Is This Cartoon Racist?

@aidan,

now let's hold hands and sing kumbahyah (however you spell it).
*I figured I should say it before someone else does.

1 Reply

@aidan,

I only hold hands as a prelude to sex, but hey, if you're up for it, take my hand, my little buttercup...

1 Reply

@kickycan,

Oh come on - you only hold hands before SEX?!!! What about when you're sitting around the table getting ready to eat and saying the blessing?

(Actually = we'd have to be formally introduced first - maybe Joe Nation could do the honors)

0 Replies

@dlowan,

dlowan wrote:

Aaaarrrrgggghhhhh!

Don't you know that the right has been targetting the ACLU?

The irony would be if that which they love to hate should fight for the creator of this racist cartoon, which some of them defend in the face of sense and history as not being racist, from a right wing rag, to have free speech.

Of COURSE it's consistent with the ACLU's mission.

That is not wherein the irony lay.

Let the record indicate that I am a rightist
and I have had no particular problem with the ACLU.

David

0 Replies

@Ticomaya,

Ticomaya wrote:

maporsche's comment from yesterday is logical, and yet no leftist seems inclined to respond to him

No, actually, I replied to it.

0 Replies

@kickycan,

kickycan wrote:

aidan wrote:

David said:

Quote:
Everyone is perfectly FREE
to utter statements regarding race,
be thay explicit or implied.

We do not have freedom of speech
and freedom of the press EXCEPT as to race.

I understand this statement perfectly. I don't find it incoherent at all - only true.

Quote:
So what? The question isn't "Should this racist cartoon be censored?"

From that interpretation: I dissent.
It seems to me that references (by politically correct folks)
to racist statements include a sneaking, subtle, vague,
silent background implication that thay SHOUD be censored
(and that thay woud DO it, if thay coud get away with it).

Quote:
This thread is about whether this cartoon is racist or not.
And obviously OMSIGDAVID agrees that it's racist. He just doesn't mind.

That s a good way to express it.
The First Amendment equally protects racists and anti-racists and everyone else.

Anyone and everyone has AN ABSOLUTE RIGHT
to have any opinion and to freely express his opinions.

The politically correct people want to limit that right to themselves.

David

0 Replies

@Ticomaya,

Quote:

If it was not in a "right wing rag," I wonder if you would be so quick to leap to conclude it's racist. I suspect you would respond, "Of course I would. It's racist either way."

Lol. I knew you'd pull that one sooner or later.

What's ironic is that I thought for most of the debate that it was in the Washington Post...not sure if I misread that in the initial post, or if that is what it actually says.

I only discovered it was the New York Post vert recently.

I know you are intent upon ignoring the historical realities (and all too frequently, current) providing the context to this cartoon, so go ahead and ignore reality.

1 Reply

@aidan,

Then stop writing as though you live in a cave.

1 Reply

@aidan,

There you go again.

You assume people are upset by the cartoon.

I expect racist ****.

I also deal daily with things that make me a lot more upset than a few inches of ink.

It is simply somewhat frustrating when people defend it on silly grounds.

1 Reply

@kickycan,

kickycan wrote:

aidan wrote:
I've said over and over and over again that I can see how it can be construed both ways.

At least we agree on something then.

Yet you insist on ignoring the entire history of race relations in your (and sadly many other colonised nations) country and choosing to go for the least likely option.

0 Replies

@aidan,

aidan wrote:

David said:

Quote:
Everyone is perfectly FREE
to utter statements regarding race,
be thay explicit or implied.

We do not have freedom of speech
and freedom of the press EXCEPT as to race.

I understand this statement perfectly.

I don't find it incoherent at all - only true.

Thank u, Rebecca.

How did the issue of incoherence arise ?

David

0 Replies

@dlowan,

dlowan wrote:

I know you are intent upon ignoring the historical realities (and all too frequently, current) providing the context to this cartoon, so go ahead and ignore reality.

What historical (or current) realities? That racism exists? I'm not blind to that reality. But that doesn't mean the cartoon is racist.

But yes ... context is important. Why are you ignoring it?

This context you didn't have for most of this thread, when you didn't know the artist was depicting a current event. Police shot a chimp that attacked someone. The cartoonist took the opportunity to use that story to take a swipe at the Stimulus Bill, which he believes might as well have been written by a chimp. If there was any indication the chimp in the cartoon was supposed to be Obama, then I would agree it was racist. But there simply isn't. Obama didn't write the Stimulus Bill ... it wasn't even his idea.

0 Replies

Quote:

Thank u, Rebecca.

How did the issue of incoherence arise ?

I've beem forbidden to say - (might look like I piggybacked).
Llook at the post of the person directly below the original of the post I've quoted above.

1 Reply

@dlowan,

dlowan

Quote:

Then stop writing as though you live in a cave.

I'm sorry = but I'm American. I was raised to believe I can write however and whatever I choose.
Ever heard of the first ammendment?
It's not a right I can easily forget that I have - no matter who bosses me around.

3 Replies

@dlowan,

dlowan wrote:

I expect racist ****. ...

That goes a long way to explain why you insist the cartoon is racist. It's like the old joke about the guy who looks at the Rohrshach ink blots and all he can see is "sex" in every one. You expect racism, so you see it everywhere, even where it doesn't exist.

2 Replies

@aidan,

dlowan said:

Quote:

I know you are intent upon ignoring the historical realities (and all too frequently, current) providing the context to this cartoon, so go ahead and ignore reality.

You have no idea what I do and don't ignore. and you never will.
I wouldn't discuss race (which is an issue that I deem important) with you.
I don't think you're a good listener and you comment impulsively without knowing all the facts.

1 Reply

@aidan,

All I can say is thank god I'm not paying for this.

0 Replies

@aidan,

aidan wrote:

Quote:
Thank u, Rebecca.

How did the issue of incoherence arise ?

I've beem forbidden to say - (might look like I piggybacked).
Llook at the post of the person directly below the original of the post I've quoted above.

Forgive me; your directions did not come to fruition.
By whose authority were u forbidden ?

David

0 Replies

@aidan,

aidan wrote:

You know, one thought did occur to me, and that is that having been living over here, I may not be as in tune anymore to the extent to which race as a subject does permeate everyday life - especially politics.
I have to say that it isn't ever my first thought anymnore - with some relief actually.
So maybe I am viewing it more as someone who's somewhat out of touch with the reality.
Sad to admit that - I'd rather believe that it wasn't so much in the forefront of everything anymore.
I guess I took Obama's election as an indication things were more peaceful.
Maybe not - what do I know about anything anyway - except that I do know I'm always looking for the happy explanation so that's basically what I always come back to.
Maybe that is a form of blindness.

I think you've put on self-imposed blinders so you only view the happy things about racial reality in every day lives rather than the ugliness that still exists.

This is evidenced by your earlier response to the link I posted about all the incidents surrounding Obama's candidacy.

Your response to it was:

aidan wrote:

But you know - I don't want to go looking for racist hatred. I can't even look at your links Butterflynet - I just want to try to keep my sanity and faith and hope in the American people alive.

1 Reply

@aidan,

Aiden, you are just fine, and please don't stop writing your good sense in thoughtful posts. I don't always agree with you, but I always admire that you are able to provide a logical rationale for your opinions, something which most of your critics here generally can't or won't do.

This whole cartoon thing is absurd.

People, of whatever color, who voted for President Obama because they thought he would make the best president cannot logically be accused of racism because they are not racists.

People, of whatever color, who voted for President Obama because he was the black guy are racist. Period.

People, of whatever color, who voted for Senator McCain because they thought he would make the best president cannot logically be accused of racism because they are not racists.

People, of whatever color, who voted for Senator McCain because he was the white guy are racist. Period.

Now then. The cartoonist who drew that cartoon, assuming the same stuff in the news as existed when the cartoon was published--news that had absolutely nothing at all to do with anybody's race--would almost certainly have drawn the same cartoon with the same caption if John McCain had won the election.

So would the cartoon be racist if Barack Obama was blond and blue eyed? Would the cartoon be racist of John McCain was president?

I think those who see racism in the cartoon simply because the President happens to be black likely have a far bigger problem with racist attitudes than the cartoonist likely does.

1 Reply

Is This Cartoon Racist?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know