It is now apparent that Republicans will use the Blut und Boden ( Blood and Soil) strategy to beat Barack Obama in the general election this fall. You see, Barack Obama is not really a true American. Right-wing columnist Kathleen Parker explains:
Full-bloodedness is an old coin that's gaining currency in the new American realm. Meaning: Politics may no longer be so much about race and gender as about heritage, core values, and made-in-America. Just as we once and still have a cultural divide in this country, we now have a patriot divide.
Who "gets" America? And who doesn't?
The answer has nothing to do with a flag lapel pin, which Obama donned for a campaign swing through West Virginia, or even military service, though that helps. It's also not about flagpoles in front yards or magnetic ribbons stuck on tailgates.
It's about blood equity, heritage and commitment to hard-won American values. And roots.
Needless to say, Senator McCain is held up as a "full-blooded American", while Obama has some African blood, and so American values are alien to him. Parker even gives a nod to Hillary Clinton, the white candidate, who "gets it":
And, the truth is, Clinton's own DNA is cobbled with many of the same values that rural and small-town Americans cling to. She understands viscerally what Obama has to study.
So it is the DNA molecules that determine the character of true Americans. Another right-wing commentator, Michael Medved, explains why Americans - that is, "full-blooded Americans" - are the new Herrenmenschen:
In today’s ruthlessly competitive international economy, the United States may benefit from a potent but unheralded advantage: the aggressive edge sustained by the inherited power of American DNA.
According to this "scientific" view of American national character, the descendents of the original immigrants possess a "distinctive makeup of their “dopamine receptor system – the pathway in the brain that figures centrally in boldness and novelty seeking.” Soon these advocates of nativism will be measuring skulls.
Of course, Parker and Medved conveniently overlook the fact that the real "full-blooded Americans" were nearly wiped out through genocide.
und ich dachte immer, es wäre der charakter der amerikanischen gesellschaft, dass ihr BLUT aus aller herren länder kommt ...
naja, wenn es um den posten des präsidenten geht, hört´s mit der grosszügigkeit dann wohl auf.
Posted by: erphschwester | May 20, 2008 at 12:33 AM
@erphschwester: maybe they "found out" that some sort of DNA-mixture in this melting pot creates iron man (or super man or such)..
It's really sad, how simplistic human beings can be and how low politics can get..
Posted by: Omar | May 20, 2008 at 04:42 AM
@erphschwester,
so sieht der neue rassismus bei uns aus.
Actually, when you read these two pieces there are two, contradictory, forms of racism at play. And both are just modern variations of old racist tropes.
Medved is presenting a genetically-based Social Darwinism. Immigrants to America are self-selected risk-takers,and this is embedded in their DNA. Black slaves were brought to America against their will, and so lack this risk-taking DNA. Ironically, Obama does have the "American DNA", since he is not a descendent of slaves: his father came to America from Kenya to improve his circumstances. But Obama (and Clinton) are seeking to impose a political structure that negates this risk-taking. By not allowing poor people to fail- and they deserve to perish - Obama would weaken the "American" gene pool.
Kathleen Parker, on the other hand, is advocating a Bush-style "Volksgemeinschaft". "Full-blooded Americans" are inextricably tied to American soil (which, unfortunately, had to be appropriated from native Americans). Obama is a "Mischling" whose mother was indeed "full-blooded" from Kansas, but whose father is from Kenya. The fact that Obama spent his childhood in Indonesia also taints his blood with "multi-culturalism". By the same token, "rootless" Jews can never be full-blooded Americans, since their blood is tainted with "cosmopolitanism". Does this all sound familiar?
Posted by: David | May 20, 2008 at 07:52 AM
"neuer rassismus"?
ich frage mich, ob die neuen gesellschaften links und rechts des atlantiks sich tatsächlich so sehr von den alten unterscheiden. wir mögen uns nach aussen so tolerant geben, so gute gesetze schaffen wie auch immer ... in unseren köpfen hat sich doch so viel nicht verändert. ob nun die "neuen rassisten" oder die "neuen faschisten" - ihnen allen ist ja gleich, dass sie sich selbst nur zu gern als etwas besseres und den anderen als irgendwie minderwertig, zumindest aber nicht wert genug für ... alles mögliche halten.
sobald die luft irgendwie dünn wird, auf die eine oder andere weise, reden wir uns gern wieder das evolutionäre recht des stärkeren herbei, ohne uns dessen bewusst zu werden, wie sehr wir uns damit von allem entfernen, auf das wir gelegentlich als menschliche eigenarten stolz sind.
Posted by: erphschwester | May 20, 2008 at 06:01 PM
Jawohl, das ist die "ewige Wiederkunft des Gleichen"(Nietzsche)
Posted by: David | May 20, 2008 at 07:50 PM
Hey! Thanks for all the great info. I was browsing through a bunch of political websites and blogs (mostly liberal ones) and I came across your blog and find it to be very interesting. There are a bunch of others I like too, like huff post, and other news sites like politico. Do you know of any that cover politics and the environment? I saw earthlab.com which has mostly environmental info but some politics. I took EarthLab.com’s carbon calculator (http://www.earthlab.com/signupprofile/). It was pretty easy to use (and it doesn’t make me feel guilty after I take it). Are there any other blogs you would recommend? Can you drop me a link to your favorites or any ones with green info?
Posted by: jordan | May 21, 2008 at 06:27 PM
I generally like your updates, and this update is no different. Keep up the good articles. I would like to share with my friends and relatives also.
Posted by: David Schillo | September 13, 2018 at 08:09 AM