Today’s piece of insufferably snotty SWPL status signaling comes to us courtesy of Ward Sutton, editorial cartoonist for the The Boston Globe. I would repost the entire thing here, but I genuinely don’t want to get into copyright issues with a major newspaper, so just go there to read it. We’ll be here when you get back. (Trigger warning: Appallingly arrogant liberal snarkiness.)
This cartoon is not funny. Well, save for the gag about American Southwest themed art being crap. That gave me a bit of a chuckle. But other than that, this is about the level of humor and thoughtfulness we can expect from this particular flavor of liberal cartoon propaganda. You know the type. The sort of dreck that is meant to appeal to the average 6/10 brahmin female with thick-rimmed hipster glasses, and whatever beta cuck liberal male she happens to be friendzoning at the moment. See also, Tom Tomorrow, Jen Sorenson etc. The most annoying thing about this sort of slop is the pretense of edginess it puts on while falling square in the middle of pedestrian, mainstream, white elite opinion and narrative.
Protip: If it’s published in a newspaper owned by a billionaire with readership in the millions, it’s not edgy.
There is very little attempt at actual humor here, just finger pointing and nastiness directed at red-state whites. That is all very conventional. What is slightly more interesting is what this reveals about the “internal contradictions” (h/t Karl Marx) of the liberal narrative on race. Notice that the mestizos are all pictured as non-threatening and white-presenting. They are basically white, East coast, American liberals with a tad bit more melanin. Also notice that in one panel the evil old racist (probably Christian) white people exclaim in fear at a politician with “brown skin.” This is an interesting lie. It speaks to the misguided notion that racism is primarily about skin color being the offending characteristic, rather than a marker that is correlated to a lot of other behavioral, social and cultural factors. If mestizos really were non-threatening and white-presenting, just with a slightly darker shade of tan, then racism would indeed be ridiculous. In fact, self-described “mild racists,” such as John Derbyshire (not to mention myself), are generally quite comfortable around neatly dressed, well-mannered people of varying quantities of melanin.
There are generally two mentalities found among white liberals. If they don’t live around POC and rely on media presentations to form their view of them, they tend to actually believe that your average non-white dresses, acts, thinks, and aspires exactly like a white Oberlin graduate. If they actually do live in “vibrant” neighborhoods, they simply lie to their fellow travelers and themselves about it. Either way, both angrily accuse anyone of racism who commits the crime of pointing out the obvious. Both are only comfortable depicting average, white, middle Americans as having negative and potentially threatening cultural tendencies.
But this narrative has a fundamental flaw. If in fact people of other races are only different than us in skin color, if everything would be exactly the same just with reversed colors if Mexico were to take over Arizona, then what is the point of multiculturalism? Being around non-whites wouldn’t be “enriching” at all. They wouldn’t actually add to the cultural landscape. It would make racism ridiculous, but it would also make anti-racism ridiculous. So what’s the point? This is the question progressives will never ask themselves. If there is no such thing as race, if everyone can assimilate just fine to a Western society, then what is the goddamn point of it all? The entire narrative “self-detonates.” (h/t Stefan Molyneux)
The main point of this cartoon is of course to poke fun at conservative and working class whites, not present an accurate picture of Mexicans. The cartoonist thus has an agenda to depict the mestizos as white-presenting as possible. He doesn’t dare accidentally grant that his opposition has a point by showing dozens of swarthy men speaking unintelligible Spanish lined up out front of Home Depot looking for day labor, depict the waiting room of the social services office overtaken by short, fat women with gaggles of unruly children swarming around them, or show a couple of squatters breaking into an empty house. The conceit that the political, social and cultural (maybe even tribal) opponents of progressivism are in opposition to the revealed truth of “rational science” has to be maintained, even if it means telling a lie so threadbare that no one really buys it. But they will pretend to buy it. Because it serves the greater “truth” of progressive intellectual and moral superiority.