Adolph Reed, Jr.: Racist
Adolph L. Reed, Jr. takes to the pages of the nation’s foremost newspaper to denounce Tim Scott as a token:
Mr. Scott will replace Senator Jim DeMint, who is leaving to run Heritage Foundation. He will be the first black senator from the South since Reconstruction; the first black Republican senator since 1979, when Edward W. Brooke of Massachusetts retired; and, indeed, only the seventh African-American ever to serve in the chamber.
But this “first black” rhetoric tends to interpret African-American political successes — including that of President Obama — as part of a morality play that dramatizes “how far we have come.” It obscures the fact that modern black Republicans have been more tokens than signs of progress.
. . . .
Mr. Scott’s background is also striking: raised by a poor single mother, he defeated, with Tea Party backing, two white men in a 2010 Republican primary: a son of Thurmond and a son of former Gov. Carroll A. Campbell Jr. But his politics, like those of the archconservative Supreme Court justice Clarence Thomas, are utterly at odds with the preferences of most black Americans. Mr. Scott has been staunchly anti-tax, anti-union and anti-abortion.
Even if the Republicans managed to distance themselves from the thinly veiled racism of the Tea Party adherents who have moved the party rightward, they wouldn’t do much better among black voters than they do now. I suspect that appointments like Mr. Scott’s are directed less at blacks — whom they know they aren’t going to win in any significant numbers — than at whites who are inclined to vote Republican but don’t want to have to think of themselves, or be thought of by others, as racist.
Crazy thought here: maybe Scott’s appointment was aimed at getting a good man for the job. Oh no wait, that can’t be right, Mr. Reed assures us, because he’s black. If he were white, he might have been picked for merit, but since he’s black, it has to have been racial politics behind the decision.
Who’s the racist again?
For Mr. Scott, the true test will come in 2014, when he will have to run to complete the final two years of Mr. DeMint’s term. (If Mr. Scott wins, he’d have to run again, in 2016, for a full six-year term.) As Mr. Obama has shown, the question is not whether whites are willing to vote for a black candidate, but whether black candidates can put together winning coalitions (no matter their racial makeup) and around what policies. I suspect black South Carolinians will not be drawn to Mr. Scott.
The trope of the black conservative has retained a man-bites-dog newsworthiness that is long past its shelf life. Clichés about fallen barriers are increasingly meaningless; symbols don’t make for coherent policies. Republicans will not gain significant black support unless they take policy positions that advance black interests. No number of Tim Scotts — or other cynical tokens — will change that.
Let me translate that for you. Tim Scott isn’t allowed to think the way he does because of the color of his skin. And you have to understand, there are “black interests” that are different from the interests of others. And if you don’t cater to those interests, then you aren’t a real black person and you will never win over black people.
Who’s the racist again?
I, for one, am sick of this kind of rhetoric, and disappointed (though certainly not surprised) to see such racism splashed across the pages of the nation’s pre-eminent journal.
Time to drag out something from a post from 2010:
Check out Larry Elder addressing the same issue to a skeptical black correspondent:
Do you know that inner-city parents want vouchers — the right to determine where their children go to school? Do you know most Democrats, including Barack Obama, oppose this? Republicans, for the most part, support vouchers. Where vouchers have been tried, kids appear to perform better, with higher parental satisfaction. You tell me, how many things are more important than a child’s education?
Do you know that 36 percent of babies aborted are black, while blacks make up 17 percent of live births? Do you know that polls show blacks are more pro-life than are whites? Yet the Democratic Party — to which over 90 percent of blacks belong — is the party of Roe v. Wade, requiring states to legalize abortion on demand. Do you know that Margaret Sanger, the founder of the organization that became Planned Parenthood, believed that poor blacks were inferior and that aborting their babies made our society better? Look it up.
Do you know that blacks stand to benefit more than whites through Social Security privatization, a position opposed by Obama but supported by McCain? Are you even familiar with the issue and what a powerful income-generating vehicle it would be for blacks? If not, take a look at the research done by the libertarian think tank Cato Institute and the conservative think tank Heritage Foundation.
Good, huh? He’s just getting warmed up.
You speak of policies that have “proven not to work.” What about the “war on poverty” that began in the ’60s, the policies that Obama and his party want to continue and expand? Do you know that today 70 percent of black children and over 50 percent of Hispanics are born outside of wedlock? The welfare state — which Democrats want to expand — has played a huge role in discouraging marriage and destabilizing families. . . . Compassion is not about making people dependent on government. Compassion is about encouraging personal responsibility, and getting people to understand that life is about making choices.
Read it all at the link.
Are there racist Republicans? Sure, just like there are racist Democrats.
But there are a lot of us who think our policies are actually best for black folks. And white folks, and brown folks, and all kinds of folks. Letting the market work isn’t just for white people. It benefits everybody.
I don’t accept the argument that black people in America have a separate set of issues that we have to cater to. They are Americans and we need to work to make the lives of all Americans better. If that happens, we should win elections.
And maybe black people will be allowed to think conservative thoughts without being called inauthentic tokens.
Nah. Who am I kidding?
Ding.Patterico (8b3905) — 12/20/2012 @ 7:51 am
So if selecting Tim Scott is racial symbolism then am I to assume voting for more and more welfare is the same?Rodney King's Spirit (951136) — 12/20/2012 @ 7:52 am
Reed’s concern is touching no, Jacobsen has a good retort,narciso (ee31f1) — 12/20/2012 @ 8:02 am
http://legalinsurrection.com/2012/12/i-would-never-be-so-insulting-as-to-accuse-the-ny-times-of-tokenism/narciso (ee31f1) — 12/20/2012 @ 8:03 am
Thank you for continued yeoman’s work on essential perspicuity. The preeminent H8ers are Liberals who’ve fantasized their moral superiority.gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 12/20/2012 @ 8:16 am
Republicans aren’t gonna win over black voters using their tired family values shtick
that doesn’t even work on white people anymorehappyfeet (ae4c7f) — 12/20/2012 @ 8:17 am
Larry Elder is an outstanding voice, and a gentleman, too.Elephant Stone (65d289) — 12/20/2012 @ 8:29 am
I wish he had a bigger platform on a national level. He considered running against Senator Barbara Botox here in California, but I think, same as Dennis Prager, he realizes if he were to run for Senate, opposition research would spend the entire campaign crafting radio & tv ads by using isolating snippets of his radio program out of context, particularly in the occasional instance where he raised his voice against a looney caller.
ESPN talking head Rob Parker (who is incidentally black) went on a crazy rant last week where he said that 2011 Heisman winner Robert Griffin III, the star rookie quarterback for the Washington Redskins, is not an authentic black person because he is rumored to be Republican and he has a white fiancee. ESPN has suspended him, however, the comments have been largely swept under the rug by the MFM.
These lefties have no concept of Martin Luther King’s “I have a dream” speech and the notion of judging someone by their merit and content of character, rather than by the color of their skin.Elephant Stone (65d289) — 12/20/2012 @ 8:34 am
Mr. Reed has a dream, in which black people will be judged by racial stereotypes rather than the content of their character. It’s a thing.daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/20/2012 @ 8:35 am
What is it about people named Adolph and racism?
Adolph Hitler => master race (Aryan) got humiliated by Jesse OwensRalph Gizzip (5ab3ea) — 12/20/2012 @ 8:37 am
Adolph Rupp => UK basketball coach refused to play blacks and got beat by 5 of them playing for UTEP.
Adolph Reed => Rep. Scott is a “token” yet the Democrat Party claims even fewer minorities in positions of power.
Well pikachu, your state is headed by that diverse team of ‘Betamax’ Brown, and what is the male version of what you call females, who don’t measurenarciso (ee31f1) — 12/20/2012 @ 8:41 am
to your standards, Gavin Newsom.
“The demographics race we’re losing badly,” said Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (S.C.). “We’re not generating enough angry white guys to stay in business for the long term.”Tillman (51d7aa) — 12/20/2012 @ 8:41 am
In the warped vision of the NYT, and Adolph Reed Jr, Tim Scott is a “traitor to his race”, which is about as Racist as it gets.askeptic (b8ab92) — 12/20/2012 @ 8:45 am
Tillman – We’ve seen that one before. Full quote and context please.daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/20/2012 @ 8:46 am
“What is it about people named Adolph and racism?”
Ralph Gizzip – Mr. Reed is a professor who specializes in race and politics. He needs to write stuff that justifies his job.daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/20/2012 @ 8:50 am
Graham, really has no grounds to talk, he’s been so much a dissapointment since he left the House, McCain’s Sancho Panza on interrogation, Libya, et al,narciso (ee31f1) — 12/20/2012 @ 8:52 am
Clearly, Democrats have not abandoned segregation.SPQR (046f7e) — 12/20/2012 @ 9:00 am
Adolph L. Reed, Jr. takes to the pages of the nation’s foremost newspaper
Surprise, surprise! The author of that piece is a (drum roll, please) liberal from the world of academia. The world of privilege, a gilded cage full of ivory towers, full of ever increasing tuition (far higher than the rate of inflation!) that students — and their parents — must pay out, full of the epitome of “limousine liberals.”
I often emphasize ideology because it seems — and this is very applicable to entities like the New York “we’re-not-biased-to-the-left” Times — that the nature of people’s biases is happily submerged by so many folks on the left, including Reed, in order to emphasize race or ethnicity. The only “race” that the left truly cares about is the race of liberalism.
That’s why I’m being only partly facetious when I theorize that if 90-plus percent of black America were centrist to conservative instead of leftwing, many liberals — both white and black (and other) — would lose their ardor for civil rights, affirmative action and diversity.Mark (94cc2f) — 12/20/2012 @ 9:04 am
a professor of political science at the University of Pennsylvania, specializing in race and American politics. He has taught at Yale, Northwestern and the New School for Social Research.
Has trouble keeping a job, doesn’t he.askeptic (b8ab92) — 12/20/2012 @ 9:10 am
12. Not to worry, by the end of 2014 we’ll be spending $1 Trillion on interest and commissions maintaining the Federal Debt, a dozen States will default on their pension obligations and 25% of current Cali cities will be unincorporated.
Morgan Stanley will have not been to big to fail along with 400 other US banks.
Old white folk dying in their feces won’t make the A section of the country’s remaining newspapers.gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 12/20/2012 @ 9:17 am
Graham, really has no grounds to talk,
There’s plenty of squish in that guy, based on things I’ve read about him. That’s even more evident when he makes a statement that is as clumsy and stereotypically leftwing as the one cited by Tillman.
Researchers have often pointed out various biological or social characteristics associated with what’s implied below (eg, people who like Broadway show tunes! People who have a lisp! People whose hair swirls a certain way! People who have a feature in a part of their brain that heterosexuals don’t have!). But they’ve never delved into the matter of the overwhelming percentage of GLBTers (surveys indicate as high as 70-plus percent) who are ideologically to the left. So is political orientation no less of a telling hint about a person’s sexual orientation as anything else?Mark (94cc2f) — 12/20/2012 @ 9:17 am
It seems that a black can never be A) Conservative, and B) Republican, without being called “unauthentic”. They consistently call Republicans the party of white people, but when they try to change that image, they are shot down again and again. All in all, I’m sick and tired of the race baiting B.S. always thrown out. We have a black president. STFU all you blacks who say you can’t succeed in this country, and get out there and do it right. And this black president doesn’t speak like a hoodlum or hip hop artist. He speaks like a “white person”, as you would snidely say about any other black conservative.JonInVa (627bcd) — 12/20/2012 @ 9:32 am
A follow up:
It appears Mr Reed is engaging in a little projection.Brian Epps (2f898a) — 12/20/2012 @ 9:57 am
How come the stereotype only works one way? I mean, if someone has every Republican stereotype rolled into one – he’s old, white, male, hopelessly heterosexual, rich beyond the dreams of the average American, and all with money he inherited and didn’t earn – how come he (Ted Kennedy, John Kerry, Jay Rockefeller, just to name three) is allowed to be on the left, when blacks, gays, and women are not allowed to be on the right?
Do lefties think we don’t notice that straight white male privilege (as defined by the actions of leftists, not their words) means that straight white men are allowed to pick any point on either side of the political spectrum to call their home, but leftists won’t allow others to do so, as if they think them somehow incapable of thinking for themselves?Dr. Weevil (44a7cb) — 12/20/2012 @ 10:09 am
Dr. Weevil – That’s different!daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/20/2012 @ 10:20 am
Dr. Weevil – That’s different!
White people are allowed to make their own decisions. They don’t need to be infantalized by the the left in the same way as minorities.daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/20/2012 @ 10:23 am
Your average conservative, old-white-guy, is not going to stand for the blather that passes for intellectual thought on the Left, and will tell the blatherer so.askeptic (b8ab92) — 12/20/2012 @ 10:39 am
Even if the Republicans managed to distance themselves from the thinly veiled racism of the Tea Party adherents who have moved the party rightward
Adolph will never let that happen. And he is a lying d-bag.JD (4cf319) — 12/20/2012 @ 10:41 am
Tillman remains as accurate as a Mayan calendar.Icy (122112) (4971a6) — 12/20/2012 @ 11:32 am
Racists.Icy (122112) (4971a6) — 12/20/2012 @ 11:33 am
Q: Which one is more “authentic,” the real black man OR the faux Cherokee woman?Icy (122112) (4971a6) — 12/20/2012 @ 11:37 am
If republicans had positions which encompassed those views I might see a point to arguing Scott isn’t a token, but we all republicans are a single issue party that believes anyone who isn’t a white male is inferior.
If those are the opposite of the views of most black Americans (polls indicate otherwise) then if Scott held views against those of Gov. Haley, he could be legitimately considered a token. At worst his views allow him to be considered an ‘affirmative action’ (in the best sense) appointment, someone who is qualified but gets preference on the basis of his race. Not the same as a token at all.
If, like the good professor, you see only the color if his skin and not the content of his character, then Scott is a poor fit for the republican party. If you ignore his skin color and look only at his character he seems to fit into the republican party (even the real one as opposed to the stereotype one which is defined by the “the thinly veiled racism of the Tea Party adherents who have moved the party rightward’), so his appointment seems in no way exceptional.max (131bc0) — 12/20/2012 @ 2:21 pm
So the “racists” in South Carolina elect a non-Anglo female who then appoints a non-anglo male who has already won election to a state office.
Excuse me but I don’t think that word means what you think it means…WarEagle82 (97b777) — 12/20/2012 @ 2:30 pm
Those Tea Partiers are so racist, they’d vote for a black guy who shares their values, just to prove they aren’t racists. Or something.
Back to Austria with you, Adolph.arik (f58171) — 12/20/2012 @ 2:44 pm
Last GOP mayor of Chicago? 1933. New Orleans 1891, Detroit 1957 etc etc. Decade after decade of poverty, crime, corruption and poor schools. It is ADOLPH REED who votes against his own interests.Dennis D (b481af) — 12/20/2012 @ 3:12 pm
What are the chances a Ma. black republican steps up and runs against the next camelot addict in the senate race for lurches seat?mg (31009b) — 12/20/2012 @ 3:35 pm
Meanwhile, you have Conyer, and rangel and this guy;
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/12/20/ethics-panel-says-new-york-rep-gregory-meeks-failed-to-report-loan/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+foxnews%2Fpolitics+%28Internal+-+Politics+-+Text%29narciso (ee31f1) — 12/20/2012 @ 3:45 pm
Are there any Black Republicans in MA?askeptic (b8ab92) — 12/20/2012 @ 4:12 pm
If so, they must be on the Endangered Species List.
I know one. No chance of him running. He is smart.mg (31009b) — 12/20/2012 @ 4:41 pm
“a gilded cage full of ivory towers”
A cage full of towers? My stars!Leviticus (17b7a5) — 12/20/2012 @ 5:01 pm
I think you misspelled one word. I fixed it for you above. Glad to help…
😀SmockPuppet, 10th Dan Snark Master and Gravitationally Distortive Object (8e2a3d) — 12/20/2012 @ 5:23 pm
A new black Republican senator in town? Huzzah! Barbara Walters thinks it’s about time.elissa (321c8b) — 12/20/2012 @ 5:47 pm
Don’t forget, Chicago Jeebus wasn’t considered black enough way back when Shrillary was all the rage.Gazzer (4c4ae2) — 12/20/2012 @ 6:10 pm
Score one for Juan Williams.
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/12/20/robert-griffin-iii-rob-parker-and-sad-truth-about-our-racial-politics/elissa (321c8b) — 12/20/2012 @ 6:57 pm
Stupid me! I was just looking at the content of their character and not the color of their skin when I chose the politicians I support. WHAT WAS I THINKING!!!WarEagle82 (97b777) — 12/20/2012 @ 9:14 pm
Elissa – excellent link. It is rare when Juan and I are on the same page.JD (eab2dc) — 12/20/2012 @ 9:18 pm
We would never see the excellent Juan Williams piece that Elissa linked in the pages of the NYT, whether op-Ed page or not. Yet the racist piece of this post is most welcome.
That speaks volumes.Dana (292dcf) — 12/20/2012 @ 9:25 pm
A Repub once said something racist:
ergo, all Republicans are racist.
Yuppers.kinlaw (2fb87c) — 12/21/2012 @ 12:50 pm
I disagree with our host’s statement, “Letting the market work isn’t just for white people. It benefits everybody.” Letting the market work benefits people who will work hard, and strive to achieve, irrespective or race; it doesn’t work so well for those, regardless of race, who believe that other people somehow owe them a living and would rather sit on their fat asses than work. Letting the market work benefits those who bear adversity with equanimity, and move forward in working to overcome hardships; letting the market work is of little benefit to those who suffer adversity with resignation and just plain give up.The realistic Dana (f68855) — 12/22/2012 @ 7:38 am
Dr Weevil asked:
It’s very simple: our friends on the left cannot allow blacks, homosexuals and women to think for themselves, or they will lose elections! Behind that, the simple fact is that they do not respect the intelligence of anyone other than white males enough to believe that they can think for themselves.The Republican, so he must be a racist, Dana (f68855) — 12/22/2012 @ 7:44 am
Some years back I taught at a large university in “flyover country”. Occasionally, black students came to me for support when they found themselves ostracized by people like Professor Reed for thinking “too independently” on matters of race and politics. Realize that Reed makes his living by stirring the pot. If racism magically disappeared, what would he do? Despite his bigotry and narrowness, Professor Reed should be pitied. In his own case, he should hope for mercy, not justice.Ged2 (4efb84) — 12/22/2012 @ 3:44 pm
51. “hope for mercy, not justice.”
Words to Live by. Merry Christmas.gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 12/23/2012 @ 10:10 am
Comment by The Republican, so he must be a racist, Dana (f68855) — 12/22/2012 @ 7:44 am
I mean, if someone has every Republican stereotype rolled into one – he’s old, white, male, hopelessly heterosexual, rich beyond the dreams of the average American, and all with money he inherited and didn’t earn – how come he (Ted Kennedy, John Kerry, Jay Rockefeller, just to name three) is allowed to be on the left, when blacks, gays, and women are not allowed to be on the right?
Because the left side, is supposed to be the right (good) side. You only have a problem when someone who should, by background, be on the good side, is on the bad side. Then, of course there must be something personally wrong with the person.
If anyone black could be on the other side, then it wouldn’t be so obvious they were on the right side.Sammty Finkelman (d22d64) — 12/24/2012 @ 7:10 am
47. Comment by Dana (292dcf) — 12/20/2012 @ 9:25 pm
We would never see the excellent Juan Williams piece that Elissa linked in the pages of the NYT, whether op-Ed page or not. Yet the racist piece of this post is most welcome.
That speaks volumes.
Many Op-eds can only appear in certain newspapers.
The Wall street Journal wouldn’t print this (rather stupid) Reed piece, of course.Sammty Finkelman (d22d64) — 12/24/2012 @ 7:12 am
the New York Daily news migght possibly have everything, but even so it wouldn’t print anything so meandering.Sammty Finkelman (d22d64) — 12/24/2012 @ 7:13 am