Day before yesterday I began a discussion of “An Amazing ‘Structural Inequality’ Argument by noting that
I’ve been writing this blog quite a while now, and one of the effects of that is that I’m rarely surprised any more by extreme or even bizarre arguments in favor of racial preferences, special treatment based on race, etc. But I’m about to share with you a justification of criminal behavior, and an official pass given to that behavior, based on an argument of “structural inequality” (as discussed at length here and here) that had even me gasping in disbelief.
Well, what shocked me then was as nothing compared to Paul Krugman’s column in today’s New York Times. According to Krugman, opponents of President Obama’s healthcare health insurance reform are “reacting less to what Mr. Obama is doing, or even to what they’ve heard about what he’s doing, than to who he is.”
Whaaaaat? Did he really say that? In the New York Times? Yes, believe it or not, he did. And wait; there’s more:
That is, the driving force behind the town hall mobs is probably the same cultural and racial anxiety that’s behind the “birther” movement, which denies Mr. Obama’s citizenship. Senator Dick Durbin has suggested that the birthers and the health care protesters are one and the same; we don’t know how many of the protesters are birthers, but it wouldn’t be surprising if it’s a substantial fraction.
And cynical political operators are exploiting that anxiety to further the economic interests of their backers.
Does this sound familiar? It should: it’s a strategy that has played a central role in American politics ever since Richard Nixon realized that he could advance Republican fortunes by appealing to the racial fears of working-class whites.
So, if us geezers are afraid of having to pay more for less care, of having our care rationed, of having needed procedures denied by federal bureaucrats (one I recently had, for example, cortisone injection for back pain, has been severely restricted in Britain), of inviting in more illegals to benefit from our involuntary largesse, we are now swastika-waving members of an angry racist mob?
And if you disagree with Krugman? Well then, you’re no doubt an anti-semite as well as a racist.
Finally, if, like me, you regard Krugman’s race-on-the-brain dementia as more than a little “fishy,” you can always report him to email hidden; JavaScript is required, the Obama office that has been created to monitor purposeful disinformation.
“And cynical political operators are exploiting that anxiety to further the economic interests of their backers.”
Jeez. Projection much? I would post this on NYT except I don’t want to go through their password firewalls.
I’m seeing this same line of logic playing out in just about every media outlet. (For example, Chris Matthews was asking a guest if Sarah Palin was the face of racism for the right). And worse, it is the same thing, writ small, with many individuals I rub elbows with on a daily basis (of course, I am in academia where this sort of illogic first showed its ugly face.
I thought exactly the same thing when reading the Krugman column. Now, don’t put me down as fans of the town hall hissy–fitters–despite whatever legitmate disagreements exist on the health care initiative, these folks do seem to have the whiff about them of the overly nasty or even the contrived. But the idea that this is all about race is laughable.