Recently Politico reporter
Marc Caputo was angered at rude hecklers at a Trump rally who booed beleaguered
CNN correspondent Jim Acosta.
So Caputo
tweeted of them, “If you put everyone’s mouths together in this video, you’d
get a full set of teeth.”
Politico had
not employed such a crass journalist since before it fired Julia Ioffe for
tweeting, “Either Trump is f—ing his daughter or he’s shirking nepotism
laws. Which is worse?” (Ioffe was then snatched up by the Atlantic,
which has an unpredictable policy either of excusing or not excusing the controversial
expressions of its newly hired journalists.)
I suppose
Caputo meant that Trump voters intrinsically lacked either the money to fix
their teeth or the knowledge of the hygiene required to take care of them or
the aesthetic sensitivity of how awful their mouths looked. Or Caputo was
simply rehashing the stereotypes that he had seen on reality TV shows like
“Duck Dynasty” and “The Deadliest Catch.”
Or none of
the above: the journalist grandee was just stupid.
That last
alternative seems most likely since Caputo then escalated and called
them collectively “garbage people.” Or rather, in the manner of a cowardly
age of social media, he tweeted that slur when safely at a distance.
What did
“garbage people” mean? That by birth or training such toothless, smelly people
were subhuman, like refuse? And if Caputo had substituted any other racial
minority for his slurs, would he still have his job according to the cannons of
progressive censure and Internet lynching? Could he have said something
similarly degrading about the attendees of after an open borders or Black Lives
Matter rally and still have his job?
Sarah
Jeong’s Struggle
Last week, the New York Times named tech writer Sarah Jeong to its editorial board with apparent knowledge of her long history of racist tweets, as well as verbal attacks on police and males in general. Perhaps such gutter venom was proof of militant orthodoxy to be appreciated rather than medieval racism to be shunned. Her mostly empty résumé seems compensated by her identity and her politics—as the Timesmore or less confessed in its sad defense of her racist outbursts.
Last week, the New York Times named tech writer Sarah Jeong to its editorial board with apparent knowledge of her long history of racist tweets, as well as verbal attacks on police and males in general. Perhaps such gutter venom was proof of militant orthodoxy to be appreciated rather than medieval racism to be shunned. Her mostly empty résumé seems compensated by her identity and her politics—as the Timesmore or less confessed in its sad defense of her racist outbursts.
Jeong
claimed that white people smelled like wet dogs. She had bragged that she hated
them, and hoped that soon they would become childless and disappear. Her final
solution of demographic extinction was, she said (in historically dense
fashion), “my plan all along.”
One wonders
whether she will canonize her collected tweets into something like “My
Struggle,” replete with less abstract territorial theories how to reify her
“plan” or add pseudo-scientific details explaining why and how whites, as she
alleges, smell or have had no cultural or scientific achievements.
Lots of her
other tweets about toxic white people and culturally repugnant white
heterosexual males suggest that Jeong’s twitter corpus is not, as alleged, one
of flippant jest, counterpunches to trolls, or accidental streaming.
Rather it
is consistent with the profile of an embittered but otherwise mostly
undistinguished social justice warrior who had fueled her bias at Harvard Law
School and honed its expression in the no-consequences world of left-wing
blogs.
Of course,
once caught, Jeong predictably retreated to victim status: she was simply
replying to hateful trolls. (One wonders whether her venom against police was
likewise supposedly prompted by police attacks on her?)
The Times,
which claims it has a practice of calling out hate speech, and blackballing any
with Jeong-like skeletons, suddenly tsk-tsked its hiring by claiming that she
was merely overzealous in her eliminationist response to Internet trolls. More
likely, the Times liked her verve and smiled at the click-bait
attention she earned. It’s a free country, after all, and the Times is
perfectly free to hire all the progressive racists it wishes to enhance its
brand.
Routine
Demonization
In the text message trove of disgraced FBI operatives Lisa Page and Peter Strzok there was the same sort of barnyard contempt. Georgetown graduate Strzok claimed to Page that a local Virginia Walmart “smelled” of Trump voters—a progressive stereotype of white Neanderthals that is increasingly freely expressed.
In the text message trove of disgraced FBI operatives Lisa Page and Peter Strzok there was the same sort of barnyard contempt. Georgetown graduate Strzok claimed to Page that a local Virginia Walmart “smelled” of Trump voters—a progressive stereotype of white Neanderthals that is increasingly freely expressed.
In another
government text, an unidentified FBI agent, assigned to the Hillary Clinton
email investigation, had written of the Trump voters that they were “lazy
POS that think we will magically grant them jobs for doing nothing.”
Again,
demonizing the Trump voter as beyond cultural redemption is nothing new. During
the 2016 campaign, Hillary Clinton infamously dismissed Trump supporters
as “deplorables” who were“irredeemable” and were “not America.”
After her
defeat, Clinton proved her early smears were no accident. Speaking in India,
she again slurred Trump supporters as being racist, sexist, and xenophobic for
their inability to appreciate her progressive godhead. All this from the 2008
candidate who earned the sobriquet of “Annie Oakley” from Barack Obama for
quaffing boilermakers, shooting, and bowling while pandering to what Clinton
had once endearingly called “hard-working Americans, white Americans.”
In some
sense, the rebranded Clinton simply continued where Barack Obama had left off
in his denunciations of the “bitter clingers” of Pennsylvania, who were prone
to simplistic trust in their guns and religion and, out of insecurity,
scapegoated others.
When Obama
periodically wrote off Americans as “lazy” and ignorant of the world beyond
them (this, from another Harvard law graduate who thought Hawaii was in Asia
and Austrians spoke “Austrian”), he was, to use a progressive metaphor, dog
whistling the themes of his clingers speech.
Easy
Targets, No Consequences
Elites are confident that there is nothing either ethically wrong or career-endangering in smearing middle-class Trump supporters with such crude stereotypes.
Elites are confident that there is nothing either ethically wrong or career-endangering in smearing middle-class Trump supporters with such crude stereotypes.
When
pundits on television go after Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.), they inevitably
resort to attacking his Tulare roots, and his dairy-farm upbringing (“A former
dairy farmer”; “way over his head”; “nothing in his résumé that would have
qualified him for the post,” etc.) to claim that he is mismatched by
Harvard-trained Adam Schiff. Again, how strange that egalitarians always revert
to base snobbery and class stereotypes in lieu of an argument or an idea.
Arkansas
native Sarah Huckabee Sanders, the White House press secretary, is a frequent
target of such venomous cultural disparagement.
She has
become our new Sarah Palin, whom the elite used to ridicule routinely, Remember
David Letterman’s stupid joke about her daughter (likely a reference to
then-14-year old Willow) being raped by baseball star Alex Gonzales in a
dugout—the subtext being that white trash like the Palins love to have underage
gratuitous sex wherever they can find it. (Projection alert: Letterman was
later blackmailed into admitting to turning his studio office into a sort of sex
den where he routinely before and after his show seduced female staffers).
At the 2018
White House Correspondents’ Dinner, comedian Michelle Wolf trashed Sanders’
appearance and her pedigree. Actor Peter Fonda later called her a misogynistic
obscenity, and said she should be deported to Arkansas.
New York
Times columnist Frank Bruni once mocked her accent.
Listening to her, he said, was akin “to hearing the air seep out a flat
tire.” And Los Angeles Times writer David Horsey mocked Sanders as
a “slightly chunky soccer mom” who was out of place with “fake
eyelashes” and “formal dresses.”
Equally
bizarre is another trope that Trump voters should be deported and illegal
aliens welcomed in their place. After the 2016 election, conservative
NeverTrump pundits variously expressed their contempt for Trump supporters as a
sort of class of expendables, or at least as inferior to immigrants.
David
Brooks, for example, claimed that white working communities were often
xenophobic given their own realization of inferiority. “You’d react negatively,
too, if confronted with people who are better versions of what you wish you
were yourself,” he wrote.
If I had
noted the same contempt for the Norteños gang member living
across the road who this month shot at another neighbor’s house, broke the
windows of my nephew’s home, was arrested, released, and rearrested in one
night, and periodically used drugs in my orchard—that he acts so antisocially
because he and associates are “confronted with better versions of what he
wished he was himself”—I would face a career-ending charge of racism from the
electronic mob.
Sometimes
state rather than national deportation is dreamed of as a less drastic cure for
the deplorables. Minnesota Governor Mark Dayton said that
his state’s white population did not have enough “B+” citizens and therefore
needed to find them from Somalia. “Our economy cannot expand based on
white, B+, Minnesota-born citizens. We don’t have enough.” One wonders why the
bigot Dayton considered himself and unknown Somali immigrants en masse to
be B+ and above, but most of his fellow Minnesotans otherwise sub-B+. What were
the racial criteria by which he judged whole classes of people?
The Shield
of Progressive Victimhood
These examples of contempt from politicians and media for what might be called the Trump voter, the white working classes, or red-state America, could be repeated ad nauseam. The stereotypes, however, raise a number of ironies and paradoxes.
These examples of contempt from politicians and media for what might be called the Trump voter, the white working classes, or red-state America, could be repeated ad nauseam. The stereotypes, however, raise a number of ironies and paradoxes.
Liberal
orthodoxy has always professed to oppose stereotyping people by their outward
appearance.
Or has it?
I might argue that progressivism used to remind us that our character, not our
color mattered. But then I cannot, because it never did—given
that progressivism at its birth emerged as a bastard mix of Darwinism-fueled
eugenics and Germanic inspired pseudo-science.
Academic
dogma postulates that white people cannot be the victims of racism, and such
banal white demonization has now seeped into the larger liberal commentariat.
With that bias comes the twin notion that one can smear the white working
classes with impunity. Caputo, however, was not brave or stupid enough to visit
a Trump rally and to suggest to the crowd around him to get to a Clear Smile
clinic.
If you are
a non-white purveyor of such prejudice, venom like Jeong’s is contextualized
through the lens of compensatory historical grievances. Someone’s grandfather
mistreated your grandmother, so you can invert and then replay the roles with
impunity. Or less charitably, life’s disappointments are always due to past
cosmic injustice, not one’s own perceived tragic shortcomings or bad luck or
just cruel fate.
If you are
an elite white liberal, you are a twofer: virtue signaling your identity politics
bona fides, while psychologically squaring the circle of your own privilege.
Those who ridicule less fortunate white others for their supposed racial
privilege—themselves often the products of old boy networks, elite upbringings,
inherited perks, prep schools and parental leveraging—end up as the privileged
smearing the non-privileged for their privilege.
Jeong is a
Harvard Law graduate. Strzok has a master’s degree from Georgetown. The
ridicule of the white working class by NeverTrump conservative pundits is read
on the pages of the nation’s premier newspapers or voiced in hallowed symposia.
Is such
ignorance of an entire class because of, or in spite of such, elite training?
Does the
university-bred cursus honorarium have room for
real-world experience beyond the campus and laptop?
Has Jeong
ever worked welding alongside the grandchildren of Dust Bowl diaspora to
adjudicate their actual skin-colored advantage? Did her class and gender
studies work at Harvard Law constitute a tougher curriculum than a 12-hour
shift at Denny’s? Is the soybean jack-of-all-trades farmer really denser than
the Yale English major?
A final
irony. In answer to the now hackneyed question, who or what created Trump? All
these purveyors of class and racial prejudice need only look in the mirror.
Content
created by the Center for American Greatness, Inc. is available without charge
to any eligible news publisher that can provide a significant audience. For
licensing opportunities for our original content, please contact licensing@centerforamericangreatness.com.
About the Author: Victor Davis
Hanson
Victor Davis Hanson is an American
military historian, columnist, former classics professor, and scholar of
ancient warfare. He was a professor of classics at California State University,
Fresno, and is currently the Martin and Illie Anderson Senior Fellow at
Stanford University’s Hoover Institution. He has been a visiting professor at
Hillsdale College since 2004. Hanson was awarded the National Humanities Medal
in 2007 by President George W. Bush. Hanson is also a farmer (growing raisin
grapes on a family farm in Selma, California) and a critic of social trends
related to farming and agrarianism. He is the author most recently of The
Second World Wars: How the First Global Conflict was Fought and Won (Basic
Books).