Comments on: Harris-Perry to Joan Walsh: we are so not friends! History and sexual politics, 1492 to the present Fri, 19 Sep 2014 13:41:03 +0000 hourly 1 By: Lanier Hunter Sun, 17 Nov 2013 01:27:48 +0000 Christian white america does not have the ability to look
at how race haterd has affected all people of color in north america. Long before millions of blacks were brought here to work the land stolen from natives white
america created an economic,social,educational and religious system that would support white racism.They have no reason to change and never will. Look at every aspect of black american society that white cristian america see as evil, centuries before it existed we had genocide against native americans, slavery every kind of evil and our white brothers and sister used the bible to
justify the evil, GOD BLESS AMERICA, as they say. It is
fun to watch the one percent screw over their own while
while a bunch of stupid poor uneducated, lower middle class and middle class whites blame colored people for their trouble, I just love it.

By: Ken Wed, 23 Oct 2013 21:49:59 +0000 “Friendship is a deep and lasting relationship based on shared sacrifice and joy”

No wonder there is not a lot of friendships on this planet!

Thank goodness for dog’s — canines all that and loyal!


By: Comrade PhysioProf Tue, 04 Oct 2011 01:34:53 +0000 Other than Glenn Greenwald, Salon is complete utter swill designed to make people who consider themselves liberals to feel all good about themselves. It is nothing but a left-wing version of Parade Magazine.

By: Historiann Sat, 01 Oct 2011 15:55:09 +0000 I think it’s totally unfair to say that she’s “completely unqualified,” but you raise an interesting point about the conflicting demands of punditry versus academic discourse. This gap is why I’ve questioned the usefulness of historians to any particular political agenda, because we are drawn to nuance rather than the stark arguments that drive political discourse. My sense is that most academic Political Scientists are also a lot more nuanced and careful in the conclusions they draw than most political pundits. It may be an irreconcilable gulf.

A hell of a lot of white pundits flaunt their academic credentials to appear as teevee historians and discuss things in ways that professional historians find laughable: e.g. Doris Kerns Goodwin, Michael Bechschloss, etc. They don’t do primary source-based research to come up with novel arguments in their snoozeriffic celebretory and historical celebrity-driven presidential histories–they’re essentially popularizers. And yet their dubious comparisons in presidential history don’t get the kind of flack that MHP is getting.

(Gene Lyons’s article is a good example of the sneering condescention MHP has drawn. But then, Lyons is an old Arkansas journalist who knows very intimately the trashing of the Clintons, so while I think he makes some interesting points he surely could have done it without the personal trashing of MHP and her academic credentials.)

So I would argue that race is everywhere in this whole dustup; I’m just not persuaded by Harris-Perry’s arguments with respect to white progressives’ evaluation of the Obama presidency. Who knows–she may be right, but we won’t know for at least another 13 months for sure.

By: schmandt Sat, 01 Oct 2011 05:03:36 +0000 “decades of research, publication and university teaching”

MHP is BS’ing all the way in her first article. As political scientist she compares the obama presidency with the clinton presidency without even mentioning the economy? without comparing how clinton stood down house republicans and won huge victory when he called their bluff and let them shut down the government and stuck them with the blame, while Obama caved at every step?

Her first article was miles away from a real professional level political argument where you are supposed to make valid comparisons and not just make stuff up at random.

Her defense is even weaker. Many, many comments on Salon addressed the legitimate reasons that progressives are disgusted with Obama. So many things that are utterly obvious yet she ignored completely to claim race is involved. Instead of admitting that she was wrong she doubled down.

Look, if you want to make that kind of argument as a random talking head, OK, it gets attention at least, and maybe you think you have a mission to raise consciousness on race. But her argument was so, so far away from serious political science that to bring up her academic credentials to defend that article in any way is amazingly ignorant.

She goes on TV behind her academic credentials. These 2 articles expose her as completely unqualified. There is a certain professional level of argument, marshaling of facts and data and logic and a way that fellow professionals have to acknowledge. That was totally absent from these 2 articles.

By: anonymous Fri, 30 Sep 2011 16:37:55 +0000 …whatever we might think of Harris-Perry’s claims regarding Obama’s dwindling support, the larger point of the prevalence of subtle racism among the left is demonstrated amply.


By: gxm17 Fri, 30 Sep 2011 16:29:12 +0000 anonymous, let me remind you that you’re the one who brought up “poor white voters” and “openly plutocratic white candidates.” And you’re the one who appears to support the notion that a plutocrat’s skin color is meaningful. Or am I just imagining that you appear to be calling yourself out as a “privilege denier”?

It seems to me that there are a lot of people trying to obscure the reality that the economy is in the toilet and people need work. This will not be lost on the people who are living the reality. Hard times will decide the next presidential election, not skin color. And folks who are colorstruck will need to just deal with it.

By: Perpetua Fri, 30 Sep 2011 16:24:20 +0000 Going back to anon’s link to the Lyons response to Harris-Perry’s piece: It’s actually a genius response because exposes every single trope of sexist racist anti-intellectualism of lefty menz everywhere. In one article! Not an easy thing to accomplish, but there it is – whatever we might think of Harris-Perry’s claims regarding Obama’s dwindling support, the larger point of the prevalence of subtle racism among the left is demonstrated amply. It’s not often that my breath is taken away by the racism & sexism in a Salon piece.

By: anonymous Fri, 30 Sep 2011 16:01:14 +0000 Very well said. “Class” is also a current favorite of privilege-deniers because they don’t have to use their imagination; 99% of the population get to point out that they’re not part of the 1% who really run everything — the implication being that if you’re not a billionaire, you’re not an oppressor.

By: Historiann Fri, 30 Sep 2011 13:09:38 +0000 Well said, Claire.