Sucking Up As Usual
(The following, time-sensitive text was prepared before the firestorm erupted over my announcement that paleoconservatism may be approaching the condition in which Nietzsche placed his maker. A detailed response to some of the insightful comments that my remarks about the changing American Right elicited will be offered next week. PG)
Last Friday the New York Post (April 4, 2008) had in its commentary section several tributes to Martin Luther King, on the fortieth anniversary of his death. Pervading these tributes were depictions of our country as a cesspool of bigotry before King came along to redeem us with his (borrowed) oratory. Before MLK taught us that we are “to be judged by the content of our character,” America was suffering under the burden of “raw racism.” Because King carried out his redemptive mission, every tribute in this commentary section asserts, “America is a far better place now than the America of 1968.”
There are several aspects of this by now predictable neocon hagiography that warrant attention. One, the neoconservatives, when I started reading them in the 1970s, were convinced that the US was falling apart because of the “lawlessness” unleashed by the civil rights movement. But this important fact, which I bring up in my latest book, has been allowed to disappear into a memory hole. At the time of King’s death, none of the leading neoconservative journalists any more than that renowned worshipper of equality Harry Jaffa had nice things to say about King. Perhaps the present neocon leadership owes us an explanation as to why their party-line on this historical question has changed so fundamentally in the last thirty to forty years.
Two, it is simply untrue or grossly oversimplified to say that America and its black population are much better off now than they were in 1968. Although obviously a leftist news-site, MSNBC posted last Friday a far more nuanced view of King’s legacy than the New York Post. MSNBC did not try to hide either King’s personal defects or the growth of a large underclass black population with mounting social problems. In 1984 the neoconservatives, who then exhibited some intellectual honesty, showcased Charles Murray’s Losing Ground, a work whose disturbing picture of the black “culture of dependence” that had developed since the 1960s is as applicable now as it was twenty years ago. Are not the neocons sufficiently sentient to notice the disastrous disintegration of black family life and the explosion of black violence, which neither the career nor death of King did anything to mitigate?
Haven’t they also noticed King’s solutions to black social problems were the same or even more radically statist and redistributionist than those that Republicans are now criticizing in the speeches of Senator Obama? From his statements, it seems that King was a passionate advocate of racial quotas, which he believed the government should impose. Whatever he may have said in his Washington speech about being “judged by the content of his character,” he also favored retribution for black, something that he thought could be paid for partly by providing blacks with privileged access to jobs and school admissions.
It is finally childish to pretend that the social policies pursued by the government and the politics of guilt, which have been around for a very long time, have nothing to do with the changed political situation of blacks starting in the 1960s. One does not have to be a fan of Southern segregation to recognize that what has taken its place is a far more widespread abuse of power than the racial situation that had existed before. We are now encountering white self-incrimination, black racist demagoguery, and the continuing extension of the designated victim list to include women, gays, Latinos, and the transgendered. Admittedly the civil rights movement did not yield the entire mind-boggling range of designated victims and victim-oriented policies which are characteristic of our updated democracy. But it would be hard to think of any of these later anti-discrimination movements making headway without the civil rights movement as an icebreaker.
Since younger neocons have no memory of a country that preceded these cataclysmic changes, what fuels their patriotism is their attachment to a society that developed in the 1960s. This is the only America that the neocons could possibly feel comfortable living in. For his present “movement conservative” worshippers, King has a world-historical significance, having accomplished internally what the great centralizing presidents had done internationally, by killing Germans or by devastating the Southern states in the early 1860s.
One of the effects of the process the neocons are celebrating is a large, radicalized black electorate that fits easily into the left wing of the Democratic Party. It has been the longtime preoccupation of Republican spin-doctors to pull this self-consciously black mass of voters into the Republican column. Despite the supportive role the GOP played throughout the civil rights revolution, black voters have come to hate the Republican Party intensely. They have gone so far as to associate GOP politicians with slavery and segregation. The neocons who are busy embellishing King’s mythology are trying to help along the party they have taken over ideologically. More specifically, they are hoping to convince black voters to become Republicans.
Note how Republican presidential nominee McCain railed against South Carolinians who had been insensitive enough to hoist the Stars and Bars over public buildings. As I write this piece, the same nominee has just finished delivering an address about Martin Luther King in Memphis; and from what I could pick up, McCain’s text sounded remarkably similar to certain recent commentaries in the New York Post. While still a governor in Texas, moreover, another Republican luminary, George W. Bush, gave orders to remove Confederate memorabilia from the statehouse in Austin. As president, Bush traveled uninvited to the funeral of Coretta King, where his outreach encountered jeers from the assembled black Democratic politicians. It is not surprising that the blacks are rewarding the Republicans and neocons who lick their boots by treating them with derision. Those who render themselves contemptible by groveling do not win the respect of those they fawn on. The share of the black vote that will go to the GOP in November will not likely exceed the 8% that it garnered in 2004. But this may be poetic justice in the case of sycophants.


Comments
Excellent essay as usual, but what is the solution?If I knew the answer I would say so.
Click to flag this comment as abusive
I have seen a lot about Democrats and Identity Politics but the flip side was the GOP becoming the party of victimized whites, God fearing evangelicals with their social conservatism, and mainly the bastion of white guys. There are minority evangelicals who identify with the message but identity politics is a two way street.
One factor in desegregation was the flight of upper and middle income from the ghettos. Movin on up took money and jobs from the old neighborhood.
The black entrepreneurs became Republican role models. And the rest could join P Diddy Daddy Puffy Combs posse on the Yacht next to Taki’s or get rich giving money to Creflo Dollar’s prosperity Gospel Church or get an NBA contract or sell drugs to rich white kids.
A few even go to school and get a job. King talked about judging people by their character and not their skin color. The Republican token blacks like Dr Rice and Gen Powell have little left in the character side after being part of the Republican administration. They may have a little more however than Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Feith, Bolton, the Kagans, and most party Congressmen. It will be interesting to see what character is left of Gen Petreaus after this round of Iranian war propaganda.
Click to flag this comment as abusive
Great post.
(Paul, it would help with readability a lot of your blogging software would indent the start of each paragraph. Right now it looks like one long run-on paragraph. Thanks.)
Click to flag this comment as abusive
Richard,
This essay could be edited to make it easier to read… the formating takes a lot away from the essay.
I remember Steve Sailer pointing out that Murray was a neocon, but his book Losing Ground is quite good.
This new conservatism you speak of, Dr. Gottfried, I have to ask: Where will blacks fit in? Where will Hispanics?
Click to flag this comment as abusive
A fascinating narrative, especially on the shifts within neoconservative agenda from the 1980s onwards. Your observation that the neocons once trumpeted the study of Charles Murray reinforces my impression that neocons today are far to the left of the late NY Senator Moynihan, who famously blamed the distintegration of poor black families on leftist collectivist policies back in the 1960s. Compared to Glen Beck and Ben Wattenberg, Moynihan was a high Tory.
Click to flag this comment as abusive
The policies that Prof. Gottfried decries are so unpopular that it is curious that the Republicans have not reversed them during their tenure in power. Perhaps it is analogous to their “opposition” to abortion, which they have used to lure pro-life voters while accomplishing little of substance (the let ‘em eat rhetoric strategy Nixon used to placate the Right). Cynics believe that the Republicans don’t want these issues to go away (no more issue, no more voters).
Click to flag this comment as abusive
There is much racial hypocrisy in the neocons fawning over MLK. Steve Sailer has cogently argued that it is all a game played by well-educated, elite whites demonstrating their moral superiority over the white working class.
Click to flag this comment as abusive
There is little to add to Dr. Gottfried’s excellent column. Miss Rice, if nominated for vice-president by John McCain, will not help him appreciably with black voters. In fact, he will lose some white votes due to her association with George W. Bush, her support of affirmative action and her support of abortion rights.
Click to flag this comment as abusive
Paul, a great piece as always—though fyi I think the phrase “retribution for black” should be “restitution for blacks.”
Click to flag this comment as abusive
Mr. Gottfried’s underlying question is what is a movement and the political party encapsulating that movement comprised of? Is it just a conglomeration of mutually supporting interests; or something more fundamental? If the latter, can it be inclusive and universal, or more constricted? Without addressing these questions, all is just rhetoric of little import.
Click to flag this comment as abusive
To get rid of Jim Crow laws and practices was and is very, very praiseworthy. What Dr. Michael Hill calls “Jim Snow” laws are not only very, very blameworthy, but also contract the principle behind the elimination of Jim Crow.
Click to flag this comment as abusive
This is a little off the general subject, but illuminating. The pope presented former Confederate President Jefferson Davis (then imprisoned) with a crown of thorns from the Holy Land that the pontiff himself had weaved. The crown is still around, housed in a museum in New Orleans. The illuminating part is why the pope did it.
Click to flag this comment as abusive
The crown of thorns woven by the Pope is housed in Confederate Memorial Hall 929 Camp St New Orleans.Several years ago the Memorial Hall Association successfully fought of an attempted closure by Tulane University and the so-called Ogden Museum of Southern(!)Art which is housed next door.
Click to flag this comment as abusive
How do you navigate the slippery slope of the cultural divide being African_American AND Jewish ?
Click to flag this comment as abusive
The only way we can judge any movement is by results. With this in mind the King movement was a disaster--total dependence on The Welfare State, disintegration of the black family, the majority of children being born out of wedlock, Aids, drug abuse, overwhelming violence, and in general a dysfunctional black culture that is the power base for race hustlers like Jackson and Sharpton who use disgruntled blacks to advance themselves. Furthermore, economic and social progress for blacks is the last thing these demagogues want; it would deprive them of their power to intimidate others and enrich themselves.Blacks must stop seeing themselves as victims and realize their grief comes from their self destructive behavior.
Click to flag this comment as abusive
Post a Comment
By submitting this form, you give Taki's Magazine permission to publish this comment. Comments will be published at our discretion, and may be edited for clarity and length. Personal attacks, ethnic slurs, the riding of hobby horses and the beating of dead ones will be deleted as soon as they are detected by our small but alert staff. Repeat abusers of this policy will be barred from leaving comments. All comments reflect only the views of those posting them and not necessarily those of this website, its editors, or authors. For best formatting, please limit your response to one paragraph and don't hit "enter" to force line breaks.
Commenting is not available in this section entry.