The Mind of the South

We were at a party last night and Adrian says "Look what I got: The Mind of the South," and say "Cool. Uh, what's that?" So he hands me the book and I flip immediately to page 53:

Such is the primary picture. But I must not leave the theme without calling your attention specifically to the stimulation of the tendency to violence... Nor must I leave it without pointing to two significant patterns which grew up in the closest association with this romanticism and hedonism and served it as channels of discharge.
The first of these is the Southern fondness for rhetoric. A gorgeous primitive art addressed to the autonomic system and not to the enchephalon, rhetoric is of course dear to the simple man everywhere...

Well, I read that and laughed and thought "What the hell is this?" and we all got a chuckle out of its ornate prose and "fondness for rhetoric."

I am no longer making fun of the book, though. I've been flipping through it and, while it is "primitive" in its approach to social sciences and says sweeping, generalizing things like "The Yankee" and "The Southerner" and "The Negro" all the time, W.J. Cash's book is truly interesting. Right now I'm reading p. 331 where he is listing a whole slew of incidents in which professors at various universities have been fired for saying things like "The North was generally in the right" or Booker T. Washington was a great man. Earlier, Cash goes into the whole idea of victimization in "The Southerner." I can only say that this foreshadows the current nativist trends in the Republican party, the militia movement and various right winger purveyors of hate. His writing is thus an ancestor to books I love like What's the Matter with Kansas?, Nixonland, and, obviously with Wendell Berry's stuff.

Cash's condemnation and deconstruction of lynching as a practice are great too. At one point he draws the obvious parallel that the KKK and the Nazi's are of a cloth: "In its essence the thing was an authentic folk movement--at least as fully such as the Nazi movement in Germany, to which it was not without kinship" (344). (Remember, this book appeared in 1941, so he doesn't need film reels of concentration camps to figure things out.) He goes on to relate the growth of the Klan in class terms: "Its body was made up of common whites, industrial and rural. But its blood, if I may continue the figure, came from the upper orders" (344). His point was, of course, that he saw through the upper class' self-interest. The KKK was being used in part to keep workers divided along racial lines.

Ok, I'm going to read now.

Thanks, Adrian. Much, much more interesting than I had thought.

ACORN: Register voters, follow the law, become a target

Crooks and Liars:

Just as surely as night follows day, violence is being directed at ACORN offices and officials in the wake of the flood of right-wing demagoguery about its vote-gathering efforts:

An ACORN community organizer received a death threat and the liberal activist group's Boston and Seattle offices were vandalized Thursday, reflecting mounting tensions over its role in registering 1.3 million mostly poor and minority Americans to vote next month.

Attorneys for the Association of Community Organizers for Reform Now were notifying the FBI and the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division of the incidents, said Brian Kettenring, a Florida-based spokesman for the group.

Republicans, including presidential candidate John McCain, have verbally attacked the group repeatedly in recent days, alleging a widespread vote-fraud scheme, although they've provided little proof. It was disclosed Thursday that the FBI is examining whether thousands of fraudulent voter-registration applications submitted by some ACORN workers were part of a systematic effort or isolated incidents.

Kettenring said that a senior ACORN staffer in Cleveland, after appearing on television this week, got an e-mail that said she "is going to have her life ended."

A female staffer in Providence, R.I., got a threatening call from someone who said words to the effect of "We know you get off work at 9," then uttered racial epithets, he said.

John McCain has played a leading role in whipping up this frenzy of hatred. In Wednesday's debate, he charged:

We need to know the full extent of Sen. Obama's relationship with ACORN, who is now on the verge of maybe perpetrating one of the greatest frauds in voter history in this country, maybe destroying the fabric of democracy.

This is consistent with the hateful language being spewed from the right by the likes of Lou Dobbs, who has taken to routinely characterizing ACORN as a "radical left-wing activist group" as well as "a Democratic Party adjunct".

In fact, the hysteria's being generated across a broad spectrum of the Right, from Outer Malkinite Wingnuttia to Inside Beltway Villagers, from McCain and Palin to the frothiest freepers.

And we can see what's coming, too: We're being set up for a running yammer from the right after Obama wins questioning his legitimacy because of a supposedly "tainted" vote. Conspiracy theories and talking points from the right will circulate, driving up the temperature and feeding the right-wing populist frenzy.

And they're not even waiting until Election Day to begin.

How to do things with words: repeat lies, encourage hatred and mistrust, wait.

Terrorist

In case you forgot what was going on:

The Good Fight and the Pedagogical Moment

Donna Brazile, who appears on our talk shows all too often repeating Washington Conventional Wisdom--you know, the WCW that we should invade Iraq, the sage opion that the smart people of Wall Street know what they're doing and should be trusted, the wisdom that trickle down economics works, you know that conventional wisdom--well, the real Donna broke through today, and she got to the heart of the matter.  She said that she sensed something deeply troubling in the Republican ranks, something truly wicked, something beyond the pale, something truly, deeply, madly racist.

Indeed, we have:

Sit down, boy.

Then there are the enlightened souls screaming, at the planned mention of Barack Hussein Obama (emphasis on Hussein), "terrorist," "kill him," and "traitor."

Update, and thanks to youtube, you can see these Republican supporters talking about Obama's "bloodline," his "muslim background," and say that he's a "one-man terror cell": (h/t digby)



Nevermind that Sarah Palin's husband was/is a member of a separatist/secessionist group.  (Though we should remember that abortion clinic bombers and militia members and the various Timothy McVeigh's of the world are never anti-American, they're anti-government.  I repeat: these killers are never anti-American, they're anti-government.)

So we have people like Sarah, people like John conducting, orchestrating events attended entirely or almost entirely by white people and, let's be honest, encouraging their crowds to jeer at the mention of the name Hussein.  This is not about policy or politics.  It's not even about personality, though some in the punditry might use such terminology to gloss over the situation.  This is about hate, this is about wanting to kill, imprison or humiliate someone because they have a different name, a different color skin.  Go ahead, say it--growl it, scream it: "Hussein."  This name, apparently, is supposed to make you mad.

While it is perhaps true that John and Sarah may not hear the remarks from the podium, they have by now heard of them.  They know this is happening.  We thus have what might be called "a teachable moment."  One of these prospective "leaders" of the United States could and should plan on interrupting their speech when they or one of their entourages hears the epithet.  They should interrupt their speech and show themselves to be above this and to signal to these crowds that its wrong, just plain wrong, plain un-Christian to act in such ways.

This won't happen.  As Digby says:

"This is the kind of thing that really makes me fear for Obama. They are already screaming "terrorist" at Palin's rallies and shouting "kill him." The whole "Obama is a muslim" thing is bizarre, but with his name and childhood spent partly in a Muslim country --- and the fact that he's black, which makes everyone flash on Louis Farrakhan --- makes the right wing lizard brain twitch uncontrollably. They will use this, I have no doubt. There is an entire wingnut industry devoted to stirring up tensions in the middle east and another on devoted to character assassination of Democrats. Obama brings them together in serendipitous loathing and paranoia. It's going to be ugly."

Ugly.

Or, as Josh Marshall quips:

"Shorter McCain Campaign: He's definitely black; probably Muslim; and maybe a terrorist."

So, Donna, thanks for the reminder.   Now do this on teevee!

Zirin does it again.

Thank you David Zirin.  It's rare that I post links almost entirely, but you say it all:

Zirin:

Let's start with an email I received this morning from Kap Fulton:

"Who are Justin, Josh, Lance, Ryan, Dan, Grady, Chase, and Evan?

A. Roll call for a second grade class in at a suburban Ohio elementary school
B. The most popular boys names in Denver, CO
C. Characters from the new 90210
D. Bud Selig's attempt at diversity: one Canadian."
If you answered D, take a bow. Yes, Justin Morneau, (the Canadian), Josh Hamilton, Lance Berkman, Ryan Braun, Dan Uggla, Grady Sizemore, Chase Utley, and Evan Longoria were the contestants in this year's Home Run Derby on the eve of the 2008 All Star Game, and it was quite the Caucasian ovation (although, as I've learned since posting this column, Grady Sizemore's father is African American). Granted, the big time rainbow coalition of home run boppers like David Ortiz, Alex Rodriguez, and Ryan Howard declined to participate, but it was still bizarre and even a touch disturbing to see a home run derby that looked a lot like a contest out of 1946, before Jackie Robinson integrated the game. The vibe wasn't helped when one of the announcers celebrated Josh Hamilton's record setting derby barrage, by exclaiming, "This is a bad night to be an atheist!" (Please may God have better things to do than watch - and intervene in - the Home Run Derby.)
Yet an all-white derby complete with hallelujahs and hosannas might be appropriate for All-Star festivities drenched in nostalgia for its host site Yankee Stadium. The 85-year-old ballpark is of course known as "the house that Ruth built," a testimony to the dominance of Babe Ruth in the 1920s, when the game was segregated and Ruth never had to face great Negro League pitchers like Satchel Paige or Smokey Joe Williams. In the All-Star game itself, the only African American to suit up was Milton Bradley, a player excoriated four years back for saying, "White people never want to see race-with anything. But there's race involved in baseball. That's why there's less than 9 percent African-American representation in the game."
The numbers back up Bradley's frustration.  In the 2008 Racial and Gender Report Card, Richard Lapchick, Nikki Bowey and Ray Mathew wrote,
"The game has the lowest percentage (8.2) of African-Americans in the two decades that we have published the Report Card. That number is less than half what it was in 1997 on the 50th anniversary of [Jackie] Robinson's debut with the Dodgers, when African-Americans made up 17 percent of the players, and less than the percentage of blacks in the general population of the U.S. (12.3 percent)."
Ironically this is occurring while baseball has gone global, with 29% of all Major Leaguers born in Latin America, with impact players from Asia making their mark as well. The number of white players has remained remarkably constant with the numbers at 58-60%. (86% of college baseball players are white.)
The debate about why the number of African American players has plummeted has been explored aplenty. The predominant argument is that baseball has an "image problem" in black America. It has no cultural cache and therefore young athletic black men gravitate toward basketball and football. I think this gets the argument completely backward, (although it can't help baseball's image in the black community that Barry Bonds can't find a team while all manner of proven juicers grace major league rosters). To make this an argument about whether or not baseball is "cool" is like saying there aren't any prominent African American harpsichord players because the harpsichord just isn't funky fresh. While it's true that if you poll an inner city classroom, and ask how many young people want to be baseball players you may get the same number that want to play the harpsichord. But is this a question of what is "cool" or is this about actual access, choices, and opportunity? Baseball requires equipment, investment, and infrastructure. But baseball owners have chosen to make this investment beyond the border where players can be developed signed and discarded on the cheap. This game of baseball that was so closely associated with the black freedom struggle in the days of Jackie Robinson has been removed physically from our cities, and is now as culturally alien in many areas as the steeplechase. I recently spoke with sports sociologist Dr. Harry Edwards and he put it very sharply.
"Forty percent of baseball is foreign born, they've gone global, globalization in sports follows globalization in corporations with the same outcome. There are off-shoring the jobs... Blacks are going to be displaced. The reality is that because of deterioration of education in the community, because of the violence in the community, we're disqualifying, jailing and burying our potential boxers, wide receivers, and baseball players. When you see that happening, then you understand that the Black athlete is really just a canary in the mineshaft because what they're really telling us is something happening in the African-American community. They're merely a canary in the mine shaft saying we have serious problems of survival."
If baseball is sincere about seeing the game return to the cities and if they don't want home run derbies whiter than the Republican National Convention, they are going to need to do more than offer meager urban academy programs. Major League Baseball might have to use its political clout to make sure our cities aren't hollowed out husks. They might have to forgo public stadium funding for a different set of priorities that pours money in instead of vacuuming it out.

Be sure to go to his page for some interesting comments.

More police: It can be a good thing sometimes

How many times have I written about the dangers of a police state? I don't know, but quite a lot. With all the caveats that go along with the subject, I am happy to report for once an instance where policing is good.

Le Monde is reporting today on the return of "police de quartier" in Saint-Denis, a banlieue (suburb) just on the edge of Paris. They write:

Quarante-huit policiers formant les trois premières unités territoriales de quartier (UTEQ) ont pris leur poste dans trois communes de Seine-Saint-Denis, lundi 14 avril. Les fonctionnaires, déployés en unités de quinze à dix-huit agents, seront chargés de couvrir les quartiers du Chêne-Pointu, du Bois du Temple et des Bosquets à Clichy-Montfermeil, le Franc-Moisin-Bel Air à Saint-Denis, et la cité des 4 000 à La Courneuve.

A terme, une soixantaine de policiers volontaires, possédant au minimum deux ans d'ancienneté, seront rattachés à ces trois UTEQ. En annonçant leur création, le 14 janvier, la ministre de l'intérieur Michèle Alliot-Marie avait ainsi défini leur mission : dissuasion, renseignement, contrôles d'identité et interpellations des auteurs d'infraction. Le premier ministre François Fillon a quant à lui prévenu que la police de quartier n'avait "rien à voir avec la conception du policier copain, animateur, assistante sociale".

UNE "DIFFÉRENCE DE PHILOSOPHIE"

Pour Frédéric Péchenard, directeur général de la police nationale, la "différence de philosophie" avec la police de proximité, créée par la gauche et supprimée par M. Sarkozy alors qu'il était ministre de l'intérieur, tient au fait que la mission de ces nouveaux policiers sera "plus axée sur le côté répressif". La "philosophie" des UTEQ reste toutefois, comme c'était le cas pour la police de proximité, d'établir "un lien de confiance" avec la population.

Les policiers ont suivi deux semaines de formation spécifique et appris les "techniques de communication dans la relation police-population", "la gestion des publics difficiles", "la connaissance du territoire, de la population, des problématiques et des populations étrangères", indique un document officiel.

Le deuxième département à tenter l'expérience des UTEQ, après la Seine–Saint-Denis, devrait être la Haute-Garonne.

Why is this a good thing? Reducing the number of police units in the troubled suburbs only creates more problems. The officers don't know the area as well and don't develop long-term relationships with the inhabitants. This causes them to swoop in, make arrests and leave. This lack of local knowledge and understanding works to the detriment of the inhabitants and the police since it undermines natural affinities and mutual respect.

Now, I'm the first one to admit that I have an inherent distrust of authoritarian measures, in particular when they come from the police. But here's an occasion where study after study has shown that policing is most effective not because of armor, weapons and surveillance, but because of community relations and communication. Given this, I hope that they put the right people on the job and that this "experiment" is given a chance to succeed. Of course, without similar investments in jobs, schools and public spaces, the police and the "troubled youth" will both fail.

That Boy

h/t: TPM

Rep. Geoff Davis (R-KY) on Obama: "I'm going to tell you something: That boy's finger does not need to be on the button. He could not make a decision in that simulation that related to a nuclear threat to this country."

Interesting wording. As a Southerner, I hold no illusions as to what is implied by the use of 'boy.' You see, as many folks from the South will tell you, Black people are like children: they can't take care of themselves and are inherently without foresight or responsibility, and they are the reason the government has so many bad social programs. Now, these same Whites will also tell you that they are OK with taking care of the childish and irresponsible Blacks or "foreigners" maybe a little bit, but there are limits. In fact, these same racists will tell you how generous they are for even paying taxes that go to public schools since they would much rather have schools for their own white children only, like they did back in the good ol' days.

Seriously, Geoff Davis is a racist and this one sentence proves it to me.

Racisme, SOS.

A bloody pigs head, swastikas, a dead (Muslim) soldier. A sad day.

On a trouvé la tête ensanglantée d’un porc sur une tombe. Et sur la stèle de pierre blanche, recouvrant le nom du soldat Younès Ben Mohamed et l’inscription «mort pour la France le 16 janvier 1916», le mot «HALAL» (sic). Quand les journalistes, les anciens combattants et les représentants musulmans sont arrivés sur les lieux, il restait une tache de sang de l’animal sur la stèle. Une croix gammée, pas loin. Entre autres, un profanateur a inscrit une injure à l’islam, qu’il a traduite en chti sur les stèles suivantes.

If you're wondering what chti is, it's the local dialect in Picardy. Read about it on wikipedia.

Yes, Master. Yes.

As you've probably noticed during your daily scroll through the headlines, the House failed to renew the Voting Rights Act yesterday because a few Republicans objected to the act's "singling out" Southern states who have a history of racism. No doubt, these Republicans feel the South does not have a history of racism but rather a heritage:

"The amendment's backers say the requirement unfairly singles out and holds accountable nine states that practiced racist voting policies decades ago, based on 1964 voter turnout data: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina, Texas and Virginia." [Source]

A Republican, either oblivious or opposed to history added,

"I don't think we have racial bias in Texas anymore." [Rep. John Carter, R-Round Rock.]

That's right. It's the "End of History." Those things aren't happening anymore.

Well, actually, they are. Take for example Georgia's on-going push to get a voter ID for which the courts handslapped them last year (from the WaPo: "Voter ID law overturned, Georgia can no longer charge for access to Nov. 8 election..."). Everyone knows about the inaccurate list of "felons" that prevented many people without any previous convictions from voting in 2000. Similarly, in 2004, the RNC came up with a brilliant plan to keep African American votes from counting in the last election. Greg Palast explains:

"Here’s how the scheme worked: The RNC mailed these voters letters in envelopes marked, “Do not forward”, to be returned to the sender. These letters were mailed to servicemen and women, some stationed overseas, to their US home addresses. The letters then returned to the Bush-Cheney campaign as “undeliverable.”

The lists of soldiers of “undeliverable” letters were transmitted from state headquarters, in this case Florida, to the RNC in Washington. The party could then challenge the voters’ registration and thereby prevent their absentee ballots being counted." [Source]

And, of course, I'm not even going into Ohio.

This should be our national shame. We should be outraged. Yet the VRA, like affirmative action, like good public schools, like tax breaks for the wealthy--like so many things--is one of America's many blind spots to its own racial and classist history. Here's a picture I took at the Atlanta airport a few weeks ago (yes, June 2006). What do you think?


Is it racist? Think it's funny? I think it is sad, and, well, it pretty much sums up where we are to me: we have this system, it's racist, yet we stare at it with a sense of irony which allow us to process it and move on. That's too bad, because it goes much deeper than all of this, back to the core of our "national character." And this brings me to something Digby wrote (and I responded to) a few months ago.

Digby

We seem to have a little glitch in our national psyche that won't go away. It isn't just southern anymore. The misadventure of the last five years has been run by a southern dominant political party, but its architects were elite, cosmopolitan intellectuals. This is an American problem and we are going to have to get rid of it if this country is going to survive.

I responded to Digby's post this way:

I couldn't agree more. We are still paying the price for the Missouri Compromise and for the failed Reconstruction period after the Civil War. This is true for race relations, as Katrina and its aftermath amply prove, and, just as importantly, it is true for class relations.

I am not a Civil War historian, but I am from the South and lived in the South for a long time before coming to L.A. One thing I know about red states is that they are a model of colonialism and extraction, seeking to suck out the fruits of natural resources and human labor where they can.

If the most efficient means of labor/resource extraction means classifying a group of people as sub-human, then that is the obvious path. If that becomes socially or politically unacceptable, then other means become necessary. The South's loss in the civil war was as much a social conversion as it was a resource failure. In fact, it is a myth to think that the South lost because it did not have industry. The South lost because people gave up. If the average Southerner in 1864 really believed in slavery and that the slave-owner society was really helping the average citizen, then the South, in 1866 or 1867, would have resembled Iraq in 2006--there would have been widespread rebellion, uprising, guerilla war. This did not happen. Why? The answer if of course complicated, but, in part, it is because many, many white people were oppressed by the upper-class land owners. These whites, while having many more benefits than slaves, obviously, understood that the system was working against them. It was not their war to begin with. How else does one explain the huge desertion rates in the Southern army? (I know, I'm generalizing.)

To get back to my point, and perhaps yours, something changed during reconstruction. As soon as Blacks had "equal" status, they could become the boogeyman for Whites. White Elites exploited this to their full advantage and began to mythologize racism and the "Golden Age of the Old South" through groups such as the KKK --and the Southern Democrats.

The racist mythology allowed poor Whites and rich Whites to find a common ground at the beginning of the 20th century, and at the present. The Republican party, as everyone knows, constantly summons this racist mythology through hint and allusion by nominating racist judges on MLK's birthday, by avoiding speaking to the NAACP, through talk radio and TV pundits. And this is where it gets dangerous, as D. Dneiwert, among others in the blogosphere, points out. The racist myth is so pervasive, so easy to tap into, and so powerful (because its fallacies seem to explain so many things), that a word here, an image there, and our Mass Media has fed into and propagated a racist creed. It is a creed that is false, but powerful because it imbues the believer with power, with an impression of superiority, and this "superiority" crosses class lines, and that is the ultimate scam.

So it isn't just Southern (it never was, it was just more so), and it isn't just race. I have lived abroad, and I will say that America is one of the most racist places I know. Racsim is a huge, huge problem. That said, I feel that it is the ability of the myth, through racism, to elide over class issues that is causing us problems today. It isn't that the "South" has taken over; it is that the extractors, those adept at mining the land and its humans, have come into power. Their belief system in 1860, like now, was exploitation (of blacks and whites), elitism, and expansion. The extractors, now as then, are constantly seeking new territories and peoples at the lowest cost. It is their way of hiding the true cost of their (and our) wealth.

They know that the weath of the here and now almost always comes at the price of people and land. They just don't care.

Look at how the Republican leadership frolics in New York and L.A., supposedly speaking for the "common man", while, in reality, the red-states they represent are among the poorest regions of the country. Though to a lesser degree, Kansas and South Dakota are to America what Africa and South America are to the "developed" world.

This is the Brand America they have created; its purveyors are Fox News and Malkin and Bush. They are all racists, they are all elitists, and they just don't care. The only hope is not it some PC version of eliminating racism, but in re-forming the instutions that purvey the racism and exploitation of Americans, namely government, big business and the media.

Whoever the next president may be, the only real hope is in "demolishing" large swaths of the federal government, and by that, I don't mean getting rid of it, but re-doing it. The Republican party has infiltrated every nook and cranny of government and will hold on to those positions no matter what. The only way to get rid of them is to litterally re-invent the departments from the ground up, removing, where possible, the revolving doors, promoting career officers, etc. Re-organize is perhaps the best term, but there will need to be some creative destruction before the demons of the Republican party, which are overwhelmingly the demons of the Civil War and the Reconstruction, are sufficiently reduced, removed, or whatever.

I do not want to absolve the Democrats in this. They carry a huge blame historically in promoting racsim and exploitation, but, presently, they are simply a weak, rudderless party. The Republicans are, and they know it, up to something far more dangerous and corrupt. It will take an earnest Reconstruction of government to repair what the Republicans have done and continue to do and to make progress in alleviating the burdens of our national demons.

So ended my diatribe and I apologize for quoting myself at such length, but, until there is some sort of reconstruction of government and the social order so as to actually understand and create solidarity with people rather than the interchangeable poles of disdain and pity, then we should be taking note. The VRA is about understanding that voting is not as easy for some as it is for others. Yet even the Voting Rights Act is only a palliative, an advil offered in lieu of real medical intervention: Heck, in most countries people vote on a Saturday or a Sunday, or they make it a national holiday. Now that would be fair to working people of every race and class. That would be an attempt to put all citizens on a more equal footing.

For good and bad (mostly bad), part of the American dream is a dream of isolation. Isolation from religious persecution, isolation in our cars, isolation in our suburbs. Part of us has thrived on being separate and our economy has grown out of this, our physical and social space has grown out of this. We're partially blind to it, and, yes, Southerners can be even more blind, as the above picture shows. And if Southerners are not somewhat blinded by their own history, why do they continue to portray themselves (oops--ourselves--I am from Georgia) as heroes rather than insurrectionists? Take a look at this tribute to American Insurgents below:

I suppose it is OK to dedicate a plaque to the POW of the Civil War, but perhaps they should mention all those other millions of prisoners that tilled the fields, picked the cotten, ironed the clothes, washed the dishes, and got whipped because they said they thought they were as good as Whites.

So it is racist to say "Blacks" are inferior or "Mexicans are inferior." And it is just as racist to say that racism is over and done with because it purposefully removes the debate about race and class in the U.S. Until there are no more memorials like this then I will assume that the South still has a few "issues."

French Racists and the 10 Condiments!

Note: This is an essay covering topics of geopolitical import. Please read it carefully, for it explains in intricate detail how, starting with the Bryant Gumble Revolution, America overcame its demons. Because of a poll that was recently conducted, the essay begins with France, a country that has failed miserably because it lacks the ability to act upon its introspection. This leads the essay to a thoughtful examination of the crucial period of the early 80's. I then develop and conclude with a significant insight into what historians will call the Condi Rice Era.

The essayist apologizes for following the strict structure of the essay form. (Essay comes from the French word "essai," which can be loosely translated as "trial," "attempt" or "experiment." And this essay is just that. It is a trial, an attempt at understanding the present and predicting the future. So, dear Reader, your patience is appreciated, as is your open mind.)


Part I: The French Problem
I was shocked to find out today that French people are racists. And this news doesn’t come from a Bush administration official, PNAC or the Wall Street Journal, but from the French themselves. Indeed, a recent poll indicated that 30% (or something like that) of the population (of that former Roman territory) considers itself racist.

You know, while living there, I kind of suspected this. There were the tell-tale signs: I saw mostly white folks stores like the Bon Marché, yet there were just a few chez Tati. I also noticed that even in France's capital city there are poor, non-white people living in sub-standard conditions. (Now, to be fair, they do provide the poor with health care and numerous childcare options, but that doesn’t make things alright with me. I don't care how much you help people--it's the thought that counts. So, even if French people are helping poor African immigrants, it doesn't matter because their heart is in the wrong place, as the survey says.)

Part 2: A New Age Dawns
Television news has always been a progressive reflection of society, so a lot can be learned looking at how France and America® do things. For example, when I was in France, another thing I noticed was that French TV hosts are almost always white. That’s a problem because TV hosts can and do change the world. Luckily for us, America solved its racism problems a long time ago. This was known as the Bryant Gumble Revolution. This was when all Americans quit being racist because we finally understood that people with colored skin were not always like Richard Pryor or Malcolm X. Rather, they were just like us! Since then, we've had people like Barack Obama. He transcends race, as do most people who don't talk about it much.

But let's leave Barack aside a moment, for I do believe we are at a crossroads: America (and the world) are currently in what serious historians will probably call the Condi Rice era. It is an age of glory, truth and justice for all creeds and colors. History is over and race is an afterthought. What proof do I have of this? Well, though we are still awaiting the arrival of the Ten Condiments, we do still know that the present era represents a profound change. How profound? Well, for the first time, the Senate heard a black woman’s testimony without challenging her veracity.

Getting back to France and the poll that shows they are racist... I think this poll represents an important step in American journalism: the AP did, for once, report what a French person thinks rather than what an American person thinks a French person thinks. Really, this is important, so I checked with my contacts at CJR, FAIR and Media Matters and they agree. (Does that make me a reporter now, like Ben Domenech, and not just a blogger? Gosh, I hope so!)

This new pollalso really just confirms what those car burnings were all about. Now, you think I’m going to say "because racism exists in France, that ’s why those disaffected youth took to the street to protest that (as well as the sinister forms of institutional racism that frame their lives.)" Well, this time you’re right. Racism--and class difference--exist in France, that ’s why those disaffected youth took to the street to protest. What do you expect, France is still socialist and now the people are revolting against the sinister forms of institutional racism that frame their lives. Luckily, in America, we no longer have to worry about government repression because neoliberalism and capitalism have brought us all the freedoms we need.

You may also remember that last weekend one million (1,000,000) French youth marched peacefully to protest a new law that allows employers to fire young people pretty much at will. While the car fires showed how disorderly French youth could be, this protest shows how spoiled and utopian the French are. Fighting for your rights is so passé, and now it may get you fired! (“You’re fired!” That’s so classic!)

Part 3: Confronting Our Demons
Now, you’re thinking: “what about Katrina?” I’m here to report that there was, kind of like for Karballah and Fallujah, a lot--a lot!--of false reporting. For example, all those reports about violence in the SuperDome, they were false. Really--even Voice of America says so! Those people, mostly African American it appeared to me, were not as disorderly and violent as it might have seemed. It was just an impression, thank goodness, and that really reminds me of why the Bryant Gumble Revolution was so important to our country and why Condi Rice is proof of the absence of racism in America. It’s all very logical if you think about it and that is why the 10 Condiments (whenever they come and whatever they say) will be so very revolutionary.

In conclusion, I think I understand why the French are racist and, more importantly for today’s news, why they consider themselves such. France has prosecuted numerous territorial, imperialistic wars. Think Napoleon, South-East Asia, North Africa, West Africa, Canada, and a dastardly (and successful) pre-emptive strike on Wallis and Futuna. This did not just come from the blue (or should I say Le Grand Bleu), but from a deep-seated belief that they were not just equal to, but better. The Best. The Best. They have HUGE egos.

Now me, I'm a huge--HUGE!--Lee Greenwood fan (I own “God Bless the USA/Proud to be an American”--I even have the American Idol version of the song that came out after, well, you know). Anyway, I think that Lee and I agree that there is a difference between pride and thinking you’re the best. I really don’t think he is trying to say America is “The Greatest.” He’s just saying we’re great, really great, but not necessarily The Greatest.

And that’s why Condi Rice is such an important figure in this essay and, dare I say, in the whole world. She’s now our Secretary of State and has John Bolton (he happens to be white so she’s not racist either) working for her at the United Nations. Since America is a land of equality and opportunity, we will be able to convey those and other ideals (democracy and freedom, for example, and our greatest gift, representative capitalism) to the world. Maybe we can spread a little humility, culture and tolerance for other races too, because, obviously they need it! In fact, I suspect that one or several of the 10 Condiments will focus on this and they will actually replace the UN Charter. Furthermore, they will be written in English Only, and French will no longer be one of the official diplomatic languages, precisely because the French are racist.

Part 4: The Final Countdown
In a final conclusion, I feel compelled to address those critics who say I'm leaving out our own history when I don't mention Native Americans, Latinos, Asians and other people whose skin is not white. My point is that things have changed and that Americans need to have a different mindset. Back in the day, we used to send people of color away. For example, we sent Josephine Baker and James Baldwin to Paris not because they weren't welcom here, but to show how amazing these black folk could be. And though the Liberal Left will say they were fleeing oppression here, that's just not true. They were sent to the even more racist country of France as punishment and show them how life was actually pretty darn good here. This recent poll just proves my point again. Furthermore, if any residual racism lingers here after the pronouncement of the 10 Condiments, it will no doubt dissapear quickly. (My concern is that the Condiments will not appear until the burning Bush. I know that this may be as worrisome to you as to me, but rest assured: anonymous sources tell me that Barbara's hair spontaneously combusted several weeks ago.)

So, in my last conclusion, , I will say, without equivocation, that France is racist and the age of the 10 Condiments lies just around the corner. This will be much better than the Teresa Heinz 57 (so verbose that Kerry clan) or heavy racist French fare such as the Hollandaise 11, the Dijonnaise 24 and Beurre Blanc for Dummies .