Phil Robertson
The real problem with the recent drama surrounding A&E star Phil Robertson isn’t that he may be a homophobic, “bible-thumping” television actor.
As the #standwithphil bandwagon of support continues to grow following the actor’s ill-advised remarks on “homosexual behavior” in the January issue of GQ magazine, there is an entire aspect of Mr. Robertson’s interview largely being ignored by those supporters: that the actor seems to believe the antebellum South wasn’t that rascist.
“Pre-entitlement, pre-welfare, you say: Were they happy? They were godly; they were happy; no one was singing the blues.”
While his more well-known comments are certainly homophobic, when you remove his comments on Jim Crowe from their racially-charged point of reference, you find a statement that exemplifies the effect of the master narrative on those generally ignorant to the continuing inequality in the United States. There is a thin difference between being a “bad” man, and being an ignorant one… but there is a difference.
The term ‘master-narrative’ describes the way a flawed history of a dominant story, person, or belief can influence society’s perception of that event more that the truth of the matter. Master narratives are easy to beleive, and require little critical thinking to understand. They affect the human existence throughout all kinds of subject matter, as they allow for the most generalized, and comprehensible view of the world.
When one considers the master-narraitve most pervasive in American society, the story of Rosa Parks is often the first to be cited. The flawed understanding of her life and mission is easy to swallow: that one black woman did not get up from a white’s only bus seat in Birmingham, Alabama, changing the country forever.
Many things are lost in the wash of this narrative, like the experience of her earlier life as a prominent anti-lynching activist, and long-time leader in the NAACP. Or the loss of her husband as a result of her continued activism. Or the fact that she died largely dependant on the kindness of various civil rights organizations. Her body may have lied in State, but few who passed through those doors knew anything of the parts of the world her body had touched.
Mr. Robertson’s statements promote another of these master-narratives — the characterization of the black existence as one dominated by hand-outs and welfare. He suggests — quite literally, it would seem — that the destruction of Jim Crowe codes in the southern United States was a bad thing for black families, and that enabling American citizens to provide food for their families was also a bad thing for black families.
His words lay the weak foundation that black Americans, more so than anyone else in the United States, are more predisposed to accepting welfare as a continuous, sustainable way of life. Though it is veiled in a bad-attempt at political correctness (Mr. Robertson says he relates to black Americans because he and his family are “white trash”) the Duck Dynasty star thinks it is commonly accepted that one race of people could be more inherently, and negatively affected by the welfare state than any other race.
But, maybe the debate isn’t about welfare stereotypes. Maybe its about a rascist statement by a man whose culture has convinced him that some race-bias is still a socially acceptable point-of-view.
During the Nadir period – the time following the Civil War where society’s laws continued to apply differently to whites and blacks – institutional violence and codified discrimination kept American citizens on distinctly different social playing fields. The sexual violence Rosa Parks fought against in the early 1900s was a direct result of these codes and laws.
For Phil Robertson to take his singular, personal experience interacting with African American workers in the Jim Crowe south as a child as proof that “no one was singing the blues,” makes him a fool.
So why are you #standingwithphil?
Chris Burns Writing 