Sirotablog

David Sirota is a political journalist and nationally syndicated newspaper columnist at Creators Syndicate. David writes about political corruption, globalization and working-class economic issues often ignored by both of America's political parties.

  • May 14, 2008 8:48 AM

    "Gritty" vs. "Athletic" - How Racism Is Structural, Not Individual

    As regular readers know, I've been doing a lot of writing on race lately, and in that light, I wanted to forward on this terrific column from the Rocky Mountain News by Paul Campos. It uses sports language to show how racism really is a structural - rather than individual - problem. Here's the key point:

    A mistake people make about racism is to think it's primarily a personal flaw which some people have and others don't, as opposed to something that distorts our society at a structural level, whatever particular individuals may believe or say.

    One of the easiest places to see this is in the sports world, where certain racial cliches and stereotypes get expressed in relatively unself-conscious ways. These stereotypes reflect the sort of language we are now seeing from Clinton and her advisers, about "blue-collar" voters.

    Just as in Clinton's special political language, in the world of sports "blue-collar" is a code word for "white." A bunch of other terms - "gritty," "gutty," "hard-nosed," "lunch-bucket ethic," and of course "intelligent" - work in the same fashion.

    The idea is that white players must overcome their lack of God-given athletic talent (which is apparently conceptualized as God's version of affirmative action for black players) through good moral character, and in particular the classic Puritan virtue of hard work.

    As I said, read the whole column here.

Discussion

  • FLGibsonJr [TypeKey Profile Page] :

    Demographical terms are used so much in any political analysis that for someone to insinuate (per the article cited) that Clinton was attempting to be racist by her trying to identify a strong constituency of hers (working and middle class whites who tend to be populist in ideology) is simply absurd. I actually think that the constant reiteration by Obama's surrogates describing Obama's supporters as being more intelligent, more affluent, and less populist (populism now becoming a veiled term indicating racism) is a tactic much more political in nature than what Clinton happened to say about one of her constituencies.

    In the end I think it will be much more the elitism of the Obama campaign as well as its seeming intolerance toward other viewpoints, as well as its anti-populism, that will doom the candidacy much more than the race issue.

    Posted on May 14, 2008 11:17 AM

Join the Discussion

Post a comment