Friday, May 30, 2008

Racism under the veil of "tolerance"

In Barak Obama's latest book, The Audacity of Hope, there's a chapter that talks about the polarization of the American media, which has allowed extreme views on either side of the political spectrum to make its way into the mainstream. He writes, "The absense of even rough agreement on the facts puts every opinion on equal footing and therefore eliminates the basis for thoughtful compromise. It rewards not those who are right, but those... who can make their arguments most loudly."

I believe that this assessment correctly identifies the growing divide amongst Americans (and to a smaller part, Canadians) which has become more and more evident after each election. It's no secret that the majority of the electorate tends to be independent-minded and moderate, yet it is those on the extreme right and the extreme left who are awarded the most air time. A unique, bipartisan, and often downright logical opinion on the slightest of issues gets trumped by the juiciness of pundits on either side turning the topic into a philosophical and self-serving argument.

Unfortunately, the monopolistic trend of the world's major media corporations has further pushed along this cause. Conservative-minded Rupert Murdoch recognized the power of the media to sway voters, which led to the creation of Fox News, a network that has relied on tabloid-style "journalism" and blatant right wing propaganda to successfully push its political agenda. The backlash over this erosion of journalistic integrity has lead to an outright paranoia amongst the few remaining media conglomerates, while they still attempt to grab the juicy headlines under the guise of independence. Now, instead of providing a single balanced view that reflects the true pulse of America, they simply throw together two polar extremists to bicker about pointless issues for hours on end.

The climate has been somehow construed such that racists are now allowed to freely give their opinions on a variety of matters, because not allowing them to do so would be denying the "right" the opportunity to express their opinion, and the conservative base would surely accuse the media of being biased otherwise.

This phenomenon has reared its ugly head in the backlash against Rachael Ray, who wore a traditional Arab kaffiyeh as a scarf during a promotional television ad for Dunkin' Donuts. Because of the scarf's association with the middle east, pundits on the extreme right were allowed to incorrectly associate the garb with terrorism, and the ad was subsequently pulled after a media infused firestorm.

Rachael "Hussein" Ray: terrorist, or delicious Christmas ham?

The notion that any accessory or piece of clothing associated with the Arab world is somehow a throwback to terrorism is blatantly racist, yet the issue has been given credence by a media market half bent on giving these assholes airtime. Social conservatives are allowed to continually refer to the Democratic presidential candidate as "Barak HUSSEIN Obama", which plays off the exact same angle.

The umbrella of tolerance has suddenly included a hatred towards an entire race of people. Exactly who is speaking up for them, and exactly who is speaking up for the millions of people in North America who still consider the realm of logic fair game?