David Brooks is all in a huff!
Today, I’m going to write about a slur. It’s a distortion that’s been around for a while, but has spread like a weed over the past few months. It was concocted for partisan reasons: to flatter the prejudices of one side, to demonize the other and to simplify a complicated reality into a political nursery tale.The distortion concerns a speech Ronald Reagan gave during the 1980 campaign in Philadelphia, Miss., which is where three civil rights workers had been murdered 16 years earlier. An increasing number of left-wing commentators assert that Reagan kicked off his 1980 presidential campaign with a states’ rights speech in Philadelphia to send a signal to white racists that he was on their side. The speech is taken as proof that the Republican majority was built on racism....
Reagan could have done something wonderful if he’d mentioned civil rights at the fair. He didn’t. And it’s obviously true that race played a role in the G.O.P.’s ascent.
Still, the agitprop version of this week — that Reagan opened his campaign with an appeal to racism — is a distortion, as honest investigators ranging from Bruce Bartlett, who worked for the Reagan administration and is the author of “Impostor: How George W. Bush Bankrupted America and Betrayed the Reagan Legacy,” to Kevin Drum, who writes for Washington Monthly, have concluded.
But still the slur spreads. It’s spread by people who, before making one of the most heinous charges imaginable, couldn’t even take 10 minutes to look at the evidence. It posits that there was a master conspiracy to play on the alleged Klan-like prejudices of American voters, when there is no evidence of that conspiracy. And, of course, in a partisan age there are always people eager to believe this stuff.
Interesting! Enough, perhaps, to make me question the intent behind one throwaway phrase Ronald Reagan used forever ago. Not enough, though, to make me doubt for a second that race has been perhaps the key driver behind the ascent of Republicanism in the past half century. But who, I wondered when I first read this, are these left-wing commentator-cum-propagandists he's alluding to? Then I remembered. It's this guy:
ince the days of Gerald Ford, just about every Republican presidential campaign has included some symbolic gesture of approval for good old-fashioned racism.Thus Ronald Reagan, who began his political career by campaigning against California’s Fair Housing Act, started his 1980 campaign with a speech supporting states’ rights delivered just outside Philadelphia, Miss., where three civil rights workers were murdered. In 2000, Mr. Bush made a pilgrimage to Bob Jones University, famed at the time for its ban on interracial dating.
And all four leading Republican candidates for the 2008 nomination have turned down an invitation to a debate on minority issues scheduled to air on PBS this week.
Game on!
Comments
Leaving everything else aside for the moment, a complaint about a slur would probably have more force coming from someone who had not written that ridiculous anti-Kos column, which was couched in a bizarre style for reasons that I assume related to potential legal liability for libel.
A wise man once told me David Brooks is not my friend. He's not Markos' or Paul Krugman's friend either.
Pattern recognition! One of the neat things computers have been have evolutionaryily programmed to do is be 'smart enough' to do is be able to take a number of optical inputs and deduce what those inputs 'mean' in an object-descriptive way - and say, for instance, that's a hair comb.
Why did Reagan choose Philadelphia MS as the place to kick off his campaign? As an isolated input, the pattern recognition software on the computer, the fact that Philadelphia MS is a small southern history wouldn't help the detection logic much. Add in the fact of the earlier murders of civil rights leaders in that city, and the computer begins to fuzzily 'see' a pattern. Add in additional facts from the recent history of the GOP in the south prior to the Reagan event (starting with Nixon's 'southern strategy') and the picture becomes clearer. Add in additional facts relating to the way the Reagan campaign moved forward after the event - in terms of dog whistles, coded phrases, places visited, etc - and pretty soon the computer's screen is flashing: "Appeal to Racism".
What Reagan actually said or did in Philadelphia MS that day isn't a key factor in recognizing the pattern - although that would help a bit if we could agree on what he actually said. What is key is that the overall impact of the campaign was a not-very-well-hidden appeal to white race prejudice in the south and elsewhere.
David Brook's dog doesn't hunt. Maybe the dog's nose is congested with ass-covering, fact denying, conservative-shillism, but whatever. Reagan was appealing to bigotry, and even a fuckin dumb computer could read that pattern.
Post A Comment