I have spoken of the Democrats’ desire to tie Barack Obama’s candidacy to the legacy of Martin Luther King and Robert Kennedy before. That desire is no secret, though it is not given the notice in the media that it deserves. That this is the Democrats year to win is a given, yet the fact that there is a largely unspoken wish to make this election bigger than a mere power grab is, for the most part, being portrayed as an undercurrent to the more widely acknowledged wave of perceived inevitability. However, the symbolism of racial progress that nominating an African American candidate provides is the fuel that powers the engine of the Obama campaign.
Okay, a couple of weeks ago, there was this big brouhaha about the “n-word” on The View. First of all, let me say, yeah, this is late, but hey I didn’t have a blog then, now I do. That’s why I’m just now writing about it, but write about it I must. I hate the “n-word.” Not just “nigger” the word that the “n-word” represents, but the actual stupid-assed euphemism itself.
Of all the awful legacies of the O. J. Simpson trial, which are legion, the birth of the “n-word” as a publicly acceptable alternative to the hateful word “nigger” has to be counted in the top ten. While nothing compares with the crime itself, the effects of many aspects of the trial on our popular culture are probably more profound than we realize. When Christopher Darden bowed to courtroom decorum by coining the “n-word” to replace the word whose effects he was trying to argue against, he not only blunted his own argument, he cursed us all.
There is no most acceptable way to say “nigger.” You either use the word or you don’t. It’s definition and meaning is part of the fabric of America, an ugly reality we have to accept before we can reject. While the derogatory nature of the word “nigger,” the devastating effects it’s use against African Americans has had and the profound negativity and disdain associated with its genesis and lifespan cannot be denied, it is still just a word.
