GEORGE Allen has put himself in a messy situation, as many political pundits, and YouTube viewers know. Last week he shot himself in the foot by insulting a University student , S.R. Sidarth, calling him "macaca" and cynically welcoming him to both "America" and "the real world of Virginia." "Macaca," depending on its spelling, can be a Portuguese name for a monkey, but is also considered a racial slur in European cultures. Allen himself claimed that he was confusing "macaca" with "Mohawk," in reference to Sidarth's mullet-like hairstyle.
A much more realistic excuse is that Allen made up something that sounded like a foreign name to describe the student, who was of Indian descent. Additionally, this incident occurred at a Republican campaign rally in Southwest Virginia, and Sidarth was the only minority and open Democrat at the event, therefore being fair game for Allen's tauntings.
However, the real debate should not just be about Allen's foolish comments. Nor should it be about his penchant in earlier years for confederate flags and nooses. Allen's official positions and proposals during his time as a public official are his true legacy, and sadly, his record on civil rights is very lacking. Allen's macaca moments and Confederate leanings mirror a more sinister side of Allen -- his dismal record on civil rights.
Arguably one of Allen's greatest gaffes was in 1991, when he stated opposition to the Civil Rights Act when asked by an anonymous source from the National Urban League. Fast forward to 2006, and Allen did vote for the extension of the Voting Rights Act, a similar piece of legislation.
Why did Allen change his stance? There are two plausible explanations. One possibility is that he had a true change of heart over the last 15 years. However, Allen's about-face is more likely a political move in a changing climate. When the 1991 Civil Rights Act was introduced, opposing the passage of the act was not considered as much of a black mark on one's record; in fact, if Allen were a senator at that time, he would have been in good company -- 38 congressmen and 5 senators opposed its passage. Comparatively, the 2006 Voting Rights Act passed without a single "nay" vote in the Senate -- anyone voting against it would be risking political suicide. Unfortunately, Allen's change of heart is more likely not the move of a civil right's progressive as much as a political opportunist.
Additionally, on other more inconsequential symbolic issues, Allen demonstrates that he is not as committed to civil rights legislation as he would like voters to believe. When Allen was a state legislator, he opposed the holiday honoring Martin Luther King Jr., and one of the first acts being elected governor in 1993 was to proclaim April to be Confederate History Month. Only more recently has Allen changed his tune on easily supportable bills -- primarily, Allen in early 2005 introduced legislation regarding a formal apology for lynching. Even now Allen is only comfortable on lightweight civil rights issues that would be impossible for any rational person to vote against.
Sadly, Democratic senatorial opponent Jim Webb is not exactly a champion of civil rights either. He is against current affirmative action policies, defining them as proposals that were primarily used to remove a "badge of slavery," and thinks that affirmative action is unmanageable when applied to other minorities, according to the Washington Times. However, Allen's position on affirmative action is not only nonexistent, he is a master at avoiding the issue. When Allen was questioned on the same issue, he wheedled his way out of the question by talking about funding Virginia's historically black colleges, according to The Hook magazine. But clearly, when both candidates stack up to each other on racial issues, Webb is the lesser of two evils.
No matter how many times Allen tries to evade "macacagate," his idiotic comment will haunt him all the way up to his presidential bid. However, the true monkey on his back is not his banter -- it's his official positions. In the end, the real issues are not in political leaders' comments, but in their actions.
Adam Silverberg's is a Cavalier Daily Opinion columnist. He can be reached at asilverberg@cavalierdaily.com.
Read More
BURSTEIN: Federal workforce cuts target Virginia — and Youngkin’s response falls short
By Carly Burstein | 3 days agoForcing employees to choose between uprooting their families or losing their livelihoods is not just callous — it is economically reckless.
HUYNH: Virginia’s proposed ‘whippets’ law is laughable
By Viet Huynh | 4 days agoAs people continue to be harmed by nitrous oxide abuse, Virginians will see this new law as the ineffective, ultimately harmful policy that it is.
EDITORIAL: We can demand more of our university presidents
By Editorial Board | 5 days agoWe hope for greater transparency because for the principles of solidarity in this statement to be enacted and effective, stakeholders must be treated as partners in resistance.
