He never said that. He said it was among those with “conventional” beliefs.
1 Like
Are you empathising or sympathising?
1 Like
You obviously don’t understand the criticism of Cohen. He argued that people who fight the urge to vomit at the sight of an interracial couple aren’t racist, just conventional.
4 Likes
No, only some significant number. To say that a political movement or party is not racist suggests that if there are any racists in there they are lone voices: they don’t represent the views of the party and they don’t hold sway in the party.
Cohen denied that by saying the party wasn’t racist, then he went on to say what he said about marriage in the very next sentence. What thread connects those two sentences as part of that paragraph? The first is about the Tea Party not being racist, the second is about people with conventional views of marriage gagging.
There are only two conclusions that can be drawn from this juxtaposition. One is that he thinks that the Tea Party is not racist despite a large portion of members and a number of influential members gagging when they think of a mixed-race marriage. The other is that he is using the comment about marriage to demonstrate how Tea Party members are not racist - that is, he means us to understand that it is racist to gag at a mixed-race marriage but for us to also understand that he is talking about people with conventional views of marriage in opposition to the Tea Party.
That doesn’t scan to me. Do I really believe that “conventional” views of marriage are an outlying political opinion in the Tea Party? Can I really think that’s what Cohen was trying to get across? I feel like you are being far too generous.
You can share the views of the Tea Party with respect to, say, government regulation, without sharing the views of the Tea Party with respect to abortion laws or marriage laws. That doesn’t mean that those views aren’t part of the party.
P.S. Talking about “mixed-race marriages” makes my skin crawl. Around here we call them “marriages.”
From the context of the article it does seem like he was describing the views of the Tea Party, as opposed to his own thoughts. Conventional was just an unfortunate (read stupid) word choice.
“Conventional” or not, if inter-racial marriage make you gag, you’re a racist.
The full methodology is available on Gallup’s site. But those results, while I don’t doubt them, surprised the hell out of me. I figured it would be around fifty percent.
But it’s not like the South is known as a haven of social/racial progress.
I mentioned the survey to my wife and she said “That thirteen percent? That’s the South.”
Agreed. Conventionalism and racism are not necessarily mutually exclusive.
Is this a witty remark, or did you actually find a problem in the logic, whatever that means?
I find 87% low. The idea that inter-racial marriage is still up for debate in some people’s minds is pretty baffling. The idea that is is wrong seems “out-of-date” or “archaic” rather than “conventional.”
People mean different things by racism. It is often used very loosely to mean prejudice or the appearance of prejudice; under this usage, the word is thrown around quite freely. However, sometimes a specific political ideology is referenced: one which holds that there are physical races, that some are better than others, and that the better races should rule over the rest. A person can lack all three of those beliefs and still be deeply disturbed by violations of the various customs she or he was brought up with. Such a person might be called ‘conventional’, another word which has a variety of meanings.
Maybe so, but if a person is “deeply disturbed” by a “violation” of the custom she or he was brought up with that considered interracial marriage gag-inducing, then that deeply disturbed feeling is still a deeply racist feeling.
2 Likes
I agree. When I said I was surprised I meant that U.S. Society has made a lot more progress than I had given it credit for.
I agree. I read about the racist reaction to a commercial featuring an interracial marriage ( WATCH: Cheerios Commercial Showing Biracial Family Riles Haters | TIME.com ) and wonder if people might say they are okay with but get upset when they actually see it.
As half of an inter-racial couple with mixed race children, I just find that article rather depressing. In Oz, NZ and UK we don’t really stand out any more — there are plenty of other mixed race families about, though more in age groups younger than us. Even when we were just married the worst we got was curious double-takes, rather than expressions of ‘revulsion’ … 
1 Like
When Richard bravely took on the Arab conspiracy known as Al-Gebra, I knew I need never trouble myself with anything he had to say.
3 Likes
He may or may not be a racist (uh, sure), but one thing is for certain. He is a terrible writer and thinker.
May I please have his job?
1 Like
Both? Can’t it be both?
If Cohen is writing about conventional social conservatives, then, he’s simply reporting the facts.
The facts have changed since the 1950’s. “Conventional” does not mean “historical”.
1 Like
That depends, how terrible can you write?
I can be pretty stupid.
3 Likes
