Admittedly, I am very easily written off as biased due to my own background but I consider myself fairly educated and I have a great deal of admiration for the US political system and the potential it offers to anyone with the right vision and work ethic. Only in this country can a refugee with no transferrable qualifications go from driving a taxi to becoming a presidentially appointed United States Ambassador. Only in this country can a first-generation immigrant build a multi-million dollar company by making deliveries from his own garage with an old station wagon and a hand-truck. I remain in awe of the opportunities offered to anyone willing to work hard. No matter what the criticisms are of this country, the economic, social and political opportunities offered to not only its citizens, but green card holders and even illegal immigrants remain unsurpassed. Why else would people risk life and limb to come here?
Back to Bush. I don't understand how his policies can be seen as anything but racist. In April of this year, he made a statement during a press conference with Canadian Prime Minister Martin that, to me, was extremely revealing of his personal beliefs about people, in his words, "whose skins... are a different color than white". The full text of the conference can be read here. It should be noted that Bush was responding to a question on what he wanted Canada to do in Iraq, both diplomatically and militarily.The statement that I'm interested in was part of a longer answer and his little pearls of wisdom are worth quoting here:
There's a lot of people in the world who don't believe that people whose skin color may not be the same as ours can be free and self-govern. I reject that. I reject that strongly. I believe that people who practice the Muslim faith can self-govern. I believe that people whose skins aren't necessarily -- are a different color than white can self-govern.
(Martin then remarked: I've got to say, though, I really do like sharing a press conference with you. You answer those questions perfectly.) Ha ha ha.
Now, I know that Bush says that he rejects the notion that non-white people are capable of self-government. But the fact that he said it reveals that there exists such a distinction in his mind. It's almost as if he's sharing a new personal discovery. I don't know how to adequately express my disgust at this statement. I am always interested in the language people use to express themselves. Obviously, such obvservations have their limitations but generally, especially in cases like this, the language someone chooses to use is revealing of what is not said. In cases like this, what is not said is more imporatnt than what is actually said. I actually cannot fully understand what was going through Bush's head when he said this because it is so ridiculous on many levels. I know the argument I just presented is incomplete, but I definitely think that something is there.
A more direct observation may be that Bush has disregarded ethnic and cultural diversity within the US. I think it is safe to assume that Americans practice self-government. (With the exception of a few Floridians.) Doesn't that in itself render Bush's statement unncessary? According to the CIA World Factbook, the US Population is approximately 290 million of which 77% are ethnically defined as 'white'. The remaing 23% are black, Asian, American-Indian, native Alaskan, native Hawaiian, Pacific Islanders or 'other'. So, if Americans are indeed self-governing, isn't that proof in itself that non-white people are capable of doing so? Furthermore, while I don't have numbers on this, there is no mutual exclusivity of being white and being Muslim. It is indeed possible to be both white and Muslim.
I know that Bush's comment was probably off-the-cuff, or whatever that means. I should give the poor guy a break. But I'm supposed to respect him as a leader? I don't think this was simply one of his signature bumbles, he was making a point. I'm also fairly certain that all those people driving around with Bush/Cheney '04 bumper stickers have no idea that he said this, but equally certain that if they did, they wouldn't pick up on the implications of his statement. Actually, I'd be interested to learn what those people know that would cause them to wear their support on their 'sleeve'.
This post is pretty long, and I know that the kind of people I would hope to influence with this probably don't have the attention span to read this far. To the people nodding your heads, well, you didn't need to read this to know what you already know. I am still frustrated that I haven't been able to express exactly what it is that bothers me about this. You'll hear from me when I do.
