The people here - like Hyabusa, I read the first few posts - who are claimming Carter is wrong, don't understand how racism works (and that they might be affected by it).
They should learn the term 'dog whistle politics'.
There's a reason why racial stereotypes/caricatures/'jokes' hve always had such strong appeal to people who often say they 'are not racist'.
Racism comes largely from the enjoyment of putting another group down. It's a weakness.
When any 'innocent' comment is made to distinguish the 'other group' from yours, that's enough to let you enjoy that feeling - so it's why it's o important to have for so long simply made references to blacks liking to eat fried chicken or watermelon. They can always rationalize it with 'so what? They like to eat a food, how is that an attack? I like steak and pears, is thar 'racist' to say about me?'
But there is a context that rationalization ignores that the reason why they want to make such a big point of blacks eating a watermelon - to thepoint that simply a cartoon with an image of it is a cliche - is because it serves the purpose of lettingt the racist put the 'other group' in a box. It's actually better that it NOT be a rationally meaningful point - it's the emotional response, the 'there THOSE PEOPLE are response - that they want to enjoy.
But racists are not going to understand that usually; they're just going to argue that, even while they are indulging in it, 'it's just a joke' or some other such denial.
'Dog whistle' politics is similar, it's saying things that aren't on their face 'racist' rationally, they're not saying 'blacks are an inferior race', but are rather the sort of 'message' that the racists can hear like dogs can hear something that is inaduble to people, that gets a response.
In short, I don't think most racists are able to understand their own racism, including how it relates to President Obama.
With hours to discuss it, I suspect I might get one to understand it better, but it takes an education for them to understand their own racism.
It doesn't help that their defense has some truth to it - it's not that they oppose Obama only for his race - their opposition is legitimately based on 'issues'.
It's how it's enhanced by racism that they don't understand. How the level of disrespect is increased, the level of anger felt is increased.
It's why you might see such an increased interest in things like 'tea bag' protests, because these people have to vent the racist anger, even if they don't know why they're so much more upset than when they saw a white person with policies they disagreed with. They understand 'raciism is wrong' and think they're not racist, even while they have a racist reaction of increased anger because Obama is half black that they just assume is all about his policies.
It's sort of like they really don't like seeing his race in the White House, and the emotion they have they just decide is all about their being a more passionate 'conservative'.
Carter understands racism better, and his comments lead the racist horses to the water, to the truth, but they won't drink much.
If you want to be honest and test yourself a bit, see how you react emotionally to things. If you see a crime story of a black hurting a white, do you feel more emotion than other times? If you see a mixed race couple, do you feel a negative feeling towards it even if you don't rationally condemn it? If you think of a black person being your doctor, being your politician, being yiour boss, do you have a bit of a feeling of negative reaction?
That's the racism you are unaware of, that you don't think you have.
I'm not talking about actually saying 'I don't want to have a black doctor - that's a much stronger form of racism when you actually rationally defend it. I'm talking about you saying you would be fine with a black doctor - but having a 'bad feeling' about it that you pretend isn't there, even while you look for an excuse to get another doctor that has nothing to do with race as a reason. That's modern racism.
And it's very exploitable by politicians who know how to appeal to your emotion,s and give you all kinds of cover for them, SAYING that they and you are against racism with words - but letting you vent the racist emotion as passionate opposition, finding phrases that are 'respectable' to hide it behind - just as racists in the South often used 'states' rights' as a 'respectable constitutional opinion' to hide their racism behind.
When you would see 'Leave it to Beaver' families ordinary housewives, out in screamnig frothing mobs facing down federal marshalls to oppose a black person going to a schiool with signs about 'states' rights', that was racism. They didn't understand, usually, why they were so passionate about states' rights'. Watching them try to give the reason was just watching them parrot the 'talking points'. That's the poison of racism.
When racism was more acceptable, you had more 'honest' expressions of it, such as when Lincoln would assure audicences that no one was more opposed to racial equality than him.
But as the view that equality is the right policy took hold, but people still had racist feelings, you saw this more tortured expression of racism.
It's why for a century you had things like 'housing covenants' being the norm that a house could not be sold to blacks in a white neighborhood, among people who 'weren't racist'.
And you have a lot of emotion aimed at Barack Obama under the cover of opposing his 'liberal' policies that it enhanced by racist feelings, in the view of many.
This is why terms like 'play th race card' are so popular, because they further provide 'cover' for people with racist feelings, to ignore them by turning the attack on those who point out the racism, by dismissing them as the people who are wrong, just 'playing politics', the 'real racists'. It's why it's so popular to oppose 'reverse racism' in affirmative action, because it lets them off the hook of dealing with the facts and injustice of unfair legacies from the policies of racism, to simply attack the proponents.
The right-wing talk show host types are expert at playing these people like a fiddle, knowing to *never* be explicitly racist, which would get them condemned by their listeners the same way the KKK is 'off limites' to respectable politics - but instead use 'dog whistle' messages to let the people vent racist emotion under a cover of it being about an issue.
People have posted there's 'no proof', and that's sort of true. This is hard to 'prove'. Each person has to look at it and reach their own conclusion about their own feelings.
But here's one suggestion to notice the racism.
Remember how around the election there was a period of media messages about the nation being 'proud' to elect a half-black person in that it showed the values of America to the world, where many other nations have clear racism. If we still saw Republicans including some messages about how they are proud of that even while they criticize Obama on issues, then I'd think the racism probably isn't there - it's not very compatble for people who feel racist reactions to also feel pride in having a half-black president.
But you don't hear a *peep* from the right about any such pride - and I think that's a bit of a suggestion how they're feeling.
It's a little like in a marriage, when a spouse feels a loss of attraction to their partner, but doesn't say that, because of the hassle it would cause - but the comments praising their attractiveness tend to stop. That's what you so often here in marital conflict - how the partner has 'stopped telling them they're sexy' - which didn't say anything, but is actually an indication of the problem they don't want to say. That's a bit like racism - don't say it but it's a problem.
And it does come out in real votes and policies, as people vote those feelings and make exucses why, not even understanding why they're doing it.
Just as the spouse might start working longer hours to avoid the tension from being at home not being physically intimate - and think they're just feeling more work ambition.
But this real problem isn't well suited to political discussion, where you judge the policies people put in words, and they don't put racism in words.
What might help is for people to get a better understanding of how racism works, whether their own or others'. The rational view can override the racist emotion.
That's partly how Obama got elected - people not letting any racist feeling change their vote on the issues - but many on the right now feel free to indulge the emotion.
And they're egged on in it by the media figures who know the game. YOU'RE not racist, those black leaders are the racists.
As I've said many times, there is some truth to some of these things; a reaction that's different to a black man walking down the street is a combination of both racism and a rational based fear that the facts are there's a higher chance of a problem. Sometimes, black people are racist. But what's missing is an appreciation of the part that is racism.
And with President Obama, racism encourages passionate, rushed, less than rational opposition to his policies. And that enhancmnent to opposition is what Carter said.
