Minority Conservatives (Or... Why I Feel Sorry For Michael Steele)

Posted by J. Alexander Mitchell on 05.12.2009

I'm talking racism, conservatism, TEA parties, AND Janeane Garofalo! How many people will we offend with one column?

Certain words pop out on a web page when I read them. Today, the words "Janeane Garofalo" and "Racist" managed to somehow grab my attention away from "Woman Accused In Porn Star Prostitution Ring" over on Foxnews.com. I'm very uncertain how that happened. Everyone's favorite demure, even-keeled spokesperson for the liberal left (note to the sarcasm-impaired – that was sarcasm) managed to get attention from Fox by refusing to back off from two of her statements made on Kieth Olbermann's show "Countdown" a few weeks back, one of which was to say that the Taxed Enough Already parties were fueled by racism, not by genuine issues with the policies of the new presidential administration. In addition, she accused Republican National Chairman Michael Steele of having Stockholm syndrome. The two statements are very connected, and the fact that the former has such a tinge of truth to it that the latter statement begins to carry weight. This is a sad and frustrating thing. Steele's goals seem to be the forging of a Republican party one that represents a culturally diverse set of interests reflective of Conservative thought. However, the devil is in the details, and the details make this look like an uphill and potentially unwinnable battle.

I really feel sorry for the guy in moments like this.


First off, allow me to wrap myself in my favorite warm, fuzzy literary blanket for quotations: context. Ms. Garofalo's segment was preceded by a clip of an unemployed blogger speaking to a crowd at one of the TEA events. The following is a transcript of the clip shown:

"BLOGGER JEFF: I want to start off by honoring the service of our veterans, our current service members, thank you so much for all you've done for this country. I also want to say, a little history lesson here. Back in 2000, there was a bunch of surplus in the country. And then the next ten years, it was just destroyed by the profligate spending by the Bush administration. Here we are today in a situation where we have to...Cheer if you make less than $250,000 in a year. Just cheer. Your taxes are going to be cut under the current budget. Congratulations. I was laid off in September because my employer had to make budget cuts. That was before the election. Let's remember if you're going to argue about more taxes and less spending, to place the blame where the blame belongs and that's squarely in the hands of the Republican congress and...
CROWD: Boo! "

The quotes attributed to Ms. Garofalo address this clip.

"JANEANE GAROFALO: Thank you. You know, there's nothing more interesting than seeing a bunch of racists become confused and angry at a speech they're not quite certain what he's saying. It sounds right and then it doesn't make sense. Which, let's be very honest about what this is about. It's not about bashing Democrats, it's not about taxes, they have no idea what the Boston tea party was about, they don't know their history at all. This is about hating a black man in the White House. This is racism straight up. That is nothing but a bunch of teabagging rednecks. And there is no way around that. And you know, you can tell these type of right wingers anything and they'll believe it, except the truth. You tell them the truth and they become -- it's like showing Frankenstein's monster fire. They become confused, and angry and highly volatile"

I think that, to say the least, Ms. Garofalo decided to interpret reality rather liberally, pun unintended. However, there are a few things we can cull from what we saw. Assuming this particular TEA party was indicative of the whole, we can also say that the difficulty is not the rampant increase in taxation. The reaction to the placement of blame on the Republican party that had six years of increased taxation supports this. We can say fairly concretely that TEA parties were not about what the original tea parties were about – taxation without representation. The fact that one does not agree with the decisions of their elected officials does not mean they are not represented; they are simply represented by people that disagree with them. That leads to one of two possible scenarios: The protests were about the newfound minority status of these people (read: "Increased taxation is okay as long as it is Republicans doing the taxing", or, to rephrase, they are protesting the fact that their side lost) or Ms. Garofalo is closer to the truth than we may like.

It is obviously difficult to know the full truth, as individual people undoubtedly have their own personalized reasons for their participation. However, I can say that I recall watching the footage of the TEA parties and feeling the "tinge". That is worrisome.

You are probably asking "what is the ‘tinge'"? If you are not asking this, that means you are skimming my work for something to complain about and argue about in the comment section. For those people, STOP SKIMMING THIS AND READ IT! IT TAKES TIME TO WRITE ALL OF THIS, YA KNOW! Now that we are all back together, I'll tell you what "the tinge" is. I first felt the tinge when I was a teenager, and was stopped while walking along a road with a friend by some police officers because I "fit the description". When asked what "the description" was, I was told "About five-ten skinny black guy". Given that this occurred in the New Orleans Metropolitan Area, I can fairly confidently state that there were a number of people that fit that description. It is no wonder that New Orleans historically has had problems with crime, given the awesome detective work at play. I felt the tinge later in life, when I was asked repeatedly by the 99%-Caucasian guys in my dorm why the people in Los Angeles were rioting after the Rodney King verdict ("I'm from New Orleans! You know I'm from New Orleans! How the hell would I know why their rioting?! Hey, here's an idea – try finding someone from Los Angeles, and they may be able to help ya…"). I felt the tinge as a software engineering consultant; the whole "random woman grabbing her purse" things is real, and it was a necessary evil to re-establish upon entering a new company that I am the intelligent, competent guy sent by my firm that is going to fix your problems. That is the tinge; the "spider-sense" that goes off when placed in situations for which some sort of subtle vibe – in my experience involving race – is detected.

The tinge, in the case of the TEA parties, had to do with a subtle theme of the fairly-extensive footage I've seen of the tea parties – there weren't any minorities. Issues of taxation in specific and conservative philosophy as a whole – with a glaring detail I will mention later – are largely race-neutral. There is no reason – as a general statement - why Blacks, Hispanics, Asians, etc. would accept taxation any more or less than Caucasians. Still… where were all of the minorities? Here's a fun game: Go to images.google.com, type in "Taxed Enough Already", and find the first page where you can clearly spot a minority on a page based on the thumbnails. I'll even give you a convenient link. Going only by thumbnails, the first I see is on page seven. Unfortunately, that is a picture of President Obama, so I'd question whether or not it is representative of the TEA party-goers. This is not to say I agree with Ms. Garofalo that the TEA parties were put on by a bunch of "teabagging rednecks". However, the fact that this is a partisan affair involving very few minorities does not paint the best picture of the place of minorities in the Republican party.

This is what leads me to have some sense of pity for Michael Steele. Conservatism as a general statement is generic in regards to race, but there is the one practical detail I mentioned earlier. This practical detail sometimes gets in the way of being a minority conservative. Minorities, as a trend, tend to have less economic, educational, social, and political resources than Caucasians. Speaking only of Blacks, it is difficult to be "equal" when you are held down from day one; you are not going to catch up to a 400 year head start in about 50 years. A very prevalent thought is that the quickest way to "catch up" requires government intervention… which is something that conservatism is solidly against. Is it any wonder why someone would label Michael Steele as having "Stockholm Syndrome"? Historically, it has been very easy to set off "the tinge" when dealing with Republicans, be it due to the community-annihilating "War on Drugs" or the need to repeatedly show the same two Black people in the crowd at the Republican National Convention (my circle of friends eventually labeled them "Old Black Guy" and "Older Black Guy" – "And… cue camera switch to Older Black Guy… looking… the same way he was fifteen minutes ago"). The tinge simply makes it hard to be a minority conservative.

Though many minorities would agree that government is a necessary component to achieve equality, there are plenty of other directions and philosophies (read up on the differences between Marcus Garvey's, W.E.B. Du Bois, and Booker T. Washington for an idea of differing philosophies); I personally believe that we will need a combination of economic, societal and educational shifts by the country as a whole and within each individual minority group. That's what makes me feel sorry for Michael Steele – so many within his own community would agree that he shouldn't work as a Black conservative, but this viewpoint assumes that conservatism holds down minorities. Perhaps it does, and perhaps it does not; I will certainly say that "the tinge" has been set off for me on multiple occasions. However, whatever side of the fence one falls on, one should be able to respect the work of people with the same goals but different methods. Unfortunately, many people – minority and non-minority - feel their way is the only way… which will continue to make it an uphill battle for a guy like Steele.