Rep. Swalwell's Racial Problem

[Ana the Ist]

I don't watch the Daily Show since they took an anti-white racist turn (I gave it a shot after Stewart left, but the racism was popping up almost every episode so I quit), but I recently caught the interview with Democratic candidate Eric Swalwell from California. In the interview, he addressed statements he made regarding his racial/gender inferiority...

You see, he's a white man. This is considered a problem for a significant portion of the left. Why? Because apparently the belief that a white man is less capable of addressing certain issues is so prevalent amongst some people on the left that he needed to address how he's going to overcome his racial inferiority. I couldn't find a video of the interview, but I did find some articles addressing it....

Swalwell: I may be 'another white guy' but 'I know when to pass the mic'

"A white guy who doesn't see other identities or understand other experiences should not be president," he says in the interview.

"I do," Swalwell continued. "And where there would be gaps in my knowledge or my experience, I will pass the mic to people who do have that experience."

Swalwell explains that should he encounter an issue that, as a white man, he's less capable by virtue of his skin color and gender than non-whites and females....and especially non-white females. We could debate all day what he meant by "pass the mic", but I think that he meant he'll have others speak for him regarding racial issues. Trevor Noah, the host of The Daily Show, asked him why people should vote for him at all then...instead of a non-white female like Kamala Harris. Sadly, he then began to explain aspects of his platform which was obviously a secondary issue to his racial and gender inferiority.

I'd like to tell you that's the extent of this racist embarrassment...but he went on to explain how slavery is the "original sin" of the US....

Eric Swalwell Backs Reparations on Comedy Central: 'Original Sin of Slavery' Never 'Rightfully Dealt With'

"I think we have an original sin of slavery that we’ve not wholly and rightfully dealt with and I’m supporting creating a committee on reparations to figure out how to deal with that."

This is CF, so I'm assuming most people understand original sin. In this context, it refers to the idea that whites today are to carry the guilt of the sins of white slaveowners of the past. This is the sort of justification needed to transfer large amounts of money from one racial group to another....without it sounding like the racist wealth confiscation it is.

This is a sad turn for the Democrats IMO...though they clearly don't all agree with this racism against whites, enough do for white candidates to address it on a national stage. The left wing media seems silent on this issue, which is odd given how concerned they claim to be regarding racism on the conservative side of the spectrum. Outlets like CNN or WaPo or HuffPo will run articles about something that may have been an act of racism against a minority citizen....yet racism against white candidates (which has far reaching consequences) is largely ignored or treated as valid.

Thoughts?

 

[RichardY]

@Ana the Ist Purity of Essence? I think that's a reference to Satan in Dr Strangelove. Jack.

Original sin has been beaten to death so much, even in Christianity. A man and his descendants are damned because he ate an apple...... Guilt trip, straight to hell.

 

[rambot]

As a white dude, I think that I cannot say that I have a well rounded experience of what it is like to be a black man in the US today.

I feel like, apparently, that makes me a racist embarrassment?

I like that descriptor of original sin; especially given how much wealth and prosperity in the US came to be directly because of the fact that HUGE groups of labourers were not being paid.

I don't know if I'm 100% in agreement with that description but it's an interesting metaphor.

Personally, I don't think reparations are a good idea.

 

[MehGuy]

I think the Republican party has a bright future.

 

[Ana the Ist]

@Ana the Ist Purity of Essence? I think that's a reference to Satan in Dr Strangelove. Jack.

Original sin has been beaten to death so much, even in Christianity. A man and his descendants are damned because he ate an apple...... Guilt trip, straight to hell.

It's weird to see the left adopt the same sort of religious-baiting tactics that the right employs. The idea of original sin is well ingrained in the identities of many Catholics and other denominations....and the appeal to it in regards to reparations is absurd.

Slavery was primarily engaged in by individuals. It's a hard topic to find evidence for...but I've never found any instances where the federal government (or even state government) bought slaves. It seems like the sort of thing that probably did happen at some point or another....but I couldn't find any instances let alone any large scale instances. It's certainly possible that someone knows more than myself on the matter...and if so, I'd like to hear about it. I think one could make a reasonable argument that the descendants of those purchased by the federal government deserve some reparations....as it was the government that did them wrong.

To my knowledge though, the vast majority of slaves were owned by private citizen or possibly companies. They owned these slaves when it was legal to own slaves. They aren't actually guilty of anything.

So when people talk about reparations in the form of taking money from whites and giving it to blacks....we're talking about committing an injustice and one that's based entirely upon racism. I don't know of anyone who would agree to go to jail for the crimes of a dead sibling or parent....so why in the world would anyone think it's ok to punish a group of people based upon their race when they may not be related to a slaveowner at all?

Ive seen other ideas about reparations but frankly, I think those who want reparations won't be satisfied. What's the point then?

I'm less concerned about reparations because our anti-discrimination laws make the very idea extremely difficult. I think that all these candidates offering to "look into it" are just saying that for political points. I think the vast majority realize it simply isn't going to happen.

I'm more concerned about the blatant racism that some in the left are engaging in....and none are actually calling out. This Democrat from California is being judged by the color of his skin...not the content of his character. His whiteness is being portrayed as making him an inferior candidate. The belief that some races are inherently superior to others is the classic definition of racism. It's the same mentality used to justify not teaching black slaves to read. Now it's being used to claim that a white man shouldn't be elected.

 

[rambot]

I'm more concerned about the blatant racism that some in the left are engaging in....and none are actually calling out. This Democrat from California is being judged by the color of his skin...not the content of his character. His whiteness is being portrayed as making him an inferior candidate. The belief that some races are inherently superior to others is the classic definition of racism. It's the same mentality used to justify not teaching black slaves to read. Now it's being used to claim that a white man shouldn't be elected.

Sorry. Is he being considered to be inferior because of the colour of his skin or because of his lack of experience and knowledge?

 

[RichardY]

@Ana the Ist Tribal society. Little difference between Irish voting for Irish, or Germans for Germans. Chinese for Chinese. Highly collective cultures. Along with the changes in the system.

As for slavery if it's not written into law to be enforced, the slave is not a secure asset, so is dependent on the brutality of the culture to turn a "profit". Plenty of slavery on the uptick in the modern & western world. An indirect paternal ancestor of mine actually wrote the legal opinion for slavery in England. The Yorke-Talbot Slavery opinion.

Saw a story on the news this morning of I think a Romanian(might be wrong) enslaving 2 Polish men in the UK.

 

[Fantine]

As usual, another young candidate, Mayor Pete, waxed eloquent on this at his town hall.

"Some women have told me they like my ideas but will vote only for a woman, and I get that, and I want you to know that even if you aren't for me, I am still for you."

He is probably the best communicator ever to run for office, and is even able to handle the abusive verbiage of Trump.

 

[Pommer]

It's the same mentality used to justify not teaching black slaves to read. Now it's being used to claim that a white man shouldn't be elected.

Now, now, Pom, ol’ boy, now, now!

 

[tall73]

Sorry. Is he being considered to be inferior because of the colour of his skin or because of his lack of experience and knowledge?

Well the question he was answering was "Why should another white guy be president?", not, "why should you be president since you lack experience and knowledge?"

 

[Ana the Ist]

As a white dude, I think that I cannot say that I have a well rounded experience of what it is like to be a black man in the US today.

And vice versa.

I feel like, apparently, that makes me a racist embarrassment?

Awwww....why? My guess is you also don't know what it's like to be a 85yo woman with arthritis...but that doesn't mean that you can't relate to one. In fact, if you wanted to get technical about it, you don't know what it's like to be anyone but yourself. That's where communication is helpful...there's really only a handful of conditions that are incomprehensible (i.e. schizophrenia) and must be lived to truly understand.

I like that descriptor of original sin; especially given how much wealth and prosperity in the US came to be directly because of the fact that HUGE groups of labourers were not being paid.

That's interesting..... it wasn't the slavery that was sinful, but the wealth generated by it? Do you think the same of all of those who gained wealth through means that we now consider immoral (but were legal at the time) like child labor, indentured servitude, or just a 12 hour workday?

I don't know if I'm 100% in agreement with that description but it's an interesting metaphor.

Personally, I don't think reparations are a good idea.

I don't either...and as someone who thinks the concept of original sin is silly to begin with, I think it's even worse applied in this context. We hold people responsible for their own actions.....not their children, or grandchildren, or great grandchildren.

 

[Ana the Ist]

As usual, another young candidate, Mayor Pete, waxed eloquent on this at his town hall.

"Some women have told me they like my ideas but will vote only for a woman, and I get that, and I want you to know that even if you aren't for me, I am still for you."

He is probably the best communicator ever to run for office, and is even able to handle the abusive verbiage of Trump.

That's a very friendly way to respond to those women lol. I wonder if he's one of those Democrats who believes in calling out sexism and bigotry wherever he sees it...or only when he sees it coming from the right side of the political spectrum.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Sorry. Is he being considered to be inferior because of the colour of his skin or because of his lack of experience and knowledge?

If anyone on the left were asking non-white female candidates about their ability to relate to the experiences of white people and men...this would be a legitimate question.

That hasn't happened though....and like Bernie Sanders and Biden, this candidate's skin color (and gender) is being presented as automatically imbuing the candidate with negative qualities.

Think of the old racial stereotype of "the lazy black man". Now imagine that several black men were running for president and this was continually being brought up in discussions about their candidacy.

You create a thread about how it's racist to assume the black candidates are lazy just because of their skin color. I reply to your thread asking "Is this really about his skin color or is it really about work ethic?"

 

[rambot]

Uh oh. I'm gonna bow out Ana. We have a tendency to have the same discussions again and again which, in itself isn't a problem. But I find it really difficult to get simple clear cut answers from you as you have a habit of creating hypothetical situations that may/may not be good analogies and use them to push forward an idea that may or may not address my questions.

No disrespect, it's just a bit frustrating for me. Best o luck!

 

[ArmenianJohn]

You see, he's a white man. This is considered a problem for a significant portion of the left.

I suppose it's convenient to make up your own "facts" and then build on them, must be nice... I don't know how you came up with this false idea.

Meanwhile, reality is that over 65% of "the left" are supporting white men over women in the Democratic primary... doesn't seem to be such "a problem for a significant portion of the left" after all.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Uh oh. I'm gonna bow out Ana. We have a tendency to have the same discussions again and again which, in itself isn't a problem. But I find it really difficult to get simple clear cut answers from you as you have a habit of creating hypothetical situations that may/may not be good analogies and use them to push forward an idea that may or may not address my questions.

No disrespect, it's just a bit frustrating for me. Best o luck!

Ok....

I guess the short answer to your question would be that experience and knowledge wouldn't be racist concerns if they weren't tied directly to his race/gender. They aren't concerns for Kamala Harris for example. The concern is that he is less capable as a white man to address certain issues than a black woman would be.

Another example would be the myriad of concerns surrounding Barack Obama during his first election.....though ironically, I don't recall his race actually being brought up.

 

[Ana the Ist]

I suppose it's convenient to make up your own "facts" and then build on them, must be nice... I don't know how you came up with this false idea.

Well I certainly didn't make it up....I doubt Swalwell addressed the issue just for funsies. It's an issue that the left has been grappling with since candidates started running.....

Should a White Man Be the Face of the Democratic Party in 2020?

Democrats Don’t Want to Nominate a Candidate Who Looks Like Bernie or Joe

To the White Men Running to Be the Democratic Presidential Candidate: Can You Not?

Durst column: The Democrats have a white man problem

Some Democrats seeking diversity frustrated by Joe Biden's 2020 bid: 'I'm over white men running the country'

That's really just a sample....I could link column after column, blog after blog, quote after quote....about how it's "problematic" to have these white men running for office.

So let's not pretend that suddenly I'm making this up. If it makes you uncomfortable to see this sort of conversation happen on the left....that's a good thing. To discount anyone because of their race or gender is racist and sexist.

 

[ArmenianJohn]

Well I certainly didn't make it up....I doubt Swalwell addressed the issue just for funsies. It's an issue that the left has been grappling with since candidates started running.....

Should a White Man Be the Face of the Democratic Party in 2020?

Democrats Don’t Want to Nominate a Candidate Who Looks Like Bernie or Joe

To the White Men Running to Be the Democratic Presidential Candidate: Can You Not?

Durst column: The Democrats have a white man problem

Some Democrats seeking diversity frustrated by Joe Biden's 2020 bid: 'I'm over white men running the country'

That's really just a sample....I could link column after column, blog after blog, quote after quote....about how it's "problematic" to have these white men running for office.

So let's not pretend that suddenly I'm making this up. If it makes you uncomfortable to see this sort of conversation happen on the left....that's a good thing. To discount anyone because of their race or gender is racist and sexist.

Seems that most conservatives, like yourself, extend your black/white, one-way-or-the-opposite mentality to others.

It's very clear that there's a problem where there aren't enough women being elected compared to men. But that doesn't mean that people are going to go overboard to create a fake remedy for that.

And the fact is that Democrats are not largely jumping into the concept of going solely on identity politics (i.e. voting for women just to vote for women). The polls in the primary race make that clear.

Yet you still go with your false premise as the basis for your story. It's odd.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Seems that most conservatives, like yourself, extend your black/white, one-way-or-the-opposite mentality to others.

I'm not a conservative....and those articles were from liberally biased sources and writers. The first is from the New York Times.

It's very clear that there's a problem where there aren't enough women being elected compared to men.

Why is that a problem? In my opinion....men and women are equally capable of being president....therefore it doesn't matter how many men or women are elected.

And the fact is that Democrats are not largely jumping into the concept of going solely on identity politics (i.e. voting for women just to vote for women). The polls in the primary race make that clear.

Apparently, you didn't read that second article I posted...

"With shifting attitudes and demographics among the Democratic base, is a straight white man really what the party wants in this moment? We did some research, and it turns out that even among white male voters in the Democratic primary, the answer is no. In other words, Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders may be leading the polls despite their race and gender, rather than because of it."

Research shows that the reason why Biden and Sanders are leading the polls is only because the left believes they have a better chance of winning. When asked directly about who they would like to win....they make it clear they don't want a white man. Why? Because they're white men.

So not only is there clearly some racism against white men in these discussions....but sadly there's also a lack of confidence in women and candidates of color.

While I understand you might want to frame this as "identity politics" let's call it what it is....bigotry and racism.

Yet you still go with your false premise as the basis for your story. It's odd.

You haven't provided any evidence that the premise of this thread is false. I've already provided plenty of evidence for this thread....but since you seem to want more...

Democrats Consider: Is A White, Straight Man The Safe Bet Against Trump?

Democrats Won’t Vote For A Woman Or Person Of Color. They Claim It’s Because AMERICA Is Sexist And Racist.

So there you have it....it appears that the reason why white male candidates are leading the democratic pack is because of racial stereotypes a portion of the left holds regarding white voters. A lot of them simply don't believe other white voters will cast a ballot for a gay man, person of color, or woman.

 

[Ana the Ist]

I'd like to make it abundantly clear that when I'm talking about racism on the left ...I don't mean that every single liberal or leftist is racist. Liberalism in the US encompasses a diverse set of beliefs and while a particular strain of liberalism in recent years has been very anti-white and/or anti-male....that doesn't mean all liberals or everyone on the left is.

I'm saying this, even though it should be obvious, because it's rather tedious to keep repeating it in a discussion about racism and sexism amongst the democratic candidates. As I've shown with numerous links to articles (and believe me, there's many many more) it's a topic of discussion in the liberal media so there's no reason to pretend that it isn't.

I also don't want to alienate any liberals from the discussion. I've read more articles than I can count from liberal sources that have stressed the importance of discussing racism and having a dialogue about it. The problem I've found is that whenever the discussion is about racism on the left side of politics or racism directed at whites....liberals tend to not participate.

I can only imagine why....but I'd rather not. I'd rather hear from some of the liberal posters here and find out what they think about a white male candidate treating his whiteness as something that makes him inferior to non-white candidates and something he needs help to overcome.