Tom Maguire's Wonderful World

by hilzoy

Here's part of a New York Times story called "Many Blacks Find Joy in Unexpected Breakthrough":

"In his remarks Tuesday, Mr. Obama did not mention becoming the first American of color with a real chance at being president of the United States, and, of course, most of the Democrats who had voted for him were white. But for that very reason, many African-Americans exulted Wednesday in a political triumph that they believed they would never live to see. Many expressed hope that their children would draw strength from the moment.

"Not that we're so distraught, but our children need to be able to see a black adult as a leader for the country, so they can know we can reach for those same goals," said Wilhelmina Brown, 54, an account representative for U.S. Bank in St. Paul. "We don't need to give up at a certain level.""

This seems like something no one could take exception to. People are happy, and happiness is a good thing, right?

Not for Tom Maguire. He calls this "absurdity", and responds to the passage I just quoted as follows:

"How Japanese kids, Chinese kids, or Jewish kids ever make it out of bed in the morning, and why they bother, is left unexplained."

Read his whole post; it's all like that.

Why? One possibility, I suppose, is that Tom Maguire is one of those people who has a heart the size of a turnipseed, and as a result just enjoys raining on other people's parades. Perhaps if I looked through his archives, I'd find lots of posts like this, about all kinds of people:

Newspaper: Charles DeLuca, 78, of West Roxbury said: "Now that the Red Sox have finally won the World Series, I can die happy!"

Tom Maguire: This guy can't die happy unless his favorite baseball team wins the World Series? Call the waaahmbulance!

Or:

Newspaper: But the armed robbery hasn't spoiled the family Christmas. The people from the Gustavson's church pitched in to buy their children presents, and Santa himself came by to deliver them. "We're so grateful", Mr. Gustavson said. "Thanks to our church, my little girls won't have to go without presents this year, and that means the world to me."

Tom Maguire: Would someone please tell this bozo about property insurance?

Somehow, though, I doubt it. Tom Maguire has never struck me as this sort of grinch-like person. Which leaves me with a second possibility: something about the particular people described in the New York Times article set him off.

I wonder what it could be?

***

For the record: yes, I do mean to imply that the 'something' is race. That seems pretty clear from Tom's post. But I do not mean to imply that Tom Maguire is a racist. (I really don't.) As I have said before, I have no interest in figuring out what counts as racism and what does not. What I am interested in is the question: when does race play a role in people's thinking that it should not play? You need to figure out whether race plays such a role in your own thought if you want to answer the question: does something here need changing? That's the question I'm interested in. It's a further question whether, and when, that fact shows that there is something seriously wrong with you, above and beyond being human and fallible. I'm not interested in that question: I don't particularly want to get into questions of blame, which strike me as less important than changing what needs to be changed.

When the fact that people are black makes you respond to their happiness not with a smile, but with disdain; when you find yourself feigning ignorance of the reasons why blacks might have a harder time than other Americans believing that full equality of opportunity extends to them and their children; when you read into their comments about their children some sort of whiny demand that simply is not there;; when parents' concern that their kids have good role models stops looking completely normal and starts looking like the work of "the race hustlers", then I think that something does need changing.

Comments

[Elvis Elvisberg]

Tom Maguire is perfectly big-hearted, sympathetic, and willing to give the benefit of the doubt to right-wing bloggers who "demand" that black people concede that certain black people the blogger doesn't like are "niggers."

[ara]

What's weird is that I can't figure out exactly what Maguire's objection is. All this talk of ironies and absurdities. I guess they are obvious to Tom Maguire, so obvious as to not be worth articulating.

[Randy Paul]

Regarding the Xmas robbery, evidently Maguire has never dealt with the glacial pace in which insurance companies pay claims.

[Gary Farber]

"...then I think that something does need changing."

That would be: people's lack of understanding of their own privilege.

"Regarding the Xmas robbery, evidently Maguire has never dealt with the glacial pace in which insurance companies pay claims."

Randy, Hilzoy made that up as a fictional example of what she thought Maguire might say if he was consistent. She was in subjunctive mode.

[TexasToast]

What's weird is that I can't figure out exactly what Maguire's objection is. All this talk of ironies and absurdities. I guess they are obvious to Tom Maguire, so obvious as to not be worth articulating.

You obviously don't read a lot o Tom. He writes in a style that allows him to take full advantage of the difference between imply and infer.

Does't get called out that much - but it does hsppen - on torture, for instance.

[cleek]

it's good to know i've not missed anything by not reading that blog.

[low-tech cyclist]

Y'know, even if one had absolutely no background on the history of black people in America, through slavery and Jim Crow and 'massive resistance' and all that, one might still notice that things are different for black children in this country than for white and Asian children in terms of role models - for instance, that black men in the professions are relatively rare, that black men who are or have been in prison are all too abundant.

And from that, one would quickly conclude that black children might benefit from an additional significant black male role model much more than Chinese, Japanese, or Jewish children would benefit from one more Chinese, Japanese, or Jewish role model. It's not like there's a shortage of Japanese engineers or Jewish doctors.

[mikkel]

I'm kind of confused. I don't know about Tom, but most of the people that are now discounting the black community's excitement are also the ones that have continuously claimed that the systemic problems that blacks face are primarily due to their own lack of work ethic, disdain of education, etc. due to an anti-intellectual culture.

Wouldn't the possibility of a black president (especially one that still acts pretty cool and not completely "white") be the best possible antidote to the lack of (dare I say it) hope that is so prevalent?

[Davebo]

Look, it's coming from TMac, a loser who can never get out of the first round of the playoffs.

Don't dignify it with a response.

[Randy Paul]

Gary,

Oops. Remind me not to post before coffee.

[solarjetman]

It's not because he's racist. It's because he's a conservative hack. It is a positive story about Obama, therefore he must react negatively to it.

[Francis]

From what I've read of TM, I thought the turnipseed diagnosis sounded pretty accurate.

[Sebastian]

Human beings have strong tribal tendencies. We're always happy to see 'our guy' do well a bit more than seeing 'their guy' do well. This exists over an incredibly broad set of possibilities for 'our guy' and 'their guy'.

One of those possibilities is 'black'.

I tend to agree with C.S. Lewis that nearly all bad human traits are corruptions of good human traits. (See especially his "The Four Loves").

This is kind of a dashed off explanation, but I see racism as a corrupted branch of empathy. Empathy is trying to extend your personal understanding to other people as if they were like you. Tribalism's positive traits make that extension emotionally easier to do with groups you identify with. But if embraced too wholeheartedly, it also makes it easier to deny common traits with people you don't classify as in your 'tribe'. Then you strongly deny empathetic similarity with such people.

[hilzoy]

Seb: hmm. I saw Maguire's piece as something more akin to what happens when I write something about iraq or the troops, and people assume that, qua liberal, I must want to lose and hate the troops, or (conversely) what happens to you when you write something and it gets fit into people's schema of "what conservatives say", even if you didn't say anything of the kind.

I mean: I think that Maguire probably has some idea about blacks whining, asking for special favors, etc. So along comes a story that is obviously not about that -- that is just people being happy, and saying: yay, a good role model for my kid -- and he reads it in this peculiar way. I think it's probably exactly like when you write something perfectly reasonable (as opposed to the many, many, wholly unreasonable things you write ;) ), and someone takes it in some way that is just (once you think about it) all wrong.

(I mean: in the Washington Monthly comments to my History post, there were, honest to god, people who seemed to think I was advocating choosing Presidents entirely on the basis of race. As though I were making an argument whose logical conclusion was that I had to vote for Al Sharpton, on pain of inconsistency. Say what?)

Except, of course, that I can stop getting this sort of reaction by not talking about Iraq or race; and you could just go play volleyball and log off ObWi for good (please don't!), but I imagine if one were black it would be all annoying preconceptions, all the time. Which is one of the reasons it seems to me to be worth writing about: every breath Obama takes will provoke these reactions.

[Slartibartfast]

Odd. He's obviously making fun of the Times, and hilzoy interprets it as...what? Making fun of the people?

[Ugh]

SlartiOdd. He's obviously making fun of the Times, and hilzoy interprets it as...what? Making fun of the people?

I stopped reading Maguire because, among other reasons, I could never tell whether he was serious or not, whether he believed in what he was posting or not, and whether he was poking fun or not. He was just incomprehensible to me.

[Gary Farber]

"...and hilzoy interprets it as...what? Making fun of the people?"

Not understand "race" in America. Making false equivalencies; falling for what I call "the false mirror fallacy," and the notion that all ethnic minorities, if not all ethnicities, proceed from the same circumstances.

And lack of empathy and understanding for fellow humans who endure conditions he does not perceive, and which he appears to deny.

That's my guess, anyway.

[ral]

Hilzoy, are you thinking of this song?

Re. the Washington Monthly, I stopped going there after I came to ObWi lo these many years ago. I spent quite a bit of time there before coming here. The discussion is better here [understatement].

[Q the Enchanter]

"I can stop getting this sort of reaction by not talking about Iraq or race..."

Unfortunately, it seems that even deciding not to talk about race will get you accused of "playing the race card." (Man, it's really getting hard not to play the race card, these days.)

[Slartibartfast]

Gary, none of your comment seems to match up with my reading of Maguire's article, so I have no idea how to respond.

Again, Maguire is making fun of the Times. First fun-making is because the Times can't seem to keep track of whether things are different for recent immigrant families of color than for non-immigrants.

But again: obvious to me; completely lost on you, and I'm not sure I want to sit down and explain the whole thing. Best ask Tom, honestly.

[Sebastian]

Heh, actually my comment was more of a jab against Maguire than a defense, but I can see I was sort of roundabout.

I make two assumptions that might not be completely easy to buy into.

First, I believe that tribalism can often be positive. It lets us extend empathy to people we often wouldn't.

Second, I think of tribalism as a sort of continuum, in which the extension of empathy is its good manifestation while the various isms (racism, sexism, classism, etc.) represent the negative side of that spectrum.

Maguire seems to be railing against something that I don't see as negative. He is attacking the tribalism in seeing part of your own 'tribe' succeed.

I suspect he is doing it by misplacing the correct realization that racism is bad into a belief that all possible manifestations of the very tribal nature of human beings are bad. But the tribal extension of empathy is one of the biggest ways of getting basically very selfish people to help out or feel for others. Noticing that taken along in the wrong direction can lead to racism isn't any better of a condemnation of the practice than noticing that insane jealousy exists is an argument against love.

[The Modesto Kid]

The discussion is better here

Calpundit was where I first noticed that blog comments sections suck, I think. Up until Kevin started having comments (2004, maybe?), I was sort of perceiving comments sections as an integral part of blogs that had them, and reading comments mostly in full for any blogs that I read. A couple of months of Calpundit threads put me right off that.

[Josh E.]

Slartibartfast is wrong. Maguire is clearly making fun of the both the Times and the individuals quoted in the article.

It appears that Maguire is a bit peeved that Mr. Sam-Brew and Ms. Brown didn't take the time to express some hatred for Al Sharpton or other "race hustlers", or acknowledge that black people really get so much preferential treatment these days.

Silly liberals might not really see the relevance of Al Sharpton or affirmative action to a story about Barack Obama winning the Democratic nomination, but Maguire understands that no story about black people is complete without acknowledging things that Tom Maguire doesn't like.

[Sebastian]

Oops I didn’t finish my thought for some reason. What Maguire gets right is that the general tone of the NYT on the issue of race buys into the idea that tribalism is a sin. So from that perspective the article looks silly. But it looks silly in a way that reveals that their general frame is wrong, not in a way that reveals this particular article is wrongheaded.

[Ugh]

TMK: Calpundit was where I first noticed that blog comments sections suck, I think.

I think there's a point where a blog becomes popular enough with enough commenters that it just overwhelms any productive discussion. Calpundit has reached that point. See also Atrios and Kos (though Kos is easier to manage because of the software).

But before that critical mass is reached, I think comment sections can be invaluable.

[Francis]

So the Times runs a straight story about how people of color, no matter how long they've been in this country, feel inspired by Obama's nomination.

TM mocks the Times, apparently because first-generation dark-skinned people (like Obama) aren't real American Blacks. Slarti defends TM.

To which my response is that middle-aged overweight white guys, including me, TM and Slarti AFAIK, aren't really in a position to comment on the validity of the feelings of people with higher melanin content in their skin no matter what generation of americans they are.

America really does have a race problem. Try the comments at Volokh, for example, for a higher-brow version of the ugliness. And last I checked, racists weren't all that concerned about whether the targets of their hate / contempt are fresh off the boat or can trace their ancestry to the founding of Virginia. If the nomination of Obama inspires anyone to push back against american racism, that's pretty much an unqualified good.

It's easy to snark at idealism. It's also a bad idea.

[aimai]

That article was hugely weird, and I commented on this elsewhere, because its just so detached from reality--not reality for black people, reality for everyone. Hullo? there used to be a well known game played by american jews--"did you know he's jewish?" in which the actual jewishness of a famous person was discussed because a) jews routinely had to "pass" as non jews to get ahead in various political, hollywood, or other areas and b) the high status of these passed jews was understood to reflect well on the rest of us. Ditto, without the passing, for famous Irish Americans, Hispanic Americans, Asians, and *exactly everyone else* in this multicultural society. Every other person except the imaginary "ordinary" and "unmarked" white wasp guys has to come to grips with the fact that just as you celebrate the great things your people have done for the world, or for each other, or for themselves the world is standing by with a fire extinguisher to hose you down when some other guy in your group brings shame on you. Did Maguire not read the accounts of Korean americans going "oh, NO!" when Cho shot all those people? Did he think that was some kind of bizarre accident that asian americans might worry about being "tarred with the same brush" as a criminal?

You'd have to be deaf, dumb, and blind to pretend that you *don't* know about Saint Patrick's day and all the other ethnic pride celebrations that are group based and *valorized for that* by society as a whole. So why pick on blacks for choosing to identify with a very sucessful black guy? And excoriate them for refusing to be limited and identify themselves only with the few black people Maguire can call to mind, those "race hustlers" who disturb his sleep and make him keep checking under the bed?

aimai

[hilzoy]

Seb: I didn't think you were defending Maguire; I was just musing in response to you.

[Sebastian]

Musing is what blogs are for! :)

[The Modesto Kid]

Calpundit has reached that point

My experience was that Kevin's site reached that point almost immediately after he opened comments. To be sure, there are some great comments sections, and it probably has a lot to do with how comment a site is.

[Populuxe]

""How Japanese kids, Chinese kids, or Jewish kids ever make it out of bed in the morning, and why they bother, is left unexplained."

Japanese kids get out of bed to save face in front of their ancestors; Chinese kids get up because the bed's too crowded to stay in; and Jewish kids get out of bed in the morning because they're breaking their mother's hearts already, you want they should stay in bed all day?

Maybe that's the answer Maguire was looking for.

[The Modesto Kid]

"how popular a site is"

[emile]

I really like the explicit "when does race play a role in people's thinking that it should not play?" framing of this and recent posts. I think it is, in general, an effective way to point out problematic *-ism content such that people can actually examine/change the way they are thinking about things. As opposed to getting them defensive while preaching to the choir.

[Gary Farber]

"I think there's a point where a blog becomes popular enough with enough commenters that it just overwhelms any productive discussion."

I thought this was too obvious for words, but I'd frame it more along the lines that the more popular a blog is, the lower the common denominator for the commenters and comments go, particularly if there isn't a tone set by tight moderation. It's just inevitable.

Thus ObWi being the sole site I regularly comment at, and my not even doing occasional drive-bys on more than a handful of other sites. (I was good with Unfogged, back when it was actually Unf and Ogged, and tried hard when it expanded, and there the problem wasn't lowest common denominator, but a crowd I never was able to be in sync with, and then too many people, however smart and worthwhile, doing stuff that I wasn't sufficiently interested in to make the all-encompassing effort that's required to follow comment threads there.)

Slart, Maguire writes stuff like this: "Littlest darling, because of the Obama Ascendancy, you will never have to endure the institutionalized racism in America that I never actually endured either, seeing as how I was born in a different country in 1970."

In his world, "institutional racism" is the only racism that mattered, and it's gone, so everyone should get with the program of our wonderful modern non-racist world, and anyone who says it's otherwise is a race-hustling leftist fool or exploiter.

In other words, he hasn't a clue what it's like to be African-American, or just dark-skinned in America, today, or in the past twenty years.

And his cruel indifference to those without his white privilege isn't something that goes down well with me.

I abhor people who mock others because of their own lack of awareness of just how privileged they are. Sorry, but I'm a bit impatient with that level of unawareness to the lives of others around us.

"a once-oppressed minority."

I'd like to see people who believe this sort of thing try a Black Like Me experience for three weeks, and see if they still have the same notions of how interchangeable the contemporary African-American, Asian-American, Jewish American, and WASP, experiences are in America today.

Also, trying to get by on, say, $200/month for a year, total assets and income, might prove educational.

But Tom Maguire appears to be too busy laughing ("once I stop laughing"). Yes, people who endure the problems of racism today sure are hilarious.

And newspapers which don't take up the moronic premise that racism isn't a problem any more sure are mockable. Ho. Ho. Ho.

[Tom Maguire]

For the record: yes, I do mean to imply that the 'something' is race. That seems pretty clear from Tom's post. But I do not mean to imply that Tom Maguire is a racist. (I really don't.)

And I can't imagine anyone could have thought that, although I also can't imagine what else they might have thought.

I have an idea - since this post of yours at the Washington Monthly was a joke and I said so, why not respond to that instead of alluding to racism and then pretending you didn't? Just a thought.

Of course, the "everyone who disagrees with me is a racist" ploy has a long history on the left, and it is an easier argument than actually addressing someone with whom you disagree on something else.

And that said, we should give you creativity points for at least stepping out of your normal victim class. Although I can't imagine you would have had to look too long for something you could characterize as sexist - this might get you started.

As to my racism - some of the sheltered readers here may not be familiar with the Obamessiah jibe, but the notion that Obama will be a cure for every evil up to and including male pattern baldness has worn thin with me. Even Obama in his race speech (comparable to the Gettysburg Address in its historic impact) said that his election won't end racism in this country, and personally I am disappointed to learn that, prior to his election, black kids couldn't even find a reason to go to school.

Fortunately, in Times World the Obamessiah is come and its all good.

Whatever. I have a pretty fair idea about what I am not, and now a much better idea of what you are. Have a nice weekend.

[Francis]

and that, friends, is the sound of a gasbag being pricked.

[cleek]

Of course, the "everyone who disagrees with me is a racist" ploy has a long history on the left, and it is an easier argument than actually addressing someone with whom you disagree on something else.

a masterwork of logical fallacy. nicely done.

[Nell]

It's so much better sometimes when people open their mouths and remove all doubt.

[Jakebnto]

I never thougth Obama was a messiah of any kind. I do think he has brought into being the seeds of a new Democratic Party, one that will better serve the nation than the one we had for the past 20 years (at least), whether in the majority or the minority.

Tom is truly pricked, for to call Hilzoy a member of a victim class is to clearly not see her as she writes here. But not seeing things as they are is the essence of the art of being Republican.

Tom wouldn't have written had he not been wounded. As they say, the truth hurts, and the truth from Hilzoy has the power to wound deeply, at least for those with little intrapersonal insight.

Jake

[trilobite]

some of the sheltered readers here may not be familiar with the Obamessiah jibe, but the notion that Obama will be a cure for every evil up to and including male pattern baldness has worn thin with me

Which has what, exactly, to do with Obama himself or the idea that he will be a good role model? Obama isn't calling himself a "messiah," neither is Ms. Brown, so why turn your rage on them?

Anyway, why "messiah"? Because some of his supporters are, to your tender ears, overly enthusiastic? Dude, have you never gone to a baseball game? How "sheltered" are you? And anyway, how does it hurt you?

And I can't imagine anyone could have thought that, although I also can't imagine what else they might have thought.

Try harder.

And while you're at it, ask yourself exactly how she could have criticized your post without raising the spectre of racism, and how she could have possibly stated more clearly than she did that she was not accusing you of it.

Poor little victim Tommy, surrounded by people who have the nerve to like Obama too much and grate on your nerves, and by others who dare to not accuse you of racism. However will you survive?

[KCinDC]

Anyone defending the party of the Bush personality cult and the 28%ers who believe he's on a mission from God has a lot of nerve making any sort of messiah jibe.

[Gary Farber]

"...instead of alluding to racism and then pretending you didn't?"

Back in the land of English, that's not what Hilzoy wrote. She wrote "I do not mean to imply that Tom Maguire is a racist."

She also wrote that "yes, I do mean to imply that the 'something' is race. That seems pretty clear from Tom's post."

She was making a clear distinction between someone whose behavior in a given instance seems to have a relationship to their perception of "race," while carefully noting that this does make someone a "racist."

As I write all the time, and millions of other people people have written countless times, thinking or doing something with a perhaps less than completely thoughtful and considered regard to the issue of race does not make someone per se a "racist."

An act or thought or statement might have an aspect that some might consider to have a racist aspect, but an act is not a state of being.

As it happens, I just wrote about it again, yesterday.

It's a distinction you may or may not be familiar with.

But, oh, look, it's so horrible to make this sort of observation that I did it to myself. Just as I will do it all the time. It's so terrible to note that none of us are absolutely perfectly non-sexist, non-racist, etc.

Of course, you might be the exception, Tom. Perhaps you could clarify on this point?

Please do also correct me for any misperceptions or misstatements I made in my comments about you above. Thanks!

[gwangung]

Whatever. I have a pretty fair idea about what I am not, and now a much better idea of what you are.

I doubt that. Many people are unaware and try to defend their own racist impulses.

And you should talk to Chinese Americans in Washington state about Gary Locke. (IOW, that was a pretty moronic thing to say).

[Gary Farber]

"...but the notion that Obama will be a cure for every evil up to and including male pattern baldness has worn thin with me."

Straw is indeed prickly and uncomfortable to be close to.

[JoshA]

As someone who was a "Jewish kid" at the time, I have to say I was pretty excited about Lieberman's nomination to be VP.

I'd be less excited if he was again this year.

[Bruce Baugh]

Is there an over/under yet on how long until Mr. Maguire calls for a bloggers ethics panel?

[Gary Farber]

"...while carefully noting that this does make someone a 'racist'" should be, of course, "does not make someone a 'racist.'"

[hilzoy]

For the record: I found Tom Maguire's post via LGM, and thus did not know that he had criticized an earlier post of mine when I wrote this.

[david kilmer]

Sebastian - I'm a little late to the thread, but could I ask you to flesh this out a little more?

"Empathy is trying to extend your personal understanding to other people as if they were like you. Tribalism's positive traits make that extension emotionally easier to do with groups you identify with. But if embraced too wholeheartedly, it also makes it easier to deny common traits with people you don't classify as in your 'tribe'. Then you strongly deny empathetic similarity with such people."

I've always though that empathy was extending your understanding to others as if you were like them. When it's the other way around, you get things like Bill saying, "I understand being poor. I was poor in college".

It seems like you're saying that tribalism is, in some way, what makes empathy possible. If so, I'm extremely interested to know how that works. If not, how do you see them as being connected?

[david kilmer]

"And I can't imagine anyone could have thought that, although I also can't imagine what else they might have thought."

They might have thought that your partisanship made you insensitive to other peoples' suffering or happiness.

That's what I thought, anyway.

[bobbyp]

"But I do not mean to imply that Tom Maguire is a racist."

Allow me. Tom Maquire is a racist.

[kim]

Texas Toast, ah, do you see that Hilzoy claims on the record that she had not seen Tom's other post shredding hers? I guess that explains her non response to it. So what, may I ask, set her off? Gustavson? Geddoudaheah.

I'm a little amused by your comment about Tom exploiting the difference between imply and infer in the light of Hilzoy's implications about Tom's racism.
===============================

[TexasToast]

Kim

I saw that last night. Looks like I was wrong, huh? Not the first time, and I expect not the last.

[kim]

Looks like we were both wrong. Funny how it gets when you speculate from ignorance.
==========================

[hilzoy]

OK, so now I am reading JustOneMinute. I found this astonishing:

"Hilzoy makes money in compassion and international relations. This is a very important person who might one day get a job at USIP on the mall or Climate Security with Air Force Geo spacial intelligence Agency or Global Poverty and Farm legislation or with Mike Honda in Electoral College redistricting - UN voting system or Public Land Community Transition and the drug trade/FARC counter intelligence or socialism in South America or running the carbon global tax or the poverty global tax or supporting women's rights with loans only for females or investigating all commodities for prices because oil and food just can't get together or term limits for Kerrys who do what Obama does or extending all government bills and foreign policy budgets to five years until it's 20 because some employees have a five year limit instead of 2."

Who knew a Ph.D. in philosophy and a job in a philosophy department opened up so many fascinating career possibilities?

[JakeB]

I think the next paper you write should make maximal use of the syntactic structure in the sentence you quote.