Spreading the aspersions
Having joked about this earlier, I might as well jump in after Ross on John Judis’s contention that McCain intends the “spread the wealth” and “socialism” tropes to roil up the old racist associations with welfare. Judis says he things the phrase “is aimed ultimately at white working class undecided voters who would construe ‘spreading the wealth’ as giving their money to blacks.” Noam Scheiber agrees.
I agree with Judis that welfare would be more popular and generous in America if it didn’t, in its public image, involve white people giving their hard-earned tax dollars to lazy black people. (This is emphatically not to say that critiques of welfare are inherently racist, or that welfare doesn’t have the problems critics ascribe to it.) But I still think that Judis and Scheiber have gone a bit loony on this one. Why? Because McCain isn’t using the word “welfare.” “Spread the wealth” and “socialism” simply aren’t “welfare.” They muster literally none of its deep associations, not because the tropes don’t share substantive features, but because “socialism” and “spreading the wealth” haven’t been part of the old discourse of, well, welfare. I’ll even stipulate something that Judis and Scheiber seem to take for granted, that GOP crowds are teeming with people itching to discharge some tribal animus, to locate an Other and marginalize it, but that still doesn’t get us anywhere near the scenario they’re envisioning. It leaves us only with a revved up crowd that, upon hearing these supposedly loaded terms, are left scratching their heads and saying, “‘Socialism’? ‘Spreading the wealth’? My reptilian Republican brain tells me that these are code words, especially because Senator McCain keeps using them so insistently and clumsily, but I can’t figure out what they’re supposed to be code words for.”
let’s face it, the only reason “socialism” is such a dirty word in America is because of black people. if we did not have black people we would be a European-style welfare state. that is the harsh truth.
so McCain’s attacks may not be directly related to race, but they derive their potency from it—a fact which steve schmidt and co. are only too aware.
— raft · Oct 30, 12:29 AM · #
The McCain campaign has been saying that Obama’s proposal to give tax credits to households that don’t pay income tax is “welfare.” http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/obamas_welfare.html
— John · Oct 30, 12:35 AM · #
the only reason “socialism” is such a dirty word in America is because of black people. if we did not have black people we would be a European-style welfare state. that is the harsh truth
Somebody needs to read a history book.
— The Reticulator · Oct 30, 01:50 AM · #
Matt this is more magical thinking.
<a href=“http://ta-nehisicoates.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/10/a_thug_for_them_deadenders_thugging_for_me.php”>Read Ta-nehisi for the 411.</a>
McCain got “niggered” in 2000, so he deliberately hired Steve Schmidt to “outnigger” the opposition, JUST like George Wallace.
“Palling around with terrorists” was vetted. Schmidt wrote it, Palin said it.
Can’t you guys be honest about the facts at this point?
How I can I stay in this party?
— matoko_chan · Oct 30, 09:06 AM · #
I’m not sure it matters what McCain “intended,” (death of the author, and all that) his veep is doing everything she can to make sure whatever associations she digs up inside the heads of her clearly troubled base are volatile and infectious. Like so many other things about his campaign, this one has simply got away from him. Does it really matter if the associations are racist or not? I mean, have you seen the videos?
So what, in your view, are the causes of the rage we’re seeing on all these YouTube videos?
— homo superior · Oct 30, 09:57 AM · #
Links please, Superman? Booing Bill Ayers doesn’t count.
— Blar · Oct 30, 10:16 AM · #
When I first heard McCain/Palin bring up the “s” card, I wondered if people would try and associate Obama with Red Communism; a new Soviet Republic perhaps? But I have to wonder if anyone is really afraid of Russia anymore. So what’s the next most-relevant institution we could associate with socialism? Welfare. Do I think McCain is race-baiting? Of course not. But I think McCain gives his base far too much flexibility in how they construe his words. Unfortunately, McCain’s base at this point is predominantly far-right religious and social conservatives who are more attracted to Palin than a McCain administration. With that in mind, McCain should at least acknowledge, just like the terrorist comments, that certain words (i.e. Arab, Liberal) bring certain connotations, especially to the post-intellectual voters who are carrying his campaign.
McCain gets off on account of misguided idealism (in trusting his base to understand his attacks) but loses points for not knowing better (tsk tsk.)
— Josh · Oct 30, 10:43 AM · #
For the record, the McCain camp HAS been using the word “welfare” explicitly—in their “Joe the Plumber” ad—for more than a week.
— nitpicker · Oct 30, 11:03 AM · #
josh how can you possibly argue that hiring Steve Schmidt was anything but an explicit attempt to outnigger the opposition?
Schmidt writes Palin’s speeches.
She isn’t bright enough to adlib.
— matoko_chan · Oct 30, 11:07 AM · #
Seriously, how about an update to this post which begins with “Okay, okay, it turns out that McCain has been using the word ‘welfare’ when describing Obama’s economic policies”.
— Anon · Oct 30, 01:42 PM · #
Given that the McCain campaign has indeed been using the word “welfare” for a couple of weeks now, in ads and stump speeches, I assume you’re willing to concede the larger point made by Judis.
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/obamas_welfare.html
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=95862820
— professordarkheart · Oct 30, 01:44 PM · #
still no admission that you are WRONG and mccain HAS been using the word welfare?
— byron · Oct 30, 03:45 PM · #
mccain has a new ad out this week explicitly using “welfare”… your thoughts?
for what its’ worth, i buy the argument that mccain’s not a racist nor is he appealing to racism. it’s bigger than that. he’s appealing to xenophobia, bigotry, hatred, fear, anti-intellectualism, and classism. he’s been muted on the religious fundamentalism bit but palin’s interview with dobson last week did a nice job of playing up that angle.
he’s desperate – it’s his last chance to win (he ain’t running @ 76) and playing nice didn’t work in 2000, and almost lost him the primaries in 2008. So he compromised, probably told himself that’d he’d make it up once he got the white house… but he needs to get there first. his ex-aides (the ones who jumped ship back when steve schmidt took over) have said as much in interviews about mccain. i.e. “he’s a great man, i just couldn’t be affiliated with the campaign he’s running.”
It is what it is. My problem is he’s trying to present it as if it’s somehow noble. It’s not. It’s gross and has long-lasting repercussions for a nation that’s has an opportunity to get over some of its really ugly scars. i honestly cannot imagine what it’s like to be a muslim (arab/muslim/palestinean/iranian/etc.) in this country. why would you support mccain/palin? for all intense purposes (even if privately they don’t believe it), the message they spread explicitly says, “we hate you.”
Or to turn on the tv and hear someone screeching about real Americans and pro-American parts of the country. talk show hosts saying the US wasn’t founded on the notion of “equality,” congress(wo)men calling for committees on un-american activities… conflating socialism, communism, and marxism… oh yeah and demonizing the poor for the hell of it.
so yeah, bigger than racism; more like the politics of fear and “the other.” stay classy john mccain.
— Anonymous · Oct 31, 12:41 AM · #