MURDER, POLITICS, AND THE END OF THE JAZZ AGE
by Michael Wolraich
Order today at Barnes & Noble / Amazon / Books-A-Million / Bookshop
MURDER, POLITICS, AND THE END OF THE JAZZ AGE by Michael Wolraich Order today at Barnes & Noble / Amazon / Books-A-Million / Bookshop |
The title of this post comes from the subject line of an email that I received from Dr. Gary L. Cass, head of the "Christian Anti-Defamation Commission." If you read on, you'll notice that none of the "top ten anti-Christian acts of 2013" represent actual discrimination against Christians. Most of them are about Christians' "right" to discriminate against gays and lesbians.
10. "Quentin Tarantino parody" on the life of Jesus Christ, entitled “Djesus Uncrossed”, showing a fake movie trailer of Jesus engaging in extreme violence and shocking profanity.9. The unveiling of an IRS scheme that harassed conservative organizations, including DefendChristians.org.8. California bill stripping youth organizations of their tax exemption unless they allow for openly homosexual members.7&6 [tie]. Air Force Technical Sergeant Layne Wilson faced sudden termination after he complained to a Air Force chaplain over the use of the Christian chapel for a homosexual “wedding”. California bill allowing “transgender” public school students to pick which bathrooms, locker rooms, and sports teams of which to be apart.5. Boy Scouts caving to the immense pressure from radical homosexuals to allow homosexuals into the organization.4. Southern Poverty Law Center partnering with Marines’ training on extremism and labeling pro-family organizations as “Christian terrorists.”3&2 [tie]. US Senate passing Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA), a bill that would allow for cross-dressing teachers in public schools and punish Christian businesses and institutions for not hiring homosexuals. Supreme Court ruling that the Federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) was unconstitutional.1. Obamacare requiring Christian businesses and institutions to fund abortions.
Dr. Cass's email embodies the nature of 21st-century bigotry in the United States. Prominent homophobes rarely attack gays and lesbians these days. Instead they present themselves as victims. Usually, they accuse gays and lesbians of discriminating against them.
The fake-discrimination gambit goes way back. When Anita Bryant led a famous campaign to defeat a Miami gay rights statute in 1977, she insisted that the proposed law was "infringing upon my right or DISCRIMINATING against me as a citizen and mother to teach my children and set examples or point to others as examples of God's moral code."
Modern racists often employ the same trick. White supremacist David Duke likes to insist that he's not "anti-black"; he's "pro-European American." Duke also founded the "National Association for the Advancement of White People," which distorts the NAACP, just as Dr. Cass's "Christian Anti-Defamation Commission" distorts the Jewish Anti-Defamation League.
Public relations is obviously a big part of such rhetoric, but people like Cass are not necessarily disingenuous. Many bigots convince themselves that they're victims in order to feel better about their own bigotry. In psychoanalytic terms, they project their feelings of hatred onto the object of their hatred in order to rationalize their intolerance. As Freud put it, "He hates (persecutes) me, which will entitle me to hate him."
So the next time you hear someone complain about a war against Christians or discrimination against white people or other alleged persecution of the majority, don't forget to read between the lines. Such is the face of modern bigotry.
Michael Wolraich is the author of Blowing Smoke (Da Capo, 2010) about the rise of the right of the right wing. His next book, Unreasonable Men: Theodore Roosevelt and the Republican Rebels Who Created Progressive Politics (Palgrave Macmillan), will be published in Spring 2014. Sign up for the mailing list to notified about pre-sales.
Comments
Under #1, nuns group claims an affront to religious freedom because of the requirement for:
“self-certifying that they are nonprofit organizations that hold themselves out as religious and have religious objections to providing coverage for contraceptive services,”
..to legally drop birth control from their health plans for non-nun employees.
It's going way beyond abortions now. (of course most of these Catholic health plans had contraceptive coverage prior to Obamacare)
by NCD on Sat, 01/04/2014 - 12:07am
Actually, it's never been about abortions. Becuase Obamacare has NEVER mandated abortion coverage.
It's just contraception which, yes, many (but not all) Catholic institutions did cover for their employees.
by Doctor Cleveland on Sat, 01/04/2014 - 1:10am
Well done.
I am laughing as I write this because sometimes these 'philosophers' let their guard down and the Duck Soup guys really did.
Oh, all people are created equal it is just that some of them engage in sodomy.....
You know, black folks used to just sing as they gathered the cotton...
Then we find out that the best thing a guy can do is 'find' a fifteen year old bride cause she will work hard to defeather your ducks. hahahahahahahahh
Ever so often a Steve King will opine about Mexican folks with cantaloupe legs. hahahahahah
Or Rush will pronounce that 'Nigga' is an apt term, for whatever reasons I cannot fathom. Except that Rush is tweeking (is that a word?) to his racist, misogynist and homophobic crowd. Rush makes money doing this shite!
Am I free from my own biases? NO
But I think the left understands, at least leftish individuals, that we all have biases that must be assessed; sometimes on a daily basis.
You or your 'editors' remove some of my bias prints from time to time; so to speak.
I will go for the ad personam attacks at times.
As far as pro-European? I tell ya that American Fries stuff just enraged me a decade ago. hahahaha
Nice essay.
Short and to the point.
I should try that sometime.
hahahahahah
by Richard Day on Sat, 01/04/2014 - 2:11am
They are actually "Flemish Fries." They got the name "French Fries" from the "Dough Boys of WWI." They were with French speaking Belgian troops when they were introduced to this kind of fried potato. French is the official language of the Belgian Army. British made them also but were cut very thick and called chips. We call those today "steak fries." French tries to claim the originator but they are not. It is a street vender food and eaten with mayonnaise in Belgian.
by trkingmomoe on Sat, 01/04/2014 - 7:10am
I just found this on you tube from the Today show this week. I don't watch the Today show. I spent 3 weeks camped in Belgian when the Berlin Wall came down in 1989 as part of the return to force with the Army. That is when I learned about Flemish fries.
by trkingmomoe on Sat, 01/04/2014 - 7:23am
Actually, No. Not Flemish Fries.
The two major languages spoken in Belgium(where I worked for 5 years) are French , spoken by the Walloons and Flemish, a variant of Dutch , spoken by the Flamands.
You're right that what we call "French Fries" are eaten by those French speaking Walloons. And probably just as much by the Dutch speaking Flamands.
Driving into Belgium from Germany, exactly on the border, there's a wagon continually turning out Fries for returning Belge craving their daily potato fix.
by Flavius on Tue, 01/07/2014 - 11:52pm
Thanks, DD
by Michael Wolraich on Sat, 01/04/2014 - 3:02pm
I was going to make a joke about the rugged conservativism of the frontier west with cowboys claiming to be the victims of Indian aggression but then I realized that this is old stuff.
by Michael Maiello on Sat, 01/04/2014 - 11:58am
Bigots always use trumped up charges of aggression to justify their own aggression. Southern racists accused black men of raping white women. Nazis accused Jews of subjugating the German race. Serbs accused Bosnian Muslims of Ottoman-era persecutions. And so on.
What I find fascinating about modern American bigots is the way they've appropriated the language of civil rights, hence the NAAWP and the CADC. Instead of claiming to be victims of aggression or violence, they claim to be victims of discrimination. They say that their freedom of religion and civil rights are being violated. They constantly attack the ACLU but apply the ACLU's legal reasoning to themselves.
by Michael Wolraich on Sat, 01/04/2014 - 3:18pm