Ta-Nehisi Coates

Ta-Nehisi Coates is a national correspondent at The Atlantic, where he writes about culture, politics, and social issues. He is the author of the memoir The Beautiful Struggle.

  • OK, This Is Just Creepy

    I don't get with the Mormon-hating. Didn't get with it when Romney was running. I won't get with it now. But dig this:

    The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints confirmed Tuesday afternoon that someone improperly, posthumously baptized the late mother of President Obama into the Mormon faith.


    Last June 4 -- the day after then-Sen. Obama secured enough delegates to win the Democratic presidential nominee -- someone had the president's mother Stanley Ann Dunham, who died in 1995 of cancer, baptized.

    On June 11, she received the endowment.

    I think the arrogance of "baptizing" someone posthumously says a lot. I think the arrogance of baptizing someone who's child, only 30 years ago, would have been scorned in your church says even more.


  • The Meme Builds More...

    From my colleague Marc Ambinder:

    Conservative talk radio hosts have begun impugning Sotomayor's credibility. And the respectable intellectual center -- see Jeffrey Rosen's case against her temperament and inherent intellectual abilities -- is beginning to have doubts.

    The case against Sonia Sotomayer is, at the moment, built on a haphazard reading of her opinions, anonymous quotes, and this amazing admission by Rosen:

    I haven't read enough of Sotomayor's opinions to have a confident sense of them, nor have I talked to enough of Sotomayor's detractors and supporters, to get a fully balanced picture of her strengths.

    I can't get past that line--mostly because, as Greenwald said yesterday, it drips with unintentional irony--Rosen is attacking Sotomayor's ability to do the necessary intellectual heavy-lifting, while explicitly neglecting to do any of his own. In this instance, His piece reads like a burglar's brief against rampant criminality. Authored mid-robbery, no less.

    I mean him no disrespect. I'm sure he is a hard-working, talented writer. Journalism is difficult, and in this age, the urge to immediately have an opinion on everything is quite strong. But this is exactly why that urge has to be resisted. Opinions matter--even ill-informed ones. You don't get to be the "respectable intellectual center" and then practice your craft in the gossip-laden, ignorant muck. Not for long anyway. You know what this is--Great power. Great responsibility.

  • A Beautiful Use Of Negative Space

    I think Matt gets at the biggest problem with Wolverines "Orgins" be it in comics or in the film:

    Wolverine isn't a character whose origins we're curious about. Wolverine is a character whose origin is that he has no memories and we don't know where he's from other than that at some point he was mixed up with a shady covert ops program that bonded adamantium to his skeleton. That's the origin. That's the character.

    I think we actually are curious about his orgins, but that's the appeal--it's in what you don't know.  How, exactly, does Wolverine know Sabretooth? How did he get admantium bones? Why is he so prone to rage? That negative space is where you put your imagination. This could be generational--I read comics mostly in the 80s, and these were still questions. But I think in story-telling, period, there something be said for letting the consumer wander.

    I never wanted to see a Gwen Stacy clone--the reach she evinced from the grave, the way she altered the Spiderman character was so profound. But the financial upside of filling in the space, of bringing back characters, of revealing orgins is simply to much for some editors, I think. It's certainly too much for Hollywood.

    On another note, sometimes I feel like Yglesias never left this space. All my links are belonging to Matt.

  • Be Serious

    John Judis makes the argument for a Latino judge. I'm mostly cool with his points about democracy and ethnicity, but then he says this:

    Is Sonia Sotomayer qualified to be on Supreme Court? I'm agnostic on that subject--I don't know enough about her--and if you read Jeff's piece carefully, so is he.

    No he isn't. The headline was The Case Against Sonia Sotamayer. It was subtitled Indictments Of Obama's Frontrunner To Replace Souter. He concludes the piece by calling Sotomayer "a gamble."  Judis continues..

    If she has the requisite abilities, and if her opinions are broadly those of Obama himself, then the President should certainly consider her. What if she is very good, but that there are more brilliant jurists around on the faculties of law schools? When Wilson chose Brandeis, he did choose the leading progressive jurist in America. But when Johnson picked Marshall or when Reagan chose O'Connor, there probably were other lawyers around who were more brilliant. Still, these were good choices and good for our country.

    Unlike all those conservative white guys who were clearly most qualified jurists in the land. It's amazing how assumptions that Sotomayer may not be the most qualified candidate (as though there's a such thing) has seeped into TNR's water supply. Funny how that happens. More amazing than that is the fact that the two writers weighing in on this know virtually nothing about Sotomayer's jurisprudence.

  • It's The Racism, Stupid

    Matt had a series of posts a few weeks back about racism and the tea parties. I thought about commenting but, frankly, I wasn't sure what to say. I couldn't tell whether the signs were indicative of the movement, or indicative of a few oddballs. I think it says something that people feel comfortable toting that sort of message to a rally. But my instincts led me to allow for a "charitable interpretation," as one commenter put it last week.

    All of that said, I think Matt was on to something.

    One common refrain of black Southeners from Robert Smalls to Booker T. Washington to Martin Luther King is the notion that white Supremacy has actually corrupted the white South, that while it is a blight on the physical conditions of blacks, it is a greater blight on the spiritual, moral, and mental conditions of whites.

    I never understood how that could be true until relatively recently. But when you think about the embrace of white supremacy by political leaders, you understand that it was not simply an embrace of evil and bigotry, but an embrace of superstition, ghost stories and, ultimately, utter ignorance. At times this has been literally true. There's a short portion in Capitol Men that discusses a late 19th century effort by the federal government to upgrade public schools in the South. For fear that black schools might benefit, South Carolina declines all federal help thus fucking over its white children in the name of white supremacy.

    Racism, like all bigotry is, at its root, lazy thinking. Thus the demagouge who employs racism is engaged in a kind of mental corruption, aimed not at the victims of racism, but its alleged benefactors. Thus when George Wallace asserts the following...

    In the name of the greatest people that have ever trod this earth, I draw the line in the dust and toss the gauntlet before the feet of tyranny, and I say segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever.

    ...he is, for sure, defaming black people. But he's also engaging his followers in a seductive flight of delusional stupidity. The "segregation" part of that quote isn't the worst part. It's the white nationalist hoodoo, the unreflective vanity of "greatest people that have ever trod this earth" that's the killer.

    More »

  • Late-Sauce

    Because I have no television, I'm late on everything. So I have no idea how long ago this Spike Jonz\Karen O collabo came out. But it's pretty awesome. Kinda like an anti-Super Bowl ad.

  • Judicial Malpractice

    Like Matt, I don't understand how in the world a journalist writes a critical piece on a possible Supreme Court nominee and includes this graff:

    I haven't read enough of Sotomayor's opinions to have a confident sense of them, nor have I talked to enough of Sotomayor's detractors and supporters, to get a fully balanced picture of her strengths.

    I should add that the thrust of the piece is that Sotomayor isn't that sharp. That may well be true, but how do you asses that without thoroughly reading her opinions, and talking to broad range of supporters and detractors? I know. You use anonymous quotes!

    Sarcasm aside, minorities and women are particularly sensitive to being told they're stupid--as they should be. It doesn't mean that there aren't any stupid minorities and women. But if you're going to make that case, you really should cover your ass.

Video

The 86-Year-Old Farmer Who Won't Quit

A filmmaker returns to his hometown to profile the patriarch of a family farm

Video

Riding Unicycles in a Cave

"If you fall down and break your leg, there's no way out."

Video

Carrot: A Pitch-Perfect Satire of Tech

"It's not just a vegetable. It's what a vegetable should be."

Video

An Ingenious 360-Degree Time-Lapse

Watch the world become a cartoonishly small playground

Video

The Benefits of Living Alone on a Mountain

"You really have to love solitary time by yourself."

Writers

Up
Down

From This Author

Just In