Is Obama “Uppity”?

One of the most dramatically ridiculous example of the “race cards” played several weeks ago — or, if you’re a Democrat, one of the most sensitive, perceptive, and erudite deconstructions and translations of evil, dirty, Republican racist code words — came from all-around expert on everything (just ask him), David Gergen, former advisor to everyone.

Gergen, with his uniquely high-powered ability to penetrate the surface of things, looked at the McCain ad “seeking to portray what it says is Obama’s smugness and false regal perception with a new comparison: to Moses” and discovered, hidden in code that only Southerners can really understand, racism:

[On ABC News This Week] longtime Washington hand David Gergen took umbrage with John McCain’s recent attack ads, charging that the Senator was using coded messaging to paint Barack Obama as “outside the mainstream” and “uppity.”

“There has been a very intentional effort to paint him as somebody outside the mainstream, other, ‘he’s not one of us,’” said Gergen, who has worked with White Houses, both Republican and Democrat, from Nixon to Clinton. “I think the McCain campaign has been scrupulous about not directly saying it, but it’s the subtext of this campaign. Everybody knows that. There are certain kinds of signals. As a native of the south, I can tell you, when you see this Charlton Heston ad, ‘The One,’ that’s code for, ‘he’s uppity, he ought to stay in his place.’ Everybody gets that who is from a southern background. We all understand that. When McCain comes out and starts talking about affirmative action, ‘I’m against quotas,’ we get what that’s about.”

As someone who grew up in much deeper South than Gergen (my Alabama easily trumps his North Carolina), I can recognize Gergen’s faux-erudite nonsense for what it is: the fragrant refuse that one cleans out of horse stalls. When McCain says he’s against “quotas,” I’m inclined to believe, contra Gergen, that he’s against quotas (although he’s no doubt voted for more of them than I would like).

Nonsense, however, knows no regional limitations, and so Gergen is not unique in hearing coded racism every time a Republican speaks, about anything. Thus David Shipler, referring in a Los Angeles Times OpEd last April to Obama’s revealing comments about bitter small town whites clinging to guns and God, also discerned accusations of uppityness behind the Republicans’ Obamessiah spoofs:

Whether by calculation or coincidence, Hillary Clinton and Republicans who have attacked Barack Obama for elitism have struck a chord in a long-standing symphony of racial codes. It is a rebuke that gets magnified by historic beliefs about what blacks are and what they have no right to be.

Clinton is no racist [JSR: but presumably “Republicans” are], and Obama has made some real missteps, including his remark last week that “bitter” small-town Americans facing economic hardship and government indifference “cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them.” Perhaps he was being more sociological than political, and more sympathetic than condescending. But when his opponents branded him an elitist and an outsider, his race made it easier to drive a wedge between him and the white, rural voters he has courted. As an African American, he was supposedly looking down from a place he didn’t belong and looking in from a distance he could not cross.

This could not happen as dramatically were it not for embedded racial attitudes. “Elitist” is another word for “arrogant,” which is another word for “uppity,” that old calumny applied to blacks who stood up for themselves.

So, for Republicans to criticize Obama as “elitist” is really accusing him of being “arrogant,” and that in turn is really nothing more than the old racist slur of calling him “uppity.” This view strikes me as so bizarre that I would say the nation’s media elite has race on the brain … if I thought it had a brain.

So, for the benefit of any race-befuddled liberals in the audience, I’ll attempt to go slow here. First, yes, “uppity” was a despicable racial slur, used in the South and elsewhere to keep blacks “in their place,” i.e., down. It was a double-standard attack on blacks for behavior that was perfectly normal, and expected, from whites, as Shipler recognizes:

Black professionals know the double standard. They are often labeled negatively for traits deemed positive in whites: A white is assertive, a black is aggressive; a white is resolute, a black is pushy; a white is candid, a black is abrasive; a white is independent, a black is not a team player….

Calling a black “uppity” thus was similar to, today, criticizing a woman as “aggressive” for behavior that would be commended as appealingly competitive from a man, as “shrill” or “bitchy” for an argumentative style that would be appreciated as vigorous from a man.

So, again, yes. “Uppity” is indeed a racial and racist slur. But “elitist” is not, and “arrogant” is not! To argue, as both Gergen and Shipler do, that no black can be criticized as arrogant or elitist — and by extension that no woman can ever be criticized as aggressive — is to insist on a new, politically correct double-standard every bit as restrictive as the old, racist one they properly reject. It is to say that blacks, because they were discriminated against in the past, cannot be treated as equals in the present, cannot be judged by the same standards we apply to “people like us.”

But then, the politically correct double standard is already quite familiar; it is the same offensive double standard, that is, that undergirds and justifies all racial preference policies today.

Say What? (7)

  1. Laura(southernxyl) August 30, 2008 at 11:30 pm | | Reply

    I always enjoy having Southernness explained to me, a native Mississippian.

    Can’t see where McCain has suggested that as a black man, Obama has a “place” and has stepped out of it.

  2. CORKY August 31, 2008 at 11:00 pm | | Reply

    Wow, I’ve been regularly reading Discriminations forever and I had no idea that you were from Alabama the Beautiful, the Heart of Dixie, Ooo, Sweet Home. No reason to be surprised, I guess (except maybe that I didn’t have too many Rosenbergs in my elementary/high school {yes, it was small enough for both to be in the same building}). I should have known, though, since you are highly intelligent and you seem quite handsome – just like me. If the phrase “War Eagle” makes you feel warm on the inside, I may ask you to be my new best friend.

    Anyhoozle, Gergen’s entire body of work is basically a mishmash of thinly-veiled double standards and hypocrisy. To be fair, you could probably say that about a lot of pundits on both sides these days. I’ve heard that Haaaaaavhaaaad grads communicate at a higher level of consciousness than we do (I believe they call it “nuance” when Mr. Obama “also communicates with his words that he speaks”) and they therefore have a highly-tuned sensitivity to “what the words-only-users really mean”.

    This is just one words-only-user’s opinion, but Mr. Obama speaks so much more eloquently than one might expect from someone, you know, like him (and he seems to practice good personal hygiene). Oops – I probably should’ve tried some fancy nuance in the last sentence. My White Southerner’s Super Secret Big Book of Bigotry Code Words suggests “articulate” and “clean”. Hee, hee….there’s no way those Haaaaaavhaaaad Democrats will be able to decode those.

  3. David Nieporent September 1, 2008 at 1:21 am | | Reply

    John, I assume you saw James Taranto’s column a few weeks ago on the Shipler piece?

    “In his view, pretty much any adjective is a few degrees of separation from a racial slur, and thus one should exercise extreme caution when modifying Barack Obama in a sentence.

    Example: ” ‘Elitist’ is another word for ‘arrogant,’ which is another word for ‘uppity,’ that old calumny applied to blacks who stood up for themselves.” And:”

  4. CaptDMO September 1, 2008 at 11:53 pm | | Reply

    After listening to the DNC speeches, all I heard was how

    historically important the election was because an “African American” (sic) and a woman

    were in the race. And of course there was all that accommodating going on.

    I call it “historical” because Marxists are mesmerizing the delusional self-entitled lemmings.

    I cannot abide. I can’t afford it.

    Feel free to disingenuously label me a voting bigot, racist, sexist (misogynist seems to be a popular new word SOME folks have recently learned from Sir John’s money raiser), it’s meaningless to me, and it helps me identify who I should further regard as challenged.

  5. Cobra September 5, 2008 at 11:14 pm | | Reply

    John writes:

    >>>”So, again, yes. “Uppity” is indeed a racial and racist slur. But “elitist” is not, and “arrogant” is not! To argue, as both Gergen and Shipler do, that no black can be criticized as arrogant or elitist — and by extension that no woman can ever be criticized as aggressive — is to insist on a new, politically correct double-standard every bit as restrictive as the old, racist one they properly reject. It is to say that blacks, because they were discriminated against in the past, cannot be treated as equals in the present, cannot be judged by the same standards we apply to “people like us.”

    Great thesis, John. You really seem to have the drop on Gergen…

    …that is until Gergen’s statement is validated right before our eyes:

    >>>”Democrats are calling on a Republican congressman from Georgia to apologize for referring to Barack and Michelle Obama as “uppity,” but the lawmaker stood by his comments and said he meant no offense.

    Speaking to reporters Thursday, Rep. Lynn Westmoreland of Grantville, Ga., described the Obamas as members of an “elitist-class … that thinks that they’re uppity,” according to The Hill, a Capitol Hill newspaper.

    Asked to clarify whether he intended to use the word, he said, “Yeah, uppity.”

    In a statement Friday, Westmoreland — a white man who was born in 1950 and raised in the segregated South — said he didn’t know that “uppity” was commonly used as a derogatory term for blacks seeking equal treatment. Instead, he referred to the dictionary definition of the word as describing someone who is haughty, snobbish or has inflated self-esteem.

    “He stands by that characterization and thinks it accurately describes the Democratic nominee,” said Brian Robinson, Westmoreland’s spokesman. “He was unaware that the word had racial overtones and he had absolutely no intention of using a word that can be considered offensive.”

    http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5g8eMUng8c9fRJPvGHYOeolqH-uzwD930N50G0

    John, where do you stand on the Rep. Westmoreland’s (R-Georgia) “uppity-gate?”

    –Cobra

  6. David Nieporent September 8, 2008 at 4:43 am | | Reply

    Westmoreland is the same idiot who wanted the Ten Commandments posted but couldn’t identify more than three of them. I don’t think he speaks for anybody.

  7. Cobra September 11, 2008 at 9:26 pm | | Reply

    David,

    Westmoreland apparently speaks for his constituents, because he keeps getting re-elected in his district.

    –Cobra

Leave a Reply to Cobra Click here to cancel reply.