First, the issue for Harrogate is not so much that people came down on Hasselbeck per se. Second, Hasselbeck breaking into tears has nothing to do with Harrogate's argument, either. For that matter, it isn't even what made her, for Harrogate, seem more human than Goldberg.
The issue for Harrogate is this: What made Hasselbeck seem more human, as Oxymoron eloquently put it, is that she acknowledges a lack of understanding on what is, contrary to some recently expressed opinions, a very complex issue. Goldberg, on the other hand, drops all the glib talking points about "APPROPRIATION," as if that settles the matter. Maybe in a Graduate Theory Course that would settle it. But that's about it.
Indeed, m, Harrogate vehemently disagrees with your suggestion that there is ever a point in the clip previously shown, where Whoopi Goldberg and Elizabeth Hasselbeck occupy the same footing, attempting to "make themselves heard." Though Hasselbeck talks more, she shows a desire to listen throughout: Goldberg on the other hand through the whole clip is as static as a medical flatline, offering only the monolithic view which she frames as beyond dispute, and cetainly beyond dispute of anyone who is, gasp! White.
How dare a white person weigh in on this issue in a way that is not fawning?--Is this question the product of an understandable impulse? Of course it is. But how it is in any way good for debate, how it advances understanding, eludes reason. And of course that wretched tool, that enabler par excellance, Barbara Walters, is practically fanning her and feeding her grapes while she pontificates.
Supadiscomama pointed out recently that in the movie
O, the modern day Othello figure tells his white girlfriend something to the effect of, "I can say Nigger. You can't. You can't even think that word." Again, understandable?--of course. But then, so too are many things understandable that we don't ultimately embrace. Shall we sympathize with O's effusion
unproblematically? Does anything outside of absolute identity politics doctrine allow such a weird assertion to pass, uncriticized?
The problem is, again, Hasselbeck and Goldberg were arguing about something that is very complicated. Neither party is Obviously right. Yet on the recent thread we had the suggestion, by two different commenters, that the problem at hand was Hasselbeck's lack of education. The self-righteousness and smugness of which assertion, and most importantly the wrongness of which assertion to anyone not invested in a particular academic doctrine, is not to be missed.So these things needed to be pointed out, and point them out Harrogate, in his own clumsy way, tried to do. It may well be that, as one commenter said, that the poster child for corporate greed and pampered vacuousness, Elizabeth Hasselbeck, needs to "get a clue." But then, by the same token, it is also the case that Goldberg's modes of argumentation are embarrassing to those of us identifying as three-dimensional liberal humanists, from sea to shining sea.
As for the assertion of departure by Anastasia, whose comments have of course been valued, and whose return we hopefully await. Harrogate, in short, hopes thicker skin prevails.
Finally, since it is so clear to so many on this Blog, Harrogate then could use some "splainin" by some of them,
why exactly it is so obvious that there is no social harm done in the Idea of African Americans, among one another, keeping the word "nigger" alive and well.