Coca-Cola makes cute ad, racist far-right idiots lose their [inks]

[HagridOfTheDeep]

I understand the backlash just in the sense that there is a fear that American identity and culture are eroding. America was always a melting pot: Newcomers learned English and became Americans. I think the ad reminds everyone that that has changed. Today, the United States is turning into what we would call in Canada a cultural mosaic. The melting pot and the mosaic each have their pros and cons, but as a Canadian who is somewhat disappointed in his country's lack of distinct culture, I understand why the ad stokes American fears.

Obviously there's some racism and xenophobia behind the backlash, but I think it's wrong to assume that every dissenter is some sort of racist.

[traininthedistance]

I understand the backlash just in the sense that there is a fear that American identity and culture are eroding. America was always a melting pot: Newcomers learned English and became Americans. I think the ad reminds everyone that that has changed. Today, the United States is turning into what we would call in Canada a cultural mosaic. The melting pot and the mosaic each have their pros and cons, but as a Canadian who is somewhat disappointed in his country's lack of distinct culture, I understand why the ad stokes American fears.

Obviously there's some racism and xenophobia behind the backlash, but I think it's wrong to assume that every dissenter is some sort of racist.

Eh, that's the narrative from some quarters but it isn't the reality.  Today's immigrants are indeed learning English (maybe not necessarily the older first-gen folks, but their kids for sure); and back in the day it was quite common to have long-lasting non-English speaking enclaves.  You know how the Pennsylvania "Dutch" still speak German?  Yeah there was a lot more of that in the 19th Century.  It took a hit with WWI and the associated xenophobia, but immigrant communities continuing to speak their old tongues has been the norm for the vast vast majority of American history.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

You're right, but I think the white majority had an easier time accepting those enclaves because their inhabitants conformed in most other respects to ideas about American culture. I can't speak to the situation in the United States, but in Ontario a lot of non-English communities were made up of farmers (I'm thinking of my anscestors in Renfrew County). If the situation was similar across the American Corn Belt, these immigrant farmers would have been reproducing American cultural mores.

Today, American culture is a bit stuck in the past. When I think of America, I still often think of family farms, small businesses, and bountiful food at the dinner table. I don't think of the cleaning ladies or the Wal-Mart greeters. Even though many whites hold these types of jobs, they are more closely associated with the immigrant class. The big, visible enterprisers are still white men, so the myth of American white culture continues, even though, in reality, there's a real mixing of the races. Whites still want to feel part of an imagined superior class though, so they latch onto the fading imagery of "American culture." Thus, I would maybe argue that immigrants today are more easily racialized than their Eastern European counterparts from the 19th century—it's the only way to differntiate between "Americans" and "other." White Wal-Mart greeters get to identify with the class that owns businesses and produces goods, where nonwhite Wal-Mart greeters are just poor immigrant Wal-Mart greeters. It's pretty terrible, but, you know what...? I think it's a subliminal and natural phenomenon. To put it another way, whites build a bit of a castle for themselves. When a new Coca-Cola ad comes around and challenges popular conceptions of what it means to be an American, it's more than a little threatening. I get it and I don't hate anyone for it.

[TheDeadFlagBlues]

To paraphrase the narrative you just presented, we're supposed to sympathize with racists because they believe they're losing their special status, afforded to them by race and race alone, in the mythology and popular imagining of America. You have a kinder heart than I...

[courts]

it didn't 'challenge' anything. multiculturalism and platitudes about 'diversity 'have been the norm since before most of this forum was even born. really its a cynical move on coke's part. they know that:
1) that usual loud minority of 'angry white people' will complain, giving them even more publicity
2) it will get the usual "good white people" to buy more of their corn syrup water to show their commitment to diversity. or feel better about it anyway. (see above)
3) in the long run, as chomsky pointed out (jesus christ that sounds so sage doesn't it? ugh) people having distinct races, cultures, nationalities, etc. is probably bad for business. its better to minimize any sort of differences between potential consumers - including 'racial' ones.

so of course corporations and the wealthy on average are going to support some ridiculous idea of a 'global village' of mocha colored people sipping mcdonalds milkshakes. its not out of the goodness of their hearts that they're 'anti racists' or anything.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

You're right, but I think the white majority had an easier time accepting those enclaves because their inhabitants conformed in most other respects to ideas about American culture. I can't speak to the situation in the United States, but in Ontario a lot of non-English communities were made up of farmers (I'm thinking of my anscestors in Renfrew County). If the situation was similar across the American Corn Belt, these immigrant farmers would have been reproducing American cultural mores.

Today, American culture is a bit stuck in the past. When I think of America, I still often think of family farms, small businesses, and bountiful food at the dinner table. I don't think of the cleaning ladies or the Wal-Mart greeters. Even though many whites hold these types of jobs, they are more closely associated with the immigrant class. The big, visible enterprisers are still white men, so the myth of American white culture continues, even though, in reality, there's a real mixing of the races. Whites still want to feel part of an imagined superior class though, so they latch onto the fading imagery of "American culture." Thus, I would maybe argue that immigrants today are more easily racialized than their Eastern European counterparts from the 19th century—it's the only way to differntiate between "Americans" and "other." White Wal-Mart greeters get to identify with the class that owns businesses and produces goods, where nonwhite Wal-Mart greeters are just poor immigrant Wal-Mart greeters. It's pretty terrible, but, you know what...? I think it's a subliminal and natural phenomenon. To put it another way, whites build a bit of a castle for themselves. When a new Coca-Cola ad comes around and challenges popular conceptions of what it means to be an American, it's more than a little threatening. I get it and I don't hate anyone for it.

The idea that there was a melting pot for American immigrants is often overstated. It was an ideal among some people like Henry Ford and TR, and among some portion of the immigrant population.  There was integration of immigrants in many ways, just as there is today. But when people are comparing immigrants today to immigrants of the past in the US in terms of integrating and adopting the broader American culture and identity,  they are really comparing the effects of having two generations, from the 1920s to the 1960s, where immigration was highly restricted.  And so it seems like the immigrants were more acculturated than today because there was not a constant stream of new immigrants who had not been acculturated and who prior to the restrictions had provided ethnic communities with a stronger link to the Old World. 

The immigrant farming communities in the US in the 19th/early 20th century were more often from Northern and Western Europe, while urban immigrants were more often from Eastern and Southern Europe - or from Ireland, which was considered just as bad. (Then you had Welsh, Slovaks, Hungarians, etc coming over to work in the coal mines, Chinese on the railroads, etc.)
The combination of urbanism and non-Protestants, often considered less white in the racial views of the day, was seen as a threat to American ideals, and increasingly as a eugenic threat at the turn of the 20th century. 

For all the xenophobia that exists toward immigrants today, I'd say it is a great deal less racial than it was back then, at least in terms of any explicitly developed ideology.  And I don't think poor whites identify with rich whites or vice-versa so much as they identify with a certain sentimental vision of America that they may see threatened by the introduction of the unfamiliar who they worry may not share that vision or simply don't easily fit into their conception of it.

[morgieb]

Voted #1, but in hindsight blaming Obama's too predictable, and #7 is more lol.

[I Will Not Be Wrong]

http://www.politico.com/story/2014/02/superbowl-commercials-coke-america-the-beautiful-103075.html?hp=r11

[Reaganfan]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ce2JrUG3JRU

The ad they could have aired to avoid any and all controversy

[Sbane]

I understand the backlash just in the sense that there is a fear that American identity and culture are eroding. America was always a melting pot: Newcomers learned English and became Americans. I think the ad reminds everyone that that has changed.

How the hell has that changed? I mean, maybe you live somewhere where it's like 99.99% white or perhaps Canada is that different from America, but everyone who comes to America learns English. Those who don't usually don't due to circumstances like not having the money or time, as is the case with most of the working class. All those immigrants kids speak English though. And that is how it was back in the day too.

[afleitch]

Martin Van Buren would be rolling in his grave.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

The man on the street speaks

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

According to my parents within my lifetime they had been in some small towns in North Dakota where some of the olds could only speak broken English and these were probably at least third generation Americans (most are probably dead now and the few that aren't are in nursing homes...though their bilingual but speaking German primarily middle aged descendents are still around.) But how many second generation Americans today don't speak English? Actually its quite simple if you go to school in the US you speak English.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Eh, that's the narrative from some quarters but it isn't the reality.  Today's immigrants are indeed learning English (maybe not necessarily the older first-gen folks, but their kids for sure); and back in the day it was quite common to have long-lasting non-English speaking enclaves.  You know how the Pennsylvania "Dutch" still speak German?  Yeah there was a lot more of that in the 19th Century.  It took a hit with WWI and the associated xenophobia, but immigrant communities continuing to speak their old tongues has been the norm for the vast vast majority of American history.

Quite so:

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

I'm wondering what advantage people like to see in a country that would have multiple languages spoken and accepted in it.

Diversity is good?

Ah, yes, "diversity," the magic word. I'd encourage you to look at Sweden to see how "diversity" lives up. As prosperous as it is in many fields, it has the highest rape rate in Europe, and more than half of those incidents are committed by Muslim immigrants.

Diversity itself had nothing to do with that and you know it.

I expected better from you.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

[Citation needed]

If you insist. This comes from an agency under the Ministry of Justice, mind you.

Yeah, this is sadly a fact. Some of it stems from the nature of Islam in regards to treatment of women, but I'd suspect that much like higher crime rates among minorities and poor whites, much of it stems from poverty, unemployment, underemployment, etc.

Lol.  And there you are on my state threads accusing everyone else of fearing brown people.

[Cassius]

[Citation needed]

If you insist. This comes from an agency under the Ministry of Justice, mind you.

Yeah, this is sadly a fact. Some of it stems from the nature of Islam in regards to treatment of women, but I'd suspect that much like higher crime rates among minorities and poor whites, much of it stems from poverty, unemployment, underemployment, etc.

Lol.  And there you are on my state threads accusing everyone else of fearing brown people.

Are you denying that some Muslims lean in a fairly misogynistic direction, and that support for that can be drawn from the Koran and Hadith. Not, of course, that all Muslims do so (I think that some people occassionally forgt that Islam is not some monolithic block, and is instead as divided as Christianity is).

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

[Citation needed]

If you insist. This comes from an agency under the Ministry of Justice, mind you.

Yeah, this is sadly a fact. Some of it stems from the nature of Islam in regards to treatment of women, but I'd suspect that much like higher crime rates among minorities and poor whites, much of it stems from poverty, unemployment, underemployment, etc.

Lol.  And there you are on my state threads accusing everyone else of fearing brown people.

Are you denying that some Muslims lean in a fairly misogynistic direction, and that support for that can be drawn from the Koran and Hadith. Not, of course, that all Muslims do so (I think that some people occassionally forgt that Islam is not some monolithic block, and is instead as divided as Christianity is).

No, just as I'm sure no one would deny that some spoiled, suburban upper middle-class white kids lean in a fairly misogynistic and racist direction, as evidenced by various individuals on this forum.

Am I wrong, Mr. "It's okay to destroy relics of other religions if it means spreading Christianity?"

[JerryArkansas]

OK, first let me say that I didn't like nor dislike the ad.  It is an ad, I really don't care what it has on it.  Now, everyone in this situation needs to step back, and look at how stupid all of you look like.  Every one in this is over reacting.  Coke should have known this would have caused an uproar, and are stupid for making it.  The idiots who don't like it are things which I can't say on this forum, and are stupid over their reaction.  It is a song.  And to the people who made this an issue, why.  Who cares if some idiots on twitter said this.  We have massive debt, a broken healthcare system, and you are spending time debating this.

[Cassius]

[Citation needed]

If you insist. This comes from an agency under the Ministry of Justice, mind you.

Yeah, this is sadly a fact. Some of it stems from the nature of Islam in regards to treatment of women, but I'd suspect that much like higher crime rates among minorities and poor whites, much of it stems from poverty, unemployment, underemployment, etc.

Lol.  And there you are on my state threads accusing everyone else of fearing brown people.

Are you denying that some Muslims lean in a fairly misogynistic direction, and that support for that can be drawn from the Koran and Hadith. Not, of course, that all Muslims do so (I think that some people occassionally forgt that Islam is not some monolithic block, and is instead as divided as Christianity is).

No, just as I'm sure no one would deny that some spoiled, suburban upper middle-class white kids lean in a fairly misogynistic and racist direction, as evidenced by various individuals on this forum.

Am I wrong, Mr. "It's okay to destroy relics of other religions if it means spreading Christianity?"

Well, let's grab the bull by the horns shall we. It is true that I am an upper middle class white 18 year old who has had a very happy childhood. I see nothing to be ashamed about in that. Secondly, I don't really see anything that I have said that can be interpreted in a misogynistic manner. Thirdly, on the whole racism thing, my comments (which are basically on the same level as 'if the USA ever get's a Latino plurality, it'll be far better for it') are not really and truly of a racist bent. I am perfectly happy, in fact I welcome, the co-opting of supportive ethnic minorities into supporting conservatism, as a means of broadening it's base of support. However, on the other hand, a situation where supermajorities of these groups vote consistently in favour of policies that lean towards the leftist side of the spectrum, I think that my dew-eyed fantasising about an electorate that, demographically, skewed right-wing is hardly racist. After all, plenty of leftists seem positivly gleeful about the gradual collapse of the demographics that support the GOP. Yet are they engaging in racist behaviour. In my view, they aren't. So, my fantasising about that electorate is not racist, indeed, here, and in other threads, I have pointed out that racism, generally, isn't particularly helpful, including to the individuals that engage in it.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

[Citation needed]

If you insist. This comes from an agency under the Ministry of Justice, mind you.

Yeah, this is sadly a fact. Some of it stems from the nature of Islam in regards to treatment of women, but I'd suspect that much like higher crime rates among minorities and poor whites, much of it stems from poverty, unemployment, underemployment, etc.

Lol.  And there you are on my state threads accusing everyone else of fearing brown people.

Are you denying that some Muslims lean in a fairly misogynistic direction, and that support for that can be drawn from the Koran and Hadith. Not, of course, that all Muslims do so (I think that some people occassionally forgt that Islam is not some monolithic block, and is instead as divided as Christianity is).

No, just as I'm sure no one would deny that some spoiled, suburban upper middle-class white kids lean in a fairly misogynistic and racist direction, as evidenced by various individuals on this forum.

Am I wrong, Mr. "It's okay to destroy relics of other religions if it means spreading Christianity?"

Well, let's grab the bull by the horns shall we. It is true that I am an upper middle class white 18 year old who has had a very happy childhood. I see nothing to be ashamed about in that.

Completely missing the point...

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I wasn't referring to anything you said that's misogynistic in particular, though you have shown to be a bigot in other respects on various occasions here.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

So in other words, "Wow, my party is so horrible on a number of issues impacting these ethnic groups that we've lost them!  Gee, if only there weren't so many brown people getting in the way of things!"  Do you understand how ridiculous and utterly repulsive this sounds?  No one says, "Can't we just go back to the good old days when the population was 85 percent white" unless they have what I'd suspect to be a racial agenda to push.  That's not even a remotely human thing to say.  So please, at least admit you were wrong to say it and retract it.  Don't try to justify it like you are now.  Because you can't.

Hardly any leftists feel "gleeful" or otherwise about the demographics change itself aside from the benefits diversity will bring, especially to people who've been left in the dark these last few centuries.  In other words, we don't "hate whitey," contrary to what you'd like to think.  But, as a leftist I think it's amusing how badly the GOP has failed in trying to reach out to a growing demographic.  No one in this thread has convinced me they want to challenge these notions.

[afleitch]

Scott, Cassius has no life experience. Leave him out in the sun for a few years then engage with him.

[Cassius]

Ok, I admit that I was wrong in saying what I said. It was very ill-phrased. But, I do not see what the Republican Party can do to reach out to blacks and hispanics, as that will, at the very least, mean the abandonment of much of the party's ideology (and such attempts will probably be futile anyway, since, to put it very crudely, the Republican's can always be 'outbid' by the Democrats when it comes to implementing policies that these groups generally want to see), and thus the abandonment of the core of the GOP's support.

Oh and Afleitch, well, meh, maybe your right. Although, given that I live and breath I guarantee you that I have at least some life experience.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

To paraphrase the narrative you just presented, we're supposed to sympathize with racists because they believe they're losing their special status, afforded to them by race and race alone, in the mythology and popular imagining of America. You have a kinder heart than I...

I don't know about you, but I bet almost everyone in my family of blue collar union workers above age 40 would at least be a bit uneasy about the implications of a non-English immigrant working class. They're my family; I love them. They don't think about it in the terms you just used. Either way, they would never treat anyone differently because of their ethnicity, and I would not call them grade-A racists. The way I see it, it's a cultural thing. They have lived a certain way for a long time and now have a "gut feeling" that their livelihoods are threatened. Is that wrong? What I was sort of trying to do was bring class into the argument. Wealthy capitalists have little reason to care about the racial makeup of America, because labour is labour. Working class whites have a higher stake in these discussions because their social standing is more precarious. To quote Avenue Q, "everyone's a little bit racist," and it's mostly because of socialization processes that are difficult for even the very best of us to overcome. So, again, I will not hate people for being concerned about a Coca-Cola ad that translates most of one of their national songs into a bunch of foreign languages. It's different when you start hating on individuals, but here, there's a backlash against an idea in the abstract, and that is "America is no longer just ours." It's tough.

Personally, I thought it was a pretty beautiful ad. But I see where folks are coming from, don't think it's particularly vicious, and feel someone needs to at least play devil's advocate.

[afleitch]

Oh and Afleitch, well, meh, maybe your right. Although, given that I live and breath I guarantee you that I have at least some life experience.

You're doing either one of two things; parroting those around you or rebelling against them by clutching at some outdated and inapplicable (to 2014) conservatism. Trust me, I went to a private Catholic school in Glasgow (there's one so take a stab) so I know exactly what it's like. I can't take you seriously because you're still in a bubble. It's taken me a decade to break out of that sort of association. So it means I can't take you seriously. I can't take you seriously when you idealise a Thatcherite past because you weren't alive (and I was only just) I can't take you seriously when you oppose gay marriage (is opposition really an English Catholic thing? Most Scottish Catholics are in favour) because I don't think by the time you're 30 and have a gay friend who is the same age that for a second you'd say he shouldn't get married to the person that makes him live and breathe, particularly given that it is now the law of the land. Nor do I think you have any weight when you criticise swathes of the public, particularly in America (and we can all be guilty of that) because you've never met them and probably never will. You're not the only one to join here with those sorts of opinions. Most people grow out of them, often while still remaining conservative in a sense and make more reasonable sparring partners