SUBSCRIBE NOW WELCOME BACK. Do you want to continue reading where you left off? New Republic subscribers can pick up where they left off no matter which device they were previously using. SUBSCRIBE NOW

Go Home Today's Obliviousness Award...

THE PLANK JUNE 11, 2009

Today's Obliviousness Award...

BY JAMES KIRCHICK

...goes to The Atlantic's Ta-Nehisi Coates, who writes of Jeremiah Wright's anti-Semitic outburst:

I'm just going to be honest and say I didn't expect this:

Asked if he had spoken to the president, Wright said: "Them Jews aren't going to let him talk to me. I told my baby daughter, that he'll talk to me in five years when he's a lame duck, or in eight years when he's out of office..."

Feel free to pillory me, but I just didn't see that sort of crude conspiratorial antisemitism coming.

Right, because it's a total surprise that a guy who printed a column by a Hamas leader in his Church bulletin and whose church magazine bestowed the "Dr. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr. Trumpeter Award" upon Louis Farrakhan would believe that "The Jews" are controlling the President of the United States.

Update: Jeremiah Wright now says that when he said "Jews," he really meant "Zionists." Maybe he's not an anti-Semite after all.

--James Kirchick

SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS

Show all 24 comments

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

24 comments

Ta-Nehisi Coates is way more interesting and honest than you are James.

- dabeffert

June 11, 2009 at 2:29pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

TNC continues.

Not to excuse anything, but I wonder if the blitz, from last year, hardened him. I say that because the worse stuff I've heard from Wright, actually aren't in his initial sermons. With the exception of the government creating AIDS bit, I never found his sermons to be particularly egregious.

But in between this and the press club, it's like he's doubling down on the caricature--like he's becoming exactly what they said he was. Maybe "they" were right. I also wonder whether you're just seeing ego--a guy who had the megaphone for much of his life, eclipsed, and doing whatever he can to get it back

See, Jamie, that part is interesting.   Look, I am tired of Jamie-bashing, because it is fish-in-a-barrel, but TNC is so much more talented than Jamie, and is a far better, more subtle, more interesting, more honest thinker than Jamie, that I can't help but wonder if this is just a manifestation of jealousy.  

- boneill

June 11, 2009 at 2:30pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I know sneering at those you disagree with puts mayo and Wonder Bread on your table, Kirchick, but the takeaway here for you *ought* to be that Coates -- a far better blogger and thinker than you -- acknowledges when he's wrong. Even if he doesn't have to.

- WoodyBombay

June 11, 2009 at 2:32pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Oh, I forgot to mention writer. He's a better writer than you, too.

- WoodyBombay

June 11, 2009 at 2:35pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Exactly Woody and boneill. I would add just one more thing. It is one of TNC's best traits that in an argument he doesn't attack the motives of whomever he is arguing with. He assumes good faith and this is real virtue. All bloggers and intellectuals should learn that from him. Whereas Jamie, even at your tender age you are already a bitter, cynical, snarky jerk.

- dabeffert

June 11, 2009 at 2:37pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

dabeffert -- so you're conceding TNC is way dumber?  

I would have said a man who blamed AIDS on a genocidal government conspiracy is capable of anything -- who needs Hamas/Farrakah?  

- Lymon1

June 11, 2009 at 2:45pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

lymon1: Nope. I'm conceding that he's more generous--and suprisingly honest and open. He didn't have to admit that at all, but he did. Of course he could spend his time attacking a few bete noirs in a sarcastic tone like Jamie does, but he is better than that.

- dabeffert

June 11, 2009 at 3:00pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

B. and W. -- as you can see, I'm with Jamie on this one.   You have to almost willfully ignore what we learned of Wright to be surprised by his "The Jews" comment.  What, because he repeatedly railed against the overwhelming evil of "the zionists" surely he was making the "anti-zionism isn't anti-semitism" distinction?  He was clearly as hard as one gets against Jews short of doing them violence before Obama enterred the primaries.  Have you ever listend to African-American talk radio?  I have (and I'm in Wright's hometown) and Wright's comments wouldn't raise any eyebrows there.  

- Lymon1

June 11, 2009 at 3:00pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I'm not surprised by what Wright said, lymon- and TNC probably shouldn't have been either.  I just find it incredible and enraging that Jamie tries to call out someone so, so much better than he is for admitting, unprovoked, that he was surprised by something.  I think he was trying to see Wright from other shoes, as TNC often does.  

Speaking of the Right Rev Wright's hometown, lymon, there is a Chi-town TNR meetup tonight- I've been posting about it.  If you (or anyone else) is interested drop me a line at cairobrian@gmail.com.  

That will be the last plug for this.

- boneill

June 11, 2009 at 3:08pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Have you ever listend to African-American talk radio?"

lymon, you should probably explain very carefully what you are trying to say here.

- FWright

June 11, 2009 at 3:10pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Actually, "hard as one gets" is a bit too much -- there are people who don't go on murderous rampages who still view Jews genetically as part of conspiracy, but my point is that these comments were well in line with his feelings about mainstream Judaism (and politics in general) expressed before the events of last summer.

- Lymon1

June 11, 2009 at 3:14pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Kirchik is right to be critical of Coates here.

After all Coates said this too:  "..With the exception of the government creating AIDS bit, I never found his sermons to be particularly egregious..."

Just for small, that is quite a "bit".

Kirchk's point that the proclaimed surprise is an instance of obtuseness or disingenuousness is entirely defensible.

Critics of Kirchik are on insubtsantial, essentially ad hominem, ground in making their argument "Coates is better than you."

What does that have to do with anything?

And as an aside, for myself, I can't recall Kirchik saying anything as dumb or ill considered as the "...Aids bit".

- basman

June 11, 2009 at 3:19pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

It's one thing to be wholly ignorant of Wright's views.  It's another thing to be startled when he makes such a blunt comment knowing that even this long after the campaign his remarks would be widely publicized.  In other words, I know that Wright is an asshole with obnoxious views, but I'm also a little surprised that, having spent so much time in the spotlight, he still made such a remark publicly.  I think TNC's reaction is not unreasonable.

I don't rush to make a comment every time Kirchick makes one of his juvenile posts, but this is a pretty simplistic and lame potshot.   And I am consistently unimpressed with his work.

- jamie322

June 11, 2009 at 3:22pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

boneil --  damn, where have I been? (actually I know the answer to that, but still, I've been popping in at TNR Online from time to time). I didn't know there even was a Chicago TNR meetup.  Dunno if I can make tonight but I'll drop a line soon and maybe can make the next one.  (I subscribe to the digital -- does this mean I have to print up a copy to bring :-) )

- Lymon1

June 11, 2009 at 3:25pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

FWright:  What I am saying is that I have frequently heard both conspiracy theories and the term "The Jews" on AA talk radio in a vareity of stereotypical contexts and the hosts nearly always glide right past it (they don't agree with it, they just ignore it) -- my first exposure to this was when Gus Savage was a congressman.

Just curious, because you hint that there was some other nefarious implication to that -- what else did you think I might mean?  I said such comments would not raise eyebrows, not that every person or even most comes on and spews Wright-like venom.

- Lymon1

June 11, 2009 at 3:32pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

The relative merits of Coates and Kirchick as journalists, bloggers, and individuals aside, this was a perfectly acceptable post from Jamie. Short, relatively restrained, and properly linked. Also the adverbs and adjectives were mostly kept locked away in the thesaurus. It may sound like I'm describing minimum standards of literate adequacy here, akin to a Little League parent cheering "good swing!" after his eight-year-old's second strike, but this is real progress for Kirchick and he deserves our honest praise when he achieves basic standards of competence across the board, as he does here. Kudos!

- rhubarbs

June 11, 2009 at 3:36pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Bassie, I don't entirely disagree with the substance of Jamie's post, just the absurd meaninglessness of it.   TNC wrote an honest post about something, something he didn't even have to mention, and even if you disagree with it- and I am not sure that I do; I was kind of seeing Wright as caricuaturizing himself as attention waned, much like a fading pop-star "accidentally" releasing a sex tape- there was no need for this.   Jamie is a consistently dishonest blogger, taking things out of context in order to grind his axes, whereas TNC is incredibly honest, both about himself and others, and writes interesting, challenging, non-dogmatic posts.  I think the reaction here is heightened by the sheer happiness many of us feel about having TNC on a regular basis, how he has enriched many of our lives, and how it is frustrating that his first mention on my favorite site is a sneering one by this juvenile hack.  

- boneill

June 11, 2009 at 3:40pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

lymon- we'll do this again soon, I am sure.  And since I am only a digital subscriber, I hope there doesn't need to be a hard-copy to attend.   Maybe we'll make the next one at Hot Dougs.

- boneill

June 11, 2009 at 3:43pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Sounds good, I'd definitely like to meet some fellow TNR'ers.  Man, the Saturday lines at Doug's are getting insane, but I'm still usually there for the 10:30 opening...

- Lymon1

June 11, 2009 at 3:55pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I'm not a regular reader of TNC -- usually only when Andrew Sullivan links to him.  He ocassionally makes a point which, I'm embarassed to say, is true and one I missed probably because of cultural (i.e., racial) bias.  At the same time, I thought his "defence" of African-Americans who voted no on prop 8 wasn't very convincing and bordered (I put that in quotes because he wasn't defending African-American homophobia in the least but this is getting way off on a tangent).  

- Lymon1

June 11, 2009 at 3:59pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Bone I agree with Rhubarbs's--to my taste, and with no disrepect to the man behind the name himself,  a very unsavoury vegetable often mistaken for a fruit--post up to the point when the sneering condescension starts.

I'm not familiar with the vaunted TNC, but now that he has my attention, I'll check him out. I'll give you my impression. Let's see if he's up to, say, Bill Kr...(you know).

If there was a Toronto tnr digital meet up, that would be a party of three as far as I know: me, myself and I.

- basman

June 11, 2009 at 4:21pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Regarding the AIDs as government conspiracy thing--

In the light of history such as

www.washingtonpost.com/.../AR2007010500180.html

it's not as totally off the wall, deal-breaking concept as one might think first blush.  That's not to give the theory any positive support, just to point out that Wright isn't automatically a total loon for holding it.  

--jt

- jtmodel

June 11, 2009 at 4:45pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

bassie, I would reccomend his exchange with Sullivan about identity and race, as well as a lot of his recent stuff on the South and the civil war.  He talks about race a lot, which sounds like it could be annoying, but he does so with sensitivity, insight and humor (today's entries are not his absolute best stuff, FYI).

- boneill

June 11, 2009 at 5:04pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

okay Bone thanks and take it easy with the cold ones tonight.

- basman

June 11, 2009 at 5:54pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

SHARE HIGHLIGHT

0 CHARACTERS SELECTED

TWEET THIS

POST TO TUMBLR

SHARE ON FACEBOOK

Close