Re: Chuck Asay’s cartoon dated 1 March 2008, in which the final frame accuses Barack Obama of “Class Envy.”
I have been regularly reading “Today’s Cartoons” since you launched the feature a few years ago. I do not recall exactly when Chuck Asay was added, but I do remember that I quickly recognized his cartoons.
A little over a year ago, I was yet again aghast at his cartoon, and shocked that Slate was continuing to publish his work. I assumed I was overreacting. In my view, Asay was outrageously bigoted and jingoistic, and I could not reconcile my thoughts about Asay with my respect for Slate. I Googled Chuck Asay’s name to see if other people shared my view. Of course, I found many sensible people (and many hysterical people) that agreed with me. I also found that he was “retiring” from his Colorado newspaper.
I was relieved.
I assumed that his “retirement” meant that his misleading hate-speech would soon disappear from Slate.
I was wrong.
Over the last year, I have steadily decreased the amount that I look at Slate’s cartoon collection specifically because of Asay–and only because of Asay. After today’s cartoon, I will not view Slate’s cartoon section until Asay’s cartoons are removed.
In the piece that Asay posted today, he depicts an American, who happens to be black, as having “Class Envy.” This American is rich–he graduated from Harvard Law. He is powerful–he is a U.S. Senator, author, and social leader. According to Asay, which “class” is this American allegedly envious? How can a rich, powerful, young, mainstream, Christian, male American be in any other class in America than the very highest class? It’s not possible: this American, who happens to be black, is in the highest class in America.
Since this American, who happens to be black, is in the highest class in America, what type of “Class Envy” does Chuck Asay think Obama has? The only reasonable interpretation is that Chuck Asay thinks Obama is envious of the “white class.”
This interpretation is reinforced when one views this cartoon in the context of Asay’s complete body of work. He routinely depicts women as being inferior and irrational. He routinely depicts non-white ethnicities as being inferior and freeloading off white Americans. The only consistently rational and absolutely moral people in Asay’s cartoons are white, male, Christian, conservative, heterosexual, Republican Americans. When one compares today’s cartoon to the rest of Asay’s work, the only conclusion is that Asay is once again expressing a disgustingly bigoted point of view.
Chuck Asay has the right to think bigoted thoughts, to draw hate-filled cartoons, and to have them published. Especially since it is easy for anyone to publish his or her own content on the Web, he has near total freedom to speak his mind. Similarly, Slate has the right to publish his cartoons and to sell advertising on the web pages that show his cartoons.
I have no right to interfere with Asay’s thinking and drawing or with Slate’s publishing, and I am not going to sue anyone over these cartoons.
I do have the freedom, however, to stop looking at Slate’s cartoon section. And, until Slate removes Chuck Asay from their new cartoons, I will not visit your cartoon section anymore.
Response: An open letter to Slate.com about Chuck Asay
You have misinterpreted the cartoon. I found it expressed a very obvious characteristic/complaint many have with ideas of utilitarianism, socialism and class warfare that many liberals espouse. This cartoon is merely stating that what Obama is offering in his campaign is the “same old liberal thinking”…create envy in the lower classes and turn them against the upper classes. In doing this, a politician can hope to garner the votes of the lower class (which is likely an absurd outcome as these politicians propose nothing but a continuation of programs that assure the further dependence on the government and as such, create a never ending class of people begotten and enslaved to/by the government).
If you will take the time to look at the cartoon again, and set aside your habitual need to find racism and victimization in all those that disagree with you, you will clearly see that the man is sweeping up the “garbage” that Obama is spouting. In doing so, he is indicating that Obama is giving us nothing of substance, but rather has re-imaged (as indicated by the “eloquent speaker” frame)the same ideas as his predecessor such as Edward Kennedy (as indicated by “class envy). The frames lying in the middle of the cartoon (frame 2 and 3) indicate the fact that a large portion of the population are blind to this fact, enthusiastic cheering the “speaker” while obviously being hoodwinked.
I am sure that you do not agree with the substance of the cartoon, but I hope that you can see that you may have misinterpreted the cartoon. In doing so, I hope you find yourself capable of disagreeing with the substance without further ignorant accusations of bigotry and hatred.
I am not the only person who thinks Chuck Asay is racist.
Nor am I the only person you thinks Chuck Asay is sexist.
Lots of people even think Chuck Asay is homophobic.
Simply put, Chuck Asay is a bigot.
Even assuming that your interpretation is correct–that Obama is exhorting other people to be “class envious”–this cartoon is still bigoted. In your interpretation, the people that support Obama are envious of the “upper class.” What about Obama’s supporters who are in the “upper class”? How are they envious? In your comment, you explicitly accuse me of “ignorance.” In his cartoon(s), Chuck Asay indicts people based on their sex, race, religion, sexual orientation, and political affiliation.
Hunter, the people in the cartoon are nondescripts. you can see if you bother to look, the cartoon depicts elderly whites, not those whom you so passionately fight for with blinders on. The cartoon is not about the individuals who are upper class who support Obama, it is about the message he is delivering. Go ahead and watch his speeches to “middle class, white, and male” voters in Ohio. They are the ones he is aiming his message toward as much as any other race of people.
Simply put, if you think the cartoon is about race or other bigotry, you are missing the point. It is about his message. If you cannot recognize the point the cartoon is picking on I truly believe it is merely because you don’t agree with it (whether the message being referred to in the cartoon is real or imagined is for each to decide).
If you’d like more information on how this political “ploy” works, please feel free to re-read the first line of the Communist Manifesto (Karl Marx – 1848). “The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles”. As Marx would predict, capitalist societies would produce internal tensions which would ultimately lead to its destruction.
Nice back and forth here, too bad we don’t have classes together any longer!
“..a large portion of the population are blind to this fact, enthusiastic cheering the “speaker” while obviously being hoodwinked.”
Bush has hoodwinked all of us into a blood-for-oil war. Are you unbiased enough to say that about Bush, or are you just another Limbaugh wannabe? Your knee-jerk reaction is to categorize everyone as liberals and non-liberals, with little understanding of centrist. If you’re to categorize Obama as liberal just because he’s slightly left of center, then Bush & co, being so far right of center, should be have a label befitting their narrow-mindedness. Maybe ultra-reactionary or backwoods redneckites.
Peace,
You post is irrelevant and I find it unnecessary to engage your pettiness. I do not advocate for or condemn Bush or Limbaugh because they are not the topic of conversation. The topic is whether Hunter has properly interpreted the cartoon….Heck, I am not even arguing whether Asay is a racist or not, just that this cartoon is not bigoted.
Thanks for your excellent post.