Ralph Nader sucks farts out of dead pigeons.
Look, I understand his frustration. The issues he wants to talk about are real. But he’s not advancing those issues by using “Uncle Tom” language to get himself on TV; he’s just advancing the cause of keeping Ralph Nader in the headlines.
Ralph Nadar is an increasingly vain and self centered man. Its quite stunning
The only campain ad of his I saw was “Nader and Obama Girl” . . . a YouTube sit-com parody with Nader played by himself and “Obama girl” played by a sexy early-twenty-something with no name.
Rather repugnant.
The most frightening – and telling – thing about the “Uncle Tom” language is that Nader seemed to actually have no clue that he was using a racist metaphor.
I would like to know how it is that Nader thought putting the term in “historical context” reduced the racism of its usage? Had Nader not decided to couch his perfectly valid argument in racism he really could have sent out a strong message. Who and what he is, is now obvious to the world at large. Brave new world we are living in eh?
Oh final thought, I am actually a little shocked that it was FOX that called him out. Of all networks who would have thought.
No, Pat, I think the most disturbing thing is that people elsewhere have been vehemently arguing that it is not actually a racist metaphor.
(Dang, now I can’t find which blog it was in, but seriously: people are arguing that “Uncle Tom” is not an insult, because the original Tom was a man who was loyal and noble. There are some fine examples at Salon but that’s not where I ran into it first and responded the only way I knew how: “uh, I do not think that metaphor means what you think it means.”)
I think it’s reasonable to argue that when said by a white person and said about a black person, “Uncle Tom” is a compliment, not an insult. After all, Uncle Tom was the patient, long-suffering and loyal slave. A white person couldn’t ask for much more.
“Uncle Tom” obviously is an insult when said by someone within a minority community to a fellow member of that community — for example, when black Clinton supporters got called that by black Obama supporters.
I think it’s obvious from Nader’s argument that he viewed “Uncle Tom” as an insult, perfectly in keeping with the historical usage of the term — the subservient lap-dog of the white master. The only difference is that Nader meant it in terms of the corporate elite instead of the plantation master.
Is it an inappropriate usage of the term? Sure. Would Nader have asked the same of, say, Hillary Clinton? Or John McCain? In both instances the same (valid) question would be appropriate — is the newly elected president, whether Clinton, McCain or Obama going to represent the People or the Corporations. That’s what Nader was trying to question — which will Obama represent.
The term Nader should have used was “Corporate Stooge”. To refer to a black man as an “Uncle Tom” is racist and Nader should have known that. There’s nothing racist about “Corporate Stooge” and it carries the same meaning, more or less, as what Nader was trying to get across.
“Corporate stooge” is a bit different from “Uncle Tom” — the whole point of “Uncle Tom” as insult is that it says you are betraying your group for the approval of a different group. One could call Meg Whitman a “corporate stooge,” I suppose, but one couldn’t really call her an “Uncle Tom” in the contest between corporations and Nader’s preferences. Obama (and other Democrats) can be termed “Uncle Toms” because they *ought* to have allegiance to progressivism and all that, but may instead betray progressives for corporate approval.
PG, comment #6 was pretty insulting.
Bjartmarr,
It was intended jokingly. Apologies to any white people who felt insulted by the statement that they would want a patient, long-suffering and loyal slave.
PG,
My point was that no one would think to apply “Uncle Tom” to Hillary Clinton — a Democrat — because she’s white. “Progressive” has nothing to do with it — it’s all about making sure African Americans know they are always going to be under a microscope. Always going to be judged on their skin color.
Using these terms is part of the process of disempowering minorities. This is a Progressive blog, so there’s a bias towards expecting people to be Progressive or get lost. But there are people in these other groups — non-white, non-male, non-straight, non-Christian — that don’t have Progressive values. And that’s fine, too.