Nick Sandmann and the problem of “microaggression”

I have to say enough is enough of this “revisionism” in favor of Nick Sandmann and the rest of that all-male, almost all-white (was there an Asian present? I didn’t see any blacks or Hispanics in that mob) from the Covington Catholic High School in Kentucky. Let’s be upfront about what we are “discussing” here: A tiny black fringe group was holding a “demonstration” at the Lincoln Memorial protesting racism in the era of Trump (an easy thing to do) when a group of privileged (i.e. from the high-end part of town) white teenagers, some of them wearing MAGA hats (which feel like they’re made of tissue paper; so much for the “great” part) decided to “engage” in a “conversation” with them. They didn’t do much to suggest that “Christianity” had much to do with their “upbringing.” I watched the longer video and any reasonable person would be hard-pressed to describe their behavior as anything but what one would expect from a group of privileged, arrogant, bigoted “kids” whose history and social studies classes seemed to lack providing insight into this country’s racial past. The very insular nature of their school obviously didn’t help in infusing a sense of “commonality” amongst their fellow humans, and the fact that they were bused all the way from Kentucky to attend an anti-abortion rally (apparently an annual event) suggests that the school has a very narrow perspective on the world.

The real “controversy” of course is not the juvenile bullying behavior of these “Christian” teens—not surprising since most of them seemed to be Trump supporters—but the actions of one MAGA hat-wearing “boy,” Nick Sandmann. A small group of Native Americans was nearby, and one of them, tribal elder Nathan Phillips, for some reason thought he could “defuse” the situation that could have been avoided if the teens had just been instructed to ignore the admittedly stupid but otherwise harmless Hebrew Israelites harangue, apparently touched off by the hypocrisy inherent in MAGA hats being present at the Lincoln Memorial (at the 1996 Republican Convention, Robert Dole told anyone present who didn’t believe in the party of Lincoln knew where the exits were). Phillips got in the middle of the greatly disparately-sized groups and started pounding on a drum, believing that it would be a distraction. Instead, the teens just made fun of Phillips, engaging in racist caricaturing before chanting their school “fight” song, obviously not meant to be suggest that they had any sensitivity to the social issues involved. And there was Sandmann, who decided to do a face-plant with Phillips, who had said or done nothing at except beat on his drum.

Sandmann’s arrogant, smirking face should not be confused with his coached, self-serving interview on NBC. I believe Phillip’s account of the going’s on because they more closely match the images. Why anyone would be “confused” about how to interpret events even after viewing all of the video evidence is mystifying. At the end of the day, what we have here are white teens from socially and economically privileged backgrounds who will have suffered at worst momentary embarrassment, and the representatives of two minority groups who will go back to being mostly marginalized. The fact that the local bishop “apologized” to the Sandmann, and his parents play to sue the media for “libel” again shows the arrogance and conceit of white America, especially those on the privileged side of the street.

As if there isn’t enough justification to condemn the behavior of Sandmann and his classmates, there is the matter of “microaggression” in evidence. Microaggression is defined as “a statement, action, or incident regarded as an instance of indirect, subtle, or unintentional discrimination against members of a marginalized group such as a racial or ethnic minority.” Of course there was nothing “subtle” about the behavior the teens in question, but that of MAGA hat-wearing Sandmann is certainly subject to “interpretation.” His in-your-face smirking signaled a white power play, of what you do is meaningless—you are nothing to me.

As a person who “looks ‘Mexican’” I am all too familiar with the concept of microaggression, and frankly from all sides and angles. I am a native-born citizen have a university degree, I served seven years in the Army, have worked almost every day of my life, yet I experience microaggressions every day, from any race, gender, education and socio/economic level. Fear, paranoia, stereotyping, prejudice—the expression of these can be endless, from one’s facial expression, to “red flag” fear of “car prowling,” security people being notified because you don’t look like you “belong,” deliberate rudeness meant to discomfit, people asking you if you have any drugs to sell (since “Mexicans” are assumed to be drug dealers), rules being changed because they didn’t accounted for people “like you,” people being physically intimidating because it is “OK” to beat people like you up who “don’t belong,” people telling ugly jokes that they say are not “racist” because other people don’t think they are “racist," people just “checking up” on you because “people like you” can’t be trusted, or selectively redefining what "normal" behavior is.

I could go on and on with this; we live in a country where superficiality is as important as substance--we only need to observe on Fox News that blonde, long-legged "beautiful" people are as cruel and contemptible as any. But the point is that Sandmann was showing (despite his and his apologists’ denials) “aggression” toward a man who was posing no “threat” to his privileged position in society—and not only that, he was confirming this position by his arrogant defiance of racial and social justice.