As I have talked about before, right-wing political thought is segregation repackaged for modern consumption. It is the merger of Republicanism with the dying segregationist ideology revived under the banned of “Law and Order” and “States Rights.”
Since it is no longer acceptable to smear Jews or Blacks in political discourse, the right has turned to groups that are more acceptable to smear, such as Muslims. Smears against Muslims are much more believable than smears against Blacks because of the 911 attacks. This MO is necessary because the political right needs scapegoats to survive, and Islam fits the bill for them.
Today’s New York Times scrutinizes the scapegoating of the CAIR from the right. The Council of Islamic-American relations is one of the biggest civil rights groups for Muslims in this country. Their services are important because people have the instinctive reaction of blaming Muslims in the event of terrorist attacks on American soil. There was a drastic level of anti-Muslim violence in the days after the 911 attacks.
Yesterday, the CAIR held a panel discussion on Islam and the West in the Capitol, prompting Republicans to call them “terrorist apologists.” Never mind that on the front page of their website, they have links to a fatwa against terrorism and links to numerous Muslim groups that have signed on. “Terrorist Apologists” is the newest version of an acceptable racial slur from Republicans.
Such slurs by Republicans are nothing new, but part of the same tired old politics as usual from the reconstituted segregationists. This slur illustrates how racism is repackaged from what it was in the 1960’s. Back before racism became unacceptable, it was common for racists to attack the person, such as in “nigger.” There were elaborate theories that the Blacks were cursed by God because of the curse of Noah or Cain or that they were somehow born inferior. But the more it became established that it was simply not the case, racists shifted their focus. Instead of attacking the person, modern racism now attacks the moral character of the group being targeted.
Ronald Reagan was the architecht of the New Racism. Instead of calling Blacks “niggers,” he attacked their moral character by calling them “welfare queens.” In other words, the goal was to get people to look down on Blacks not because of their race, but because of their supposed moral characteristics. So that whenever a White saw a Black on the street, the first thing that would come to mind was not “nigger,” but “welfare cheat.”
The same tactic can be seen in operation against Latinos. Instead of pointing at a Lation and making fun of their skin, people rant at the problem of “illegal immigration.” For racists like John Tanton and the Minutemen and Tancredo, the goal is clear — the goal is for a White to look at a Latino and have the first thing come to mind be, “illegals.”
We now see this tactic in operation by the Republicans today. Whenever you see a Muslim walking down the street, the first thing that the Republicans want you to think is, “Oh, my god, a terrorist!” The next thing that they want you to think is, “Call the police!” Some people have actually gotten Muslims kicked off of planes and thus allowed themselves to be played by racists and hatemongers. This is what the Republicans were doing when they used the word “terrorist.”
Never mind that there are Progressive Muslim communities out there such as Eteraz which have nothing to do with terrorism. Republicans do not want to be confused with the facts when it comes to people. This tactic is old and worn, with the Nazis accusing the Jews of being the cause of their own problems because of their filthy sanitation habits or people in both England blaming Irish “popery” for the cause of their famine or decrying their lifestyles and claiming that to be the cause.
This, then, is the essence of the New Morality among Republicans — use morality as a tool to keep other races or religions out of the loop. Of course it never applies when you are a Republican. This is an attractive tool for fundamentalists because they can rationalize that they have plenty of friends who are Muslim or Black or whatever; all they have a problem with is their morality.
Speaker Nancy Pelosi is to be commended for allowing CAIR to have dialogue with Democrats in the Capitol. The fact that the Republicans could not be bothered to attend the meeting or even to address the merits of the dialogue places them outside the mainstream of American political thought. They have completely isolated themselves from the rest of the country and are becoming increasingly less relevant as they do so.
And what we would like to see less of is people like Senator Boxer cave into their fears like this:
Last fall, Senator Barbara Boxer of California issued a routine Certificate of Appreciation to the organization representative in Sacramento, but she quickly revoked it when critics assailed her on the Web under headlines like “Senators for Terror.”
“There are things there I don’t want to be associated with,” Ms. Boxer said later of the revocation, explaining that her California office had not vetted the group sufficiently.
CAIR and its supporters say its accusers are a small band of people who hate Muslims and deal in half-truths. Ms. Boxer’s decision to revoke the Sacramento commendation provoked an outcry from organizations that vouch for the group’s advocacy, including the American Civil Liberties Union and the California Council of Churches.
“They have been a leading organization that has advocated for civil rights and civil liberties in the face of fear and intolerance, in the face of religious and ethnic profiling,” said Maya Harris, the executive director of the A.C.L.U. of Northern California.
It can be intimidating to have to deal with the pressure from such groups. But the fact of the matter is that we cannot make any headway against the forces of fear until we demand that our elected officials not cave into them. The reason the Democrats lost elections for the previous three elections before this one is because too many of them acted like Republicans and caved into their fears instead of acting out of their hopes.
