comments_image Comments

Charlie Rangel Is Right: The Evidence is Overwhelming That the Tea Party is in Fact a Group of 'White Crackers'

Share
 

In a recent interview with The Daily Beast, Representative Charlie Rangel stated that the Tea Party is akin to the “crackers” who fought against Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and the Civil Rights Movement. Predictably, Rangel’s description of the Tea Party was greeted with claims of “reverse racism” by conservatives, the Right-wing media, and their black conservative lapdog apologists.

Precision is important when discussion the relationship between race and language.

Cracker is a word used by African-Americans to describe white people who are racist and bigoted towards them.

While the exact origins of the word cracker (or its other version “cracka”) have not been determined, it was most likely based on the sound that an overseer’s whip would make as it tore and scarred the flesh of black human chattel. Whatever its etymology, the word “cracker” is in no way equivalent to the word “nigger”.

To point: Black folks yelling cracker did not systematically deny whites their civil rights, burn them alive, enslave and rape them by the millions, mutilate their bodies, or leave them hanging from tree during spectacular lynchings. Likewise, African-Americans never enforced a several centuries long regime of racial terrorism against white people, dehumanizing them through the use of language intended to legitimate their oppression and exploitation.

As comedian Louis CK so deftly observes, “is there even a word in the English language that a black person can use to hurt a white man’s feelings?” No.

The feigned offense and hysterical response by the Right-wing media to the use of the word “cracker” by African-Americans, as seen several weeks ago during the Trayvon Martin murder trial, and now in the aftermath of Rangel’s interview with The Daily Beast is simply one more example of the White Right crying the victomology blues in order to gin up support for their sick fiction and delusion that white people are now oppressed by racial minorities in the United States during the Age of Obama.

Rangel’s suggestion that the Tea Party is comprised of white crackers is actually a claim that can be empirically evaluated. If a cracker is a white person who holds anti-black animus and feelings—what can range from “old fashioned” open and public bigotry, to “backstage racism” and more subtle types of implicit bias—then what does the actual evidence tell us about the Tea Party GOP and its members’ racial attitudes?

In the most obvious and public examples, Tea Party rallies have featured signs depicting Barack Obama as an African “witchdoctor” or “savage”. Tea Party supporters have also carried signs emblazoned with the Confederate flag, or used monkey and ape imagery to describe the country’s first black president at their rallies.

Silence and complicity is endorsement: the attendees at these rallies were not rejected or condemned by their fellow Tea Party members; rather, their racist message was embraced and supported.

When combined with the Tea Party’s support of Birtherism, a racially degenerative picture is painted which suggests that black people are closer to animals and apes than full human beings. Moreover, from this perspective Barack Obama is not a legitimate president because he is not white, and is thus some type of perennial Other, one who cannot be reconciled within the tradition of White “Real America.”

Leaders in the Tea Party have been caught sending racist emails and other communications to their colleagues and supporters that have contained vicious stereotypes of Barack Obama and his family as primates, the White House overrun with watermelons, and the President as a pimp.

Given the record number of assassination threats against the United States’ first black president, and the rise in the number of White militia groups during his tenure, the repeated association of Barack Obama with ape imagery is highly dangerous: research in social psychology demonstrates how an association between black people and apes subconsciously primes white test-takers to support violence against African-Africans. In this way, racist humor works as an appeal to violence by the White Right, and conservatives more generally, against the United States’ first black president.