I don't know. I think his decision to abandon building a viable third force in American politics is the main reason he would not be covered. When you can't get 1% of the vote, exactly how much air time have you earned?
But I suppose you're right. None of us would know who Howard Stern was if weren't for his blatant racism and sexism. Controversy sells.
I think it's hyperbolic to accuse someone of being a racist based on one comment, which may or may not have been ill considered.
I note in a quick bio of Nader ( I am becomming a wikiholic) that Nader's resume doesn't include anything on equal rights activism. But on the other hand, the intent of his consumer activism wasn't to limit it to white people, or wealthy people.
It was for everyone.
Nor does it say who Nader hires for his various Non Profit organizations, whether he is racist in that he only hires a certain race, or systematically excludes a certain race.
So, I don't know if Ralph Nader is a racist or not-- and I certainly wouldn't sum up a man's character based soley on his worst moment.
I think the word "racist" can be thrown around far too easily these days, and it will only serve to dillute the effect of the charge, eventually.
Speaking for myself, I have never called Nader a racist. I deplored a racist statement that he made.
quote:
Originally posted by Coyote:
[b]How about "suck up"? Toady? Stooge? Pawn? Sell-out? Bought and paid for? Corporate hack? Tool? Useful idiot?Anything but racist insults?[/b]
Those are useful, but, frankly, don't have the insult level. Racism is probably part of that equation.
Benedict Arnold might get to the same level of insult, but doesn't have quite the same meaning.
quote:
Originally posted by Coyote:
[b]Speaking for myself, I have never called Nader a racist. I deplored a racist statement that he made.[/b]
Race has been central to the theme of the entire campaign. In its positive cast it has been a symbolic struggle for the full enfranchisement of Black Americans, and this was very much the tenor of the whole election night coverage, even that coming from the defeated side. The establishment seems full prepared to rally round and use the momentum of this victory for Black people in the US, and make it their own.
In my view, Nader flipped the equation over to expose that reality. And I don't think anyone else was really positioned to do so, black or white.
[ 08 November 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]
Race being a theme is not a question. Questioning whether Obama will deliver for Black America is well within bounds.
Using racist terms to get there is not.
I can think of equivalent terms to be used in the First Nations context in Canada, and I'll tell you I would never say them.
British right-wing assshole [url=http://www.spectator.co.uk/stephenpollard/2582741/ralph-nader-racist.tht... Pollard[/url] of the UK paper [i]The Spectator[/i] has of course jumped on the "Nader = racist" bandwagon. One of his readers makes a very perceptive comment:
quote:
Here's another example of the American media playing childish games with semantics in order to manipulate the public. But, if the comment sections of left wing blogs indicates anything it is that this kind of thing works astoundingly well.It makes me sad for the American people. There is so much truth in what Nader says but they just can't get past his perceived role as "spoiler" in elections where the two parties agree on what to debate and how to be different.
It also saddens me that people are so stupid these days. The last example of this media manipulation aptly occurred when Obama said that the Sarah Palin's nomination was to the McCain campaign like "putting lipstick on a pig." The fine folks over at Fox News claimed he was calling Sarah Palin a pig!
So the use of ironic racism by progressives is okay if it helps to get airtime in order to get the light shone on the message?
Of course right wing assholes are going to jump on a left winger saying something racist.
All the more reason NOT TO SAY SOMETHING RACIST.
Yes, of course, the right wing assholes of Faux News and other media are the ultimate arbiters of what is and isn't racist, and can always be counted upon to expose racism wherever it may be lurking! [img]rolleyes.gif" border="0[/img]
quote:
Originally posted by Coyote:
[b]Speaking for myself, I have never called Nader a racist. I deplored a racist statement that he made.[/b]
It saddens me, really, that Nader would end on such a note.
It saddens me, really, that people who consider themselves progressive would fall for this crap.
quote:
Originally posted by M. Spector:
[b]Yes, of course, the right wing assholes of Faux News and other media are the ultimate arbiters of what is and isn't racist, and can always be counted upon to expose racism wherever it may be lurking! [img]rolleyes.gif" border="0[/img] [/b]
Spector. Hi. I'm Coyote. You might remember me: we've posted on the same board for years. You might also remember that I don't base my opinions on what Fox News says. Shockingly, I come to my own judgement on issues. On this one, I think the statement is racist because of the racism contained within it, not because Fox News jumped on it. You think it's not racist because, I guess, Fox News says it is.
That's your perogative. But quit telling me why I think what I think. I've been pretty effin' consistent my entire LIFE what I think about playing with racist and sexist stereotypes by the Left. I'm against it. Because of the racism/sexism.
Whether Fox News reports it or not.
The "Obama's talking white" thing?
Felt it to be offensive myself, but hey, I'm just a mutt like Obama, what does my gut know?
Of course I heard right-wing assholes like Limbaugh say the exact same thing, and it bothered me then too.
Sort of like when I tell some people I'm from Jamaica and they (not Jamaicans mind you) get all offended that I'm not throwing big ups and burning a spliff all the time.
quote:
Originally posted by Coyote:
[b]Spector. Hi. I'm Coyote. You might remember me: we've posted on the same board for years.[/b]
Yeah, I remember you.
[ 08 November 2008: Message edited by: M. Spector ]
quote:
Originally posted by Coyote:
[b]Of course right wing assholes are going to jump on a left winger saying something racist.All the more reason NOT TO SAY SOMETHING RACIST.[/b]
Well, I am not entirely sure it was racist. The statement was:
"Barak Obama can be Uncle Sam for Americans, or Uncle Tom [i]for the corporations.[/i]"
It's defintely provocative and offensive, and plays on the ever present theme of black enfranchisement, but that was a good portion of the Obama election theme anyway. But Nader did not say that "Barak Obama was an Uncle Tom".
quote:
Originally posted by M. Spector:
[b]It saddens me, really, that people who consider themselves progressive would fall for this crap.[/b]
It saddens me really that people that consider themselves progressives would think that other people who consider themselves progressives can't actually hear or read something with their own eyes and use there own brains to make up there own minds.
Who here read or heard the right wingnut spin and said, "Oh golly gee. Look at that. I never would have considered it that way unless you saintly people told me too. You are so right. I am corrected' Hands anyone?
Spector you can keep spinning all you want that everyone here is only parroting Faux news if it makes you feel better but that doesn't make it true.
Nadar said it. It's on camera. It's open for interpretation with or without the nutter spin.
quote:
Originally posted by M. Spector:
[b]Yeah, I remember you.[ 08 November 2008: Message edited by: M. Spector ][/b]
Ooh, you're so clever!
I remember you, too.
BTW, pardon my ignorance, but what [b]is[/b] the politically correct term for a black person who does the bidding of white corporate America to the detriment of his fellow African-Americans?
quote:
It makes me sad for the American people. There is so much truth in what Nader says but they just can't get past his perceived role as "spoiler" in elections where the two parties agree on what to debate and how to be different.
It's the people's fault! They should be supporting Ralph Nader! If only people supported Nader, he would be relevant!
Well, I remember both of you.
If it's not racist, Cue, what's offensive about it?
quote:
Originally posted by Cueball:
[b]It's defintely provocative and offensive, and plays on the ever present theme of black enfranchisement, but that was a good portion of the Obama election theme anyway. But Nader did not say that "Barak Obama was an Uncle Tom".[/b]
You are right he didn't and if you look upthread his actual comment was posted and is the one being discussed. Not that he said Obama was an Uncle Tom.
quote:
Originally posted by Coyote:
[b]If it's not racist, Cue, what's offensive about it?[/b]
It's offensive in the same manner as making an objection at a wedding is offensive, or saying the King has no clothes. But he did not say the King has no clothes, he said the King can get a new tailor or stick with the ones he has.
[ 08 November 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]
quote:
BTW, pardon my ignorance, but what is the politically correct term for a black person who does the bidding of white corporate America to the detriment of his fellow African-Americans?
Office worker
Ha! Well, that's one perspective. I think it's offensive like Howard Stern is offensive.
quote:
Originally posted by Cueball:
[b]
It's offensive in the same manner as making an objection at a wedding is offensive.[/b]
Yeah, i agree, i think the term you used in the other thread was "tasteless".
Nader does not know how to reach people anymore.
quote:
Originally posted by djelimon:
[b]Office worker[/b]
Do all black office workers act to the detriment of their fellow African-Americans? Of course not.
You can't think of an appropriate answer to my original question, I take it.
Anyone else?
quote:
Originally posted by Coyote:
[b]Speaking for myself, I have never called Nader a racist. I deplored a racist statement that he made.[/b]
Well, I looked and I never saw anyone, myself included, say "Nader is racist."
quote:
Originally posted by djelimon:
[b]Office worker[/b]
LOL!
quote:
Originally posted by wage zombie:
[b]Yeah, i agree, i think the term you used in the other thread was "tasteless".
Nader does not know how to reach people anymore.[/b]
Well all I can say is this thread is nearing a hundred posts. And that you only have one opportunity to make an objection at a wedding.
[ 08 November 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]
quote:
Originally posted by remind:
[b]Well, I looked and I never saw anyone, myself included, say "Nader is racist."[/b]
You said his words were racist. Big difference.
Then of course there was [url=http://www.rabble.ca/babble/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic&f=13&t=004405#0... thread[/url], where you called Nader a "racist shit".
[edited to fix link]
[ 08 November 2008: Message edited by: M. Spector ]
"Do all black office workers act to the detriment of their fellow African-Americans? "
Assuming that all white corporations work to the detriment of African Americans (which I assumed you assumed) then yes.
If that isn't your assumption, then I must ask which specific corporations you think oppress African Americans and have Obama in their thrall.
If you can't answer my original question there's no point in engaging in idle banter with you about "which corporations".
quote:
Originally posted by M. Spector:
[b]You said his words were racist. Big difference.[/b]
Well there is difference but that really doesn't speak to the main reason why the whole thing came up with in the first place. Which had to do with people, progressives and his support or non-support for him.
I don't think he's racist because of it.
I just think it was an absolutely idiotic and stupid thing to say. It's actually perfect example of how using 'ironic' racism can totally backfire and make a person look like an ass.
And in defence of it we've had, 'well it's just right wing spin' and just the same that Howard Stern does to create controversy so maybe it's okay.
That really helps. Last I checked Howard stern was not professing to be anywhere near progressive and not trying to be a progressive political movement.
It did get him noticed though. So I guess if you support the idea that no publicity is bad publicity then cool, it worked.
quote:
If you can't answer my original question there's no point in engaging in idle banter with you about "which corporations".
Au contraire - anyone who works in an office by definition furthers the agenda of a corporation.
I can tell you that in the black Jamaican community, you call these people "Office workers". It's not considered selling out to work for Big Money.
Unless you mean "politicians".
I'm still trying to figure out how Obama, with his history of not working for corporations but doing civil rights law and community organizing fits into all this, but nevertheless I find your interpretation of this issue fascinating, if puzzling.
quote:
Originally posted by Cueball:
[b]Well, I remember both of you.[/b]
The gold is in Sad Hill Cemetary, in the grave marked "Unknown".
[img]biggrin.gif" border="0[/img]
[img]biggrin.gif" border="0[/img]
I know what movie I am watching tonight.
Nader can't win for the same reasons the NDP struggles with third highest popular vote in Canada and fourth party status. "The Church tried for centuries to stamp out the heresy, but even the Inquisition couldn't quash it. Manichaeism is the philosophy of sheeple, of gutless droids disguised as humans, whose brains are unable to deal with any system more complicated than a dichotomy." [url=http://earthblog.net/eb-articles/hartman16.html]Pat Hartman[/url]
quote:
Originally posted by djelimon:
[b]I'm still trying to figure out how Obama, with his history of not working for corporations but doing civil rights law and community organizing fits into all this, but nevertheless I find your interpretation of this issue fascinating, if puzzling.[/b]
Well, maybe you should try reading what Nader said before you start calling him a racist.
What he said was that Obomba's choice, "is whether he’s going to be Uncle Sam for the people of this country, [b]or Uncle Tom for the giant corporations.[/b]" One or the other - it's Obomba's choice.
That's how the reference to corporations "fits into this".
According to the [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncle_Tom]accepted meaning of the epithet[/url], Nader is suggesting that one way Obomba could possibly go is to make unnecessary accommodation with the giant corporations of Amerika to the detriment of his fellow African-Americans.
I just what to know how he could have said the same thing without using that term, while still retaining the connotation of turning his back on his fellow African-Americans. I suspect Uncle Tom is the perfect term to use for that purpose.
quote:
Originally posted by M. Spector:I just what to know how he could have said the same thing without using that term, while still retaining the connotation of turning his back on his fellow African-Americans. I suspect Uncle Tom is the perfect term to use for that purpose.[/QB]
He wasn't talking about just African Americans.
quote:
Originally posted by ElizaQ:
[b]He wasn't talking about just African Americans.[/b]
By using the term Uncle Tom, he was. Otherwise the term makes no sense at all. It's not just a general pejorative term; it has a specific connotation. An Uncle Tom is an African-American who is a traitor to his own race. Nader knew what it means. Apparently many babblers don't.
quote:
Anyone who has worked in the areas of civil rights, economic justice, and health and safety over the decades knows that whenever minority candidates are elected to legislative offices, their minority constituents remain wary regarding whether the entrenched power structures are affecting these self-avowed representatives, or whether the reverse is occurring – that is, they are standing up to the corporate supremacists. All political pioneers have to answer this question as they move into these positions of trust. Unfortunately, as many people of color – struggling through the day in often desperate circumstances – know from the lessons of history, there are more than a few times when they are let down by a surrender to the rich and powerful – an obeisance that has its vernacular. - [url=http://www.votenader.org/blog/2008/11/07/rn-statement-on-tru/]Nader[/url]
quote:
Originally posted by M. Spector:
By using the term Uncle Tom, he was. Otherwise the term makes no sense at all.
Geez, now maybe you can see why people went huh?
quote:
It's not just a general pejorative term; it has a specific connotation. An Uncle Tom is an African-American who is a traitor to his own race. Nader knew what it means. Apparently many babblers don't
I know what Uncle Tom means. It's considered a slur, used by mostly people in the African American communities to speak about other African Americans, as an insult with connitations of being a sell-out and a race traitor. No problems in getting that part.
Read his comments again, he said, " Uncle Sam for the people of this country, or Uncle Tom for the giant corporations."
I read it as ..."Will you stand with the American people with their best interests or be a traitor and sell out for the corporations'
So now your suggesting that no, that 'people of this country' actually means African American people of this country only? And was only talking to African American people?
If that's what he actually meant then that makes it even worse.
Now you're just being obtuse. I'm done trying to explain the obvious to a closed mind.
[url=http://www.ww4report.com/node/5716]Obama and the School of the Americas[/url]
quote:
Still, the Democratic presidential candidates refused to take a stand against WHINSEC. In fact, the only two Democrats who expressed opposition to the institution were long shots Mike Gravel and Dennis Kucinich (on the Republican side, Ron Paul said he too would shutter WHINSEC)
quote:
Originally posted by M. Spector:
[b]By using the term Uncle Tom, he was. Otherwise the term makes no sense at all. It's not just a general pejorative term; it has a specific connotation. An Uncle Tom is an African-American who is a traitor to his own race. Nader knew what it means. Apparently many babblers don't.[/b]
I certainly did, moreover, I gave the definition above to boot.
Moreover, I suspect you do not realize you are arguing that Nader is a "racist shit", as I noted right after I had first heard about it.
Now, I agree, it is not just a general perjorative. And when a white person uses a racially charged perjorative for a descriptor of a black person, or even about future supposed/assumed/presumed actions of that person, that have NOT yet even come close to occuring, and labels said person with it, it is racist speech. And contrary to other's opinions here, it is not Nader's "pre-emptive", or even post event call to make.
It is a WHITE man pre-judging, or making potential inferences, based upon the determinents of race, and setting a conceptual lens/framework, from which to slant perceptions prior to any actual occurances happening. IMV, it is dangerously close to race baiting.
I am reminded of the brouhaha over Mallick calling Palin's pregnant daughter "pram faced" and the indignant cries against her and her progressiveness here, because she dared to make such a comment in her own column. But now, when we have a clear racially charged pejorative in play, by the allegedly most progressive politician in the USA, it is supposedly acceptable, and indeed non-racist, and according to some could actually be progressive discourse to get a deeper point/message across. Personally, I think it is an example of white male privilege that as of yet, or even still, knows no bounds, and not so much 100% racism.
Though Nader was being a racist shit when he said that, his words were racially charged, and they contained a racially biased perjorative, used by the black community itslef, not by whites, whether or not he is extremely racist in his mental constructs is perhaps only known to himself. Note, I use the word extremely, because I believe that most whites are racist, against any given race differing from whites according to one's own personal biases, to greater and lesser degrees, including myself. That is why racism, and racial biases still exist, eh!
[ 08 November 2008: Message edited by: remind ]
I thought Nader quite adequately explained his meaning in his subsidiary comments.
quote:
Originally posted by M. Spector:
[b]Now you're just being obtuse. I'm done trying to explain the obvious to a closed mind.[/b]
Oh get off your martyr podium. Your apologist explanations are not doing him any favors. Ditto on the closed mind insult it goes both ways here. I was just being nice and not actually saying it.
I never had a problem with the meaning of the actual message. Go back and read mine and others comments.
It's not hard one to figure out. It actually took a whole split second.
Guess what? I think he was right and that it was perfectly valid and good question. Comprede? Can you actually understand that and get it through that closed thick skull? Hello?
Oh hey this is fun....not really, but like begets like I guess.
My issue and others, who by the way actually do get the message behind the words as well...funny that... is the choice of words and just the general assholly time he chose to use them. Yes, yes use a racially charged ephitet, that has different meanings to different people, in perhaps a witty and intellectual way I'll give him that much...just hours after the black guy gets elected. Smart one buddy.
And then wonder why people go wtf?
You can agree with him fine, and think that that's just a fine and dandy way to get your message out because hey, he's radical and so progressive blah blah, but don't think that just because other progressive think that it was pretty shitty that it's because we just don't "Get it" or are *gasp* 'closed minded' and aren't capable of understanding Nadars great intellectual insight.
Here's the thing. We disagree! And harping on trying to explain our horrible transgression of poo pooing Nadar, by calling people close minded and implying stupidity and that people are just beholden to wingnut spin, isn't really going to change that.
quote:
Well, maybe you should try reading what Nader said before you start calling him a racist.
I'd like a source wherein I called him a racist (I already Googled it) [img]wink.gif" border="0[/img]
[ 08 November 2008: Message edited by: djelimon ]
quote:
Originally posted by remind:... used by the black community itslef, not by whites, whether or not he is extremely racist in his mental constructs is perhaps only known to himself.
Yeah I thought about bringing that point up, that it was a white guy using what is most commonly used only by the black community and the racial issues with doing that, but I figured it might get to complicated, trying to explain the nuances of how that plays out.
According to Spector he WAS just talking TO the black community only...so basically he was saying hey you black folks out there you'd better watch out for this black guy he might be like one of your Uncle Toms!
I don't think he meant it that way. At least I hope not.
