There has been some surprise that when pressed, Bennett insisted on reiterating the racist position that more Blacks = more crime. As a former Reagan Secretary of Education whose job it was, on behalf of an overtly racist president, to oppose affirmative, promote school vouchers, and deride multicultural courses, Bennett has already demonstrated an ideological commitment to racist ideas.
The notable thing here is not that Bennett has shown himself to be racist, but that he is expressing his racist views in more extremist terms. Rather than couch racism within elevated discourse about education or drug policy, he is saying the sort of thing David Duke or Hal Turner might say.
Bennett is now behaving as a "transmitter," to use David Neiwert's term:
This crossover is facilitated by figures I call "transmitters" -- ostensibly mainstream conservatives who seem to cull ideas that often have their origins on the far right, strip them of any obviously pernicious content, and present them as "conservative" arguments. These transmitters work across a variety of fields. In religion, Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell are the best-known examples, though many others belong in the same category. In politics, the classic example is Patrick Buchanan, while his counterpart in the field of conservative activism is Paul Weyrich of the Free Congress Foundation.
In the media, Rush Limbaugh is the most prominent instance, and Michael Savage is a close second, but there are others who have joined the parade noticeably in the past few years: Andrew Sullivan, for instance, and of course Ann Coulter. On the Internet, the largest single transmitter of right-wing extremism is FreeRepublic.com, whose followers -- known as "Freepers" -- have engaged in some of the more outrageous acts of thuggery against their liberal targets.
Consciously or unconsciously, Bennett has sensed that the current climate in America invites this sort of blurring of the line between mainstream conservatism and right wing extremism. Call it a response to wider public discussions of race, post-Katrina. Call it getting with the program of the right, already well underway.
BLOG POSTS
COMMENTS
PODCASTS
Do you remember that little cartoon history of the United States in Bowling for Columbine?
You gotta helluva a point there, that Bennett’s acting as a transmitter. I focused on the racism of directly linking black skin color to the crime rate, and I wish I had a buck for every right wing commenter I’ve seen call that part of his statement “unimpeachable truth” or some variation on that. And I don’t even read that many right wing commenters. He’s helped empower the semi-closeted racists, for sure.
Brandon, I saw the movie, and I vaguely recall the cartoon, but I can’t get it clear in my memory…
Phaedrus, your comment is great b/c it makes it clear how the transmitter thing works. Well known “legitimate” conservative makes blatantly racist remark an insists it is a legitimate non-racist thing to say and then seeds the meme everywhere. And right now, with all that is at stake for African Americans in NOLA, what was sort of whispered and insinuated to justify white land grabs and redevelopment of Black areas now gets to be part of the mainstream debate. (Also in lots of other cities where the non-apocalyptic version of racist and classist urban redevelopment schemes are par for the course.)
I also think we’re letting Bennett off too easy on the “you could abort every black baby in this country” portion of his comments. For one thing, he’s fantasizing about genocide. Call me prejudiced but I don’t like people who fantasize about genocide—even if after they finish fantasizing they say, “but, oh I would never really do that…”
I really disagree about Andrew Sullivan – he is not a transmitter of a further-right ideology. Read his blog more carefully – because of Bush’s stance on gay rights, he voted for Kerry. Because of the Catholic Church’s stance on gay right, he left the church. He has been steadfastly denouncing the torture of prisoners in Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere, and has been calling for an open, honest investigation into what’s been going on. He is a conservative, and a supporter of the Iraq war – but he is not transmitting a farther-right ideology. You can see this especially when he publishes e-mails sent to him by his farther-right wing readers who denounce him venomously. You might disagree with him – hey, I don’t agree with everything he says – but read him more carefully.
Rebecca, you’re the second person I’ve seen object to lumping Adrew Sullivan in with the likes of Coulter and Limbaugh. Frankly, I have not read him enough to have a considered opinion. Given your and the other objection I saw elsewhere, I’ll certainly suspend judgment on Sullivan until I know better. I think Neiwert’s point about transmitters is still relevant, even if he is off-base on one of his examples.