Racism and prejudice are not just right-wing phenomena
The late great civil rights activist Malcolm X once said, “The white liberal differs from the white conservative only in one way: the liberal is more deceitful than the conservative…Both want power, but the white liberal is the one who has perfected the art of posing as the Negro’s friend and benefactor; and by winning the friendship, allegiance, and support of the Negro, the white liberal is able to use the Negro as a pawn or tool in this political “football game” that is constantly raging between the white liberals and white conservatives.”
Looking at the current political atmosphere in the country, it is obvious the country still has issues with racism. Whether it be the rise of the alt-right and the recent marches in Charlottesville, the rise in xenophobic and Islamophobic hysteria coinciding with Trump’s campaign and eventual election, or the endless killings of unarmed Black men by police, racism is a sad part of our daily reality in the United States.
When thinking of racism, many immediately receive the image of the stereotypical Conservative hillbilly Trump supporter from the Deep South, carrying a shotgun and openly sharing his racist views with everyone.
However, there is another phenomenon of racism which is often overlooked in this country, and that is from those very same individuals who seem to be arguing against racism the most: liberals.
Jordan Peele’s recent horror film Get Out helped to bring light to the phenomenon of White Liberal racism. The film’s villains aren’t the typical people you think of when you hear the term “racist”. They are just average White Liberals, with the dad even saying he “would have voted Obama for a 3rd term if he could”. They were not wearing White sheets on their heads and burning crosses. However, their actions and underlying intentions were based in a different, yet just as harmful form of racism than what we are used to. In line with the aforementioned Malcolm X quote, they seemed nice and inclusive, but it was a part of their deceitful intent to take advantage of minority populations as they see fit.
Such is the reality of liberal racism in this country. It is not apparent. In fact, at times, it seems as if they are being all inclusive and open to accepting minorities. But in the end, it is still the other side of the same coin we see with conservatives’ racism. Application of this phenomenon was certainly seen in the months leading up to the 2016 Presidential election. It was most apparent in my eyes during one of the last presidential debates between Trump and Clinton.
The two candidates were asked about Islamophobia and Muslims in American society. Trump’s views on Muslims were apparent since he started his campaign. He made no attempt to hide his rhetoric and went out and openly advocated for the curtailment of Muslim immigration into the country. Because of this, he has been condemned, criticized, and labeled as an Islamophobe by many since, and with good reason.
However, Clinton’s response, seeming benevolent at first, can easily be seen as the other side of the same coin of Trump’s anti-Muslim rhetoric. Clinton said that, “We need Muslims to be part of our eyes and ears on our front lines [against terrorism]”.
At first hearing, these words do not seem very harmful. Muslims want to defeat terror just like everyone else, right? Nothing more, nothing less to that statement, correct?
Looking deeper into the statement shows that on the contrary, there is plenty to be worried about in regards to this response.
What exactly does “eyes and ears on our front lines” imply? It implies that somehow, just by being Muslims, we have some sort of special access to information about terrorism that the general public does not and that there is some burden on our back to reveal this supposed information. It implies that Muslims are not just as much, if not more of, victims to these horrific acts and that somehow such terror is being allowed to happen due to us not reporting this supposed secret information.
What would the response be if a politician made a statement like “we cannot isolate Blacks, they are on our front lines to fighting gang violence!”? How about “we cannot isolate White Americans, they are the key to stopping mass shootings!”? I mean, if we are talking statistics, the latter certainly makes more sense than Clinton’s comment. According to Newsweek, right-wing extremists committed nearly twice as many acts of terror on U.S. soil than Islamic extremists. Not only that, but the statistics show they are more successful at it. Of 115 acts of right-wing terror in that timespan, only 35% were thwarted by police, compared to 76% of the 63 acts of Islamic terror. Going by the stats, is it not safe to say that Whites have to be more vigilant on the “front lines against White extremist terror”? Are Whites not doing enough to condemn and report these actions?
Of course, there is nothing wrong with telling individuals to report anything suspicious they may see or hear. In fact, that is certainly your civic duty to do what you can to protect the lives of your fellow citizens. But this kind of rhetoric only serves to make it worse between Muslims and American society. Why am I specifically on the “front lines”? I know just as much about terrorism as just about everyone else.
Why not talk about how Muslims are on the front line against social injustice, as we have seen with Muhammad Ali, Malcolm X, Mahmoud Abdul-Rauf, and recently Linda Sarsour? Why not how Muslims are on the front lines against illnesses, with nearly 10% of the nation’s doctors being Muslim despite being merely 1% of the population? Why is it that our value, even to individuals who seem to be so high on inclusion and diversity, is still tied in some way to terrorism?
The purpose of this piece is not to argue one side is better or the other, nor is it any endorsement of any side. All I want to get across is that racism and discrimination are far from black and white issues in the United States. Yes, the most vocal racism is most likely from the far-right/alt-right, but that does not excuse the left for the elements of prejudice still present in their rhetoric. Just because one side seems like it is all-inclusive and for justice does not exempt them from having discriminatory undertones to what they say.
