I Can’t Stop Condescending! Help Me!
by KTKJanuary 31st, 2007
I had some followup thoughts to Kevin’s post below.
you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy
I think there’s something interesting about this. I think the connotations of the word “articulate”, in this context, have changed somewhat over the years, but not in a way that makes it any less stupid. And the condescension that it used to convey has certainly not diminished, although it has evolved somewhat.
It used to be that people would compliment smart blacks for being “articulate” because they were surprised at it. Gradually they realized that was insulting, and gradually their surprise wore off (a bit). I think that usage of the term has faded. But the word keeps surfacing.
I think today bonehead whites describe articulate black people as “articulate” not because they hadn’t imagined they could be, but because there’s nothing else they notice about them. I mean, one reason people keep calling Obama articulate is that he’s got a lot to say, and he’s good at saying it. But they always notice the second part, without ever noticing the first part. It’s as if he gets judged on style points alone - as if his words had no actual content. (Maybe clueless whites regard black speech as some sort of exotic art form, like opera. Maybe Obama needs a little scrolling screen across his forehead to put his words into supertitle translation that white people could understand.)
Of course, Obama is articulate - extremely so, by anyone’s standards. But “articulate” and “unusually articulate even in a profession that values oratory” are not the same thing, and the latter is not what is implied by the former, especially when used by old-school whites about uppity blacks. In the thread on Kevin’s original post, Ted says: “I think it’s pretty obvious he meant . . . the first politically viable black candidate for President who also presents very well on TV”, and suggests Biden is just a victim of the sound-bite gotcha. But I don’t think it’s as simple as that.
Biden’s comment was stupidly condescending throughout. “Articulate”? Maybe. But what are we to make of “bright and clean and a nice-looking guy”? “Bright”? That’s a clever third-grader. “Clean“? He’s a United States Senator, you dumb motherfucker! Did you expect him to be dirty?! “Nice-looking”? That’s like “bright”, but weirder. There are two problems here. First, just like “articulate”, these remarks are superficial and condescending; they praise Obama for things that are peripheral to his political career, and would be non-issues in any white person in his position. (Not all Senators are all these things, it’s true; some are none of them. But none of them, or all of them together, is remarkable in a Senator, and nobody would remark on them in a white Senator. JFK was all of that in abundance, and while many people commented on his good looks, nobody ever dismissively summed him up as “bright and clean”.) What matters about Obama are his policies, and what he is able to accomplish. Being smart, articulate, and even good-looking are tools that will help him on his way, but they are only that - they are not the policies themselves. Biden comments on the externals, and in condescendingly diminutive terms (”bright”, not “smart”; “clean”, not “sharp-dressed”; “nice-looking”, not “good-looking”). But second, and more importantly, he chooses - four times in a row - terms that carry racial baggage. Of these, “articulate” and “clean” are the worst: they directly evoke racist stereotypes that, I’m sure, Biden doesn’t hold, but that somehow don’t seem to be far from his mind in evaluating blacks. “Bright” and “nice-looking” again are terms that soothe white anxieties, not that truly express admiration of a grown man in one of the most responsible positions the world can offer. Add to these “mainstream” and you get the perfect picture of white framing of an acceptable black person: not demanding; not asking to do anything, you know, out of the whitestream; meeting low expectations and content with that. Not having substance or content, not having ideas fit to be mentioned, let alone taken seriously. But clean, upstanding . . . a credit to their race.
There’s a scene from a sitcom in which Julia Louise-Dreyfus tries to introduce a good-looking black male acquaintance to her friend Barbara (Wanda Sykes), but she can’t get either of their names out - she just keeps calling them both “Black”:
[Dreyfus:] Thank you, Mr. Black. . . . This is my handsome friend Harry. No! My black . . . Bar- . . . my black Bar- . . . black! . . . I can’t stop! Help me! . . .
[Sykes:] Girl, you had a black attack!
I think Biden had a black attack - or rather, a condescension attack triggered by blackness. He truly thought he was praising Obama, and offering a considered assessment of his political chances. But Biden can’t see anything more than “black man” when he sees Obama, so everything about Obama, and his political impact, comes out in coded superficialities that erase the real substance of the man. “African-American! Articulate! Bright! Clean! I can’t stop! Help me!”
Categories: Culture, General, Media, News & Current Events, Politics |
He truly thought he was praising Obama, and offering a considered assessment of his political chances.
In context, I’m not entirely sure I agree. I know a lot of it is in the presentation, but it sure looks like Biden is scoffing at Obama’s political chances, by saying that all the “good” things about him are superficial. Maybe I’m reading too much into this, but that certainly seems to be the context of Biden’s remarks.
In other words, I think you may be giving Biden more credit than he deserves in this case.
It seemed to me Biden was being whiney and suggesting that the deck is stacked against him. A reverse affirmative-action whine. “He’s black and he’s smart and he’s clean…how can I ever compete?”
Idiot.
KTK, I’m not sure how well you recall when Kennedy was running for for office, but I can assure you that many people dismissed him as being a young, well-spoken, good looking guy with precious few accomplishments for a presidential candidate. Perhaps you have heard about the Nixon/Kennedy debates and the fact that those polled who heard the first on the radio thought Nixon won while those who watched on TV thought Kennedy won.
I believe you have blogged about how style seems to trump substance in politics. But you criticize a six term senator running against a guy who has two years of political experience at the national level for being dismissive of his opponent’s achievements. Let’s put aside the fact that rival candidates don’t often dwell on the competition’s achievements. To the degree that it exists, is it more probable that Biden’s dismissiveness is because Obama is black or because Biden has 30 or so years more of national experience? I don’t know the answer, but I have a suspicion.
Also, as mentioned in the related earlier thread, when a politician is sitting at a table discussing his opponents in a race, do you really believe the term “mainstream” is some sort of code about being “whitestream”, or is it more likely the guy is talking about his opponent’s political positioning. Especially when his opponent is regarded as being mainstream by virtually the entire free world (hey, that’s fun. I see why you do it. I have to use hyperbole more often.)
Finally, I have just learned that “articulate” is a slur when used to describe blacks. Now you are saying “clean” and “bright” and “nice looking” are as well? I really need to compile a list. (Speaking of clean, I did come across one explanation that makes some sense. Instead of referring to the bathing habits of Obama, perhaps Biden was referring to the fact that he has no scandals or missteps – such as poorly chosen words – associated with him. So he is clean in a political image sense. I don’t know, it’s a very odd choice of words at best.)
Ted:
But you criticize a six term senator running against a guy who has two years of political experience at the national level for being dismissive of his opponent’s achievements.
No, I think you misread KTK. He’s not criticizing him for being dismissive, but for how he went about being dismissive. And if you’ll read carefully, you’ll notice that he’s giving Biden the benefit of the doubt here, saying that he doesn’t think Biden had racist intent, but rather that he just stumbled into exactly the worst way to put it. As I said above, I think he’s probably giving Biden too much credit.
And as to the racial overtones of such phrases as “articulate” and “clean” and so forth, it’s clear that we’re never going to agree. But I can’t help but try to explain anyway. It’s all about history and context. If you lived in a bubble (or, perhaps, were quite young) and were ignorant of the history of how those terms have been used condescendingly in talking about minorities (and, in particular, African-Americans), it probably would seem silly to suggest that such terms could have any nefarious overtones. Which is precisely why such terms were used that way in the past. Plausible deniability and all that.
That’s why that type of racism is so much more subversive: because it isn’t in your face. But the fact that it isn’t immediately apparent to many doesn’t mean it isn’t there. And to be fair, the history of such terms doesn’t mean that Biden meant them in the nefarious way (although I’m afraid I have my suspicions). The point here is that even if you give Biden the benefit of the doubt on intent, a Senator with “30 or so years of national experience” (as you seem fond of pointing out) ought to have a friggin clue and know better than to use those terms.
Bottom line, it’s not so much what Biden said, but how he chose to say it. If he had said, “Obama’s polished, but hasn’t really done anything,” nobody would be talking about the racial overtones. But he didn’t say it that way. Not even close.
The unfortunate thing about this is that the senator is very articulate and it is a compliment. The word is used in that so many politicians are so inarticluate. They drone on and say nothing. Barack Obama says so much without waste of words. His gift of being articulate as a person is a rare power. to listen to him is a treat. He can break things down and explain the most complicated issue so the average person understands it all.
It’s also unfortunate because he is so very intellegent and that, too, can be sometihng to be used to seem like something racist. I think many of his gifts and abilities, ect. can be used to seem like you are being racist.
But, those same words are meant as a compliment for a person who is so much of the descriptions.
Barack Obama is my senator and I support him for 08. I use the same in describing a person who seems so much more articulate or intellegent or thoughtful than the average person, average politician. Not as for a black guy… But, because he rises to those as a person much admired for himself.
From KTK’s post: “Of these, “articulate” and “clean” are the worst: they directly evoke racist stereotypes that, I’m sure, Biden doesn’t hold, but that somehow don’t seem to be far from his mind in evaluating blacks” followed by “But Biden can’t see anything more than “black man” when he sees Obama” OK, sure, I see your point. No implications of racism there.
To make sure I have this straight, if I use the term “articulate” I need to be aware of the historical significance of the word wrt racism. But KTK can write what I snipped above and we should all assume there is no intent to label Biden as even a bit racist. I can see I am just not up to speed on the whole topic of racism.
Finally, no Biden didn’t say “Obama’s polished, but hasn’t really done anything”. By making this statement, are you claiming that the reason Obama has received all the attention he has received is becasue he is polished (talk about being woefully ignorant of common knowledge), or are you just citing examples of things Biden did not say.
Vwcat, I agree with your comments. I like Obama very much as well. If more politicians were like him, I think the population at large would be more engaged in politics.
I think he is a bit inexperienced to be president, but I’m not ruling him out on those grounds - at least not yet. Waiting to see how he does in the next year.
Right on, right on, right on! Here are my views that I posted earlier at Daily Kos:
* [new] Joe Biden is a racist with more hair than brains! (3+ / 0-)
Recommended by:rgdurst, Sagittarius, soccergrandmom
Here’s what Aravosis at AmericaBlog had to say about this brouhaha:
Okay, what Biden was trying to say, I think, was that Obama is quite possibly the first serious black presidential candidate who doesn’t scare white people (or at least a good segment of white people). And I think that’s true. Jesse Jackson? Scary (yeah, a lot of you like him, a lot of us don’t). Alan Keyes? Insane. Al Sharpton? I find him funny, but he’s still fighting the Tawana Brawley image. What other serious black candidates have we had? So, yes, in that context, Obama is the first candidate that doesn’t routinely scare white people - and that’s part of the reason Republicans are trying to smear him as a scary madrassa-attending radical Muslim.
Here’s my response:
What Biden said, and meant, comma or no comma, was racism pure and simple. There’s no gravy that can make that white rice racism edible. It can’t be explained away, and no linguist, semanticist, or apologist can make it better. It is what it is.
As for the scariness of African-American men, that’s racist bullshit too. Guiliani married his cousin, serially cheated and humiliated his wives, promoted and enabled police brutality, but despite all that, he’s the GOP presidential front-runner. Newt divorced his wife while she was recovering from cancer surgery, refused to financially support her or their children, was another serial adulterer, was an ethics violator, but he was elected Speaker of the House and is constantly lauded as the architect of the “Contract with America.” McCain dumped his first wife so he could marry a rich woman and has explosive public temper tantrums, but he’s a MSM darling and still considered a GOP presidential front-runner. As far as I’m concerned, they’re the ones who are truly scary, indeed frightening in their ability to fool the (white) general public and appeal to the mainstream.
What’s my point? It should be obvious, that being “clean” is only a priority if the candidate is African-American. Racism, pure and simple.
Jesse Jackson has negotiated with countries around the world to secure the release of hostages. Both Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton have led countless voter registration drives in this country, which have exponentially increased the number of Democratic voters, many of whom would never consider voting for either Jackson or Sharpton mainly due to the ridicule Jesse and Al receive from the MSM.
No, Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton aren’t mainstream. Neither are Carol Moseley Braun or Julian Bond. Obviously, Shirley Chisholm and Barbara Jordan weren’t mainstream. Until these racist attitudes - some subtle, others quite overt - are changed, no African-American who looks distinctly Black, who cares about African-American issues, and who embraces his African as well as his American heritage will ever be considered mainstream.
Yes, Jesse can rhyme and Al can make us laugh, but when you get to the bare bones of their message, an sapient objective listener realizes that neither is extremist, far left wing, or on the fringe. They are two gentlemen who happen to believe that the Constitution should mean what it says and this country should be to the least of its citizens exactly what is it to the greatest, that is, an opportunity to live ones life freely, with liberty and justice for all, with the potential to discover all the wonderful empowering possibilities that life has to offer.
Here at Kos and other blogs, there is - on a regular basis - much scorn, contempt, and condescension heaped on Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton. The mainstream corporate media has made sure that most Americans know little about either Jesse or Al, except for “hymie town” and Tawana Brawley respectively. Now I’m seeing, with HDTV clarity, that white middle-class mainstream America is stuck in those time warps, preferring to do so, because to move on and accept the authenticity of their causes, the veracity of their platforms, the patriotism that underlies their political activism would be to accept their own inherent racism . I’m so saddened to realize that. As I’ve said before, but it bears repeating, I detest racist wolves cloaking themselves in progressive sheep’s clothing.
Ted
KTK’s point is that while Biden doesn;t see himself as racist, and would never doing anything overtly racist, he still sees African Americans ina condescending fashion that is racist at its core. So Biden doesn;t intend to be a racist, but he doesn’t have the self-awarness to realize that he is being condescending in a racist fashion.
I just encountered an examination of this comment which suggests that it might not be as bad as it seems; it looks like Biden may have been mis-quoted. Check out this article at The Economist, which contains a link to an audio clip of the actual comment:
http://www.economist.com/debate/democracyinamerica/2007/01/joe_biden_moron_racist_or_poor.cfm
Kevin:
There you go with that damn nuance again! Don’t you know by now that anything short of dropping an N-bomb (outside the context of a rap song) is automatically not racist?!?
Ted:
To make sure I have this straight, if I use the term “articulate” I need to be aware of the historical significance of the word wrt racism.
Frankly, if you’re using it in anything resembling the context in which Biden was using it, and if you’re in a position anything like Biden’s, then you absolutely do. It’s an unfortunate reality, living in a country with the tremendous racial baggage ours has. Words have connotations as much as they have meanings, and they can develop negative connotations which overshadow their original meanings (cf., “negro,” which is simply a technical term if divorced from its history and context).
Somebody who’s very young and/or very sheltered might be excused for ignorance of those connotations, but a several-term senator is (or, at least, ought to be) neither of those things.
By making this statement, are you claiming that the reason Obama has received all the attention he has received is becasue he is polished
OK, now that’s just idiotic, and frankly well beneath you. I wasn’t making the claim that Obama was “all polish and no substance” — that’s how I understood Biden’s comments. I was merely rephrasing his remarks in a way that would not have been the least bit racially offensive. The context in comment #4 is crystal-clear. “If he had said … nobody would be talking about the racial overtones” [emphasis added] People would certainly still be talking about the slight, just not through the lens of race.
I don’t know why it doesn’t seem to get through to you that how he said it is as important as what he said, but that’s absolutely at issue here.
Tgirsch, sorry, you have totally misunderstood my point about your polish statement. However, since I am no longer in the throes of an insomnia-induced trance, it just doesn’t seem important to me any more. I do wonder if it is safe to use the word “polished” to describe a black person. If you did so as a politician, I have no doubt you would catch flack because for some the word conjures up images of shoeshine boys and thus is considered derogatory. To which you could reply that the term “shoeshine boys” is derogatory, and on and on. All of which will continue to trivialize racism to the detriment of all concerned.
Kevin, your comment is excellent. Concise and clear and convincing. I will note the implication is KTK is able to glean an incredibly deep understanding of Biden’s inner psyche based on one transcribed sentence he spoke while eating lunch. It might be an interesting exercise to go back through KTK’s posts and pull out a single poorly worded sentence and use it to analyse his character.
KTK is able to glean an incredibly deep understanding of Biden’s inner psyche
You’re still missing the point. I don’t think anybody in the country who has commented on this thinks Biden is especially racist, in the sense of harboring overt racial hostility. And I never said anything about his psychology, deep or otherwise.
My remarks, and pretty much everyone else’s, are directed entirely to his words. He expressed himself in very awkward and loaded terms that cast racially-tinged aspersions on Obama in the guise of praising him. That’s a reprehensible means of expression, and just rank stupidity in someone in his position. And from that we can make a couple of observations about Biden that don’t require any psychological insights: he’s clueless about racial tensions (at least in some respects), and he defaults to superficial, condescending, and racially-loaded descriptions of black people when he’s not watching himself carefully (at least sometimes).
We’re entitled to wonder about his actual beliefs on the basis of what “accidentally” comes out of his mouth, and we’re entitled to wonder about his comprehension of the issue when he claims not to know that what does come out of his mouth has well-understood racial overtones. But again it has little to do with his psychology - he said what he said, it was dumb, and he claims not to understand that. Those are two good things to worry about that have nothing to do with whether he’s a closet Klanner.
KTK, I accept your last comment (even if it does not entirely jibe with what you wrote before). However, my previous comment was in response to Kevin’s comment, where he wrote:
“he still sees African Americans ina condescending fashion that is racist at its core. So Biden doesn;t intend to be a racist, but he doesn’t have the self-awarness to realize that he is being condescending in a racist fashion.”
This is typical “race card” pulling by blacks. Since when is the word “Articulate” an insult to anyone? If someone called me articulate, I would say thank you very much for the compliment. Everyone is a racist now, what a crock, get over it people, quit “looking” for hidden meanings behind the words of others. It is obvious that Biden and now Bush were not being condescending, it was a compliment, plain and simple, no more. Both Bush and Biden did not make the comments in a condescending way. Wow, first its the “N” word now its the “A” word, when will it end? If blacks want racism to stop, then stop using the “N” word and stop drawing the race card every chance you get…its getting old…
See my poem: “Obama, The Lemon Cake Boy, A Satire” on the “Obama and Substance” thread by Keith. The satire was posted on March 1, 2008. It ought to be great for a few laughs.