I stopped reading Paul Krugman after…Jun 27th, 2008 | By admin | Category: Politics
I’m steady trying to figure out what Krugman’s problem with Obama is.
In any case, I did read the whole piece and I think Krugman is over-reaching a lot (and just plain wrong) when he says that pc-ness has driven “overt and strongly implied racism from out of our national discourse.” We’re still not anywhere near being able to bring to light–in full measure–the reality of race as it exists today. The reality that’s currently (and consistently) obscured by in politico/msm coded language–the kind of language that fuels what’s been deemed here and other places as “white paranoia,” among other things.
Krugman is also wrong to say that “[r]acial polarization USED to be a dominating force in our politics.” He need to look no further than Hillary’s “kitchen sink” strategy to see that even the most “enlightened” or “liberal” of candidates see it as a viable way to run a race, but God forbid I ask Krugman to be critical of anyone other than Sen. Obama and conservatives, so another stark example is the immigration debate, where the crude racism of Juan Crow is aired in prime time (both in the media and in politics) and receives high ratings from viewers and voters alike.
That said, I don’t think you need to know who the “fervent supporters” are to say that there are probably a significant number of folks out there who think that Obama’s getting into the White House will mean change–transformation–is to come. Krugman is NOT wrong in saying that the fact that Obama is currently the Dem nominee from president and may become president of the US is an indication that change between, say, 1965 and now, has already occurred.
But you are right that it is a lazy point, and given Krugman’s clearly anti-Obama stance even in the face of his clinching the nomination, I have a feeling that he’s got a treasure chest of strawmen left to shoot up. And now, it’ll seem even more justified as some “holding the presumptive feet to the fire, truth to power” bs.