Creative commons license: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/
So, we are finding out that Ronald Reagan’s legacy might very well be permanently damaged, because it turns out that he was racist.
Reagan racist?
Yup. Reagan and Nixon both, as it turns out.
This just became major news when the full tape of what had previously been a censored telephone conversation between then President Nixon and future President Reagan was released. In that conversation, Reagan makes a pretty blatantly racist joke, and Nixon laughs in good humor. Here is a summary of the conversation, according to a recent article by Elisha Fieldstadt of NBC News:
“Last night, I tell you, to watch that thing on television, as I did, to see those, those monkeys from those African countries — damn them — they’re still uncomfortable wearing shoes!” Reagan said on the call.
Nixon allowed a chuckle after Reagan uttered the word “monkeys,” but by the time Reagan was done with his thought, Nixon was laughing heartily. "Well, the tail wags the dog there, doesn't it? The tail wags the dog," Nixon responded.
Keep in mind, that the Tanzanian delegation had sided with the United States, which should have made Reagan and Nixon a bit more friendly towards them. But with friends like the two American presidents, Tanzania does not need enemies, do they?
Frankly, this was not much of a surprise to me. After all, there were already signs that had existed. At least, that is, if one cares enough to pays attention. Or, perhaps, if one cares at all, as apparently, tens of millions of Americans do no. Given who we have in the Oval Office right now, it sure seems clear enough that many Americans are not really bothered at all by the idea of a blatant racist in the White House.
Reagan was very accepting of the Confederate battle flag being flown at his campaign events when he was, at that time, still running for the White House. He would win in a landslide, and then would win re-election in record fashion, winning every state but Minnesota and the District of Columbia.
Also, one of the very first things that he did was lift sanctions on apartheid South Africa, which should have been quite telling.
Again, though, most Americans either did not know, or did not mind or care.
And really, is that not basically the major problem that we seem to have today with the blatant displays of racism and narrow-mindedness that we have to witness on an everyday basis with this current president? This kind of casual racism. Not an in your face, don the white sheets and burn crosses or straight-arm Nazi or Fascist salute or even a legally and socially enforced Jim Crow system of racial segregation, but another kind. This would be more passive, and frankly, less honest. This would be laughing along with the racist joke or comment and/or look the other way when a so-called leader makes a racist comment or gesture, or institutes a racist policy, even while denying their own racism. In some ways, that kind of racism is worse, because it not only is racist, but it adds an obvious measure of hypocrisy into the mix, like people who get angry when their racist action or sentiment is called out. And let's face it: when you have the kind of inequality that you see in this country between races, and you have young black men being brutalized and too often killed by police time and time again, and police officers getting away with it, and you have a racist son of a bitch in the White House regularly making racist statements and/or actions, and then claiming that he is the least racist person in the world, and trying to say it with a straight face, then the entire world can (and often does) call you out not only on that racism, but on your hypocrisy as a nation, as well. At least during the apartheid days, South Africans whites were not claiming that they were not racist or that they were the least racist people you could hope to meet, like Trump is claiming.
South Africa's apartheid policies brings us back to the Reagan era, because he was the one who lifted sanctions on the white minority regime, after his predecessor, Jimmy Carter, had imposed those sanctions, in an effort to force the hands of the regime minority government and end apartheid. Reagan called it "constructive engagement," and it gave new life to the apartheid regime, a similar kind of de facto legitimacy that Trump has lent to the North Korean regime. Giving them exactly what they want, in other words, to look more like they are an accepted member in good standing of the world community. Somehow, this did not portray Reagan as a racist in the eyes of many, even though many were troubled by it.
Likewise, there were other signs that he seemed to harbor some racist sentiments, although generally, save for this phone call which, until now, had remained private, Reagan usually at least had enough tact to keep these feelings and sentiments from the public eye. But not always. A recent article by Sanjana Karanth (see link below) summed up some of the other seemingly racist signals sent by Reagan:
During his gubernatorial campaign in 1966, Reagan said, “If an individual wants to discriminate against Negroes or others in selling or renting his house, it is his right to do so.” Reagan is also credited with promoting the “welfare queen” stereotype, which paints black women as people who abuse taxpayer money for lazy lifestyles.
Legislation that disproportionately hurt marginalized communities also laid the groundwork for Reagan’s “War on Drugs.” The former president also blocked an anti-apartheid bill to impose sanctions on South Africa; the House voted to override his veto.
Which brings me to a question that seems to be a burning one for many Americans these days: how can you tell when someone says or does something racist?
Honestly, I am not sure that there is one definitive answer. Different people have different standards and approaches towards defining racism. I once read a Native American's opinion about whether or not the name "Redskins" for a professional sports franchise was inappropriate or racist, and he argued that it was not. He suggested that he should not take offense anymore than Irish people should take offense to Notre Dame's "Fighting Irish" team name as also perpetuating stereotypes, and made the point that nobody was pining for Notre Dame to change their team name.
Personally, though, my own suspicion is that the best way to gauge whether something is racist or not, or how racist the sentiment of the person saying or doing something to perpetuate stereotypes tends to be, is to see if they are willing to say it in front of members of the group that they are stereotyping, particularly if the individual or individuals are outnumbered, particularly greatly so. This is an imperfect system, because some people nonetheless have no problem saying or doing blatantly racist things. But in many cases, especially in our modern society where racism is generally regarded as an evil, the vast majority of people will go to extraordinary lengths to avoid being themselves labeled as racists.
By that measure, we must ask the question: would Reagan have called the Tanzanian delegation monkeys to their face, perhaps in a formal speech to be aired and viewed by millions around the world? Would he have "joked" about how they still had not gotten used to wearing shoes just yet? Would Nixon have laughed? Would Reagan have made a speech justifying the "constructive engagement" with South Africa's racist apartheid white minority government in front of anti-apartheid activists? For that matter, would Donald Trump have referred to those Latin American and African countries as "shithole nations" if members of their delegations had been present during one of his speeches? Would he have dared to tell a crowd of Jews and/or blacks that some of the Nazis and other outright white supremacists in Charlottesville two years ago were "good people"? Would he feel as free to tell a crowd of mostly Hispanic immigrants that most Mexican immigrants are criminals and rapists? Would he go before a Muslim crowd and justify his ideas for a national registry of Muslims, or for the Muslim ban that he wanted to institute?
If the answer is no - and let's face it, with Trump, you never know anyway, because there is so clearly an absence of limits and class with that "leader" - then yes, you are flirting with racism, at the very least, and outright harboring racist sentiments and mentalities, at worst. And if you are white, and you know those things about these elected leaders of the land, and you turn a blind eye, then maybe you do not think of yourself as racist, because you do not give the Hitler salute or burn crosses, but maybe, just maybe, you can understand why blacks and Jews might suspect that you harbor more racist sentiments, or are far more comfortable with your prejudices, than you let on.
Patti Davis, the daughter of the late President Reagan, weighed in on this comment, and tried to offer something in the way of perspective regarding how this might impact her father's legacy. Here is some of what she wrote in an article recently published in The Atlantic:
"There is no defense, no rationalization, no suitable explanation for what my father said on that taped phone conversation.
“But the words he used in his conversation with Nixon cannot be interpreted as anything but ugliness. That’s what makes this so painful. Legacies are complicated, though, and for people to be judged fairly, the landscape of a lifetime has to be looked at.”
She is rationalizing, and that is somewhat understandable. After all, Davis is former President Reagan daughter, and so this hits her more personally than most. She asks if “others will forgive my father for words that should never have been uttered in any conversation.”
Maybe they will, maybe they will not. My guess is that many, many Americans will react in the same way that they do when Trump says and does some outlandishly stupid and/or racist and/or xenophobic things. That is to say, with an indifference which, itself, is beginning to define the American character, and not in a flattering manner, at that.
Until we take an honest and thorough look at what has been, in reality, an extensive history of American racism (after all, post-slavery legalized racial segregation was born here before anywhere else, and it was here that other wonderful ideas, such as euthanasia, were also first thought up), we will very much continue to be dragged down with racism as a major issue weighing the nation down, anchoring it in the middle of a storm of racial tensions that prevent the country from finally moving forward.
Once again, I am reminded of the words of one of America's great authors, W. E. B. DuBois, who once said something that seems truer now than it probably seemed even then (and that is saying something):
"Either the America will destroy ignorance or ignorance will destroy the United States."
Here are the links to the two articles that I used in writing this blog entry, and from which, all of the quotes used above (except that one from W.E. B. DuBois, which is a rather famous quote) were taken:
Ronald Reagan called African U.N. delegates 'monkeys' in call with Richard Nixon, audio recording reveals by Elisha Fieldstadt, July 31, 2019:
Ronald Reagan’s Daughter Weighs In On His Racist ‘Monkeys’ Comment By Sanjana Karanth, August 1, 2019:
No comments:
Post a Comment