Pat Buchanan, a former Republican presidential candidate currently working as a talking head for MSNBC teevee, is an intelligent and knowledgeable white man. He knows history, he knows how the political and governmental systems of America work. He brings insights to teevee news programs. In addition to all these strengths, Buchanan seems to be a likeable guy with a sense of humor.
I say these things in recognition of Pat Buchanan's many abilities. I do not regard him as a wingnut extraordinaire. Naturally, I can't possibly agree with many of Buchanan's viewpoints because to me they can't stand up under scrutiny, but that doesn't mean that I simply dismiss what old Pat has to say.
Having said all that…
Pat Buchanan's racial views, his understandings, his comprehension of racial divides in America are those of a white exceptionalism authoritarian.
Buchanan's take on Obama's speech addressing race….
Barack says we need to have a conversation about race in America.
Fair enough. But this time, it has to be a two-way conversation. White America needs to be heard from, not just lectured to.
This time, the Silent Majority needs to have its convictions, grievances and demands heard. And among them are these:
First, America has been the best country on earth for black folks. It was here that 600,000 black people, brought from Africa in slave ships, grew into a community of 40 million, were introduced to Christian salvation, and reached the greatest levels of freedom and prosperity blacks have ever known.
Wright ought to go down on his knees and thank God he is an American.
My late father had a dash of white exceptionalism sprinkled over his thinking that was similar to Pat's here. My dad used to say similar things about those slave days in America. He used to tell us boys that many slaves were treated very well, taken care of quite nicely by their beneficent owners. Suggestions that slaves in America "had it good" and that whites had somehow done blacks a favor by enslaving them were suggestions I found silly and a bit dishonest. I always thought that the concept that people owned by other people "had it good," was quite a stretch. It simply never rang true.
White authoritarian thinking, the kind Pat Buchanan is afflicted with, demands that white America must be heard from in any discussion about race. The presumption is that white Americans have been silenced, muted, prevented from speaking out up until now. The presumption is twisted up so badly until it comes out, as it did with Buchanan, in a "blacks have refused to be grateful, they refuse to rightly appreciate, what all the good whiteys have done for them."
This is what Buchanan means when he says, "white America must be heard from", if our country is to have a discussion about race. Pat is talking the talk of the old-time white slave owner. I'm sure white slave owners repeatedly tried to remind their captives how much better they had it being held captive in America. I'm certain white slave owners sought to coerce compliance from their captives by repeatedly telling them they just didn't appreciate all that their white owners had done for them. Whites, then as now, somehow, actually talked themselves into believing that enslavement in chains, the trading of humans like cattle, and the mistreatment of blacks for hundreds of years……is just not appreciated enough by blacks.
The shorter, yet more recognizable version of all this is, "blacks still don't know their place". According to Buchanan, and he isn't the Lone Ranger of Race, what whites need to hear is more respect from blacks. More appreciation for all that whites have done to help them out. This is the arrogance and authoritarianism of America's former slave owners. Sadly, it is still the operating principle of white authoritarian thinking, white exceptionalism, today.
Buchanan goes on…..
Second, no people anywhere has done more to lift up blacks than white Americans. Untold trillions have been spent since the ’60s on welfare, food stamps, rent supplements, Section 8 housing, Pell grants, student loans, legal services, Medicaid, Earned Income Tax Credits and poverty programs designed to bring the African-American community into the mainstream.
Governments, businesses and colleges have engaged in discrimination against white folks — with affirmative action, contract set-asides and quotas — to advance black applicants over white applicants.
We hear the grievances. Where is the gratitude? Link
Blacks do not sufficiently appreciate what majority white powerbrokers, from the goodness of their hearts, have done for black people. According to Buchanan, it's whites who have voluntarily suffered and sacrificed themselves all these years since the 1960's to help blacks out…..it's the white majority who has been discriminated against. Just look at all that the white majority has done for all you blacks……and you blacks have not shown us virtuous and charitable self-sacrificers enough gratitude. Buchanan simply wants some praising of the good whiteys from the ungrateful blacks. That's all he's asking.
Buchanan really believes his own racist horse pucky. I think he can't help himself because he is such a hopeless white authoritarian. His thinking about the ingratitude of blacks resembles the mean-spirited authoritarian husband, home after a tough day at work, losing his temper, kicking some stuff around, raising his voice, frightening his wife. If she says one word in an attempt to attenuate a volatile situation, the authoritarian husband will launch off into an even louder diatribe, similar to Buchanan's, rehearsing all that HE has done for his wife, how hard HE works, what HE has made possible for his wife, etc. 'Look at everything I've done for you and all I hear is bitching, why don't you appreciate and thank me for all that I've done for you?'
Blaming black descendants of black slave victims because they aren't sufficiently grateful to a white race who originally victimized them goes beyond audacious.
Continuing with my authoritarian husband comparison…..the husband comes home a bit more worked up than normal, breaks up some stuff in the kitchen which results in physical injury to his wife. The husband blames the wife for getting in the way or "making" him lose his temper so badly. The following day the authoritarian husband brings his wife a bouquet of flowers. If the wife, just as with Buchanan's blacks, doesn't show sufficient appreciation for the flowers, then she is an ungrateful bitch who never is thankful for anything that the husband has ever done for her.
Pat Buchanan and his ilk have little interest in having a national discussion about race. In the same way that an authoritarian husband doesn't want to have a discussion about marriage relations. What Buchanan demands of blacks, just as white supremacists demanded in the slave owner days, is that blacks know their place and are properly appreciative for all that the white majority has done to help them. That's not an attempt at a discussion……that's an attempt to stop a discussion.
{ 22 comments… read them below or add one }
One of the best books I have read in the last few years was "Death of the West" by Buchanan. Among other things, it lays in out great detail about how we arent being repopulated at fast enough rate…except for Mexican imigrants.
I've read his statements a few times and can't see where he says slaves 'had it good.' He says they have it good now, which is a little scary in its own right, but he doesn't say slaves had it good.
Rev,
White Europeans did not keep slaves in order to raise up the black race—so gratitude to white people who owned slaves and their descendents is not in the offing —white people are not due outward appreciation–but, remember, grouping all white people into this giant category is wrong from several standpoints:
1) "white" colored people were not all here back then; many immigrated after slavery ended
2) white people usually have the advantage of knowing their roots—not all white people are the same: Irish, English, Hungarian, and so on—many cultures, one color does not make them all the same
3) even if a white's roots extend prior to slavery, they did not all own slaves, and many were slaves themselves in a different form: endentured servants, poor beholden to abusive bosses, and women who have been perpetual slaves since man stood upright and decided her hair made a nice handle for dragging her around
4) and furthermore, as far as possible reparation money? I want some for having had ancestors who were slaves in Egypt about 5,000 years ago, AND, I want reparations for having been born a woman who is expected to behave according to patriarchal principles, and yet, is expected to be satisfied with 77 cents for every dollar a man makes for the same work—is this not slavery in a sense?
And, furthermore,if any race is due reparations, or gratitude or a great big sorry, it is the Native Americans without a doubt, and still the poorest people on earth to this day (except for those true Natives involved with legalized gambling)— native Americans still poorer than even the Haitians.
My point being—we all have grudges, some more entitled than others. So we all should just quit our whining and realize that we're on this ship called earth together and we should just "love one another".
Pat may not have said the specific words….but it's implied right here…..
"First, America has been the best country on earth for black folks. It was here that 600,000 black people, brought from Africa in slave ships, grew into a community of 40 million, were introduced to Christian salvation, and reached the greatest levels of freedom and prosperity blacks have ever known.
Wright ought to go down on his knees and thank God he is an American."
He's saying that blacks should be overjoyed that they went through the slave period…..it was a good thing for them. Otherwise they would have never become Americans.
I do give credit where credit is due. Buchanan's "have it good now" remarks are scary and I commend you larry for stating so.
"Wright ought to go down on his knees and thank God he is an American."
Yeah, he should. We all should. we shoudl all be appreciative we were born here and not in some third world country somewhere.
I think 'third world' is now one of the forbidden phrases on these sorts of blogs, Ben.
For Pat Buchanan to suggest blacks owe gratitude to whites for bringing blacks to america in slave ships is totally nuts. The fact that blacks today are better off in america than in africa is no justification for slavery and oppression. Someone should slap Buchanan upside the head for even implying such a thing.
But the slave days are long behind us, and those like Rev. Jeremiah Wright don't seem to realize it. Those of his stripe, and there are many of them, continually portray blacks as victims. Blacks are not victims in america today. Those like Wright, who see blacks as helpless victims of white oppression today, who want to blame whitey for all the problems in black society, are contributing more to the idea of what you call 'white exceptionalism' than even Buchanan is, because they falsely assume blacks are powerless in this free society. That comes perilously close to implying that blacks are inferior. That's the bigotry of soft expectations that must be smashed to pieces forever. The racist chains of the past can't ever be removed if you keep holding onto them.
As for Buchanan's idea that the white voice should be heard in a discussion of race, isn't that also what Obama said in his race speech that you thought was the greatest speech ever in the history of mankind ? I'm surprised you are disavowing Obama so quickly. Besides, if the white voice isn't heard in a discussion of race, if it's just black people talking to black people, then it's really not a discussion among races, is it ? Then it's just preaching to the choir, which nullifies the entire notion.
Obama pretty much said that viewpoints like the Reverend's has gone the way of the whip and chain.
My criticism of Buchanan was over what it was whites had to tell blacks in the discussion, not that whites shoudn't be part of the discussion. Buchanan, speaking for whites, said what whites have to say to blacks is that blacks don't show enough gratitude to whites.
That's a sucker punch to all blacks, that's not discussing anything.
You do acknowledge Buchanan should be slapped upside the head…. that's common ground we both share.
I will grant you that the Wright's out there in the black community, and Obama granted this too, are hurting any chances of real progress in race relations by spouting hate and victimhood, the same spoutings, by the way, that can be heard coming out of white preachers mouths. So I don't disagree with you here either.
But here….
"Those of his stripe, and there are many of them, continually portray blacks as victims. Blacks are not victims in america today."
To say that blacks are not victims in America today is like saying that the American Indians are not victims in America today. I'm not sure you're appreciating this thing about black/white in a collective sense. Blacks, as a collective racial segment of America who were originally enslaved inside America for over a hundred years are still today, collectively, victims in America. Blacks, as a collective racial segment of America who were originally enslaved inside America for over a hundred years and not given equal civil rights for another hundred years, are still today, victims in America.
So when Rev. Wright or I say that blacks are victims in America today, it is because of the historical, collective nature of the black race in America.
I think the same way of the American Indians. They are victims.
No one is suggesting that blacks have no responsibility or accountability personally because their race historically and collectively has been victimized. At the same time, I don't believe it's credible to think blacks and whites are on an equal footing in society today. While personal choices are extremely important, so are historical perspectives.
Blacks are definitely victims in America today. They are victims of sociopathic, self-destructive behaviors. Black men sell their women and children into slavery today by the millions, giving them over to the productive members of American society to provide them with food, clothing and shelter, generation, after generation, after generation.
If racism (The Great Excuse) were to magically disappear tonight while we slept, and we awoke to a nation devoid of anything even resembling racism, the only change people would notice would be the disappearance of folks like Al, and Jesse, and Louis and Jeremiah. The same sociopathic, self-destructive behaviors would continue with no end in sight, albeit with no more excuses.
Rev,
You say blacks are victims in america today, but you didn't bother to mention HOW. I think we need some examples. I also don't hold with that 'black collective' concept of yours. Blacks aren't a collective. They are individual persons, like everyone else.
And speaking of examples, I need some here too:
"…by spouting hate and victimhood, the same spoutings, by the way, that can be heard coming out of white preachers mouths."
I am aware of exactly ZERO white racist preachers in america today, or any preaching white victimhood. I'm not saying there might not be a few somewhere, but I don't know of any, I haven't heard any preach, and most importantly, if I had, I sure wouldn't have kept attending their church for 20 years. Know what I mean ?
Balladeer: Do you simply hate the Sharpton's, Jackson's etc? Or is it all blacks? And if you only despise the Jeremiah Wrights out there, is it because they say stuff you don't want to hear? Is that it?
Or is it that when the Jacksons and the Wrights out there speak up, like Buchanan says, you want them to be more appreciative of whites?
King: How? How?
Collectively, blacks are still victims of being undereducated. You would say that's the blacks fault. You approach it from an individual responsibility point of view. One that I don't fully disagree with. At the same time, historically and as a collective group, blacks have been victimized for so long, that being undereducated is one of the cumulative effects.
I said "spouting hate and victimhood". Far right evangelical preachers spout hate for secularists, undocumenteds, Muslims, other Christian denominations,…and they spout victimhood every opportunity they have. War on Christmas malarkey. Victims of no prayer in public school. Victims of the meanie secularists who don't want the state to fund their nonsense. Etc.
I'm not clear on why it is that you don't see this white preacher, black preacher stuff. Conservative Christianity, and specifically extremist right, pie-in-the-sky, evangelical Christianity have been spouting and advocating for intolerance, hate and division in America for a good long time.
You are upset about a black separatist who mouths off using wild-eyed hyperbole…..but you don't seem to be able to apply the same criticisms towards white separatists who mouth off using wild-eyed hyperbole.
The Reverend Says:
"Balladeer: Do you simply hate the Sharpton's, Jackson's etc? Or is it all blacks? And if you only despise the Jeremiah Wrights out there, is it because they say stuff you don't want to hear? Is that it?
Or is it that when the Jacksons and the Wrights out there speak up, like Buchanan says, you want them to be more appreciative of whites?"
Reverend, don't tiptoe around the real issues with meaningless queries, and don't try to put words in my mouth. As anyone can see, I am quite capable of expressing my own opinions. If there is a point you would like clarified, just ask, don't rant. If you can present a credible rebuttal to what I've written, we can have a meaningful debate.
It's easy to ignore the hard fact of self-destructive behaviors being at the root of the black experience. It takes tremendous courage and fortitude to admit the problem lies within, and not without. The Sharptons and the Wrights of America lack this courage and fortitude, and it appears that you do, as well. The Reverend Jesse Lee Peterson has this courage and fortitude, and speaks out every chance he gets. He's not as popular among blacks as the race-hustlers, because he doesn't say what they want to hear. I believe the truth is hard, very hard, against the wicked.
Rev,
Your sole example of black victimhood was that blacks are undereducated, but even you disagreed with your own premise. Thanks for proving my point. The education level of inner city blacks is not due to the oppression of majority whites.
So you did say 'spouting hate and victimhood' about the white preachers, which I read as 'racism', since that was the subject we were discussing.
I must be going to all the wrong Christian churches, because I've never heard one preacher ever spout hate for Muslims, illegal immigrants, other christians, or anyone else. The only exception I have is the denunciation of gay marriage. That I have heard a couple times.
Trying to draw a moral equivalence between being in favor of prayer in schools and what Rev. Jeremiah Wright said from the pulpit is an exercise in dishonesty.
Both of you:
There is this thing called, "historical grief" or "Inherited Historical Post Traumatic Stress Disorder", but mostly, it has been served up by Native American descendents who have made it into the world of academia and have done empirical research backed up by great institutions—but any group that has suffered unfairly can claim it (Inherited Historical PTSD), because, certainly, oral narratives obsessing on the hurts that have accumulated are passed from generation to generation around kitchen tables and trickles into the church, as well. We are taught to never forget, but some are taught also to forgive, and start looking at people with a clean eye, as well.
Down at the nitty, gritty level, it is families that make the difference in a child's life—but much of the skills needed to be successful must become part of the family—such as knowing how to study, pay attention, listen, not let inherited anger get in the way of keeping open, letting go of grudges, starting over. We can observe this evolutionary process within the black families and Native American families.
The question here: Why do some families succeed against all odds? My guess is that these families, whether led by a single mom, or grandparents who have stepped in, or by necessity have had to take over, or through great educators with patience and fortitude and a deep compassion and intuitive sense, realize that others make it because they never give in to anger and hatred, whether espoused by the relevant cultural narrative, or by society's ugliness towards them.
It takes time. We are witnessing this as it happens. Be patient.
Balladeer:
"It takes tremendous courage and fortitude to admit the problem lies within, and not without."
You were doing okay with this sentence until you added, "and not without".
I stated and I will state again…..No one is making excusing for the lack of personal responsibility. No one is simply discarding the obligation of personal responsibility. I'm certainly not….I know Obama is not.
However, you, by saying "not without", are suggesting that the problems of blacks have nothing to do with the 200+ years of historical enslavement and refusal to grant civil rights blacks have experienced in the U.S.
From what I can gather here, you kind of agree with Buchanan.
"The Sharptons and the Wrights of America lack this courage and fortitude, and it appears that you do, as well."
You may not like the style or the words used by these men, just as you may not like The Reverend's style or wording. Buchanan certainly doesn't. However to suggest that means they, or I, lack courage and fortitude, to confront problems head on…is simply a silly right wing talking point withour merit.
Obama spoke courageously and with guts to both whites and blacks, stripping away the smartass white and black racism excuses always used to justify hate and a continuation of the problem of intolerance. And folks like you and King rejected Obama's speech as not good enough….as not going far enough.
Talking out of both sides of your mouth.
Obama sacrificed his grandmother in order to make the stretch that Wrights comments and those of his grandmother had parity. Instead of coming clean and rejecting outright the blatant racism of a man he admired and supported financially for twenty years, he wimped-out. And you call that courage? You don't have a clue as to what the word means. I call it pandering. Look it up in the dictionary, if you own one.
200+ years of slavery is a poor excuse for the failures of blacks in 2008. In 1950, 70% of black children weren't illegitimate.
Blacks who are successful today are those who have done what is necessary to conform to the standards required, just as I and every other successful individual has had to conform. But these black folks are accused by you and other race-hustlers as "not being black enough" or "uncle toms" or "house slaves". That is where the "not without" comes from. When blacks do everything they can, from a personal standpoint, to get along and conform, they are successful. The 200+ years and history of inequality arguement is a sorry excuse for sociopathic behaviors.
You mention Buchanan often. I couldn't care less about what Buchanan thinks.
I notice you completely ignored my reference to the Reverend Jesse Lee Peterson. Was that purely a matter of convenience?
I would really like to see what you have to say about a black man who promotes individual responsibility from the pulpit, and not hate, excuses and propaganda.
I cannot call Obama's race speech courageous, because the purpose of it was to save his own butt, politically speaking. What would have been courageous was if Obama spoke out against that hate-spewing pastor of his while he was attending that church, which is something Obama apparently never did. He only denounced the man when, again, his political butt was on the line. You and I must have very different definitions of courage, Rev. Yours equates courage with political utility.
I do not harbor any animosity, nor do I desire to call anyone an Uncle Tom for stating that blacks should lead responsible lives.
Balladeer, I'll always fight for your right to express yourself….but I don't think we agree on this….
"200+ years of slavery is a poor excuse for the failures of blacks in 2008. In 1950, 70% of black children weren't illegitimate.
Blacks who are successful today are those who have done what is necessary to conform to the standards required, just as I and every other successful individual has had to conform. But these black folks are accused by you and other race-hustlers as "not being black enough" or "uncle toms" or "house slaves". That is where the "not without" comes from."
What I'm saying is that it's BOTH. Personal responsibility is vital….plus….the scars of a less than stellar history of blacks in America haven't been overcome. I take it that you don't agree.
I do agree with you on the personal responsibility stuff….but your inclusion of the 70% number of black births to single mothers…by choosing to use the word "illegimate" to describe these children….I don't find to be honest or helpful.
Is the 70% number really that much worse than the 50% white number?
I'm not familiar with Peterson. If he's trying to change the way young black men and women regard personal responsibility and accountability…..how could I be against it? Don't white preachers do the same? I'm not against that either.
You say…
"Instead of coming clean and rejecting outright the blatant racism of a man he admired and supported financially for twenty years, he wimped-out."
I didn't take Wright's comments as blatant racism. Obama must not have either. Though Obama did denounce the more volatile HIV and God damn America comments.
It just seems like those who are still worked up about Wright/Obama are being unreasonable. Would you patently reject a family member if they said whacky stuff? I'm not talking about rejecting the stuff said, which Obama did, but the person, themselves.
Finally….I can't relate to your use of "successful". Success is determined many ways. I've met many financially successful blacks. I don't equate success with financial standing necessarily. Maybe that's not what you're saying.
What more could the Manchurian have said in the speech that would have appeased Whitey?
It was a great speech but it looks like Wright's inflammatory statements have more legs.
So it would be a choice of all blacks to have been left in Africa ? Check out Africa, and check out the living conditions, disease ,etc. that is rampant. Welfare, and jobs aren't past out there like here. You all should be getting on you hands, and knees and thank "Whitey" for taking you out of that hell hole..White folk's decendants from long ago had to pay with pain to get 'Whitey" to where they are now. So you lazy asses need to stop whining…