racist cartoon? or not?

[I.P.Freely]

I would portray an American like this,would this be racist

 

[I.P.Freely]

Don't know about

cartoon JIMROMENESKO.COM

I would say no although I was wondering what if that was native Americans sitting down to a meal and illegal European immigrants crawling through the window.

Yeah, because you are stupid enough to think that the Amerindian tribes had immigration laws and policies.

Dear Jim: I see what you're saying. And who knows if the people inside the house are part Native American, Black or whatever.

but HONESTLY the cartoon is drawn for people to interpret by the most common associations.

Anyone can look at that and tell it is going to be interpreted as Latino's coming through the window
while the family inside is going to be interpreted as White.

What the cartoonist could have shown is the people, perhaps a church dinner of mixed company,
fighting over who is standing or skipping in line to get turkey dinner while the guests look dejected.
And in the background, gangs and traffickers with guns
are robbing the cash box and stealing all the money behind their backs while they're distracted.

So this would make a distinction between the problems with breaking the rules by nonviolent offenders,
which is still a problem and unfair to people who do things legally, like wait in line and don't overstay visas,
vs.
the violent dangerous offenders who are taking advantage of the backlog and the lack of consistent enforcement.

racism, to distinguish one race as inferior or superior to another race. Which race was portrayed with the hole in the shoe and why?

Are you serious? You're actually suggesting that if one has a hole in one's shoe it's a product of their race?? Do various races have different levels of shoes?

Call me crazy but far as I know a hole in the shoe means you've done more walking than shoe-buying. I can't see how that's related to race. I can see how it might be related to class, but that's not the question here.

It is there to demean the person, to show that in your country he is valueless. So the artist is claiming the superiority of the indigenous race.

That's not what I get from the cartoon. To me the main point is that they are coming in uninvited.....or at least uninvited by the family. But they are invited by BHO.

As for your interpretation of the hole in the shoe......that's what it is....your interpretation.

In the cartoon above how would you interpret the the big nose on the wall street banker?

He is probably suppose to be Jewish.

Why?

 

[emilynghiem]

cartoon JIMROMENESKO.COM

I would say no although I was wondering what if that was native Americans sitting down to a meal and illegal European immigrants crawling through the window.

Yeah, because you are stupid enough to think that the Amerindian tribes had immigration laws and policies.

Dear Jim: I see what you're saying. And who knows if the people inside the house are part Native American, Black or whatever.

but HONESTLY the cartoon is drawn for people to interpret by the most common associations.

Anyone can look at that and tell it is going to be interpreted as Latino's coming through the window
while the family inside is going to be interpreted as White.

What the cartoonist could have shown is the people, perhaps a church dinner of mixed company,
fighting over who is standing or skipping in line to get turkey dinner while the guests look dejected.
And in the background, gangs and traffickers with guns
are robbing the cash box and stealing all the money behind their backs while they're distracted.

So this would make a distinction between the problems with breaking the rules by nonviolent offenders,
which is still a problem and unfair to people who do things legally, like wait in line and don't overstay visas,
vs.
the violent dangerous offenders who are taking advantage of the backlog and the lack of consistent enforcement.

It is just a fucking cartoon, not a doctoral dissertation.

The left is crying 'racism!' at every turn. The NFL is racist, Charlie Brown is racist. JFK was racist. etc.

IT is all ideology based bull shit.

I think I would be more alarmed at the racial implication about white middle class.
To me, what stands out the most is to paint the stereotype of middle-class whites thinking that way!

 

[emilynghiem]

In the cartoon above how would you interpret the the big nose on the wall street banker?

He is probably suppose to be Jewish.

Why?

It says on the sign that this is the US
in the hands of the Jews? That the cartoonist
is making it clear he is paralleling the Jews of
the past with the Jewish business interests of that time?

[I guess the equivalent cartoon I might draw today
is paralleling the Reformation against the Church authorities clearing people of sins for money
with the Reform of Govt where lawyers and politicians clear crooks of crimes for money.
That would not have any racial tones, and it's socially accepted to pick on lawyers as a group]

 

[JoeMoma]

Don't know about

cartoon JIMROMENESKO.COM

I would say no although I was wondering what if that was native Americans sitting down to a meal and illegal European immigrants crawling through the window.

Yeah, because you are stupid enough to think that the Amerindian tribes had immigration laws and policies.

Dear Jim: I see what you're saying. And who knows if the people inside the house are part Native American, Black or whatever.

but HONESTLY the cartoon is drawn for people to interpret by the most common associations.

Anyone can look at that and tell it is going to be interpreted as Latino's coming through the window
while the family inside is going to be interpreted as White.

What the cartoonist could have shown is the people, perhaps a church dinner of mixed company,
fighting over who is standing or skipping in line to get turkey dinner while the guests look dejected.
And in the background, gangs and traffickers with guns
are robbing the cash box and stealing all the money behind their backs while they're distracted.

So this would make a distinction between the problems with breaking the rules by nonviolent offenders,
which is still a problem and unfair to people who do things legally, like wait in line and don't overstay visas,
vs.
the violent dangerous offenders who are taking advantage of the backlog and the lack of consistent enforcement.

Are you serious? You're actually suggesting that if one has a hole in one's shoe it's a product of their race?? Do various races have different levels of shoes?

Call me crazy but far as I know a hole in the shoe means you've done more walking than shoe-buying. I can't see how that's related to race. I can see how it might be related to class, but that's not the question here.

It is there to demean the person, to show that in your country he is valueless. So the artist is claiming the superiority of the indigenous race.

That's not what I get from the cartoon. To me the main point is that they are coming in uninvited.....or at least uninvited by the family. But they are invited by BHO.

As for your interpretation of the hole in the shoe......that's what it is....your interpretation.

In the cartoon above how would you interpret the the big nose on the wall street banker?

He is probably suppose to be Jewish.

Why?

Historical Context.

Are you trying to say that a hole in a Mexican's shoe has a historical context of showing Mexicans (or perhaps Hispanics) as being inferior? I know of no such historical context. To me it simply shows the Mexicans as being poor.

 

[I.P.Freely]

cartoon JIMROMENESKO.COM

I would say no although I was wondering what if that was native Americans sitting down to a meal and illegal European immigrants crawling through the window.

Yeah, because you are stupid enough to think that the Amerindian tribes had immigration laws and policies.

Dear Jim: I see what you're saying. And who knows if the people inside the house are part Native American, Black or whatever.

but HONESTLY the cartoon is drawn for people to interpret by the most common associations.

Anyone can look at that and tell it is going to be interpreted as Latino's coming through the window
while the family inside is going to be interpreted as White.

What the cartoonist could have shown is the people, perhaps a church dinner of mixed company,
fighting over who is standing or skipping in line to get turkey dinner while the guests look dejected.
And in the background, gangs and traffickers with guns
are robbing the cash box and stealing all the money behind their backs while they're distracted.

So this would make a distinction between the problems with breaking the rules by nonviolent offenders,
which is still a problem and unfair to people who do things legally, like wait in line and don't overstay visas,
vs.
the violent dangerous offenders who are taking advantage of the backlog and the lack of consistent enforcement.

It is just a fucking cartoon, not a doctoral dissertation.

The left is crying 'racism!' at every turn. The NFL is racist, Charlie Brown is racist. JFK was racist. etc.

IT is all ideology based bull shit.

I think I would be more alarmed at the racial implication about white middle class.
To me, what stands out the most is to paint the stereotype of middle-class whites thinking that way!

In the cartoon above how would you interpret the the big nose on the wall street banker?

He is probably suppose to be Jewish.

Why?

It says on the sign that this is the US
in the hands of the Jews? That the cartoonist
is making it clear he is paralleling the Jews of
the past with the Jewish business interests of that time?

[I guess the equivalent cartoon I might draw today
is paralleling the Reformation against the Church authorities clearing people of sins for money
with the Reform of Govt where lawyers and politicians clear crooks of crimes for money.
That would not have any racial tones, and it's socially accepted to pick on lawyers as a group]

so it would have nothing to do with his nose?

 

[JimBowie1958]

Don't know about

I would say no although I was wondering what if that was native Americans sitting down to a meal and illegal European immigrants crawling through the window.

Yeah, because you are stupid enough to think that the Amerindian tribes had immigration laws and policies.

Dear Jim: I see what you're saying. And who knows if the people inside the house are part Native American, Black or whatever.

but HONESTLY the cartoon is drawn for people to interpret by the most common associations.

Anyone can look at that and tell it is going to be interpreted as Latino's coming through the window
while the family inside is going to be interpreted as White.

What the cartoonist could have shown is the people, perhaps a church dinner of mixed company,
fighting over who is standing or skipping in line to get turkey dinner while the guests look dejected.
And in the background, gangs and traffickers with guns
are robbing the cash box and stealing all the money behind their backs while they're distracted.

So this would make a distinction between the problems with breaking the rules by nonviolent offenders,
which is still a problem and unfair to people who do things legally, like wait in line and don't overstay visas,
vs.
the violent dangerous offenders who are taking advantage of the backlog and the lack of consistent enforcement.

It is there to demean the person, to show that in your country he is valueless. So the artist is claiming the superiority of the indigenous race.

That's not what I get from the cartoon. To me the main point is that they are coming in uninvited.....or at least uninvited by the family. But they are invited by BHO.

As for your interpretation of the hole in the shoe......that's what it is....your interpretation.

In the cartoon above how would you interpret the the big nose on the wall street banker?

He is probably suppose to be Jewish.

Why?

Historical Context.

Are you trying to say that a hole in a Mexican's shoe has a historical context of showing Mexicans (or perhaps Hispanics) as being inferior? I know of no such historical context. To me it simply shows the Mexicans as being poor.

We are talking about a stupid ass cartoon instead of the steady growth in Imperial Presidential power.

Leftist thugs win again while GOP takes the bait.

 

[I.P.Freely]

Don't know about

Yeah, because you are stupid enough to think that the Amerindian tribes had immigration laws and policies.

Dear Jim: I see what you're saying. And who knows if the people inside the house are part Native American, Black or whatever.

but HONESTLY the cartoon is drawn for people to interpret by the most common associations.

Anyone can look at that and tell it is going to be interpreted as Latino's coming through the window
while the family inside is going to be interpreted as White.

What the cartoonist could have shown is the people, perhaps a church dinner of mixed company,
fighting over who is standing or skipping in line to get turkey dinner while the guests look dejected.
And in the background, gangs and traffickers with guns
are robbing the cash box and stealing all the money behind their backs while they're distracted.

So this would make a distinction between the problems with breaking the rules by nonviolent offenders,
which is still a problem and unfair to people who do things legally, like wait in line and don't overstay visas,
vs.
the violent dangerous offenders who are taking advantage of the backlog and the lack of consistent enforcement.

That's not what I get from the cartoon. To me the main point is that they are coming in uninvited.....or at least uninvited by the family. But they are invited by BHO.

As for your interpretation of the hole in the shoe......that's what it is....your interpretation.

In the cartoon above how would you interpret the the big nose on the wall street banker?

He is probably suppose to be Jewish.

Why?

Historical Context.

Are you trying to say that a hole in a Mexican's shoe has a historical context of showing Mexicans (or perhaps Hispanics) as being inferior? I know of no such historical context. To me it simply shows the Mexicans as being poor.

We are talking about a stupid ass cartoon instead of the steady growth in Imperial Presidential power.

Leftist thugs win again while GOP takes the bait.

Didn't Herbert Wanker Bush pull the same stroke when he was POTUS

 

[emilynghiem]

Don't know about

Yeah, because you are stupid enough to think that the Amerindian tribes had immigration laws and policies.

Dear Jim: I see what you're saying. And who knows if the people inside the house are part Native American, Black or whatever.

but HONESTLY the cartoon is drawn for people to interpret by the most common associations.

Anyone can look at that and tell it is going to be interpreted as Latino's coming through the window
while the family inside is going to be interpreted as White.

What the cartoonist could have shown is the people, perhaps a church dinner of mixed company,
fighting over who is standing or skipping in line to get turkey dinner while the guests look dejected.
And in the background, gangs and traffickers with guns
are robbing the cash box and stealing all the money behind their backs while they're distracted.

So this would make a distinction between the problems with breaking the rules by nonviolent offenders,
which is still a problem and unfair to people who do things legally, like wait in line and don't overstay visas,
vs.
the violent dangerous offenders who are taking advantage of the backlog and the lack of consistent enforcement.

That's not what I get from the cartoon. To me the main point is that they are coming in uninvited.....or at least uninvited by the family. But they are invited by BHO.

As for your interpretation of the hole in the shoe......that's what it is....your interpretation.

In the cartoon above how would you interpret the the big nose on the wall street banker?

He is probably suppose to be Jewish.

Why?

Historical Context.

Are you trying to say that a hole in a Mexican's shoe has a historical context of showing Mexicans (or perhaps Hispanics) as being inferior? I know of no such historical context. To me it simply shows the Mexicans as being poor.

We are talking about a stupid ass cartoon instead of the steady growth in Imperial Presidential power.

Leftist thugs win again while GOP takes the bait.

Dear Jim: No, you don't have to lynch anyone over it to
be honest and notice that the family inside the house is all White
and the people outside the window have Brown skin.

Of course that represents race. Anyone can see that it does.
But I agree, there is no reason to turn this into a liberal lynch fest.

You are right that this is wrong to abuse it as bait for overblowing it, and projecting blame everywhere which way,
but yes, the cartoon does play on racial representation. I'm not going to deny that, and that the
cartoonist did deliberately choose to portray the family inside as White skinned and the family outside as Brown skinned.

Now if you want to get analytical about it,
you can point out that EVERY culture has its issues
with fairskinned members associated with upper class who get to stay indoors
and the darker skinned members associated with working class or field workers who labor manually.

this is found in the Asian cultures,
the Latino and the Black. So you can say it is a
class division between rich and poor
and not just Europeans.

But still you have the representation of the White as the middle class
and the Brown as the working poor. so it is still tying class division with skin color.

it doesn't have to mean European white,
it can represent middle class family indoors
vs lower class working poor outside.

 

[LoneLaugher]

"racist cartoon? or not?"

It's not 'racist,' it is ignorant, wrong, and fear-mongering.

Why would anyone want over supposed five million new workers when we have so many Americans not working?

They aren't new workers. They currently have jobs. That is why they came in the first place.

And that job would be held by an American if Obama would enforce the fucking laws, dimwit.

No it wouldn't. Your outlook on life is so simple it borders on being precious.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Don't know about

cartoon JIMROMENESKO.COM

I would say no although I was wondering what if that was native Americans sitting down to a meal and illegal European immigrants crawling through the window.

Yeah, because you are stupid enough to think that the Amerindian tribes had immigration laws and policies.

Dear Jim: I see what you're saying. And who knows if the people inside the house are part Native American, Black or whatever.

but HONESTLY the cartoon is drawn for people to interpret by the most common associations.

Anyone can look at that and tell it is going to be interpreted as Latino's coming through the window
while the family inside is going to be interpreted as White.

What the cartoonist could have shown is the people, perhaps a church dinner of mixed company,
fighting over who is standing or skipping in line to get turkey dinner while the guests look dejected.
And in the background, gangs and traffickers with guns
are robbing the cash box and stealing all the money behind their backs while they're distracted.

So this would make a distinction between the problems with breaking the rules by nonviolent offenders,
which is still a problem and unfair to people who do things legally, like wait in line and don't overstay visas,
vs.
the violent dangerous offenders who are taking advantage of the backlog and the lack of consistent enforcement.

racism, to distinguish one race as inferior or superior to another race. Which race was portrayed with the hole in the shoe and why?

Are you serious? You're actually suggesting that if one has a hole in one's shoe it's a product of their race?? Do various races have different levels of shoes?

Call me crazy but far as I know a hole in the shoe means you've done more walking than shoe-buying. I can't see how that's related to race. I can see how it might be related to class, but that's not the question here.

It is there to demean the person, to show that in your country he is valueless. So the artist is claiming the superiority of the indigenous race.

That's not what I get from the cartoon. To me the main point is that they are coming in uninvited.....or at least uninvited by the family. But they are invited by BHO.

As for your interpretation of the hole in the shoe......that's what it is....your interpretation.

In the cartoon above how would you interpret the the big nose on the wall street banker?

He is probably suppose to be Jewish.

...supposed to be......

Back to third grade with you. Listen this time around.

 

[Jarlaxle]

He should've just called them wetbacks. Since he's engaging in completely stereotyping all hispanic people why not?

We're talking about illegals regardless of nationality. But you on the left including dumb ass obama it's all about Mexicans.

That cartoon is all about Mexicans. Hell it would've been less racist if the Mexican dad had been wearing a sombrero. And the kids smiling behind him?

Despicable.

Illegal is illegal regradless if they are Mexicans Russians or ISLAMIC STATE.

Sure. That doesn't mean the cartoonist's comic wasn't shameful. A Mexican in a flannel shirt with a Speedy Gonzalez Mustache crawling in through a window while his children (portrayed as bad guys) smile and wave behind him.

That's not classy.

No...but it's damn funny. (Well, it would be funnier if it wasn't true...)

 

[bigrebnc1775]

"racist cartoon? or not?"

It's not 'racist,' it is ignorant, wrong, and fear-mongering.

Why would anyone want over supposed five million new workers when we have so many Americans not working?

They aren't new workers. They currently have jobs. That is why they came in the first place.

And that job would be held by an American if Obama would enforce the fucking laws, dimwit.

bless his heart.

 

[JoeMoma]

Don't know about

cartoon JIMROMENESKO.COM

I would say no although I was wondering what if that was native Americans sitting down to a meal and illegal European immigrants crawling through the window.

Yeah, because you are stupid enough to think that the Amerindian tribes had immigration laws and policies.

Dear Jim: I see what you're saying. And who knows if the people inside the house are part Native American, Black or whatever.

but HONESTLY the cartoon is drawn for people to interpret by the most common associations.

Anyone can look at that and tell it is going to be interpreted as Latino's coming through the window
while the family inside is going to be interpreted as White.

What the cartoonist could have shown is the people, perhaps a church dinner of mixed company,
fighting over who is standing or skipping in line to get turkey dinner while the guests look dejected.
And in the background, gangs and traffickers with guns
are robbing the cash box and stealing all the money behind their backs while they're distracted.

So this would make a distinction between the problems with breaking the rules by nonviolent offenders,
which is still a problem and unfair to people who do things legally, like wait in line and don't overstay visas,
vs.
the violent dangerous offenders who are taking advantage of the backlog and the lack of consistent enforcement.

Are you serious? You're actually suggesting that if one has a hole in one's shoe it's a product of their race?? Do various races have different levels of shoes?

Call me crazy but far as I know a hole in the shoe means you've done more walking than shoe-buying. I can't see how that's related to race. I can see how it might be related to class, but that's not the question here.

It is there to demean the person, to show that in your country he is valueless. So the artist is claiming the superiority of the indigenous race.

That's not what I get from the cartoon. To me the main point is that they are coming in uninvited.....or at least uninvited by the family. But they are invited by BHO.

As for your interpretation of the hole in the shoe......that's what it is....your interpretation.

In the cartoon above how would you interpret the the big nose on the wall street banker?

He is probably suppose to be Jewish.

...supposed to be......

Back to third grade with you. Listen this time around.

Thank you!

And you are welcome! I bet correcting the millions of grammatical errors to be found on a message board is great therapy for your OCD. Every day is an Easter Egg hunt.

 

[Pogo]

cartoon JIMROMENESKO.COM

I would say no although I was wondering what if that was native Americans sitting down to a meal and illegal European immigrants crawling through the window.

Yeah, because you are stupid enough to think that the Amerindian tribes had immigration laws and policies.

Dear Jim: I see what you're saying. And who knows if the people inside the house are part Native American, Black or whatever.

but HONESTLY the cartoon is drawn for people to interpret by the most common associations.

Anyone can look at that and tell it is going to be interpreted as Latino's coming through the window
while the family inside is going to be interpreted as White.

What the cartoonist could have shown is the people, perhaps a church dinner of mixed company,
fighting over who is standing or skipping in line to get turkey dinner while the guests look dejected.
And in the background, gangs and traffickers with guns
are robbing the cash box and stealing all the money behind their backs while they're distracted.

So this would make a distinction between the problems with breaking the rules by nonviolent offenders,
which is still a problem and unfair to people who do things legally, like wait in line and don't overstay visas,
vs.
the violent dangerous offenders who are taking advantage of the backlog and the lack of consistent enforcement.

It is just a fucking cartoon, not a doctoral dissertation.

The left is crying 'racism!' at every turn. The NFL is racist, Charlie Brown is racist. JFK was racist. etc.

IT is all ideology based bull shit.

I think I would be more alarmed at the racial implication about white middle class.
To me, what stands out the most is to paint the stereotype of middle-class whites thinking that way!

That's true but there's no causal connection stated, i.e. there's no statement that "they think/act this way specifically because they are white". And that's why it's a cultural stereotype rather than racism.

 

[Pogo]

Quick question...................how would you people react if those climbing into the window were wearing Pilgrim clothing, and the person holding the turkey was standing there in a loincloth and had feathers weaved into their hair like many Native American braves?

It would be a much more accurate depiction.

It would be poignantly spot-on accurate. But it still wouldn't be making a case that either party was acting out of their race as a causation. That's why it can't be described as racist.

racism, to distinguish one race as inferior or superior to another race. Which race was portrayed with the hole in the shoe and why?

Are you serious? You're actually suggesting that if one has a hole in one's shoe it's a product of their race?? Do various races have different levels of shoes?

Call me crazy but far as I know a hole in the shoe means you've done more walking than shoe-buying. I can't see how that's related to race. I can see how it might be related to class, but that's not the question here.

It is there to demean the person, to show that in your country he is valueless. So the artist is claiming the superiority of the indigenous race.

Again, while the shoe-hole does designate a social class, there's no equation there to race --- even if "Mexican" were a race, which it isn't.

Is it not possible for a white, black, brown, yellow or red person to have a hole in his shoe, given a low social class? Of course it is. Shoe holes are in no way specific to race, color creed, gender or national origin. You don't have a hole in your shoe because you're brown. If that were the case there could be no rich brown people.

Does anyone, even in the stereotype, imagine that rich Mexicans are lining up to break the border? Of course not. Now apply that to any stereotype of the past: did Ellis Island see a stream immigrants because they were rich in Italy or Ireland or Poland? Did the West take in rich Chinese? Clearly race is not the commonality here; class is.

So yes the cartoon device of the shoe-hole is there to designate the "valueless" person. But nowhere does it claim that that is a result of his race.

 

[emilynghiem]

I would say no although I was wondering what if that was native Americans sitting down to a meal and illegal European immigrants crawling through the window.

Yeah, because you are stupid enough to think that the Amerindian tribes had immigration laws and policies.

Dear Jim: I see what you're saying. And who knows if the people inside the house are part Native American, Black or whatever.

but HONESTLY the cartoon is drawn for people to interpret by the most common associations.

Anyone can look at that and tell it is going to be interpreted as Latino's coming through the window
while the family inside is going to be interpreted as White.

What the cartoonist could have shown is the people, perhaps a church dinner of mixed company,
fighting over who is standing or skipping in line to get turkey dinner while the guests look dejected.
And in the background, gangs and traffickers with guns
are robbing the cash box and stealing all the money behind their backs while they're distracted.

So this would make a distinction between the problems with breaking the rules by nonviolent offenders,
which is still a problem and unfair to people who do things legally, like wait in line and don't overstay visas,
vs.
the violent dangerous offenders who are taking advantage of the backlog and the lack of consistent enforcement.

It is just a fucking cartoon, not a doctoral dissertation.

The left is crying 'racism!' at every turn. The NFL is racist, Charlie Brown is racist. JFK was racist. etc.

IT is all ideology based bull shit.

I think I would be more alarmed at the racial implication about white middle class.
To me, what stands out the most is to paint the stereotype of middle-class whites thinking that way!

That's true but there's no causal connection stated, i.e. there's no statement that "they think/act this way specifically because they are white". And that's why it's a cultural stereotype rather than racism.

OK you can call it a stereotype, that's close enough.
My point is the cartoonist knew the average audience is going to SEE that as White/Brown.
So it does play on RACIAL stereotypes, knowing that's going to be the reaction.

 

[emilynghiem]

Quick question...................how would you people react if those climbing into the window were wearing Pilgrim clothing, and the person holding the turkey was standing there in a loincloth and had feathers weaved into their hair like many Native American braves?

It would be a much more accurate depiction.

It would be poignantly spot-on accurate. But it still wouldn't be making a case that either party was acting out of their race as a causation. That's why it can't be described as racist.

racism, to distinguish one race as inferior or superior to another race. Which race was portrayed with the hole in the shoe and why?

Are you serious? You're actually suggesting that if one has a hole in one's shoe it's a product of their race?? Do various races have different levels of shoes?

Call me crazy but far as I know a hole in the shoe means you've done more walking than shoe-buying. I can't see how that's related to race. I can see how it might be related to class, but that's not the question here.

It is there to demean the person, to show that in your country he is valueless. So the artist is claiming the superiority of the indigenous race.

Again, while the shoe-hole does designate a social class, there's no equation there to race --- even if "Mexican" were a race, which it isn't.

Is it not possible for a white, black, brown, yellow or red person to have a hole in his shoe, given a low social class? Of course it is. Shoe holes are in no way specific to race, color creed, gender or national origin. You don't have a hole in your shoe because you're brown. If that were the case there could be no rich brown people.

Does anyone, even in the stereotype, imagine that rich Mexicans are lining up to break the border? Of course not. Now apply that to any stereotype of the past: did Ellis Island see a stream immigrants because they were rich in Italy or Ireland or Poland? Did the West take in rich Chinese? Clearly race is not the commonality here; class is.

So yes the cartoon device of the shoe-hole is there to designate the "valueless" person. But nowhere does it claim that that is a result of his race.

Dear Pogo: I didn't even see whatever this hole in the shoe business is.
I saw the hat which is going to be associated with workers and day laborers.

Maybe it's because I live in Houston, and this issue of how to protect workers even though some are of illegal
status is prominent, and the City policy is to leave the federal laws to the Feds and not have the local police go there.
Houston is criticized as a sanctuary city for illegal labor and also drug and human trafficking, so I hear all the complaints.

Sure, if other people live in a region where it's the image of Middle Eastern terrorists in their minds first,
they might see that coming through the window.

Most people I know would ASSOCIATE the depiction of the people outside
with day laborers and Mexican workers, because that IS the ongoing stereotype, the most predominant issue people discuss.

So the Cartoon WAS drawn KNOWING it would trigger THAT association.
And the family inside is GOING to be associated with "White Middle Class"

That is going to be the first and strongest association because that is where the debate is focused in people's minds and the media. The cartoonist being experienced in politics KNEW how this would be taken, or should have known better, and deliberately drew it that way.

If the stereotypes weren't intended, they were certainly played upon, KNOWING that's what would be associated first with those images.
=============================================================
Pogo, when we were back in the day of Clinton, Lewinsky, and the whole scandal,
I saw a cartoon contest to come up with a caption for two men: one with grey hair who "could resemble" Bill Clinton, sitting across from someone who "looked like Fidel Castro" holding up a cigar. Nothing in that cartoon said Castro or Clinton,
but everyone knows that cigars are Associated with Cuba. It didn't say Cuba but the uniform on the man and the hat LOOKED like Castro's. Of Course people are going to make the leap and say it is picking on Clinton and the infamous cigar.

You can blame that on the audience for thinking that, but Clearly the cartoonist KNEW those associations were going to be made, even though NOTHING was stated at all, and the figures could be anyone. it was left to the viewers to come up with the caption.

Are you going to blame it on the viewers for interpreting that as Clinton and Castro? Just because nothing was stated?
clearly the intent of the cartoonist was to make those insinuations.

Maybe this cartoonist should have left it multiple choice, and let people pick which caption they wanted to read!
That way it would be their fault if they chose the stereotypical ones instead of the analytical alternatives you offer!

(incidentally the caption I posted for the cigar cartoon was "Look at what I bought on ebay. Signed by Lewinsky!"
Again, the two people could be anyone, and not necessarily Clinton and Castro, but it is funnier to think it was them.)

 

[Howey]

My point is the cartoonist knew the average audience is going to SEE that as White/Brown.
So it does play on RACIAL stereotypes, knowing that's going to be the reaction.

Boy...you're a real smarties, aintcha? That's the job of a cartoonist. Relay a message (in this case a racist one) to his core readership.

duh

 

[Ravi]

White people acting superior. Yeah, it appears to be bigoted if not downright racist.