Tweet
So today the President will sit down with Skip Gates and his arresting officer, Sgt. James Crowley of the Cambridge PD to have a beer. A lot of Internet bandwidth and airwave time have been spent dealing with trivialities, such as who is consuming which brand of beer (Obama a Bud, Gates tossing back a Jamaican Red Stripe. Crowley’s will opt for a Coors Blue Moon).
I just want to point out that the fact that we’re talking about a beer summit confirms the role of class in this whole brouhaha, an issue I raised earlier (“Why class does matter in the Gates arrest debate“). They are not sitting down to share a bottle of wine; the decision to “lower the class bar” by using the alcoholic beverage of the working (class) man is quite purposeful. Beer is a social signifier that Gates, Obama, and Crowley are on the same level as regular guys shooting the sh*t. Palin aligned herself with “Joe Six Pack” for the same reason — to indicate she’s down with the working class American.
Of course this is all artifice; Crowley is sitting down with the President of the United States and a superstar scholar from Harvard. Gates and Obama are way above Crowley’s station in their professional and social spheres. However, what the Gates incident has taught us is that if you take Barack Obama, Henry Louis Gates or any prominent black man out of context — they can still easily and quickly drop well beneath Crowley’s station given the right (or more accurately, wrong) circumstances. In the often-disappointing real world colored by perception and stereotypes, it’s a rude awakening. If the President and Prof. Gates are anonymized into the average black man, it is still a world of driving while black, voting while black, shopping while black, hailing a cab while black, and now, being in your own home while black that they would experience.
What will these three talk about today, as they chug a cold one? I venture they will touch upon race in some, hopefully productive way, but I can put money on it that class won’t be on the table.
***
On that note, I am really perplexed about the definition of racist at this point. The Oxford English Dictionary:
racism• noun 1 the belief that there are characteristics, abilities, or qualities specific to each race. 2 discrimination against or antagonism towards other races.
- DERIVATIVES racist noun & adjective.
It’s clear no one wants to be labeled a racist, no matter how insane and inappropriate an action or comment they make. Some people seem to have a definition of it in their heads that excludes the possibility that anything THEY say or do might be steeped in racism, intended or not.
Take Boston Police Officer Justin Barrett, whose beat is District B-3 (Dorchester and Mattapan). He mass-mailed an execreble piece of trash to his presumably fellow non-racist friends (as well as The Boston Globe(!) and colleagues in the National Guard):
"His first priority of effort should be to get off the phone and comply with police, for if I was the officer he verbally assaulted like a banana-eating jungle monkey, I would have sprayed him in the face with OC deserving of his belligerent non-compliance."
"He indeed has transcended back to a bumbling jungle monkey, thus he forever remains amid this nation's great social/racial divide..."
"That paragraph was as pathetic as jungle monkey gibberish."
You are a Fool. An infidel...You should serve me coffee and donuts on a Sunday morning."
I am "not a racist but I am prejudice [sic] towards people who are stupid and pretend to stand up and preach for something they say is freedom but it is merely attention because you do not get enough of it in your little fear-dwelling circle of on-the-bandwagon followers."
"Gates is a goddamned fool and you the article writer simply a poor follower and maybe worse, a poor writer. Your article title should read CONDUCT UNBECOMING a JUNGLE MONKEY-BACK TO ONE'S ROOTS. JB"
Ummmm…never mind racist, this man is a dumbass for sending it to the media. Or maybe he really thought there was nothing wrong in that missive. No one is saying he can’t have an opinion over who is right or wrong in this incident — why in god’s name is it relevant to refer to Gates as a “jungle monkey” in his criticism? BTW, the Police Commissioner, Edward Davis took Barrett’s gun and badge; Barrett is awaiting a termination hearing.
Watch the “apology” below the fold.Look at this apology — and watch the video for an insane defense of Barrett’s screed by his attorney, who said “there was no racial tone” to the email:
“The words were being used to characterize behavior not describe anyone,” said Barrett. “It was a poor choice of words. I didn’t mean it in a racist way. I treat everyone with dignity and respect.”Boston Mayor Thomas Menino wants Barrett fired from the department.
“I just say that we want to rid our department of the cancer, and that is what we did — rid the department of the cancer. All the police officers I know don’t condone any of that,” Menino said.
Help me out here — If Officer Justin Barrett’s that transparent in his racism and yet doesn’t consider himself racist, what in his mind constitutes racism? Burning a cross on a lawn? Lynchings? Unleashing dogs and training high-blast fire hoses on people? Fire-bombing a church and killing four girls? If that’s the line that people like Barrett draw to cleanse their consciences of any ability to say or do anything racist, then we are so far away from a post-racial society that I want to weep.
Don’t get me wrong — this cuts both ways, because it’s equally damaging for blacks to throw down the race card at the drop of a hat in a confrontation; do so is signaling that the slight automatically presumes intent and malice when it may be simple ignorance and the defense shields go up because one must avoid being labeled a racist at all costs because it is toxic. The escalation rate is high, and damage is hard to undo, so both sides need to take care when assessing a situation. Most of the time it isn’t clear cut, and as we’ve seen in the Gates case and even in The Valley Swim Club debacle, some people will defend the indefensible, regardless of the obvious, so consensus only appears to exist when it’s instances of outright violence and lack of remorse involved. What is wrong with America?
28 Comments
If he believes he didn’t mean it in a racist sense…… then let me call him an ignorant redneck wanker. After he removes his fist from my teeth, then I would have the chance to explain that I didn’t mean it as an insult, right?
I don’t think even he believes himself there.
What is wrong with America?The list is innumerable, however, the continuation of tribalism and clannish behavior seems to be the biggest hurdle Americans have. Being a former Army brat, this kind of behavior is understandable. Group norms are practiced at every level of society. Society has so many subsets of groups that there is no longer a single “norm” to which everyone aspires. If American children were just brought up to respect American laws instead of American and theological mythology, we would be better off in hundreds of ways.
i’m speechlessThe statement by Barrett is so mind-numbingly false that it takes my breath away.
My only thought is that people don’t believe in the power of words (other than the N word–for which there is now consensus). What exactly was Barrett trying to say with “banana-eating jungle monkey”? Note that “jungle monkey” is used REPEATEDLY in the rant. Would he describe Officer Crowley as a jungle monkey?
The whole incident is about “contempt of cop”–as NPR snarkily referred to it, in their first report on the Gates incident last week.
I’m more offended by his apologythan anything. Especially the “I didn’t mean to be a racist” excuse.
And what about the 911 caller?Great post, Pam! Thanks.
I’d also like to mention the 911 caller, Lucia Whalen, who said in her press conference yesterday that she never mentioned race in the 911 call – a claim that was borne out by the release of the actual call.
AP reported this from the news conference:
And of course, there’s Glenn Beck calling Obama a “racist” – video here.
I think we’ve stepped through the Looking Glass…..
Keep Quiet President ObamaPresident Obama learned the hard way what happens when he called Sgt. Crowley “stupid.” He wound up having to throw back a beer with him.
Now, Officer Barrett is just a Klanservative-style racist.
If the president weighs in on him, he might end up having to invite this scalawag to Martha’s Vineyard for the weekend.
Shhhhhhhh. Don’t say anything, Mr. President.
I had the same thoughtI had to read it a few times to make sure I wasn’t reading it wrong.
After the shock wore off I wondered about this amusing tidbit…I’ll let any English teacher’s get into the specifics of it, but what’s with the grammar and spelling going on here?
followed by this laugh out loud assertion:
ROFTL
After the beer…Gates must sue the police officer and his department for false arrest.
That’s the only way these kinds of things can be resolved.
Gates can get the best lawyers in the country and easily win a suit against Crowley and the Cambridge police.
I’d be telling Crowley, “No hard feelings. See you in court.”
not to pick nits but…I’m not sure there was ever consensus on societal norms. You could make an argument that during say the 1950′s society at large held to certain norms that were culture wide, but that is only the way it looks from 2009. In fact in the 50′s and every other period there has been subsets of people with often contradictory “group norms”
But I’m not an anthropology expert either.
“Porch Monkey”I had never heard that term until I visited my ex’s racist family in Michigan.
They believe that black people don’t work and sit on their porches all day.
They argued with me that “porch monkey” is not a racial slur.
Years later, I heard the same debate in the movie Clerks II:
Next will come the apologist…Who will swear up and down that ‘he didn’t mean it that way’ and that ‘he’s being made into a racist when he’s a good man who served his country, OMG racism against white cops what is this country coming to!’ in 5….4….3…2…
Of course, you’re righta mild case in point, “The Fonz”
Or even go back to some 50′s TV shows like “I Love Lucy” (a mixed race couple) or the “Twilight Zone” or even “My Favorite Martian.”
The class argument over beer as the beverage isn’t rock solidSome people who can afford any priced beverage, even those completely self confident in selecting the best vintages of wine, or the premium brands of hard liquors, still prefer to have a beer. President Obama seems to have made the selection of a beer in his invitation to his guests, and I would guess he is completely at ease with any beverage selections availiable. As a politician Obama may have put on the common man touch of beers, but that’s his choice.
The Barret case is pure hateful bigotry, and racist as it can get. NO EXCUSES that can be mouthed, changes that.
Perhaps a little off-topic, but…The first OED definition of “racism” is kind of a crock. We use characteristics and qualities like skin color to define “race.” Without a handful of superficial differences, in fact, we wouldn’t even have the concept as it is being used. (Interesting fact: if a black man and a white woman have a child, it’s a baby, not a mule.) I’m also pretty certain that as a non-hispanic white male I am unable, for instance, to develop sickle cell anemia.
I suppose it’s a bit of a waste to split hairs over the wording of such a thoroughly flawed concept, but for some reason this still bothers me.
Officer Barrett is a *perfect* example . . .. . . of a racist. He shouldn’t get to hide behind the concept of “institutionalized racism” for his obviously racist terminology. Calling an African-American man a “jungle monkey” is saying that he is sub-human. It is exactly the same attitude shared by Aryan supremacists, who classified Jewish, Slavic and Negroid peoples as “untermenschen” suitable for extermination like vermin.
Barrett should resign as a police officer, or be fired. There is too much in the way of public trust that would be violated by his retention on the police force.
The situation with the officer who arrested Professor Gates is not as obvious. My first reaction was like that of President Obama. Then I read a lot of analysis.
It is entirely possible that Officer Crowley isn’t “intentionally” racist as Officer Barrett (despite his denials) so obviously is. It’s the institutionalized racism that still permeates our society that could have been at work here. If Professor Gates had been white, would he have been arrested given the exact same circumstances? The answer to that question, if it is possible to answer that question, would determine whether Officer Crowley’s arrest of Professor Gates was racist.
Barrett suspended pending hearing
I agree. IIRC from the campaign,Michelle is the oenophile in the family.
If Professor Gates was white, the circumstanceswouldn’t have been the same. Neither Prof. Gates nor Officer Crowley would have mentioned race in their encounter.
There is no “Card”Just ceaseless white racism.
the actual arrest in Cambridge………..strikes me as being as much about “town vs gown” as about race, perhaps more. I grew up in Princeton and I’ve seen this before.
“brought up to respect laws”is the groundwork for authoritarianism. How about “brought up to respect people“? That’s the only real “norm” we should aspire to.
Barrett has also been suspendedfrom the Massachusetts NG.
Wow As an African American there are few things more disconcerting than reading comments by non-African Americans on race and racism. But I understand that to have a conversation everyone needs to be able to speak.
Though in my opinion The Black President, black governors and even World renown black professors say little about racial advancement in the last 50 years. But that 78 year old great grandmother getting tazed on the side of the road in Texas speaks volumes! It my not be getting netter but it is definitely getting equal. smirk
Except he never called Crowley stupid.He said Crowley acted stupidly.
If you can’t understand the difference you need to take some English classes.
Sir Charles over at Cogitamus, a DC labor attorney & Brandeis graduate, with a Boston area childhood and a retired MA state cop for a dad, made this same point (as did Pam). I’ve otherwise seen very little mention of that.
The law is not always right, nor just…Seriously, obey American laws? All of them, absolutely, regardless of whether they are just? Not to mention laws tend to open to interpretation, esp. if one has a good lawyer, adn that laws are often deliberately flexible to allow for changing situations.. but lets just look at the US Constitution:
The definition of citizen as understood by the white men who wrote the US Constitution was a white man with property… then it morphed into just white men… then white men and women.. then there was that whole chattal slavery thing to deal with… followed by Jim Crow and De Facto segregation and “anti-micegenation” laws… then debates along the color lines about whether (and white) Latin@s would be considered white some of the time, but Asians and Blacks definitely weren’t… meanwhile, it still takes an additional 100+ years for black Americans to be treated as full citizens under “the law” and it requires more laws to do so… And so on and so on….
Under the original constitution, I, my daughter, and her decesdents would be non-citizens counted as 3/5 of a person for tax and census purposes only. If we were lucky we would be FPOC, although the “free” part would be at the whim of the law, and we still would not be citizens.
Until 1919, regardless of my skin color, I wouldn’t have been allowed to vote under the law because of gender. I recently found out that my working-class, mother-of-6, abandoned-by-her-husband-during-the-depression, great-grandmother marched for the suffrage movement.
Blind obedience to the law? No thanks – a little too fascist for me.
I don’t think of them as normsBut as ideals, and flawed ones at that, at a period where the US in particular was experiencing a boom from the post-WWII era that hadn’t quite trickled down to people who suffered the worst during the Depression, and conformity in the face of “The Red Menace” was used to portray a false view of US culture.
Add to that the creation of the white middle class, and the new powerful media (commercial TV) tapping into that newly disposable income, and you have a self-feeding mechanism for portraying the 50s and early 60s as having cultural “norms” while stifling the dissent that absolutely existed.
Stephanie Coontz wrote an awesome book on the subject: http://marriage.about.com/od/b…
We NEVER had one unified societal code. No society really does. I mean, if Ancient Romans are bitching in letters that they don’t undertand the youth of today, and they don’t respect their elders, can’t we chalk it up to the human condition?