Count on Charles Blow to always, always, always blurt out in the most indelicate way possible what Democrats and liberals in the media have been trying to do with at least some discretion.
Blow wrote Monday in the New York Times that it should be pro forma to call someone, anyone, a racist, regardless of whether it can be proven. So long as it feels right, the label should be generously applied.
“How is it that America insists on knowledge of the unknowable — what lurks in the heart — in order to assign the appellation?” pondered Blow. “Why are so many Americans insisting that racism requires conscious, malicious intent in order for the title to be earned?”
See, being called a “racist” should no longer demand any concrete proof that an individual believes one skin color is inherently superior to another. As described in my forthcoming book Privileged Victims: How America’s Culture Fascists Hijacked the Country and Elevated Its Worst People, Democrats and liberals in the news media believe that earning the “racist” label requires only an affirmative answer to three questions:
1. Is the target of the “racist” label white?
2. Is the target of the “racist” label deemed to benefit from any “privilege,” such as wealth or male heterosexuality?
3. Did the target of the “racist” label say anything at all, regardless of race, that could be construed as derogatory to an individual who is not white?
If each of those can be met with a yes, then the Democratic Party, the national news media, academia, and even Hollywood will feel well within their right to call a person “racist” or, at the least, strongly imply that a person is racist.
That is exactly what happened last week with the saturated coverage of President Trump and the “squad” of House Democrats. Trump questioned their patriotism and said they should leave the United States if they were so unhappy with it.
If there existed a liberal congressman with blonde hair, blue eyes, who spoke with a German accent, and who said the things about America that Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., has said, I’m certain Trump would have told that representative to “go back,” too.
But because Omar and the rest of the “squad” are nonwhite minorities, and because Trump is a wealthy, straight, white male, his comments were presumed as a fair mark for the “racist” label.
That is the same formula applied to the media’s coverage each and every time Trump directs an insult to any person who isn’t white.
Trump appears to hate former House Speaker Paul Ryan and he most certainly hates the late senator, John McCain. But they’re both white, so you’ll never see the “racist” accusation come up.
But when Trump’s ire is directed at Omar, Barack Obama, or even former White House official Omarosa Manigault? Racist!
It’s what animates news coverage of almost any conflict. Georgia state Rep. Erica Thomas, a black Democrat, accused a man of being inspired by Trump to make what she considered a racist remark toward her in a grocery store last weekend. “‘Go Back to Where You Came From,’ Georgia Lawmaker Says She Was Told,” read the New York Times’ initial headline covering the story.
It would later turn out that the accused man is Cuban and also a Democrat.
But the national media at large don’t want the general public to catch on to their warped race logic. They want people to believe that there is no question as to whether Trump and his supporters are “racist” because after all, they wouldn’t say it if it weren’t expressly true.
Blow, on the other hand, wants the media to be more open about it.
He wrote that his “white colleagues in journalism,” including at the New York Times, “have done a tremendous injury to truth and honesty by providing the dangerous illusion that racism was hard to define and racists were hard to designate” in their apparent failure to more frequently call Trump a racist.
Give Blow credit. He’s at least up-front about needing no proof in order to call someone a racist.
