Nice. Topekans commemorate the 60th Anniversary of Brown v. The Board of Education of Topeka by bitching about a black First Lady coming to visit their town. That’s classy.
About The Author
BooMan
Martin Longman a contributing editor at the Washington Monthly. He is also the founder of Booman Tribune and Progress Pond. He has a degree in philosophy from Western Michigan University.
67 Comments
Recent Posts
- Day 14: Louisiana Senator Approvingly Compares Trump to Stalin
- Day 13: Elon Musk Flexes His Muscles
- Day 12: While Elon Musk Takes Over, We Podcast With Driftglass and Blue Gal
- Day 11: Harm of Fascist Regime’s Foreign Aid Freeze Comes Into View
- Day 10: The Fascist Regime Blames a Plane Crash on Nonwhite People
I was astounded by this story (when I read it this morning)…and by the ridiculously transparent rationales they’ve come up with for their objections.
It’s some bullshit about limiting the number of tickets…or about how her appearance is “not about the kids” or that it “politicizes” the graduations (like we’ve never seen politicians or other public figures giving commencement addresses).
The “don’t ‘politicize’ this” argument — which is turning up more and more often — is particularly Orwellian.
It’s some bullshit about limiting the number of tickets…or about how her appearance is “not about the kids” or that it “politicizes” the graduations (like we’ve never seen politicians or other public figures giving commencement addresses).
My HS graduation speaker was, at the time, a US Representative and who later became Governor and also a convicted criminal. What anyone ever complained about was that he was caught giving the same commencement address 2 years in a row, seriously.
I guess he was just putting the timeless principle of Don’t Retreat, Reload into action.
I’ve heard the first lady speak, and she’s amazing. I would go through a lot to hear her again.
I’m sure there’s a political motive to some of the objections, and probably an element of racism and sexism as well. At the same time, I’ve clicked through the links to this story, and I’ve discovered some of the objections are valid. This is very late in the year. Printed announcements and invitations are now incorrect. Five high school graduations are being combined into one massive 6-hour ceremony at a venue too small to seat all the guests already invited.
I can see how this would cause major stress to my long-gone high-school senior self, even if I really wanted to hear Michelle Obama.
Why do we bother? It’s really not worth the effort.
I disagree. Racist dog whistles should be labeled as such. This is a particularly blatant, piercing whistle. Allowing the whistles to blare without comment is dangerous. It allows racism to maintain acceptance in society.
That this attempted rejection of the First Lady is indirectly associated with the Brown v. Board decision certainly makes this a teachable moment.
I’m sorry… this probably isn’t really about politics or racism. As a childless person, I watched with amusement as my many brothers and sisters had children and turned into blithering idiots. Then my young nieces and nephews turned from cool young people in to oblivious creepy people who can’t pull off a social visit without being consumed by the silliness of their children’s behavior.
So really… all parents are crazy. That’s OK. They should be focused on their kids. Expecting them to have concern for society at large while managing the significant milestones of their offspring’s lives is naive.
So let them have their moments without injecting any larger meaning. Commencement speeches are a waste of time and should be avoided by any one with any sense. But then… Mrs. Obama is a parent of teenagers so… there you go.
The very reason the Topeka schools, from which all these thousands of children are graduating, is at all integrated is because of politics and its interaction with the Federal Judiciary. The reason Brown needed to be heard at all, and the reason that these schools would be nearly completely segregated today without the Court’s decision, is racism. Politics and racism surround these kids, and their parents. In fact, it will be an extraordinary expression of politics and racism if Michelle’s invitation is rescinded.
On the sixtieth anniversary of this irreplaceable improvement in the law and society of the United States, the School Districh which was the defendant in that case wants to commemorate it by inviting a member of the First Family. These excuses you offer here to explain why they should not have bothered are pathetic.
Again, I thought the idea of a high school graduation was to call on the best in people, children and adults alike, not the worst or most trivial.
All the legislation that has been passed can not nor never will control the prejudices of people. Those that are raised in an environment of hate. Will continue to spread it and it will grow in their families as long as it is taught.
All too true.
Totally lost upon them is the lifelong memory this will provide. I can’t remember who spoke at any of my 3 graduations, high school, college or grad school. Nor were the speeches of any great merit. This opportunity is wasted upon them. Not to mention rude.
Do we ask or expect the former Confederate States to commemorate the major anniversaries of Ulysses S Grant’s victory at Appomattox?
It’s not so outrageous that Topekans would prefer not to politicize a high school graduation. As this is the 60th anniversary year of “Brown” and Michelle Obama is the first African-American First Lady, having her speak would politicize the event. Understand how school officials and Michelle Obama thought it sounded like a good idea, but it’s not.
By your (cough) logic, I guess we should let Topekans out of recognizing Martin Luther King Day too.
What’s politicizing this is the complaints, not the speech. Had there been no fuss, the First Lady would have come into town, given a speech, a 10-second clip from said speech would have been on the nightly news, and then everyone would have gone on with their lives. In what possible way would that have “politicized” the graduation?
And by their standards everyone pointing at them and laughingly calling them ‘crackers’ is ruining their grad night. And politicizing it!
MAHAHAHAHA@ the crackers.
.
Is it mandatory that states recognize federal holidays? And hold appropriate commemorations on those days? Ya might want to check your facts before making a claim. Most states follow the lead of the federal government wrt holidays – but they don’t have to. All have now adopted MLK, Jr. Day as an official state holiday. That only means that state and federal offices and operations are closed on that day. In the private sector 67% of businesses don’t recognize it as a holiday. By your logic, they shouldn’t be allowed not to recognize it.
The POTUS and First Lady are unable to go anywhere for a public appearance without a fuss. The security detail alone is a massive undertaking. Sorry – bad optics on this one. But Democrats would prefer to complain than own a mistake.
AFAIK Arizona doesn’t recognize MLK day.
AZ has joined the Union on this one.
Thanks for the update.
I would have been thrilled to have had JFK address my graduation. Even VP Johnson. It’s the PRESIDENT. Jackie or Lady Bird would have done fine, too. If Nixon had been elected I would have been thrilled for him to speak too. It’s the PRESIDENT. Same with Pat Nixon. It would have been really cool for Pat Nixon to join us in the parking lot passing the bottle of Jim Beam around, surreptitiously of course.
Had Pat Nixon (remember this diary/thread is about a First Lady and not a POTUS or VP) been the speaker at mine, I wouldn’t have attended. And yes, it would have been seen as nothing other than the politicization of a HS graduation. Plenty of time for that at colleges and when the graduates are old enough to make a more informed and mature decision about who speaks at their graduation.
Marie2, that’s crazy. The First Family- that’s a special thing. I wouldn’t have gone crazy applauding for Pat, Nancy, Barbara or Laura, but I wouldn’t dream of trying to prevent people from enjoying the occasion.
“Politicizing the graduation”? What in heaven’s sake do you think Michelle is going to do, attack Republicans? Aren’t we calling on the BEST of people at a high school graduation, not the worst? And your comparison between the mere appearance of the First Family to celebrate the Brown decision and a celebration of Appamattox at a former Confederate State event is rankly offensive.
I guess I didn’t make myself clear enough. You originally said:
Well, we damn well “expect” former Confederate States to recognize MLK Day, and every other state too. When Arizona tried to duck out of it, they got shamed and boycotted into submission.
But by the logic of your analogy, the shamers and boycotters were the ones in the wrong, since we should not have asked or expected a state like Arizona to commemorate the birth of an American hero who fought for things some of the people in that state might not particularly like.
See, now you’ve got me on a roll. The analogy is actually worse even than that, since it assumes that the citizens of Topeka were the “losers” in Brown v Board of Education, which is about as sketchy an interpretation as I can think of. The plaintiffs in that suit – Brown and the other parents – were all citizens of Topeka too. Do they and their families not get to have the anniversary of their win acknowledged by the First Lady? Why do only the opinions of the “losers” matter? Why do you consider their position to be the default position of all Topekans?
When Coates talks about the white supremacy encoded into the DNA of America, this is exactly the kind of shit he’s talking about, Marie.
I disagree with you on this one. Let the racist dog whistles fly and proceed with the First Lady going to Topeka and speaking at this combined graduation event. You can call it political;I call it historical, as well as a memorable event for those young graduates.
Your analogy fails. Utterly.
Why? Isn’t it more common to celebrate decisive war battles on major anniversaries than to celebrate the anniversary of SCOTUS decisions? You think it’s a good idea for the winners to impose such celebrations on those that continue to feel like losers while they continue grudgingly to accept the outcome? Bullying them into acceptance within their hearts and minds and politicizing what at its essence is a cultural and economic issue is counterproductive.
LOL.
They extended an invitation. She accepted. The crackers don’t like it.
HS commencement is pretty much the stupidest, most meaningless, made up occasion in existence. At least she Would give it a little meaning.
If she decides to skip it, it will hang around their necks for 40 years.
.
The “crackers” seem not yet to have weighed in. With luck the students will quickly adjust to the change and not air their disappointment, and the “crackers” won’t seize this an an opportunity to steal the spotlight.
I don’t get your response at all. The First Lady coming to speak (upon being invited), to encourage graduates and to celebrate an important milestone in American history, is somehow bullying?
WTF? Why are you even framing it this way, as “winners imposing celebrations on losers”? BvBoE was an important contribution for all of America, not some factional victory between rival parties. If somehow some people don’t see it that way, if they somehow believe “separate but equal” should still be the law of the land, then they have a problem. That problem is fundamentally un-American, and we should not be catering to their feelings.
You could debate the merits of the disruption the First Lady’s presence will cause vs. the increased memorableness of the event due to her speech, as someone has done on this thread. (I personally think the latter far outweighs the former). But to argue that we should be concerned because some don’t like the BvBoE decision is just nonsense.
Agree with the first part, but unfortunately it has also always been viewed as a factional victory between rival parties. To deny betrays an historical ignorance since the “Brown” decision was issued. School segregation remains entrenched today. And that contributes greatly to our income and wealth inequality.
Pig people gotta’ act like pigs.
It’s not about trying to fix them. They’re beyond hope.
It’s about making sure every non-pig person reads about this. It’s about the decent people being exposed to it so they can judge it, appropriately, as inappropriate.
I couldn’t give a shit about pig people, honestly. They’re disgusting. But, please, make a massive stink about it and politicize the holy fuck out of it.
That will be quite a few less Republican voters in the future.
Bet on it!
I guess all you can say is that some people are willfully sad bastards.
It is amazing to me that “classy” has been so downgraded in popular culture. How could anyone ever say the Sarah Palins, Ted Cruzes or Rand Pauls or Pat Robertson’s are classy?
I’m stunned by some of the comments here.
I don’t agree with the protests, but they appear to be led by students and parents. The students, in particular, could not care less about having their special day given over to commemorate an event that happened before their grandparents were born. Is that a narrow, parochial focus? Of course it is, and it’s kind of sad. But a totally understandable one for anyone who remembers what they were like when they were 18.
It’s completely plausible that most of the students and parents involved are motivated by nothing more than that. It’s certainly what they’re saying. To conclude otherwise, and especially to think that it springs from racial animus that wouldn’t have been aimed at, say, Laura Bush or Hillary Clinton, without any supporting evidence specific to this situation, strikes me as bigoted (it’s Kansas!) in its own way.
They would rather have a commencement address by the local Ford dealer? Or some pompous ass from the Chamber of Commerce?
that was kind of my reading of the comments too, but I found it strange – isn’t it memorable to have the FLOTUS speak at graduation?
OT, but I’m still trying to recover from Michael Bloomberg trying to take over St Peter’s job – re: the Hillary grandchild in Game of Thrones speak: http://wonkette.com/547028/game-of-hormones-how-will-lady-clyntons-grandchild-help-her-usurp-the-thr
one
I’d have thought that a sane reaction would be to be immensely happy that your school, your poxy little middle of nowhere in flyover country school, yes, that school had a chance granted to very few other schools – namely, to get to hear some thoughts by an accomplished, hardworking, successful First Lady in person. I mean, what would be a better alternative? The glorious winner of the Topeka Pigfertilizer Gazette Prize For Hamburger Consumption? Some local sports anchor bimbo with big hair and a litter of meth-head brats? I mean, here you have the chance for a truly special high school graduation – and the best you can do is make yourselves look like a bunch of crass, ignorant, arrogant hicks who don’t deserve to listen to the local dogcatcher’s bowel movements? Heckuva job, Topeka!
Your comment is rude insulting rural bashing and unseemly in this forum.
No, it’s exactly what these ungrateful, self-absorbed wretches deserve. I am sick of people giving ignorance a pass because they worry about the delicate feelings of people who can’t be bothered to think beyond their own short-term folly. See: Palin, Sarah.
well, if you think the language of your comment is appropriate, you’re on the wrong blog. your comment is nasty, insults ppl with broad strokes and does not advance discussion of the issues
Booman, thank you for reading this swill so I won’t have too. It’s like cleaning toilets. No one like it, but someone has to do it.
IMHO “Brown vs. the Board of Ed” is one of the most brilliant and important SCOTUS decision. It laid down the marker of “separate isn’t equal.” That remains the law of the land — but by a slender thread considering the subsequent rollbacks of later SCOTUS decisions and legislation intended to enforce both the letter and the spirit of “Brown.”
Now that US schools are more segregated than they were in 1954 (and not much less equal wrt to resources) and a SCOTUS that only an ostrich would fail to recognize is itching to overturn “Brown.” Waving a symbolic celebratory red flag at ground zero of “Brown” does nothing to advance its psychological and cultural acceptance among those taught to embrace inequality and separateness. Battling for hollow victories at the very real risk of enraging the opposition is a dumb move.
Running away from the achievements of the past and hoping and praying that if you cower hard enough the hard right might just decide to forget about it isn’t exactly a winning strategy, Marie. That’s how we ended up letting the crazies have so much of the territory that they occupy today.
Why pick a battle with no inherent gain to be had and risks losing more of what you consider “achievements of the past?” What is it about schools being more segregated today than in 1954 that you don’t get?
Celebrate in venues where the people embrace “Brown” as having been a plus for them as individuals and their communities. That makes for good PR.
It was decades of political cowering by Democrats and DINOs that have led us to this place. Democrats without the courage to say no to the nominations of Alito and Roberts. Democrats that since 1976 have approved the Hyde Amendment that has allowed the wingers to make abortion less accessible and unaffordable for too many women.
Know when to show em, hold em, and fold em. While I have major differences with Harry Reid, he’s the only Democrat at the national level that’s been demonstrating good poker skills during the past couple of years.
“Why pick a battle with no inherent gain to be had”
The gain is a fairly obvious one -you commemorate and take pride in one of the most significant moments in modern American history. The more we run away from these moments, the more we let the right wing infect children (the future of this country) with ignorance and bigotry – and the more we give credence to those who try and de-legitimize liberal accomplishments.
“Celebrate in venues where the people embrace “Brown” as having been a plus for them as individuals and their communities”
Which was what the people who extended the invitation were trying to achieve. If we aren’t willing to stand with these people in a red state, we might as well give up and roll over, because the right wing aren’t going to stop once they’ve silenced all dissent in the red states – they’ll keep coming until they have imposed their repulsive vision everywhere. Howard Dean had his faults, but he was absolutely right to try and get a 50 state strategy working. We need to fight ignorance and veiled bigotry wherever we find it – and the best way to do that in this situation is to take any chance we get to open up a dialog with the people in red states. We can’t do that by running away.
Nick, some of your earlier comments were a bit on the obnoxious side, but this one is absolutely spot on.
Let’s hope it all goes well. That graduating seniors accommodate themselves to the change in venue for their graduation ceremonies and limited guest tickets with limited fuss and report that it was worth it. And the authorities can easily handle any crazies this draws out.
In early 2007 when so many of those commenting on blogs were doing the pearl clutching thing about Obama because he’s not white, I argued for over a year that the country could handle that — and I was right. The country could also have handled a woman President in 2008 but probably not Hillary. Was an early and fierce supporter of Howard Dean — in part because of his impulse and style not to back down even if he fell short on that measure more often than I liked. However, forcing an issue when the proper groundwork hasn’t been laid or doesn’t exist is a crapshoot and the odds are long. Howard Dean’s 50 state strategy was about groundwork and it was very successful in two election cycles. Until the pearl-clutchers told Dean to get lost and results were predictable. Cowering isn’t a natural impulse for me — but it’s not often that I’m wrong when I sense a caution sign, do hope this is one of those times.
You’re wayyy off your form here, Marie. Schools are more segregated than they were in 1954? That’s not true. Are they largely segregated? Too much so, yes. But Brown began the tearing down of the collectively monolithic Jim Crow laws. That the right wing is on a long-term project to reimpose Jim Crow says nothing about the importance of recognizing and commemorating that Jim Crow laws were EVIL. And if racists are mad because they don’t have resegregated schools today, the hell with them. Racists must be defeated, not accommodated.
I also love your upthread blame of Democrats for not admitting when they’ve made a mistake. THE SCHOOL DISTRICT INVITED THE FIRST LADY. Is the Topeka School District full of Democrats?
Not according to Jonathan Kozol who I’ve been reading since the early 1990s when he published Savage Inequalities.
Do you believe that there have been no “separate and unequal” outcomes to the SCOTUS decisions in the Seattle-Louisville School Integration cases? GMAFB.
Do you know what’s happening in those charter schools? From Kozol:
Well meaning white liberal people always found it easier to attack the forced segregation policies in southern states than the perniciousness of “separate and unequal” in their backyards. New York State’s Extreme School Segregation: Inequality, Inaction and a Damaged Future. That’s not from 1960 but today!
This presumes we’re not viciously opposed to the privatization of the public school system as well. If New York and other areas have been less successful in fending off the powerful people and big money behind the monitization of public schools, don’t foist that off on the entire progressive movement. Hell, didn’t the New York Mayor’s election turn partially on DeBlazio’s willingness to pull back on the City’s support of K-12 privatization?
Me, my primary question of School Board candidates is whether they support or oppose charter schools. I recognize a mealy-mouthed response to that question, and am certain to vote against that candidate and tell others to vote against them as well.
It’s also preposterous to say that unless you’ve prevented some resegregation of local schools that you can’t celebrate and support Brown v. Board.
This wasn’t a discussion about charter schools. I offered evidence for my statement that public schools (charters paid for with public dollars are public) today remain segregated.
Not according to WAPO and the WH: A Smart, Savvy, and Wise FLOTUS Pivot. Why defend a losing hand when recognizing that it’s a loser is the first step to finding new and better options?
Apparently others figured out what seemed obvious to me and eluded you: A Smart, Savvy, and Wise FLOTUS Pivot. One advantage of age is that quickly smelling winners and losers becomes easier.
I agree. It might indeed be unsafe to be in attendance what with the all these American traitors around.
Real work toward educational equality is necessary. Ceremony aside.
How much would this mass celebration cost? How many graduates in Topeka have the financial surety of advanced education? How about a city wide program to financially support graduates as they enter adult life through further education?
How about a 1960s LBJ-style federal audit of the city schools to determine the present equality of the different schools involved?
What’s fascinating about this, is the conversation that’s not happening.
The entire event is based on the idea that, as Americans, we’re proud of our history. You learn in school about the triumphs of equality and the civil rights movement — the important breakthrough incidents when we advanced ourselves as a society. So we go ahead and commemorate the anniversaries of these triumphant historical milestones — based on the assumption that we all agree that these were our proudest moments.
But the whole thing falls apart if this isn’t true. What if we’re dealing with people who don’t agree? Who aren’t in favor of the Civil Rights Movement? Who aren’t interested in “commemorating” anything having to do with anti-discrimination and enfranchisement? What then?
That’s the “elephant in the room.” Nobody’s going to say it…but the Topekans aren’t even on board with the basic premise…the idea that there’s any “historic achievement” involved at all. But they can’t say it. So we get this kind of situation where everyone’s tied up in rhetorical knots talking about “the size of the hall” or “politicizing” or whatever.
But we’re never going to get to the bottom of this until somebody forces the conversation and says, “Look, we’re celebrating important historical milestore: the anniversary of a great achievement. Do you agree with this, or not?” And then we get them on record once and for all saying that they’re against the Civil Rights Movement.
It’s exactly as if we were trying to commemorate the moon landings in a constituency who believed that we should not (or did not) go to the moon…or trying to celebrate V-day amongst the American Nazi party. They don’t agree. They’re just not going to say it. That’s why they don’t want there to be a Martin Luther King Day; that’s why they still want to see the “long form birth certificate.”
The Obama administration keeps making this mistake, like when they “reach compromise” with the House of Representatives that isn’t trying to compromise (but is trying to unilaterally obstruct). They won’t even let Michelle Obama be pro-nutrition. They don’t want to have anything to do with any of it. They just aren’t going to come out and say it, because they’re cannier than that.
Yes.
…
O, let America be America again
The land that never has been yet
And yet must be
…
Langston Hughes 1935
this comment was spot on, but the only thing I disagree with you about is your interpretation that the Obama Administration keeps on making this mistake.
Barack Obama’s been Black in American longer than 3 days, they know which way is up, and in a way, they just keep on pushing forth, forcing the crazy to reveal itself.
I graduated college in 2011. Michelle Obama came to speak in 2012 at the college’s commencement, clearly because it was 2012 and Tim Kaine was running for Senate (no guarantee he’d win). But I still thought at the time, “Hmm, maybe I should have taken an extra year so she could have been my commencement speaker…”
Geov asks us to remember that time then…it wasn’t too long ago, for me. I surely can’t remember my high school commencement. All I thought the entire time was, “I wish mom would have just let me have them mail my diploma because it’s really sunny and hot out here in this field…”
But you can be damn sure that if Michelle Obama spoke that I would remember that for the rest of my life. Fuck this noise…
I imagine the only commencement speaker I’d have protested would be Dick Cheney. I know my friend at BYU protested his speaking at hers and they invited Ralph Nader to give a separate one.
I have a longer list of names I would boycott…and would have even as a graduate of high school or college.
I actively shun people who can’t seem to live up to our shared humanity.
Bob McDonnell gave the commencement the year before I graduated. I “said” if I was graduating I may not have gone because of it, but I probably would have.
My uni one was actually memorable because it was a huge storm and rained very heavily right when he started speaking. Was shorter than 5 minutes. Everyone was very happy.
This consistent stupidity has been engrained in the American Society because we have never as a nation politic admitted the hypocrisy of our national history. Even this week a Princeton Report comes out to say the US is no longer a democracy…well, when were we a democracy?
Surely, not at our inception, not in our slavery days, not during the industrial revolution, Manifest Destiny occupation of the continent, the herding of original Americans unto reservations, The the Civil War, before the 13th Amendment, the 19th Amendment, the internment of Japanese Americans, the segregation by race, the incarceration of millions of citizens…
Americans have been encouraged, nay, required, to believe in American exceptionalsm.
Incidentally, for those who buy the line about “politicizing” high school graduations, I invite you to guess who the first sitting president was to address a high school graduation ceremony. The answer might surprise you, but it’s worth bearing in mind when the right-wing crazies start yipping on the topic.
Just guessing from your clues: either Ronald Reagan or George W. Bush.
Glassboro High School
They just need a larger venue, keep the spotlight on the achievement of the high school graduates, and have Michelle Obama celebrate the changes in Topeka since 1954. The sixtieth anniversary of Brown v. Board of Eduction is something to commemorate nationally. Hopefully the White House intends to do something in Clarendon County, SC, a case that was combined with Brown. IIRC, there was also a Virginia case that was combined with Brown. And maybe someone will lampoon the silliness of a Columbia University professor of psychology who argued for the segregationist side in Brown with a “blacks are inherently inferior” Charles Murray type of argument to show that the issue was a national one and still is.
It is true that some high schoolers just want high school graduation to be their big day and not be upstaged. Those folks are not into historic occasions involving their high school.
Every bit of the advancement of this country is based upon Brown v. Board.
Everything.
It is THE court case upon which the advancement for everyone else who isn’t a White male has been placed over the past 60 years.
It is THE pivotal case, and it was so much more than just education.
All advancements, across the board, can be traced back to Brown v. Board.
And, it is the case in which the right-wing despises.
So, to be blunt,
FUCK ALL THOSE MUTHAFUCKAS complaining about the First Lady coming. From those idiot kids, to their racist ass parents.
FUCK ALL OF THEM.
tired of folks worrying about their feelings.
FUCK THEM.