• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is this cartoon racist?

Is this cartoon racist?

  • Total voters
    69
The German said:
So what is your definition of real racism?
Click to expand...

Apparently it's anything that he can possibly find a negative connotation to.


So, for example, if you were to say "good morning", that would be a subtle play on Reagans "morning in America" campaign theme, which in turn would translate to "Republican campaign strategy" which would be a code word for "Southern Strategy" which was a blanket term that meant "appeal to working class whites in the south" which was supposed to work through "calling for law and order" which people accused of being secret dog-whistle code for "imprison black people", and therefore by wishing him a good morning you are, in fact, "subtly" suggesting that he should be imprisoned because of his skin color. You racist.
 
I didn't know excrement was a race. It may be offensive to equate Obama policies with ****, but unless you consider **** a race it's not racist at all.
 
MildSteel said:
There is an old joke that says if black is beautiful that my feces is a masterpiece.

The cartoon can be viewed as racist because it subtly plays on the notions of Obama's skin color, chocolate and feces.
Click to expand...
I figured that this is why you identified it as racist. I thought of that as well, but I also find that the chocolate vs. feces comparison is also just an easy way to make a point about how seemingly "sweet" policies are actually crap. The same cartoon could easily be used for a White politician and doesn't rely on race to make it's point. That's what I don't believe that it's racist. I see where you're coming from though, particularly since modern racism is often subtle and relies on plausible deniability.
 
ThePlayDrive said:
I figured that this is why you identified it as racist. I thought of that as well, but I also find that the chocolate vs. feces comparison is also just an easy way to make a point about how seemingly "sweet" policies are actually crap. The same cartoon could easily be used for a White politician and doesn't rely on race to make it's point. That's what I don't believe that it's racist. I see where you're coming from though, particularly since modern racism is often subtle and relies on plausible deniability.
Click to expand...

Exactly. It's the plausible deniabilty that makes it possible for people to get away with it.
 
MildSteel said:
Exactly. It's the plausible deniabilty that makes it possible for people to get away with it.
Click to expand...

The fact that it's so "subtle" that it's meaningless is what makes it so cunning and insidious. Of course.
 
MildSteel said:
Some time ago this cartoon appeared with a George Will column. Is this cartoon racist?

View attachment 67180002
Click to expand...
This cartoon is metaphorically saying that the president see's his actions as being good, while others (mainly Conservatives) see the presidents actions as being bad.

Only a racist would see this cartoon as being racist. It is a shallow assumption that chocolate and feces are the same color as the president. Nothing in the cartoon makes such a assumption. If you look Obama's skin is a different tone than the darker objects. If the objects and Obama were jet black and Obama was drawn in a racist way then it would have been a racist cartoon. But it was not.

SO I voted no it is not racist.
 
FreedomFromAll said:
Only a racist would see this cartoon as being racist.
Click to expand...
Or someone who is aware that Black skin color is sometimes referred to as "chocolate" and that anti-Black racists have historically compared Black skin color to feces. While I share your perspective that the cartoon is not racist, there is certainly historical precedence for taking the opposite view.
 
tres borrachos said:
Is this thread about suspected racism in a cartoon, or is it about right wingers, and rhetoric and ethics?
Click to expand...

It's about a desperate attempt to project racism and nothing else. MS is a closet racist who can't face his own racism. Most people wouldn't even think about the association he's projecting, but he sees it right away. Say "chcocolate", "tar baby", "dark", etc. and MS automatically jumps to "black". It's an ingrained reaction that shows his racism and since he can't accept that he's a racist, he tries to assuage his guilt by projecting it on others. It's a common trait among racist liberals (fortunately there aren't that many of them, unfortunately the ones that are seem to very vocal).
 
faithful_servant said:
It's about a desperate attempt to project racism and nothing else. MS is a closet racist who can't face his own racism. Most people wouldn't even think about the association he's projecting, but he sees it right away. Say "chcocolate", "tar baby", "dark", etc. and MS automatically jumps to "black". It's an ingrained reaction that shows his racism and since he can't accept that he's a racist, he tries to assuage his guilt by projecting it on others. It's a common trait among racist liberals (fortunately there aren't that many of them, unfortunately the ones that are seem to very vocal).
Click to expand...

That's a reach.
 
Obama turns everything into **** and **** is always some shade of brown ... call it a scientific & empirical coincidence that he is too.
 
I can't see any feasible way someone could call that cartoon racist
 
I don't suppose that it means anything to MS that there are 26 votes and that he's still the only one that sees "racism" in this cartoon.



49199180.jpg
 
As someone who sees racism as a lot more prevalent than most any right-leaning person here, no, I don't see racism in the cartoon. And believe me, I think the national dialgue regarding Obama is buried under a mountain of racism.
 
Zyphlin said:
I can't see any feasible way someone could call that cartoon racist
Click to expand...

Greetings, Zyphlin. :2wave:

Neither can I! This is really getting absurd! :thumbdown:
 
polgara said:
Greetings, Zyphlin. :2wave:

Neither can I! This is really getting absurd! :thumbdown:
Click to expand...

I don't know quite what Midsteel's deal is but an honest exchange definitely isn't it.
 
There are so many racist things in this world that one does not need to take something that isn't racist and say that it is.

The cartoonist started with the idea of Obama turning everything into feces and from there added the bit about chocolate to create a punch line. Otherwise, it would have been very blunt but not funny to anybody.
 
ThePlayDrive said:
No. Popularity is never a measure of accuracy. Popularity may correlate with accuracy, but it doesn't measure it.
Click to expand...

That is correct. The popular view on this is right because it is right, not because it is popular.
 
ThePlayDrive said:
Or someone who is aware that Black skin color is sometimes referred to as "chocolate" and that anti-Black racists have historically compared Black skin color to feces. While I share your perspective that the cartoon is not racist, there is certainly historical precedence for taking the opposite view.
Click to expand...

You are correct, it would have been less controversial to use something else in the cartoon. But like talk radio political cartoonist thrive on controversy.
 
cpwill said:
No. Only someone desperate to find inherent racism in criticism of the President could come to that conclusion.
Click to expand...

Nearly correct. People use the term "racist" as an I win button. If they can label some one as racist, they do not have to argue their politics. It is used alot by people of both sides. The connection is poor debate skill, not ideology.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom