once more into the breach on obama, teapartiers, carter, and race. now let me start off by saying that the left has a million ways to not listen to what their opponents are saying. they regard the opposition to health care legislation, for instance, as only the ignorant, manipulated by demagogues. this is a way to say: no rational person can possibly disagree with what i'm saying. it's actually a kind of 'argument' for their position, based on the a priori or ad hominem dismissal of its opponents. as usual the basic strategy is self-praise. alternatively or as a supplement, we hold that the opposition to some very elaborate government program can only be based on something like race: or in other words, if you disagree with me, you are ignorant, manipulated, and just to throw this in, evil. so the arguments are strategic in terms of the inner life of those who make them. looked at from the other side, what they really say is: i am so reasonable and good, so educated and benevolent, that the positions i hold - despite the fact that i accept them on raw authority - cannot be rationally opposed. and if people do, they are evil, because i am so perfectly good.

but let me go the other way too, briefly. my view - which obama appears to agree with - is that these folks want to have an argument about the size and scope of power of the federal government. it's always a good time to have that argument, and this is an acutely, a severely good time for it. this view - suspicion of government, localism, small-scale democracy, fierce autonomy, etc etc - is at the precise heart of our tradition. just say 'jefferson' or fly 'don't tread on me.' however, this american tradition - which i believe is our contribution to mankind - is bound up throughout our history with racism, as the name 'jefferson' signals. but nullification, states' rights, goldwater-style libertarianism - all of them have been intertwined with racism throughout. (goldwater opposed the civil rights bill on libertarian grounds, e.g.).

here's one reason for that: the fierce individualism characteristic of america is an outgrowth of our settlement by radical protestants, whether quakers, puritans, or baptists. these people came from northern europe, and they're white. and throughout our history, most of the people touting individualism and small gov have been white men. and the defense of economic and political liberty entailed for them a continuing right to enslave, degrade, and exploit other sorts of people without state interference.

there is no conceptual connection between [love of liberty, individualism, and suspicion of state power] and racism. in fact they are in tension. but the historical connections are extremely elaborate. so when someone at a town hall says: "i'm losing my country" or "is this america?" i think that they are basically talking about pervasion of state power - the american tradition of loving liberty. but they are also, probably, talking about race; the two things are not fully distinguishable on the ground. we are losing our white protestant nation, and people like obama and sotomayor are perfectly visible signs of that. well, this is losing our ethnic character. but it is also losing our basic values.

it may be that individualism and personal autonomy are characteristic values of northern-european protestants. it is often said that asian and african cultures are more "collective" or less focused on individual differences and autonomy, and more on social cohesion. i would make such claims very carefully. but, that we are losing both an ethnic heritage and a set of values is, it seems, to me undeniable. the loss is real and important. that this heritage is problematic is undeniable. that it is inspiring is undeniable. do white people have a message for the world?

so anyway, my question would be: could we still care about liberty and stop caring about race? can we detach the needed part from the unneeded, the liberatory from the repressive?