Friends, the Republican Party and the conservative movement face a dilemma in dealing with outspoken "nationalists" like Steve King and Donald Trump. Sometimes their rhetoric is widely condemned as "racist". That's par for the course, and often these allegations are trumped up nonsense, but sometimes Republicans have to disassociate themselves from obviously offensive views. The latest case is that of Steve King and his comments to the New York Times. (Note to self: NEVER, EVER talk to the New York Times.) In my latest article, you'll find my take on how Republicans and conservatives should and shouldn't respond.
Stripping Rep. Steve King of His
Committee Assignments is a Mistake
Iowa
Congressman Steve King has been widely and rightly condemned for his
recent remark questioning the offensiveness of “white supremacy”,
“white nationalism”, and “Western Civilization”. From the
context of his statement, and based on his strong denials, we can
interpolate that King is not a white supremacist, nor did he intend
to express support for white supremacism, but his wording in the
fateful New York Times
interview was nonetheless careless and, well, offensive.
The
GOP is right, therefore, to distance itself from this sort of racist
rhetoric – rhetoric that frankly flourishes on the Left, where it
invariably involves the demonization of white people and attracts
little media interest. The hypocrisy of Democrats and liberals
notwithstanding, the Republican Party is a party that believes in
equality under the law, human rights, respect, and non-racialism.
Indeed, one of the chief problems with King's statement was the fact
that he grouped “white supremacy” and “Western Civilization”
together. As an instructor in Western Civilization classes and as the
author of a Western Civilization textbook, I know as well as anyone
that Western Civ is not
defined
by white domination and racism; on the contrary, the true legacy of
the West is our increasing acceptance of the dignity and rights of
all people, regardless of race and other factors. King apparently
needs to be reminded of this, and so the GOP should do its best to
enlighten him.
Had Republicans
in Congress merely lent their support to the motion to rebuke Rep.
King for his offensive comments, they would have been in the right.
Had the Republican National Committee or the Iowa Republican Party
decided to expel King, that too would have been a legitimate, if
extreme, course of action, consistent with the freedom of speech and
freedom of association which Republicans have a right to exercise.
Unfortunately,
Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, who leads Republicans in the House of
Representatives, decided to take a different approach. He stripped
Steve King of his committee assignments – specifically, his
positions on the House Judiciary Committee, the Agriculture
Committee, and the Small Business Committee. I strongly disagree with
this decision, just as I strongly disagree with King's wrongheaded
interpretation of Western values.
Late in 2018,
House Republicans decided to deny two re-elected Republican members
of Congress any committee assignments. These Congressmen were Chris
Collins of New York and Duncan Hunter of California. The reason was
that both men are under indictment for serious crimes. Now Kevin
McCarthy has apparently decided to expand the list of reasons why a
Republican Congressman can be kicked out of all committees. Steve
King is to suffer the same fate – not because he committed a crime,
not because he is accused of committing a crime, but simply because
he said something that many people deem to be offensive.
This
is a terrible precedent to set for the obvious reason: who shall
decide in future which remarks are sufficiently offensive to merit
similar punishment? McCarthy has set House Republicans on a slippery
slope. Undoubtedly there will be more calls – mainly from the Left
– to strip more Republicans, and perhaps eventually most or even
all of them, of their committee assignments, or even to expel them
from Congress, because of statements that certain people find
objectionable. We must not forget that, for many leftists, every
Republican and every
Trump supporter is
presumed to be a racist. McCarthy's policy is thus not sustainable,
and nor is it right, for two key reasons.
First, no
American should be punished simply for stating his views, no matter
how offensive they may be. The growing view, especially in academia,
that offensive speech is something that must be suppressed, and that
voices outside the (left-leaning) mainstream should be silenced, is
not one to which Republicans should subscribe. Moreover, if they
choose to placate the advocates of intolerance in one case, they will
find that the demands for further concessions will be unending. One
day, Republicans and conservatives could find themselves kneeling
like supplicants at the high altar of political correctness, as
Democrats already do, and that would be a tragedy and a national
disgrace.
The
second and even more important reason why Rep. King's committee
assignments should be restored is that service on such committees is
a vital function of Congressional representatives. Whether you like
Steve King or not, the people of northwestern Iowa elected and
re-elected him to the United States Congress. They did so because
they wanted him to represent them, not only in votes on the floor of
the House, but in Congressional committees, where many of the most
important decisions are made about the future of our country.
Arguably, therefore, stripping King of his committee assignments
punishes his constituents, who are guilty of no offense whatsoever,
more effectively than it punishes King himself. This is a travesty
and an abrogation of the basic principles of American democracy.
Simply put, Steve King may or may not be a Republican in good
standing, but he is
a United States Congressman, and he should receive all the powers and
perquisites attached to that high office.
Let us hope that Minority Leader McCarthy will reconsider his
penchant for shunning those members of his caucus who embarrass the
GOP. There are other, better ways to reproach and discipline a member
of Congress than by expelling him or her from all committees.
When the House Republicans come to their senses, they should offer
Reps. Collins, Hunter, and King committee assignments consonant with
their experience and interests. After all, the democratic rights of
the people who elected these representatives in the first place are
on the line.
Dr.
Nicholas L. Waddy is an Associate Professor of History at SUNY Alfred
and blogs at: www.waddyisright.com.
He appears weekly on the Newsmaker Show on WLEA 1480.
Dr. Waddy: Once again you offer a well reasoned defense of democracy (in all its painful, yet historically exalted, reality). Your criticisms of Rep. King are objective but the excoriation of him from the left (supported ,in effect, by those who seek to appease those incipient totalitarians)is reflexively and profoundly bigoted. Let's see them take Maxine Waters , Keith Ellison and Jerrold Nadler, Charles Schumer,Nancy Pelosi and Hillary to task. He may have been clumsy in his defense of yes, mainly white Western civilization but spirited defense of its history is eminently sustainable. Its overall positive effect on the world can be very plausibly argued, I agree. And your exposition on the legitimacy of Rep. King's representation of his district is sound. Should his constituents seek to replace him they may employ the means to do so. Meanwhile his earned institutional privileges should in no way be abrogated; this is DEMOCRACY, Rep. McCarthy, and it is not easy but as Churchill maintained, its the best way, compared to all the others.
ReplyDeleteHear hear, Jack! In retrospect, I think I may have been too hard on King. It's clear that the offensiveness of his comments springs totally from the punctuation supplied by the New York Times. Some periods, instead of commas, would have dramatically altered his meaning. Poor guy. He speaks the truth, and some very important truths, and the establishment can't abide it.
ReplyDeleteVery articulated post. Thank you for this fantastic work. Apply online for Kenya 5 year multiple entry visa if you have a long plan to stay in Kenya such as business, tourism, or any other valid work.
ReplyDelete