

---

Well that settles it, you know Feminism then because you read women mighty nice of you.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Scout:
[b]

Well you keep pretending that your smugness about being above the muck and PC isn't classism at it's worst. You're too good to be crass. [img]rolleyes.gif" border="0[/img] [/b]

---

I am known to be very crass, thank you very much. There is a difference between offensively crass and offensively classist and racist.

I've never seen this first-class journalism of which you speak.

I read all stripes of columnists because it's generally well-considered to think about stuff instead of just playing in a little ideological pond. How can you disagree with an argument unless you know what the argument is? Is the best thing you can say about Heather's article is that it was "crass"? In my experience, the quality of logical argument is directly inverse to the number of personal attacks in that attack. Am i alone?

I am not sexist, nor classist. I'm still not sure why that even came up. I demand logical argument from columnists. Did i say i demand logical argument from female columnists?

If anything is sexist, it's her use of the word "pramface". Liberal-minded people cringe when someone calls a poor immigrant mother a "breeder". I know I do. This expression is indistinguishable in its intent.

This is not a progressive or productive article. At least it's crass.