politics

This video, produced by Mother Jones, shows Pastor Rod Parsley arguing that America was founded to destroy Islam and has a divine mandate to do so.  It is interesting on at least two levels:

First, as a response to the Reverend Wright story, it reminds us that Wright is not the only preacher who says outrageous things, and Obama is not the only politician to get “spiritual guidance” from a controversial figure.  In which case, the question might be: Which outrageous preachers are most likely to be targeted as problematic?  And by who?

Second, the video could be used to demonstrate how a person can be made to appear frightening or evil through editing.  In this case, the move to slow motion, the use of black-and-white, the strategic stills.

In many ways, this video, produced by the left, uses many of the same tactics as the anti-Reverend Wright clips on Fox News and elsewhere. For comparison, The Daily Show put together a montage of coverage that appears in the clip below (at about 6 minutes, 51 seconds) that uses choice words (“fiery”), tone of voice, and fast motion:

Thanks to Joe DeM. for tipping us off to the Mother Jones video!

Lisa Wade, PhD is an Associate Professor at Tulane University. She is the author of American Hookup, a book about college sexual culture; a textbook about gender; and a forthcoming introductory text: Terrible Magnificent Sociology. You can follow her on Twitter and Instagram.

See also these and these.

Thanks again, p.j.!

Here are two videos from MTV’s Think campaign (both found here):

I am not at all sure what the message is here–just a general “fear your government” warning? A comment on the Bush Administration’s policies? The Patriot Act? Also note that the message is that the Holocaust happened to people like us–not that it was done by people like us, which might be a more interesting message.

Anyway, I think this could be compared to the PETA posters in a discussion about history and who has the right to use it how. Will everyone see these images as offensive? Is any use of the Holocaust as an example or comparison automatically offensive? Would campaigns that use the Holocaust be as offensive to people if they used the genocide in Rwanda instead? Who gets to claim the right to use images and symbols of historical events, including horrible tragedies, and in what ways can they use them?

Thanks to Simone for pointing these out!

This ad, playing on white resentment about affirmative action, ran during the 1990 North Carolina Senate race between Harvey Gantt and Jesse Helms:

Before the ad ran (during the last week of the campaign), Gantt was ahead in the polls. The ad is widely believed to be the reason Helms won.

Might be good to pair with the infamous Willy Horton ad from the 1988 Presidential campaign in a discussion of how images of minorities have been used to frighten white voters.

Found here.

You may have seen this Hillary Clinton nutcracker around, but did you know they are selling it at the super popular Urban Outfitters?

Analiese M. said that when she “ran across this item in Urban Outfitters online store… [she] emptied [her] shopping cart.” Awesome, Analiese!

NEW: A commenter on this post, Ana, says she found this on the Urban Outfitters store also:

Note: It also comes in George W. Bush, but not Barack Obama.

More sexism and racism in the 2008 elections: sexist anti-Hillary propaganda, comparing sexism and racism, and “How do we beat the bitch?”

Marcello sent us this really fascinating example of political propaganda from an anti-immigrant party in Italy. He translated the text as:

They suffered immigration
Now they live in reserves
Think about it

The implication is, if they let immigrants into Italy, the current residents will suffer the same fate as American Indians.

Marcello writes:

Beside the obvious racist concept i think it’s quite ironic that they identify
themselves with people they would probably discriminate [against] if they ever
met any american-native people here in italy and the fact that they criminalize
the role that the very same “western civilization” they stand for (against the
“bastardization of culture from muslim heretics”, their words, not mine) played
in the american-native genocide.

Original post, by Marcello, here. Thanks!

.

In response to Condoleeza Rice’s comments that contemporary racial relations reflect an American “birth defect,” Lou Dobbs offered a dismissive monologue in which he tried to deny that there is really any problem to talk about. In a truly beautiful moment of irony, he accidentally lets slip a good part of the slur “cotton-pickin’” in reference to Black leaders.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Y0W19-N3Ik[/youtube]

* Title stole from Jessica’s post over at feministing.

Also awesomely ironic: Dr. Watson is more black than most.