Is Hillary Clinton a Racist? Yes.

 April 25th. UPDATE:

Whew!  Ya’ll seem to have had your socks knocked off by Hillary Clinton this past week.  Everyone wants to know whether or not she’s a racist!  I point to the info in this post, and also look for “White Privilage: Hillary has it”, also on this blog.

A lot of self proclaimed White people want to know more about what racism is in the wake of the last debate and the Penn primary, but it all started when Hill employed the kitchen sink strategy.  Not only did her gloves come off but all the rules and niceties went right out the window; everything was considered in play, including race, and playing on people’s fears about race.

White people have heard the ever rising accusation that Hill is in fact a racist, and they want to know if it’s true.  Particularly if they support her or are undecided and thinking about supporting her. 

After all, if she is a racist, voting for her would put one in a tricky position.  So, your concern is understandable.  Hopefully the information you find here helps you out a little bit, and puts you on the path towards truly examining race in your life.  Peace.

###

April 24th.  UPDATE:

Well.  This blog about whether Hillary Clinton is a racist or not has been getting major hits since the Pennsylvania primary.  I can only guess that is because people’s frustration levels are rising; you’ve seen the tactics being employed by her camp, so it’s natural to then ask the question, “is she racist?”

Let’s set that aside for a moment.  What I’ve outline is my personal opinion.  I’ve also outlined straight facts about white privilage.  I want to clarify someting.  All white people, no matter what class they grew up in or live in now, have white privilage.  It’s something granted by birth.  White people can not refuse their privilage, just like people of color can’t stop discrimination and racism from impacting their lives. 

But that doesn’t mean that I am saying that because you are white, you are racist.  No.  I’m not saying Hill is a racist because she is a privilaged White woman.  I am saying Hill is racist because the woman is smart as hell, let’s not get it twisted.  And what we are seeing is how she is using her White privilage in her campaign against Barack Obama.  The common theme is playing on America’s ingnorance of, uncomfortablnes with, guilt over, Black people.  She knows exactly what she is doing.  She is the one playing the race card.  Again and again and again. 

She could go about campaigning any number of ways.  She could choose the moral high ground.  But in desperation, losing the nomination, she decided to unleash the kitchen sink.  The ‘kitchen sink’ is code for by any means necessary, right wrong or otherwise.  And she can do that.  Because she’s a White woman.  So is Hillary Clinton a racist?  I would have to say yes.  I wouldn’t have thought so a year ago.  But I am cery clear on it today.

So, that is my update and clarification. 

Sable Verity

####

Typical Sable Verity, talking that racism nonsense again!

When I ask the question “is Hillary Clinton a racist”. I get one of two answers; yes or no.  Actually, I don’t get many ‘no’s', but they’re out there.  I’m sure her supporters shout and argue it down whenever they have the chance.  I’ve written on Hillary’s White privilage, but white privilage isn’t chosen- you’re white, you’re privilaged.  We’re not talking class, so let’s not get into the i-am-not-a-privilaged-person-my-family-struggled-when-I-was-growing-up discussion…

Not only is Hillary racist, but she appeals to other racists as the candidate of choice:

ABOUT WHITE PRIVILAGE:

White privilege is a sociological concept describing advantages enjoyed by white persons beyond what is commonly experienced by the non-white people in those same social spaces (nation, community, workplace, etc.). It differs from racism or prejudice by the fact that a person benefiting from white privilege need not hold racist beliefs themselves.

Scholars associated with the legal studies field of Critical Race Theory have argued that whiteness or white racial status can be thought of as property, something of value owned by certain members of society. This idea has been advanced in particular by Cheryl Harris^[1] and George Lipsitz.^[2] Betsy Lucal writes that current ideas about racism are limited because of their tendency to focus only on racial “minorities” and the oppressive aspects of race. This approach, she writes, overlooks how whites are affected by race and indeed receive privileges through race.^[3] It is particularly difficult for white people to learn about White privilege. Dan J. Pence and J. Arthur Fields suggest that resistance to acknowledging white privilege stems from the fact that whites often see inequality as a black or Latino issue. Reactions range from hostility to a “wall of silence.”^[4]

A study published by Branscombe et al found that thinking about the benefits gained from a privileged group membership can threaten social identity and evoke justification of the existing status difference between the ingroup and a disadvantaged group. For white Americans, racial privilege may be justified by concurring with modern racist attitudes. The study found that increased racism in response to thoughts of white privilege was limited to those who highly identified with their racial category. In contrast, when white racial identification was sufficiently low, thoughts of white privilege reliably reduced modern racism.^[5] Statements about racial inequality may be framed as either White privileges or Black disadvantages, when framed as White privileges a 2005 study found that the statements resulted in greater collective guilt and lower racism compared to a Black disadvantage framing. The findings suggest that representing inequality in terms of outgroup disadvantage allows privileged group members to avoid the negative psychological implications of inequality and supports prejudicial attitudes.^[6]

In the widely circulated essay, White privilege: Unpacking the invisible knapsack, Peggy McIntosh sought to enumerate the social, political and cultural advantages accorded to whites in American society. McIntosh claims there are parallels between white privilege, male privilege and heterosexual privilege. ^[7]

The absence of racism

Definitions of privilege also include the absence of racism as a privilege^[8]. Privilege, then, includes both human rights, which are understood to be deserved, and unearned immunities and advantages, because disparity of both types exists.^[9]

History

In his 1935 Black Reconstruction in America, W. E. B. Du Bois first described the “psychological wages” of whiteness:

It must be remembered that the white group of laborers, while they received a low wage, were compensated in part by a sort of public and psychological wage. They were given public deference and titles of courtesy because they were white. They were admitted freely with all classes of white people to public functions, public parks, and the best schools. The police were drawn from their ranks, and the courts, dependent on their votes, treated them with such leniency as to encourage lawlessness. Their vote selected public officials, and while this had small effect upon the economic situation, it had great effect upon their personal treatment and the deference shown them. White schoolhouses were the best in the community, and conspicuously placed, and they cost anywhere from twice to ten times as much per capita as the colored schools. The newspapers specialized on news that flattered the poor whites and almost utterly ignored the Negro except in crime and ridicule.^[10]

This concept was later taken up by David Roediger in his book, The Wages of Whiteness: Race and the Making of the American Working Class^[11] Theorists associated with the journal Race Traitor, such as editor Noel Ignatiev, argue that whiteness (as a marker of a social status within the United States) is conferred upon people in exchange for an expectation of loyalty to what they consider an oppressive social order. This loyalty has taken a variety of forms over time: from the suppression of slave rebellions to whites-only unions to support for police brutality. Like currency, the value of this privilege (for the powerful) depends on the reliability of a white appearance as a marker for social consent. With enough “counterfeit whites” resisting racism and capitalism, the writers in this tradition argue, the privilege will be withdrawn or will splinter, prompting an era of conflict and social redefinition. Without such a period, they argue, progress towards social justice is impossible, and thus “treason to whiteness is loyalty to humanity.”

The theory of White privilege in America may be seen as having its roots in the system of legalized discrimination that existed for much of American history.^[12] In her book Privilege Revealed: How Invisible Preference Undermines America Stephanie M. Wildman writes that many Americans who advocate a merit-based, race-free worldview do not acknowledge the systems of privilege which benefit them. For example, many Americans rely on a social and sometimes even financial inheritance from previous generations. This inheritance, unlikely to be forthcoming if one’s ancestors were slaves, privileges whiteness, maleness, and heterosexuality.^[13] In addition to legal rights, whites were sometimes afforded opportunities and benefits that were unavailable to others. For example, government subsidized white homeownership in the middle of the 20th century through the Federal Housing Administration, but not homeownership of other minorities. ^[14] Some social scientists suggest that the historical processes of suburbanization and decentralization are instances of white privilege that have contributed to contemporary patterns of environmental racism.^[15]

Historians and authors, including Noel Ignatiev and Karen Brodkin, discuss the historical trajectory from exclusion to acceptance of Irish and Jewish émigrés in the late 19th and early 20th centuries in terms of white privilege. Many see a continuing, although not legalized or acknowledged, system of advantage to white people in areas such as housing, salaries, access to employment (especially to positions of power), access to education, even life expectancy.^[16][17]

Sociologists in the American Mosaic Project report widespread belief in the United States that “prejudice and discrimination in favor of whites is important in explaining white advantage” or in their terms that “prejudice and discrimination create a form of white privilege.” According to their 2003 poll, this view was affirmed by 59% of white respondents, 83% of Blacks, and 84% of Hispanics.^[18]

Justice

A 2002 Department of Justice survey found that, although the likelihood of being stopped by police did not differ significantly between white drivers and other races, Black or Latino drivers were three times more likely to be searched than white drivers.^[19] Young white offenders are likely to receive lighter punishments than minorities in America. Black youth arrested for drug possession for the first time are incarcerated at a rate that is forty-eight times greater than the rate for white youth, even when all other factors surrounding the crime are identical. ^[20][21]

Employment and economics

There is a correlation between a person’s name and their likelihood of receiving a call back for a job interview. A field experiment in Boston and Chicago showed that people with “white-sounding” names are 50% more likely to receive a call back than people with “black-sounding” names, despite equal resumé quality between the two racial groups. ^[22] White Americans are more likely than African Americans to have their business loan applications approved, even when other factors such as credit records are comparable. ^[23]

Black and Latino college graduates in America are less likely than white college graduates to end up in a management position. ^[24] This is true even when other factors such as age, experience, and academic records are similar. ^{[25] [26]}

Education

Minority students are less likely to be placed in honors classes, even when justified by test scores. ^{[27] [28] [29]} Visible minority students are more likely than white students to be suspended or expelled from school, even though rates of serious school rule violations do not differ significantly by race. ^{[30] [31]} E. Manglitz argues the educational system in America has deeply-entrenched biases in favor of the white majority in evaluation, curricula, and power relations.^[32]

Self-image

Beverly Daniel Tatum points out that most white people do not think to describe themselves as “white” when listing descriptive terms about themselves, whereas people of color usually use racial or ethnic identity descriptors. Tatum suggests this is because the elements of one’s identity that are congruent with the dominant culture are so normalized and reflected back at one that one is apt to take such traits for granted. This is not the case for identity aspects of those who are defined as “other” by the dominant culture, whether it be on the basis of race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, or other microcultural aspects.^[17] The true reasons behind this occurrence are unknown, but may also be due to many different unspoken psychological effects on minorities and majorities alike, whether it be pride, shame, or an environmental stimulation such as a rally.

Tatum writes that dominant microcultures (in this case, white people) set the parameters in which “subordinate” microcultures operate. Subordinate groups are often labeled as substandard in significant ways: e.g., blacks have historically been characterized as less intelligent than whites.^[17] Subordinates are also defined as being innately incapable of being able to perform the preferred roles in society.^[17] Some members of the subordinate microculture internalize these negative messages, thus being further disadvantaged by the entrenched belief that they cannot succeed to the same extent as white people.^{[citation needed]}

The use of skin whitening treatments by non-whites has been linked to the benefits of white privilege. According to several theorists, the relationship between white privilege and skin whitening is explained by colorism and colonial mentality.^[33][34]

Criticism

Low impact of white privilege

Conservative scholar and renowned opponent of affirmative action programs, Shelby Steele at the Hoover Institution, believes that the effects of white privilege are exaggerated. Steele argues that irresponsibility is a larger problem for blacks, who may incorrectly blame their personal failures on white oppression. He also argues that there are many “minority privileges”: “If I’m a black high school student today… there are white American institutions, universities, hovering over me to offer me opportunities: Almost every institution has a diversity committee… There is a hunger in this society to do right racially, to not be racist.”^[35]

Justification of white privilege

Journalist, conservative^[36] blogger and “race realist” Steve Sailer argues that white privilege may be real, but that “it was earned for [whites] by the hard work and self-discipline of [white] ancestors and relatives … If, say, [a white person] inherit[s] a valuable house in a nice, crime-free white neighborhood, it was earned for [them] by the law-abidingness of other whites” ^[37]

References

#####

I wonder if Hillary ever types “clinton” and “racist” into a search engine to see what comes up.  Here are 10 excerpts from the first ten responses (excluding video) to come up on Google’s general search…

1.  Clinton: Racism remains an issue

by Greg Johnson

Forty years after a U.S. commission warned that the United States was descending into two separate and unequal societies—one white and one black—Penn’s Center for Africana Studies revisited the issue in an effort to assess just how far the nation has come since those dark days.

And they brought in former President Bill Clinton to help.

Read more at Penn Current

2.  Clinton racism out of control

By Zenni Abraham

The Clintons are using the worst aspects of America to win. Is that any way to run a campaign? It’s not worked for them to this point, but God help us all if it does. America should be ashamed of itself for even allowing this kind of political farse of a campaign to go on.
Read more on Zennie’s Blog

3.  Massive Clinton Racism Skills

After issuing such thoroughly racist slurs as “fairy tale” and “Lyndon Johnson passed a civil rights bill,” the Clintons are now trailing Barry Obama by 50 points — 66% to 16% — among black voters, according to a new Rasmussen Reports survey. The Clintons still lead among crackers, 41% to 27%, which must mean she is 14% more racist than Obama, or some such. Silly Clintons! Don’t they know that it was Senator President Martin Luther King Jr. who pushed that civil rights legislation through Congress?

Read more here: [Rasmussen Reports]

4.  Obama and Clinton: Racism and Sexism

The Postnational Monitor

There’s a lot of sexism vs racism talk in the current Democratic Election. I’ve heard some people say that it appears sexism is now worse than racism due to what’s happening to Hillary. I for one do not see it as sexism as much as anti-Clinton bias. I’m getting tired of Hillary and her supporters playing the gender card. Every time I see her or her surrogates on television they are talking about how women should vote for her because she is a woman and how it will be a “sea change” in American cultural life. Imagine for a second if Obama pandered like that to people based on his race. I can imagine how fast his polling numbers among whites would drop. In fact Obama has went out of his way (I believe pretty strongly despite criticism from blacks) to not talk about race in this campaign and stand on his own merit. Hillary waves her ovaries around and says look “I ain’t got no penis…vote for me”. I find this disgusting and anti-feminist (Hillary claims to be one).

More here.

5.  NY Times and Clinton: Racism wins

Black Star News Editorial

The New York Times early this week criticized the Clinton campaign for injecting lowly race-baiting tactics into the Democratic primary campaign. The newspaper appeared respectable on that occasion. 

 Today, the newspaper repudiated its own earlier critical editorial by endorsing the beneficiary of the race-bating, Senator Hillary Clinton. Her campaign’s principle characters are the senator herself and former president Bill Clinton, who has in recent weeks become a most obnoxious character with his vicious personalized attacks against senator Barack Obama.

More here

6.  For Bill Clinton, Echos of Jackson in Obama Win

Anne Kornblut

On Saturday, as Sen. Barack Obama was sweeping up the South Carolina primary, former Pres. Bill Clinton was busy downplaying the significance of Obama’s impending win, casting it as a function of the state’s demographics and the Illinois senator’s heavy African American support. “Jesse Jackson won South Carolina in ’84 and ’88,” Clinton said at a rally in Columbia. “Jackson ran a good campaign. And Obama ran a good campaign here.”

It was a sour note on which to end the contentious Democratic race in South Carolina. For her part, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton barely acknowledged the defeat in her post-primary speech here, except to say that she congratulated Obama on his win. Even when a voter at her rally asked about her defeat, Clinton limited her remarks and made it sound as though she had hardly had a chance. “I’m very very proud to have competed there. It was a close contest going into it,” Clinton said. (It was a close race going in, followed by a trouncing on the way out).

More here

7.  The Hidden Clinton Racism: Not so hidden anymore

It wasn’t enough that Bill alluded to The Black Guy’s campaign as a “fantasy”. Nor was it enough for Hillary’s campaign to display the reprehensibly arrogant attitude that “Obama should come from ahead and be her VP“.
The Clintonesque racist tendencies become more and more apparent as her campaign continues to fail, and it’s despicable. Almost indescribably villainous, the word “monster” comes quickly to mind.

More here.

8.  Clinton’s racism is showing

That makes Clinton’s show of being fair to all ethnic groups a SHAM. She’s making a big deal out of Kenyan leaders giving Obama a native outfit to wear during a visit there? Many dignitaries have done the same. This Hillary woman is tiresome. I click past the channels really fast when I see her or that husband of hers. YUK! AND YUK! again.

9.  Other folks apparently want to keep the dialogue at the lowest common denominator: reptilian hatred. In my email inbox this week, I received a photo of Chelsea Clinton holding a t-shirt proclaiming “My mom is getting her ass kicked by a Negro.” Photoshopped tears in Chesea’s eyes betray her happy grin to a look of surprising agony as she displays the small t-shirt like she is trying it on.

More of that here

10.  Obama and Clinton: racism in the primaries?

Don’t you think that Hilary has blown it with her racist attack on Obama? For a Democrat it was rather disappointing to see her stoop so low. Obama is half-African, half-Irish- what is the problem with him dressing in African dress on a trip to his father’s homeland? If he had gone to Ireland and drunk Guiness, worn a shamrock and danced a gig no one would have said anything would they?

This also brings me to another point. In my experience there are two kinds of racists
1. The in your face I will call you a ni@@er type- well they may be low but at least they are honest.
2. The “we are not racist at all type”- that is until their daughter comes home with a black man…. enough said. The closet racists- in my opinion both are bad but the latter rather than the former are in a way worse!
The rest of this post can be found here