[Kathy G. is a shrill feminist, bleeding heart liberal, hardcore policy wonk, political junkie, ardent cinephile, and lover of 19th century novels. She lives in Chicago with her husband and two loveable mutts, where she is attempting, amidst numerous diverting distractions, to complete a Ph.D. in the social sciences.]

Okay, there's one more piece of Wieseltier-bashing I've got to get out of my system, and it concerns this pompous pronouncement he made about Obama's victory:

"Americans who were not moved by what happened the other night were in some way un-American. A dry eye was a misinterpretation of American history."

Here's what I've got to say about that: could each and every person who is ever tempted to invoke the epithet "anti-American" please put a sock in it, now and forever?

I really, really hate the term "anti-American." It is meaningless. Conservatives use it in a truly vicious way to attempt to describe liberal ideas they disapprove of. The implication is that any liberal who supports such and such an idea is the equivalent of a fifth columnist colluding with enemy foreign nationals to destroy cherished American institutions and values.

Liberals use it as well, in a way that is not quite as slimy, but is nevertheless plenty dubious. Liberals tend to use it as shorthand for "intolerant" or "undemocratic" or for being against any of the rights -- freedom of speech, freedom of speech, freedom of religion, the right to fair a trial, etc. -- enshrined in the Constitution.

As I said, liberals' use of the word tends not to be quite as sleazy as conservatives, but it's still deeply offensive. I object to it on a number of levels. First of all, as I said, it's meaningless. In what sense is being intolerant, or undemocratic, or anti-civil liberties, "un-American"? Sorry, but this country has a long, deep, strong, vibrant tradition of being all of those things. The U.S. of A. was founded on slavery and genocide, after all. "Great" Americans have supported such abominations as imperialism (Teddy Roosevelt), interning the Japanese (FDR) and McCarthyism (Ronald Reagan). The things liberals have hated about America are every bit as much a part of it as the things we've loved, and it's wrong to whitewash our historical legacy by implying that the bad things are somehow other than American..

Secondly, the term "un-American" implies that the person supporting the "un-American" position is a traitor colluding with foreign nationals to betray their fellow citizens. That's a truly vile smear, because it's almost never true -- even when you're talking about the most far right wingnuts or the most far left moonbats. Many people have political viewpoints that many others may (justifiably) feel are extreme, offensive, and disgusting. But that doesn't make those viewpoints "un-American," and it's almost always inaccurate and unjust to try to discredit them by describing them that way.

Thirdly, I especially hate it when liberals use the term "un-American." Right wingers are often such intolerant thugs than I basically expect this shit, coming from them. Not that it makes it okay -- it's still thoroughly nauseating for them to use it. I think part of the reason liberals like to use the term is that they hope to reclaim it, to take the sting out of it, to use it to argue that there are many ways to see America, and that the right-wing attempts to define America in a reactionary, jingoistic way are false. And while that is one sense admirable, I think it's wrong, because when you try to determine what is or is not essentially American, ultimately you end up stooping to wingnuts' simplistic, intolerant, bigoted level.

Wieseltier's use of "un-American" in the passage quoted above is a perfect example of deploying the term in a "liberal" sense. He's saying if you weren't in some way moved by Obama's victory, you're not really American -- because, presumably, any "real" American would applaud the progress in race relations that the election of our first African-American president undoubtedly represents.

I beg to differ.

First of all, I resent the implication that racism is somehow not a part of America. On the contrary, it's one of the deepest strains in our history. Racism has indelibly stained our legacy and left its mark on every major institution of our society. Don't misunderstand me -- anti-racism throughout our history has been every bit as important, and every bit as American as well. But that doesn't mean that racist America is somehow something other than America.

Secondly, I really, really hate the heavy-handed bullying inherent in the term "un-American," the underlying premise of "if you disagree with me, you have no right to call yourself an American, and you must really hate this country and be plotting its destruction." That premise is of course absurd, and accusing someone of being un-American is absurd as well -- or would be, if the accusation still didn't have such considerable power. And let there be no doubt -- it does.

The "un-American" charge remains potent, and has frequently been leveled against liberals with great success. The charge has not only caused liberals to lose elections, but it's also led to their being humiliated, destroyed, discredited, and hounded out of polite society and public life. Yes, it is that powerful -- which is why so many of us were furious when John McCain, Sarah Palin, and others began hurling this charge against Barack Obama. We feared that these charges, baseless as they were, would stick, causing voters to distrust Obama and vote against him. These kinds of charges often bypass rational thought and go straight to everyone's lizard brain.

So, in contrast to Wieseltier, here's what I have to say to anyone who wasn't moved by Obama's election: that is your God-given right.

Paul Krugman wrote today, "If the election of our first African-American president didn’t stir you, if it didn’t leave you teary-eyed and proud of your country, there’s something wrong with you." And, indeed, I agree with him whole-heartedly. If you weren't touched by the extraordinary event that occurred this Tuesday past, you probably have a hole where your soul should be.

And yet . . . I wouldn't call you un-American. You might be a racist, of course. Or -- in a more charitable interpretation -- maybe you're not a racist, but you are a hard-core conservative who despises Obama's politics and policies and honestly believes he will be a disaster for this country -- so much so that you harbor no warm feelings whatsoever about the man's ascension to the presidency. Not even where the historic, anti-racist nature of his victory is concerned.

If you're that conservative, and that resolutely anti-Obama, then I believe you are profoundly wrong, and I sincerely hope to see your brand of politics weakened and marginalized to the greatest extent possible. But I don't believe you are under any obligation to share my joy at his election, or even feel moved by the victory for racial equality it represents. I mean, if you weren't moved at least a little, I have a hard time imagining that I would like you very much. At minimum, I'd think you were profoundly, infuriatingly, world historically wrong. And I might also believe you're a huge asshole.

But no -- you're not un-American. Hardly.