In a recent installment of Black Girl Dangerous, a popular blog of the post-new left, Mia McKenzie questions the willingness of people of color to defend The Colbert Report against Suey Park’s #CancelColbert Twitter campaign. “What is white racial satire doing for us that is so important?” McKenzie asks, wondering why people of color would put themselves on the line in defense of a white comedian.
The wording of the question is part of a trend in post-new left circles that devalues the nuances of individual experience in favor of identity-based narratives. A person of color defending Colbert is suspect because his or her primary motive should be racial self-interest. Colbert’s race outweighs the content and context of his satire, allowing McKenzie to draw a false equivalence between The Colbert Report and Chelsea Lately. The details of the event itself are less important than their potential as a jumping off point for a discussions of race, gender, and sexuality. In the process, individual experiences are flattened and personal agency is diminished.
Park’s very campaign is emblematic of this approach. Despite the campaign’s name, Park is not particularly concerned with any single joke or even Colbert himself. In an interview with Salon, she describes the hashtag as a “tool” to describe the evil of “whiteness at large.” According to Park, no individual white person is welcome in her revolution against the racist hegemony because “whiteness will always be the enemy.” Park expresses impatience with “understanding context,” instead highlighting the overwhelming importance of race in determining her understanding of events.
Black Girl Dangerous takes a similarly deterministic approach to identity and interpersonal relations. White supremacy, patriarchy, homophobia and cissexism, are treated not as overall trends, but as literal realities that create near impossible divides between identity groups. According to the blog’s ideology, empathy across lines of gender, race, or sexuality is virtually impossible. In fact, a large proportion of the blogs posts are dedicated to casting suspicion on the very idea of an “ally.” Aside from a page that encourages readers to become “allies of the blog” for $20 a month, the term is treated with a mix of skepticism and disdain.
Emphasizing boundaries and divisions is one of the blog’s primary motives. While McKenzie and other contributors might make passing mention of self-avowed enemies of the movement, their true vitriol is reserved for those who attempt to transgress social boundaries. Thus, activists are far more likely to criticize Macklemore’s pro-gay anthem “Same Love” than Eminem’s blatantly homophobic “Rap God.” People who attempt to serve as allies to a movement outside their identity are far more suspect than those that act in self-interest.
Tightening down on boundaries makes good sense as a business strategy for rising stars of the post-new left. By emphasizing the importance of race in shaping interests, identity bloggers can essentially corner the market. In this light, Suey Park’s interview style has as much to do with self-promotion as it does with social change. Park devotes as much space to referencing her own work as a creative writer and comedian as she does to critiquing the powers that be. Park’s message to potential audiences and employers is clear. Her identity as a person of color allows her comedy to succeed where the work of white satirists inevitably fails.
Yet while the new left’s boundaries keep the privileged out, and benefit activists colonizing new markets, they also police the behavior of the disadvantaged identities the new left claims to speak for. When people of color, gays and women transgress identity-based barriers, they are accused of internalized racism, homophobia, and sexism. In the case of Colbert, McKenzie’s question is rhetorical. A white comedian can do nothing to advance the cause of equality—”It’s white supremacy (with a heaping helping of patriarchy and male privilege) that tries to convince us otherwise.”
But the question remains to be answered: “What is white racial satire doing for us?” Or, more specifically, what is Stephen Colbert doing for us? As a straight, white, male comedian, Colbert represents the possibility of a human rights discourse that isn’t solely based on self-interest. The possibility that identity may shape our actions and tastes, but it does not predetermine them. The possibility of empathy.
Colbert is by all means an imperfect ally. Sometimes his jokes go too far, and sometimes they unintentionally detract from his broader purpose. Yet, at its best, his work calls into question and exposes the unsound foundations of our nation’s racist, homophobic, transphobic and sexist assumptions. Activists like Suey Park and Mia MicKenzie have made a name for themselves by highlighting and reinforcing the boundaries that divide us. Stephen Colbert and, yes, white racial satire, show us how absurd those boundaries are to begin with.
Image credit: Cliff1066/Flickr
© 2024 Harvard Political Review. All rights reserved.