Cagle World

Just when you though they couldn’t go any lower, some Republicans have taken to labeling Democrats as the pro-pedophilia party.

Yes, you read that correctly.

On April 5, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Jezebel of the conservative far right, during an appearance on Real America’s Voice network, levied the following allegation:

“The Democrats are the party of pedophiles. The Democrats are the party of princess predators from Disney. The Democrats are the party of teachers, elementary school teachers trying to transition their elementary school-age children and convince them they’re a different gender. This is the party of their identity, and their identity is the most disgusting, evil, horrible thing happening in our country.”

The Jewish space laser conspiracy guru did not stop there. Greene further stated she hoped her fellow Republican colleagues Lisa Murkowski, Susan Collins and Mitt Romney are held accountable for “being pro-pedophile and voting for Ketanji Brown Jackson” to be confirmed to the Supreme Court.

It was bad enough Republicans treated incoming Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson with such blatant disrespect, especially considering her academic credentials and intellectual acumen far surpassed each of theirs. Accusing the esteemed judge of coddling child pornographers and aiding and abetting terrorists are scurrilous allegations that could be grounds for libel.

The attacks against Jackson appeared to be largely racially based, driven by resentment over the fact a Black woman was selected for such a prestigious position. In fact, even Tennessee Sen. Marsha Blackburn conceded to the esteemed judge “it is obvious that you have been blessed with God given talent,” before later disingenuously asking her how to define a woman.

It is not just Greene and her wayward right-wing comrades in Congress who are peddling disingenuous rhetoric in an attempt to tarnish those on the left. Christina Pushaw, spokesperson for Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, argued that anyone who was in opposition to the governor’s “don’t say gay” is “probably a groomer.”

Shameful allegations and antics notwithstanding, if the Democrats wanted to engage in a “two can play at this game” sort of politics against Republicans, they would have a number of examples to exploit. Donald Trump, still the party’s leader, has been accused by five witnesses of walking in on undressed teenagers. Dennis Hastert, the former Speaker of the House, engaged in horrendous sexual abuse of minors.

Let’s not forget that Rep. Jim Jordan was accused of helping cover up a sex-abuse scandal in college, or that former Republican Senate candidate Roy Moore was credibly accused of sexually assaulting minors. More recently, both Republican National Committee aide Ruben Verastigui and Trump appointee Adam Hageman were arrested on child pornography charges.

Whether Greene, DeSantis, and others on the far right actually believe the rhetoric they are touting, the fact is many of their followers do. By espousing such irresponsible nonsense , they are encouraging certain unhinged, mentally unbalanced individuals to engage in violence that could lead to massive catastrophes.

Remember QAnon follower Edgar Maddison Welch, the then 28-year-old parent from Salisbury, North Carolina who believed the false rumors about Hillary Clinton running a child sex ring out a pizza parlor? In 2016, Welch traveled to Washington DC. and fired an assault weapon inside the restaurant. Fortunately, no one was injured during the melee.

Some Republicans are playing a very dangerous game by irresponsibly portraying the opposition party as being in favor of child abuse. Such reckless behavior will culminate in rampant social discord, massive levels of violence and destruction, which apparently they have no problem with.

–

Copyright 2022 Elwood Watson, distributed by Cagle Cartoons newspaper syndicate

Elwood Watson is a professor of history, Black studies, and gender and sexuality studies at East Tennessee State University. He is also an author and public speaker.

There has always been a segment of Americans harboring rabid levels of hostility and hatred toward non-White Christians. These men and women were largely forced to discuss and reaffirm their racist and bigoted viewpoints with like-minded individuals. For much of our recent history, their outpourings were confined to secret conferences, white supremacist communications, obscure far-right radio programs and the darkest, racially sordid corners of the web.

However, to quote a line from the music of iconic musician Bob Dylan, “The times, they are a changin’.” Such apprehension in engaging in racially inflected behavior has all but evaporated for many individuals who inhabit this political and cultural sphere. Indeed, blunt, acerbic, and outright racially arrogant antics have become the order of the day.

Take Indiana Republican Sen. Mike Braun, who recently stated that interracial marriage is a decision that should be left up to individual states. Realizing he actually stated his true bigoted feelings, he quickly attempted to clarify his remarks, claiming he “misunderstood” the question. No senator, you stated your viewpoint quite clearly. There was nothing ambiguous in what you said or meant.

Even more blatantly racist behavior was on display when a cauldron of Republican senators engaged in scurrilous attacks on Supreme Court nominee Ketanji Brown Jackson. Missouri Sen. Josh Hawley disingenuously questioned her “supposed reluctance” to prosecute child predators, while South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham dishonestly referred to the esteemed judge as “a left wing radical.”

Not to be outdone, Tennessee Sen. Marsha Blackburn asked judge Jackson “how would she define the term woman.” Ted “Cancun” Cruz, the Texas senator who likes to mix it up with big bird, charged Judge Jackson with being a “strong proponent of critical race theory.” The acidic banter went on and on. MSNBC contributor and USA Today columnist Kurt Bardella said it best: “The GOP senators took off their White hoods!”

We have also witnessed several conservative politicians flexing their political muscle at the local and state levels. They have arrogantly imposed their will by crafting and implementing draconian laws in school districts, targeting transgender youth and alternative sex curriculum being taught in public schools. Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis’ ratification of the “don’t say gay” bill is the most politically pernicious example.

Republicans have targeted race-based curricula in public schools with bills like the “stop woke act,” a law supposedly designed to prohibit kids (read white children) from being directly attacked or feeling bad about their race. More recently, these politicians have targeted higher education, disingenuously promoting red herrings such as “critical race theory,” “woke professors,” and other fallacies.

Education is not the only arena where conservatives are flexing their regressive muscles. Right-wing politicians have systematically packed local and state courts with ideologues, passing voting restriction laws in Mississippi, Louisiana, New Hampshire, Arizona, Missouri and other states. Many of these appointees are hell-bent on reconverting America into a nation more reminiscent of the Jim Crow era through voter suppression.

Far right gadfly Tucker Carlson declared, “The Biden Administration is engaged in an unrelenting stream of immigration designed to change the racial mix of the country,” Thus, deviously tapping into the deep-seated racism, xenophobia, and other insecurities of his Fox News audience, particular, older white Americans. This has certainly been psychologically and economically profitable for some opportunistic charlatans. I say some because others, sad to say, genuinely believe in the reductive rhetoric they espouse to their listeners.

The truth is that there has always been a right-wing network comprised of politicians, pundits, radio hosts, journalists, and clergy. This right-wing group has been astute to the insecurities that have rankled the psyche of their listeners, readers, voters, and congregations.

Thus, they have eagerly, and in many cases, deviously capitalized on white fragility and fear. It has become a truly alarming and perturbing state of affairs. Those of us who are committed to a progressive, inclusive society that respects the rights of all American citizens must combat and respond to such vile politics proactively and with fearless ferocity.

–

Copyright 2022 Elwood Watson, distributed by Cagle Cartoons newspaper syndicate

Elwood Watson is a professor of history, Black studies, and gender and sexuality studies at East Tennessee State University. He is also an author and public speaker.

It has been dubbed by many as “the slap heard ‘round the world.“

By now, pretty much anyone with a beating pulse is aware of the fracas that occurred during the Academy Awards on Sunday night, where Will Smith assaulted Chris Rock and yelled at the comedian to “keep my wife’s name out of your [expletive] mouth!“

The internet has been in overdrive ever since.

As is often the case when two high profile celebrities are involved in controversy, sides were quickly taken and lines were firmly drawn. There were those who rallied to the defense of the A-list actor for his chivalrous defense of his wife. Others were firmly casting their empathy with Rock, seeing him as unfairly and violently attacked by an out-of-control movie star.

Immediately following the incident, Smith was consoled by Denzel Washington, Bradley Cooper and Tyler Perry, according to reporters in the theater. Later during the telecast, when he was announced as the winner of the Best Actor award for his role in the film “King Richard,” Smith spoke of love and grace” and shared the advice that Washington dispensed to him: “In your highest moments, be careful, that’s when the devil comes for you.”

The Smith-Rock imbroglio has brought up all sorts of topics to discuss, including toxic masculinity, the angry Black man stereotype, Black-on-Black violence, and celebrity entitlement.

For example, would Smith risk slapping a larger, stronger guy, like Dwayne Johnson, or a powerful white male celebrity, such as Tom Hanks, if they had made the same joke? Highly unlikely. Moreover, in the case of the latter, would he have gotten away with it? More than likely, at the very least, he would have been escorted from the ceremony and possibly arrested, whether the aggrieved party had decided to press charges or not.

Some, including Kathy Griffith (no stranger to controversy herself) and other comedians, fear Smith’s antics has opened the door for them to become targets from mentally unbalanced fans, who may suddenly believe they have free license to attack a performer who upset them, regardless of reason. Perhaps this is true for a few people, but it is highly unlikely that we will see large numbers of comedians being attacked by unhinged audience members.

More than a few Black people believe that such an embarrassing incident involving two Black men could negatively impact upon the larger Black community. My response to such thinking is not at all! Does the behavior of one white person represent or reflect the actions of all white people? Of course not. The same applies to Black people or any other race or group of people.

Will some people attempt to equate Smith’s behavior with the false stereotype of the undisciplined, dangerously violent Black man? Of course they will. That being said, these are the individuals who have always harbored perversely misguided perceptions of people they deem as the “other.“ In most cases, they have done so by choice.

Quite frankly, it’s a waste of time obsessing over what men and women who hardly have your best interests in mind think of you. Such dehumanizing thoughts benefit no one, including racists. Will Smith’s actions are solely a reflection on Will Smith. Period.

Drama aside, there may be a silver lining for this entire episode. The Oscars may finally turnaround its increasingly sagging ratings and become must see television in 2023.

–

Copyright 2022 Elwood Watson, distributed by Cagle Cartoons newspaper syndicate

Elwood Watson is a professor of history, Black studies, and gender and sexuality studies at East Tennessee State University. He is also an author and public speaker.

Editor’s note: An earlier version of this column incorrectly stated that Jussie Smollett’s conviction had been overturned. It has been updated to reflect that only the order denying Smollett bond was overturned. We regret the error.

Love him or hate him, there can be no denying that actor Jussie Smollett conjures up passionately deep emotions from people from across the political spectrum.

Last week, an Illinois Appellate Court overturned a bond ruling on Smollett’s conviction for staging a fake hate crime, and ordered him released from prison after serving just six days of a five-month sentence.

Even as the spotlight on Smollet and his actions have receded from the spotlight, it still drew some attention from predictable corners of the right-wing media world.

Fox News host Tucker Carlson said Smollett’s release was a sad day for “equal justice.” The headline on a piece from Eddie Scarry, a columnist for The Federalist, read that Smollett’s “Black, Gay, and anti-Trump privilege continues to save him.” John Nolte of Brietbart called those that demanded justice for Smollett “idiots.”

To be sure, there were those on the political left who made their displeasure with Smollet known as well. Chicago Tribune columnist Clarence Page wrote of the admittedly sordid incident: “… The whole wackadoodle scheme defied plausibility from the beginning…But even as his case sparked national outrage as a metaphor for systemic racism, it unraveled like a cheap sweater as police combed the city on fruitless search.”

The fact that so many people have weighed in on Jussie Smollett, many with a hyper degree of self-righteousness, is notable. Admittedly, once could see why Chicago law enforcement would very well be riled up and put off by Smollett’s antics. Nonetheless, for so many other Smollett detractors, the issue seems to have a racial nexus.

Smollett is a man of wealth, some degree of influence and connections. There is no doubt these factors have culminated in the actor evading the severe treatment that has too often eluded most Black and Hispanic men who find themselves entangled within the criminal justice system. This enrages many of his critics, who believe he should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

Smollett’s unapologetic embrace and open frankness about being gay likely contributed to the levels of vitriol he receives from those that embrace racism, homophobia, and other darker instincts. The fact that he attempted to label his hoax as a MAGA-inspired hate crime further inflamed the anger of his Trump worshiping critics.

Let’s make one thing clear — I am not making excuses for Smollett. He committed a crime and is paying for it, whether his critics recognize this fact or not. While I am far from an expert, it is a safe bet to say Smollett has serious psychological issues. The guy needs some serious help.

Nonetheless, people committing elaborate and dishonest schemes is hardly new. Charles Stuart murdered his pregnant wife in the late 1980s and blamed the killing on a Black man. Susan Smith, a white woman, killed her two children and falsely claimed to police Black man had kidnapped them during a carjacking. Some human beings can be sadistic, with little to no rhyme or reason.

But with Smollett, some have intentionally magnified the events of the story to make it seem more important than it actually is. It’s a safe bet that most of the White people crying foul against Smollett had no idea who he was prior to his trial, and had probably never tuned in to a single episode of “Empire.”

This story will eventually recede from the news cycle. People will begin to direct their attention to other matters facing the nation. The more important question is whether those who have lathered themselves into a racial hissy fit will take to reflect on their own behavior.

–

Copyright 2022 Elwood Watson, distributed by Cagle Cartoons newspaper syndicate

Elwood Watson is a professor of history, Black studies, and gender and sexuality studies at East Tennessee State University. He is also an author and public speaker.

When President Biden announced his intention to fulfill a campaign promise to nominate the first Black woman for the Supreme Court, many conservatives reacted with fierce and flawed attacks. Some, such as Georgetown law professor Ilya Shapiro, even went as far as to claim his nominee, Ketanji Brown Jackson, would be seen as a “lesser Black woman.”

The immediate backlash to such racist behavior from across the political spectrum has not stopped some conservatives from attacking the president for his choice. Perennial flip-flopping South Carolina Senator Lindsay Graham said, “Biden is caving into the wishes of the far left.” His comments were mild compared to the acidic commentary that emanated from right-wing blogs and websites, much of it so vile it can’t be reprinted here.

Last week, bombastic Fox News host Tucker Carlson — scion of the Swanson frozen dinner empire — derided Judge Jackson’s first name in a fit of xenophobic immaturity, stating that “even President Biden has trouble pronouncing her name.” He perversely paraded on with his juvenile rant declaring that “Biden should release Judge Jackson’s LSAT scores” for public consumption.

Yes, you read that correctly.

Demanding we see test scores is just one example of the double standard some on the right have in their hostility toward Jackson. They did not ask to see the test scores of Trump’s three nominees, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett. The not-so-subtle critiques of her first name are a direct message to the more bigoted right-wingers that she is not one of us — meaning a white Christian conservative.

Legendary broadcaster Dan Rather referred to Carlson’s antics as “straight up racism,” while CNN news anchor Jim Sciutto derided such behavior as “petty and offensive.” Pulitzer Prize-winning author and journalist Nikole Hannah-Jones called Carlson’s presumption that Black people are dumb “standard white supremacy.”

The unvarnished truth is that every person who is not White will confront the dim reality that no matter how accomplished their career has been, they will be labeled by segments of the conservative right as incompetent and lacking in qualifications. Instead of achieving success through their own hard work and intelligence, they’re painted as the recipients of preferential and undeserved treatment.

Jackson — who graduated Magna cum Laude as an undergraduate at Harvard, was the editor of the Harvard Law Review and a Supreme Court Clerk — has not been immune to such bigoted attitudes.

Remember when former President Barack Obama was chided by then reality show host and eventual president Donald Trump, a man whom even some of his own cabinet members referred to as “an idiot”? At that time, he levied the charge that President Obama was not intelligent enough to get into Columbia University and Harvard Law School with his own intellectual abilities, and demanded to see Obama’s grades. Interestingly, this is the same Trump whose own attorneys threatened legal action if the University of Pennsylvania, Trump’s alma mater, dared to make his grades and test scores available to the public. I would argue that such hypocrisy speaks volumes.

If Tucker Carlson and his right-wing comrades are so dedicated to ensuring that America is an unbridled meritocracy, maybe they should look into a mirror sometime. As the late Colin Powell argued as a guest speaker at the 1996 Republican National Convention, “There are those whose entire lives have been filled with preference and privilege, yet who want to deny others access to the same opportunities.”

I couldn’t agree more. Those who live in glass houses of privilege shouldn’t throw stones.

–

Copyright 2022 Elwood Watson, distributed by Cagle Cartoons newspaper syndicate

Elwood Watson is a professor of history, Black studies, and gender and sexuality studies at East Tennessee State University. He is also an author and public speaker.

Last week, Jeffrey A. Lieberman, chair of the psychiatry department at Columbia University, was suspended for his tone-deaf comments regarding a a Black model.

“Whether a work of art or a freak of nature, she’s a beautiful sight to behold,” Lieberman wrote on Twitter.

The model he was referring to was Nyakim Gatwech, an American model of South Sudanese descent. Gatwech is a popular model whose fans refer to her as the “Queen of the Dark.”

Soon afterwards, Lieberman issued an apology stating that he used language that was “racist and sexist.” He further stated that he was “deeply ashamed” of his “prejudices and stereotypical assumptions.”

Lieberman, who according to the New York Times is considered one of the leading psychiatrists in the nation, was removed from his position as psychiatrist-in-chief at Columbia University Irving Medical Center/NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital. He also resigned from his role as executive director of New York State Psychiatric Institute.

The esteemed physician had quite a dramatic week due to his awkward comments, which were completely tone-deaf, regardless of his intentions. Would could possibly be complimentary about being referred to as a “freak” of anything?

Lieberman’s commentary was even more unsettling given the fact that he directed them toward a Black person. Not surprisingly, many Black folk and folk of other ethnic groups chided Lieberman about his wayward and undisciplined mouth.

Truth be told, referring to Black Americans and people of African descent as physically abnormal — often associated with monkeys, apes, and other primates — has long, deeply etched roots in our society. From the time of our arrival to this nation, Black people were immediately and routinely characterized as subhuman species.

A correlation between Africans and apes without tails was a common myth and legend propagated by the British in the early 17th century. Equating Black people with animals was commonplace. Throughout much of the 1800s and well beyond, a number of writers did not hesitate to imply that Africans were the descendants of apes or unknown African beasts, or vice versa.

Here on American shores, similar regressive ides were commonplace as well. Founding father and former President Thomas Jefferson wrote without any degree of hesitation in “Notes on the State of Virginia” that Black men were a lower species who lusted after White women. He also expressed his deep misgivings about interracial relationships despite producing a number of children with one of his slaves, Sally Hemings. Such a level of rank hypocrisy speaks for itself.

It was due to such vile and negative rhetoric of equating Black people (in particular, males) to animalistic, savage beasts that resulted in centuries of degradation, denigration, and downright humiliation for people of African descent. Such mistreatment manifested itself in the form of Jim Crow, chattel slavery, lynching, wanton violence, and other abominable forms of marginalization.

The abominable 1915 film “Birth of a Nation,” produced by D. W. Griffith, assisted in propagating this horrendous, intellectually dishonest mythology by portraying Blacks as uncivilized and animal-like.

The undeniable fact is that the Black person as a “freak of nature” trope is very problematic. Such regressive commentary has had a devastating impact on Black people, in particular, younger Black people.

Such rhetoric, regardless of intent, propagates the false message that Black people are not fully human. It especially cannot be allowed to continue in a nation that is becoming more diverse on a daily basis.

–

Copyright 2022 Elwood Watson, distributed by Cagle Cartoons newspaper syndicate

Elwood Watson is a professor of history, Black studies, and gender and sexuality studies at East Tennessee State University. He is also an author and public speaker.

At this point, anyone with a beating heart is aware debates over free speech, cultural appropriation, and intolerance covered by the umbrella term “cancel culture” have etched themselves firmly into the fabric of our current discourse over the past few years.

Thanks to this suffocating discourse, it’s not surprising that many observers believe it’s the sole cause for much of the disruptions that have plagued every quarter of our society.

Pundits from all sides of the political divide waste no time chiming in on the arguments, complaints, and other expressions related to cancel culture. Being a vociferous supporter or an outspoken opponent has become a surefire way of achieving a degree of notoriety and acquiring supporters (and detractors).

Many critics of cancel culture see it primarily as a meandering evil originally constructed by the left, and deride proponents of the movement as unhinged and oversensitive snowflakes.

The truth is that liberals are not the sole purveyors of cancel culture. This reductive ideology is a bi-partisan movement. The right has not been immune to the temptation of employing various practices of cancel culture, targeting academics, politicians, and other left-wing leaning entities in what they see as combating the left.

More often than not, both liberals and conservatives aggressively utilize ill-defined indignities, manufactured outrage, and bombastic rhetoric to score cheap political points against the other side.

Currently, we are witnessing such antics being shamelessly employed by right-wing politicians such as Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis and Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin, who have waged wanton attacks on the freedom of speech while promoting all sorts of political smokescreens and red herrings.

Some on the right have weaponized such tactics to impact the education of children, be it prohibiting certain books or discussions in K-12 public schools or stacking local school boards with conservative ideologues.

Political persuasion and personal feelings aside, the answer is not to deny them the right to express their viewpoints because you disagree with them. Rather, the appropriate and more effective response is to challenge such rhetoric with concrete facts and logic that will effectively disprove the positions that one may find objectionable or even abhorrent. To paraphrase the old saying, “Sunlight is the best disinfectant.”

Free speech is crucial to our democracy. Either you have it, or you don’t. It is important to remember that when you attempt to curtail the civil rights of others, it may very well only be a matter of time before you, yourself can be stifled, if not outright canceled. Denying others the right to voice their opinions is a misguided and dangerous activity that can result in dramatic and disastrous consequences for all.

The scorched earth approach that many purveyors of so-called cancel culture often engage in is a malignant form of dictatorial behavior that cannot be condoned or tolerated in a society that prides itself on liberty, freedom, and justice for all. We should certainly remember to keep such sobering thoughts in mind.

–

Copyright 2022 Elwood Watson, distributed by Cagle Cartoons newspaper syndicate

Elwood Watson is a professor of history, Black studies, and gender and sexuality studies at East Tennessee State University. He is also an author and public speaker.

Editor’s note: This column has been updated to correct Brian Flores’ first name. We regret the error.

Even in the wake of the Super Bowl, the one story that won’t go away involves Brian Flores, Roger Goodell, and the NFL drama that’s been ensuing over the past week.

Even President Biden weighed in on the issue hours before the Super Bowl kicked off.

“The whole idea that a league that is made up of so many athletes of color, as well as so diverse, that there’s not enough African American qualified coaches to quote, ‘to manage,’ these NFL teams, it just seems to me that it’s a standard that they’d want to live up to,” Biden said.

The Rooney Rule was implemented in 2003 by the NFL in an effort to provide minority coaches the opportunity to be considered for primary positions within NFL organizations. While the rule appears fantastic on its face, the policy has turned out to be another example of the league simply “checking the box,” as Flores referred to the situation.

In his lawsuit, Flores accuses the Denver Broncos of disingenuously interviewing him for their head-coaching position in 2019. He also accuses Miami Dolphins owner Stephen Ross of offering to pay him $100,000 a game to lose intentionally for a better draft pick, and claims the New York Giants arranged for an intended to conduct a sham interview.

While all three teams deny Flores’ accusations, the former Dolphins coach looks to have provided evidence to support his assertions.

On January 24th, New England Patriots head coach Bill Belichick “mistakenly disclosed” to Flores that he would be hired by the Giants, mistaking him for Brian Daboll, offensive coordinator for the Buffalo Bills.

The Giants officially announce Daboll’s hiring three days after interviewing Flores. Daboll is white, while Flores is Black. In interviews with several media outlets, Flores described the plethora of emotions he harbored, which ran the gamut between humiliation, anger, and disbelief.

Flores was hurt. What rational human being wouldn’t be?

In comes Goodell, who said next to nothing of significance in regards to Flores’ accusations. If anything, he recited the usual obligatory mea culpas of how the NFL takes the issue of racism seriously, has no tolerance for it. and will move to address and punish those caught engaged in such acts. Yada, yada, yada. Please, spare us.

What did anyone with half a brain believe Goodell was going to say? We condone and support racial discrimination in all its forms, both subtle and overt? Racism is a prime goal of the NFL?

What group, organization or foundation is going to espouse such a thing? Art, entertainment, business, academia, politics, the ministry all have diversity and inclusion statements on their websites. Hell, even the Ku Klux Klan has decided to implement a diversity statement on its website. (sarcasm)

The NFL is a corporation, and Goodell is its face. During his tenure, the league has continued to financially grow and prosper. And Goodell is very effective in his position, deftly protecting the interests of the league. Thus, the man is keeping his job for the time being.

Meanwhile, many observers believe that Michael Flores, like Colin Kaepernick, may have effectively ended his career by pursuing such a stance.

Racism is a reactionary ingredient that has been deeply etched into the fabric of America. It has been with us since the settlers arrived on the shores of Jamestown, Virginia— the cruelest of cancers that has managed to metastasize its rapacious spirit within the bones of our nation’s DNA.

Racism is as American as blue skies and apple pie. And the NFL’s Brian Flores saga is just a mere microcosm of this sad reality.

–

Copyright 2022 Elwood Watson, distributed by Cagle Cartoons newspaper syndicate

Elwood Watson is a professor of history, Black studies, and gender and sexuality studies at East Tennessee State University. He is also an author and public speaker.

In the early 1980s, there was a movement by some on the right to target and ban books, music, films, magazines, and other forms of media they deemed “offensive” and “inappropriate.”

Among the books swept up in the conservative purge during that decade included classics like The Catcher in the Rye, 1984, The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, and The Color Purple, to name a few.

Believing they had a staunch ally in President Ronald Reagan and the backing of large swaths of the nation gripped by conservative sentiment, the newly-elected Republican House and Senate acted fiercely. Fortunately, they were largely unsuccessful in achieving their goals.

A few decades later, right-wing activists have decided to pick up where they left off, decrying critical race theory, so-called “cancel culture,” “wokeness,” and any form of public dialogue that is considered an affront to conservative sensibilities. Consider the following:

– In New Hampshire, Republican officials enacted “Prohibition on Teaching Discrimination” legislation in June, a law that bans educators from teaching children they are inferior, racist, sexist, or oppressive because of their race, gender, or other characteristics. ”

– Moms for Liberty, a newly formed conservative organization that advocates parental rights, has opened chapters in several states. This organization has campaigned against school curriculums that mention LGBTQ rights, race, critical race theory, and discrimination, and multiple chapters have also campaigned to ban certain publications from school libraries

– Recently elected Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin, signed an executive order on his first day in office seeking to ban “divisive concepts,” including critical race theory in public schools (despite the fact it’s an academic framework that’s not taught in K-12 schools).

– Texas officials are pulling books off shelves that discuss racial and LGBTQ issues, and other subjects that challenge white heterosexual conservative opinion. A Missouri education group that calls itself “No Left Turn in Education” promotes similar bans. And surprise, discussion of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. is largely off-limits as well.

– In Tennessee, where I live, the McMinn County School Board voted unanimously to remove Maus, the Pulitzer Prize-winning book that tells the story of author Art Spiegelman’s relationship with his father, a Holocaust survivor, by depicting Jews as mice and Nazis as cats. According to local reports, the school board objected to eight curse words and nude imagery of a woman used in the depiction of the author’s mother’s suicide

Such antics are clear and blatant acts of suppression, and such a movement is vehemently disturbing. The fiercely brazen degree of arrogance levied by many conservative organizations to enact their reactionary agenda is alarming and appalling.

Fortunately, opponents of this right-wing agenda have not taken such behavior lying down.

High school students in Texas, Virginia, and elsewhere have fought back against such censorship, making it clear to their local school boards, parents, and other public officials that they are not a “fragile species.” They are not adolescent snowflakes who need to be protected from reading literature and documents that their largely misguided and bigoted elders perceive to be “harmful” or “detrimental” to their emotional well-being. Additionally, a number of teachers and parents in other states have filed lawsuits and challenged such prohibitive efforts.

Censorship, regardless of whatever wing of the political spectrum it originates from, is unacceptable. The fact is that the current right-wing attack on free speech and its ruthless efforts to implement an intellectually nihilistic agenda is Orwellian, reeks of McCarthyism, and must be combated ferociously and vigorously.

–

Copyright 2022 Elwood Watson, distributed by Cagle Cartoons newspaper syndicate

Elwood Watson is a professor of history, Black studies, and gender and sexuality studies at East Tennessee State University. He is also an author and public speaker.

Boy, it didn’t take long for right wing activists and pundits to jump into attack dog mode once President Biden announced he would nominate a Black woman for the Supreme Court seat being vacated by retiring Justice Stephen Breyer.

Ilya Shapiro, a constitutional-law expert and an incoming Georgetown Law professor, decided to get a jump start by posting on Twitter ahead of Biden’s announcement:

“Objectively best pick for Biden is Sri Srinivasan, who is solid [progressive] and [very] smart,” Shapiro tweeted. “Even has identity politics benefit of being first Asian (Indian) American. But alas doesn’t fit into last intersectionality hierarchy so we’ll get lesser black woman. Thank heaven for small favors?”

Yes, you read that correctly. “Lesser Black woman.”

That’s not all. He also tweeted that if Biden will solely consider a Black woman to fill Breyer’s seat, his nominee “will always have an asterisk attached. Fitting that the Court takes up affirmative action next term.” A third tweet included a poll in which Shapiro asked his followers if Biden is racist, sexist, both or neither for his commitment to selecting a Black female nominee.

Shapiro deleted his tweets, but not before his remarks garnered fierce push back and condemnation from Georgetown Law School dean William M. Treanor.

“The tweets’ suggestion that the best Supreme Court nominee could not be a Black woman and their use of demeaning language are appalling,” Treanor stated. “The tweets are at odds with everything we stand for at Georgetown Law and are damaging to the culture of equity and inclusion that Georgetown Law is building every day.”

Shapiro made similar remarks about identity following Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor’s nomination to the high court in 2009. “In picking Sonia Sotomayor, President Obama has confirmed that identity politics matter to him more than merit,” Shapiro wrote.

Predictably, Shapiro had plenty of company from his right wing compatriots. Fox News’s Sean Hannity said “Biden said he will make his pick based purely on race and gender, which is possibly illegal.” Constitutional scholar Jonathan Turley, in a Wall Street Journal article, claimed that Biden’s promise is unconstitutional discrimination.

Irresponsible Fox News host Tucker Carlson argued: “It’s possible we have all marinated for so long in the casual racism of affirmative action that it seems normal now to reduce human beings to their race.” The routinely irascible and frequently bigoted Ben Shapiro called it “definitionally affirmative action and race discrimination.” The National Review said, “In a stroke, [Biden] disqualified dozens of liberal and progressive jurists for no other than race and gender.”

The reality is that such racially charged commentary is nothing short of nonsensical. In fact, such pronouncements have had long historical precedent, nor do they violate the law. Where were the objections when former president Donald Trump proudly announced at a MAGA rally that he “intended to appoint a highly qualified woman to the Supreme Court.”

Truth be told, the majority of recent Republican presidents made similar declarations with virtually no resistance from conservative quarters. In the final months of the 1980 presidential campaign, Ronald Reagan promised that he would nominate a highly qualified woman to the Supreme Court if the opportunity provided itself adding: “It is time for a woman to sit among the highest jurists.” His successor, George H.W. Bush, echoed similar sentiments when he nominated Clarence Thomas, but took care to say his pick would not be based on a “quota” or anything other than the best person for the job.

Did Sandra Day O’Connor, Clarence Thomas or Amy Comey Barrett conjure up discussion of asterisks being ascribed next to their names? Did the same right wingers who are now suddenly crying bitter alligator tears lash out in unhinged rage when Trump made his promise less than two years ago? Of course not.

What makes President Biden’s potential nominee any different? I think we all know the answer. In the eyes of many in conservative right wing media and their base of voters, only white or white adjacent people should be considered for the Supreme Court.

There are numerous Black women who are immensely qualified to serve on the nation’s highest court. At the moment, the shortlist likely consists of Ketanji Brown Jackson, Leondra Kruger and J. Michelle Childs.

Black women have been the most reliable and dedicated base of voters in the Democratic party. Black female representation on our nation’s most esteemed legal body is long overdue.

–

Copyright 2022 Elwood Watson, distributed by Cagle Cartoons newspaper syndicate

Elwood Watson is a professor of history, Black studies, and gender and sexuality studies at East Tennessee State University. He is also an author and public speaker.