On this week in which we have seen many Americans celebrating the death of Osama Bin Laden, it’s as good a time as any to discuss this problem of the “birthers”. Birthers are those individuals who maintain that Barack Obama cannot be the President of the US because he is not a natural born citizen of the USA. These people maintain that he was born in Kenya (not Hawaii) and that his birth certificate is fake. I used to laugh at the birthers, and I was convinced that they would go away, but they haven’t and I don’t laugh at them any more.
This conspiracy has been going on from before Obama was even elected, and picks up pace from time to time. Donald Trump (who is threatening to run for the 2012 election) is one such birther, for example. He’s a very nice man.
The entire birther conspiracy is not, however, about Obama’s birthplace; no, it is much more sinister than that. It’s about racism. More specifically, the birthers (and likely many others) believe that Obama could not possibly be educated, capable, articulate, and fit for the presidency, because, well, because he’s black. African Americans can’t be president (or claim any accomplishments at all) because they’re not white. In America, only the white can aim for such dizzy heights. And we want to keep it that way, right? After all, if we allow the blacks to get above their station, who will shine our shoes? You can hear the dinner party giggles already. That is what the birther conspiracy is about, and the President’s birthplace has nothing to do with it.
From moderateleft:
One thing that cannot be said enough about birtherism, afterbirtherism, and all its myriad forms: it is racist at its core. An argument that Obama cannot be who he is — an intelligent, accomplished, American president — because he is an African-American.
Why does the right push the meme that Obama wasn’t born here? Because to admit that he was born in America is to admit that an African-American man, the son of an American woman and a Kenyan man, born in America, is as American as any other American. Why does the right claim that Bill Ayers wrote Dreams From My Father? Because no Black man could possibly have written such an affecting book, because…well, you know. Why does the right still harp on Obama’s use of teleprompters, which have been de rigeur since the Eisenhower Administration? Becauseobviously Obama isn’t as smart as he so obviously is, because…well, he’s not white, is he?
This is the sick, beating heart at the center of the right’s assault on Obama’s legitimacy. Not their assault on Obama’s policies — though the right is wrong on policy, such disagreements are why we have politics. But their assault on Obama’s very right to serve in the office of president, because that is an office that, though they dare not say it out loud, the believe is reserved for white people.
Let us state this clearly, and let us not shy away from it: those who peddled the birther myth are racists. Those who continue to cling to it, and who cling to all its myriad facets, are racists. Those who have and who continue to insinuate that a man born in America is not a real American are racists.
They are racists. They are racists. They are racists. And if they don’t like being called racists, they should stop being racists. They should be ashamed of their conduct, apologetic for their actions — not “honored” as Donald Trump claimed to be. Their actions bring shame on this country, on Americans as a people, and most certainly, on themselves.
Well said.
And, frankly, this editorial from the Washington Post is right. It’s deeply embarrassing that this has gone on (and been allowed to go on) for so long. With all of things America has to worry about at the moment (health care, employment, maintaining two wars, ongoing recession, to name but a few), you’d think someone would have called it by now.
That wedding happened, and didn’t we all know it!
Sun, May 1, 2011 1 Comment
- Johann Hari
If ever the problem with the monarchy can be summed up, it’s in that quote. Elitism, privilege, and a spurious claim to power indeed. Incidentally, Johann Hari makes a very good case for a republic in the remainder of that piece. This country doesn’t “need” a monarchy (despite the claims that the tourism industry would fold if it were disbanded) and I, for one, am tired of my tax dollars keeping it in an ostentatious lifestyle.
Praise the gods one journalist was able to keep her head screwed on about the royal nonsense while all the others fawned, bleated and generally disgraced themselves when they allowed their critical faculties to escape them for the day. Laurie Penny rather wonderfully (as always) discussed in a number of pieces in the New Statesman how the reality of life in the country continued abound while we were all subjected to the royal celebration. Now, don’t get me wrong: I’m sure Wills and Kate are very much in love and I don’t begrudge them that. But the country spending yet more money on unnecessary whimsy, and it being the sole focus of most of the news for days if not weeks while 1000s in this country continue to lose their jobs, their homes, and, quite possibly, their minds, is very troublesome. The Wedding of Mass Distraction indeed. (Incidentally, the best hidden news of the day came courtesy of the BBC at approximately 11.30, around about the time they said their vows, most likely. The regulator of NHS foundation trusts in England has warned hospitals they must make even bigger efficiency savings than previously thought. Nice work, Beeb.) Penny also points out the affront of this debacle to democracy and liberty. Protestors were told that they could not protest at the event and pre-emptive arrests of potential dissenters were made. Since when did we live in a nation where we arrest people before the fact (said “fact” being subject to definition if and when a definition is required)? Since about two weeks ago, is when.
It’ll all blow over, of course, and we’ll be talking about something else come Wednesday but I intend to remain bitter about the whole sorry situation for quite a time to come. And so should you. The next time you hear of a governmental cut to something as important as the Poppy Project (links 1, 2, 3), ask yourself if it could possibly have been avoided had the royal couple decided to get married in a village church in Berkshire. Answer: yeah, probably.
And come on, we might as well be honest in any case. What has most of the chatter around the royal wedding been about anyway? That’s right. Babies. Our Kate better be able to spit out the babies or she’s not going to be of any use to her new husband. He might not be king yet but he needs an ‘eir nonetheless. Just as her father “gave her away”, and she is the only one of the newly-entangled duo to wear a wedding ring, she is now a possession of the royal house. And, as she should know from her betters before her, she needs to procreate and she probably needs to do it fast. THAT, the great British public, is her role now. And, although they’re going to start discussing the Law of Primogeniture (where a younger brother can accede to the throne before his older sisters), she still better hope it’s a boy.
Too right Mr Self. Too right.
–
In case you missed it: Charlie Brooker’s précis of the day.
Filed under feminisms, randoms, sociologies Tagged with commentary, cynicism, despair, feminism, politics, society, sociology, women's rights