Strange but true: White supremacists rejoice at election of Barack Obama
Against all intuitive reasoning the white supremacist movement in the United States thinks the election of Barack Obama is the best thing to happen to them for decades.
By Matt Kennard on Wednesday, November 12th, 2008 - 666 words.
Aside from Republicans, you might expect the American community most piqued by the election of Barack Obama would be white supremacists. There is surely no harsher blow to a single-issue political program of racism than the ascension of a black man to the highest office of the land. It’s like a hardened Communist watching Milton Friedman elected Dear Leader in the Soviet Union, or Ariel Sharon taking over the Palestinian Liberation Organization. There is surely no way back for a movement so harshly served; it’s merely time to pack up, accept its over and move on.
Or so you would think. In the increasingly surreal U.S. political landscape white supremacists have actually greeted the election of the first black president not as the death knell of their cause, but a historic leap forward. “I don’t see anything but very positive things coming out of it,” says Tom Metzger, the former Grand Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan who now runs an outfit called White Aryan Resistance (or W.A.R, for short). “We don’t have to do much, everything is going sour; the economy is getting worse and worse. I don’t think we have to do much more than sit in and be aware of what is going on and train because the government is eating itself.”
And not only is the American Nazi happy about his first black president, but he believes it occasions the way for dialogue with, of all things, the Left. “We are becoming more like leftists, and leftists are coming more into agreement with us on race,” he says. “I actually agree with Ralph Nader on economics. Though he’s not a racist, I think politics is going to change a lot over the next few years, dumping of old left and old right.”
But for unbridled joy at Obama’s win you can’t beat August Kreis III, the fiery leader of the Aryan Nations, a Hitler-worshipping outfit out of South Carolina. “I can actually tell you it was the best thing that happened to our movement in the Unite States ever,” he says breathlessly. In fact he even wants this new wave of pinko tolerance to spread overseas. “I’d like to see happen in the UK, but in your case, a Muslim should be elected, because that will do something to get people off their fat asses.”
But it’s not just getting people off their fat asses (less of those in the UK) that has emboldened the American neo-Nazi movement; now white supremacists finally feel that one of their own is the President. “Obama is a racist down deep and his wife is even more,” says Metzger. “It would be better for him if he now said, ‘Hey guys! Fooled you! I’m a racist!’ and I would respect that.”
Erich Gliebe, who runs the biggest neo-Nazi group in the U.S., National Alliance, agrees. “As far I know John McCain is not a racist,” he says. “But Obama, he is an outright racist, he was part of a racist church, he had a racist pastor. At least he has that.”
Whether Obama is a racist or not, doesn’t this election render white supremacists in the U.S. irrelevant? I prod. “No, actually it shakes people out of their slumber,” says Gliebe. “I think a majority of Americans still want racial segregation, there are tens of millions of people who would prefer only to marry other whites, and to send their kids to white-only schools.”
I have to remind myself that the first black president has just been elected with a large percentage of white voters. Gliebe pauses when I remind him too. “Well, people voted for Obama because of white guilt,” he says after an awkward hiatus. “They were made to feel guilty! People were afraid of voting for McCain because they feared being called a racist!”
I refrain from mentioning that the U.S. has a secret ballot because by now appeals to logic are futile. Barack Obama, first black president, the toast of the white supremacists. Unlikely, but true. Only in America.
(+2 rating, 2 votes)
Loading ...One Comment
Leave a Reply
Matt Kennard
26London
Matt Kennard graduated from the Journalism School at Columbia University as a Toni Stabile Investigative scholar in 2008. He now works for the Financial Times in London. He has written for the Guardian, Salon, The Comment Factory and the Chicago Tribune, amongst others. In 2006 he won the Guardian Student Feature Writer of the Year Award
mattkennard@thecommentfactory.com
Articles by this author
-
Chavez, Morales and Correa must speak out on Iran
As I said some months ago, when I get depressed about the state of the world I’m always cheered to think of the movements in Latin America that are genuinely empowering the hitherto marginalised sections of those societies. This movement has the power to make itself felt throughout the world – but it needs to apply itself consistently. That can even take the approach of Lula who stopped short of denunciation and just put forward an offer of sanctuary in an effort to shame the Iranian regime
-
The Observer's Chomsky fetish
Chomsky is big enough to put up with this kind of rubbish, but can the Guardian or Observer, the most influential left-wing journal in the English-speaking world, really not find one journalist who doesn’t have a visceral dislike of Noam Chomsky? Sadly, but maybe predictably, for a newspaper made up of liberals pickled in the self-righteous playfields of Oxbridge liberalism, I guess they don’t
-
The fight to preserve Latin America's democratic revolution
For Prof Anderson the template of Spain after Franco’s destruction of civil society “has become the general formula of freedom: no longer making the world safe for democracy, but democracy safe for this world.” Through a confluence of historical factors, Latin America is the crucible where the last chance to make a world safe for democracy is being fought. The importance of this battle shouldn’t be underestimated: if it fails, we might not get another chance
-
Jan Nederveen Pieterse on Globalization and Empire
The fundamentals of American weakness are its shrinking share of world manufacturing, its gargantuan consumption, low savings rate, faulty policies (massive military spending, massive war spending, deep tax cuts) and gigantic financial deficits. Some problems are structural (high American health care costs are a function of lack of restraint on pharmaceutical industries and reflect the large influence of business interests); this prompts outsourcing, which further weakens the American economy. The military interventions are destabilizing (increase risks for others) and costly (adding to American economic problems) and erode American legitimacy. So the problems are not merely overstretch
-
Massive Attack on influences, war and the cult of fame
I think a lot of it is damaging and I feel there has to be at some point a change in the way we deal with different peoples situations and development. I hate double standards more than anything – I hate the current row over Iran’s nuclear ambitions and whether they should be allowed to have nuclear technology or even nuclear energy. It seems to me that our history is littered with hypocrisy and I find that quite hard to live with being a British citizen
-
Matt Kennard on Russia Today extended: 'US Army sent 'hardcore' neo-Nazi troops to Iraq and Afghanistan'
Under the Bush administration, the U.S. military allegedly started to recruit neo-Nazis and gang members to fight in Afghanistan and Iraq. Investigative journalist Matt Kennard talks to RT about his researh into these allegations and other problems in the US military.
-
Tony Benn on the EU, Cuba and Islam
Well I don’t think it helps to go around saying, “Try Blair for war crimes,” if you’re trying to persuade Labour MPs to vote against the war and they are told they’ve got to arrest and see Blair and Cherie locked up. It’s ridiculous. I said this to all the people… I mean it’s mad… I can understand peoples anger, but it is crazy
-
Hilary Benn on aid, the US, Iraq, and Tony Blair
The truth is: The real answer to the question why did we take the decision that we did, is because on the 18th March 2003 a majority of the House of Commons voted to do it
-
Johann Hari on Chomsky, Hitchens, Iraq, and anarchism
But I think Hitchens arguments are so well put and one should engage with them and take them at face value. He says Saddam was intermeshed increasingly with Islam. Zarquawi, for example, was already in Iraq before the war. I don’t agree with his argument on that. Ba’athism and Islamism are different things, and should be opposed for different reasons
-
Polly Toynbee on Iraq and New Labour
No I think it’s very difficult to navigate because for one thing even if you more want to bring democracy to the Middle East more than you want to take the oil – which I think probably is the case now – but such is the fear of fundamentalism that you wonder if you knock over the Saudi’s who takes over? Is it even stronger Wahhabist, and is that even more dangerous, and even less democratic? It’s very difficult
-
Noam Chomsky on the US Empire and hopes and prospects
They hope that China will organize a coalition of peace loving states to stop the militarism and aggressiveness headed by the US and its British ally. Well it's interesting that they have such contempt for American democracy and British democracy: they don't even dream of it coming from within. I don't agree with it - I don't think we have to wait for China to save us from all doom - I think we can do it ourselves
-
Professor Michael Mann on America's incoherent empire
The most you can have is a kind of informal imperialism where the state remains sovereign - you don’t try to interfere in it but you limit its options. This is what, typically, the US has done in Latin America when it is not intervening. The US is formidable. People contrast so-called multilateralism to unilateralist and they think of the United Nations. The US runs the UN and had run the UN for most of the 1990s and that’s what the US can do because the US provides certain resources that no-one else can provide. Nothing much is going to happen in the way of international activity unless the US is part of it and leading it and that’s what the US can return to again. What I think it cannot do is to reconstruct foreign countries on its own without having considerable local support
Did anyone notice that the word count on this is 666? I also live at 666, ominous