Click amount to donate direct to CounterPunch
  • $25
  • $50
  • $100
  • $500
  • $other
  • use PayPal
Please Support CounterPunch’s Annual Fund Drive
We don’t run corporate ads. We don’t shake our readers down for money every month or every quarter like some other sites out there. We only ask you once a year, but when we ask we mean it. So, please, help as much as you can. We provide our site for free to all, but the bandwidth we pay to do so doesn’t come cheap. All contributions are tax-deductible.
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Reflections on a "Smokescreen"

Legal papers filed Monday in Ohio (and circulated quickly over the internet) allege that civil rights violations were deliberately used as “smokescreen” by Republican strategists who hoped to distract attention away from tactics of “traditional vote fraud” such as ballot stuffing. At first glance, this allegation appears to encourage a concept of Ohio vote fraud whitewashed of civil rights abuses, but a more careful reading is in order.

A more careful reading of the legal language suggests that civil rights abuses were important tactics for Republican victory, but their effects could not be precisely counted in advance. So in order to “control absolutely the outcome of the election,” Republican strategists also needed to engage in systematic vote fraud. In the end, alleged vote fraud guaranteed success of vote manipulations begun by alleged civil rights abuses, denying “minority” voters their preference for a Democratic President. In paragraph 86 of the petition, plaintiffs introduce their “smokescreen” charge:

“Unconstitutional discrimination served as a smokescreen to distract attention from vote fraud needed to control absolutely the outcome of the election. The discrimination served to decrease the vote for candidates Kerry and Connally by an amount which could not be known precisely in advance. The vote fraud served to control precisely in certain critical counties the certified vote for candidates Bush, Cheney, Kerry, Moyer, and Connally by amounts which (when taken in the aggregate) could be known in advance and which would be sufficient to control the outcome of the election.”

In Monday’s legal challenge to the Ohio election, Moss v. Bush, lawyers mirrored the logical priorities set by Republican strategists, focusing first on the precision of vote fraud allegations, then (in paragraph 104) turning attention to alleged civil rights abuses, which would be more difficult to quantify in terms of votes gained or lost. But we should be careful to go no further in our reflection of Republican “smokescreen” tactics. We should never allow ourselves to treat civil rights abuses as smokescreens, so long as the abuses are real.

The remarkable legal petition filed on behalf of Ohio plaintiffs relies heavily on exit poll data to make its case for election fraud. The exit polls demonstrate that the certified results in Ohio defied the will of “minority” voters. According to CNN’s version of the Ohio results, Kerry was the preferred candidate for 84 percent of African American voters and 65 percent of Latinos. White voters split in Bush’s favor, 56 percent to 44. On the basis of these facts, attorneys might well have argued that vote fraud served as a precise mechanism for denying civil rights in force and fact. Where vote fraud serves to disenfranchise the will of civil rights classes, doesn’t vote fraud itself contribute to “unconstitutional discrimination”?

While the “smokescreen” language in paragraph 86 seems to collude with Republican strategists in taking civil rights abuse as something apart from and less serious than vote fraudósomething to be “seen through”–a more careful reading of the petition suggests that lawyers for the plaintiff were not themselves treating civil rights abuses as mere “smokescreen.” In fact, if the plaintiffs are correct in their allegations, then the will of voters of color (in Ohio and elsewhere) was denied by a combination of precise and imprecise means. While mechanisms of discrimination and intimidation may be imprecise (call them brutish if you will) and difficult to remedy, vote fraud is more immediately calculable and easier to appeal.

Let the attorneys argue, if they want to, that a challenge made on grounds of civil rights or “unconstitutional discrimination” simply would not be treated with the urgency or seriousness as charges of vote fraud. Fine. Let the attorneys tell us that civil rights violations in the election process have limited remedies under the law as we know it. Fine. Such explanations would help to restore the centrality of civil rights as an aspiration of the coalition that just had their election stolen away.

The “smokescreen” language in the legal petition makes sense only if Republican strategists intended the spectacle of civil rights abuse to stand in public perception as the common sense account of everything that went wrong. But massive violations of civil rights and voter rights cannot be written off as smokescreens only, unless racism is the ultimate reality that we’re still trying to hide.

If the Ohio legal petition is correct in its allegations, then it portrays a process of deliberate manipulation that begins and ends with overt attempts to frustrate the will of classes of voters protected by civil rights. The ultimate remedy to such assaults should come in the form of a politically coherent coalition of civil rights voters, including white voters, who are resolved to win back the eroding high ground of a civil rights democracy in the USA.

GREG MOSES is editor of the Texas Civil Rights Review and author of Revolution of Conscience: Martin Luther King, Jr. and the Philosophy of Nonviolence. His chapter on civil rights under Clinton and Bush appears in Dime’s Worth of Difference, edited by Alexander Cockburn and Jeffrey St. Clair. He can be reached at: gmosesx@prodigy.net

 

More articles by:

Greg Moses writes about peace and Texas, but not always at the same time. He is author of Revolution of Conscience: Martin Luther King Jr. and the Philosophy of Nonviolence. As editor of the Texas Civil Rights Review he has written about racism faced by Black agriculturalists in Texas. He can be reached at gmosesx@gmail.com

October 15, 2018
Rob Urie
Climate Crisis is Upon Us
Conn Hallinan
Syria’s Chessboard
Patrick Cockburn
The Saudi Atrocities in Yemen are a Worse Story Than the Disappearance of Jamal Khashoggi
Sheldon Richman
Trump’s Middle East Delusions Persist
Justin T. McPhee
Uberrima Fides? Witness K, East Timor and the Economy of Espionage
Tom Gill
Spain’s Left Turn?
Jeff Cohen
Few Democrats Offer Alternatives to War-Weary Voters
Dean Baker
Corporate Debt Scares
Gary Leupp
The Khashoggi Affair and and the Anti-Iran Axis
Russell Mokhiber
Sarah Chayes Calls on West Virginians to Write In No More Manchins
Clark T. Scott
Acclimated Behaviorisms
Kary Love
Evolution of Religion
Colin Todhunter
From GM Potatoes to Glyphosate: Regulatory Delinquency and Toxic Agriculture
Binoy Kampmark
Evacuating Nauru: Médecins Sans Frontières and Australia’s Refugee Dilemma
Marvin Kitman
The Kitman Plan for Peace in the Middle East: Two Proposals
Weekend Edition
October 12, 2018
Friday - Sunday
Becky Grant
My History with Alexander Cockburn and The Financial Future of CounterPunch
Paul Street
For Popular Sovereignty, Beyond Absurdity
Nick Pemberton
The Colonial Pantsuit: What We Didn’t Want to Know About Africa
Jeffrey St. Clair
The Summer of No Return
Jeff Halper
Choices Made: From Zionist Settler Colonialism to Decolonization
Gary Leupp
The Khashoggi Incident: Trump’s Special Relationship With the Saudi Monarchy
Andrew Levine
Democrats: Boost, Knock, Enthuse
Barbara Kantz
The Deportation Crisis: Report From Long Island
Doug Johnson
Nate Silver and 538’s Measurable 3.5% Democratic Bias and the 2018 House Race
Gwen Carr
This Stops Today: Seeking Justice for My Son Eric Garner
Robert Hunziker
Peak Carbon Emissions By 2020, or Else!
Arshad Khan
Is There Hope on a World Warming at 1.5 Degrees Celsius?
David Rosen
Packing the Supreme Court in the 21stCentury
Brian Cloughley
Trump’s Threats of Death and Destruction
Joel A. Harrison
The Case for a Non-Profit Single-Payer Healthcare System
Ramzy Baroud
That Single Line of Blood: Nassir al-Mosabeh and Mohammed al-Durrah
Zhivko Illeieff
Addiction and Microtargeting: How “Social” Networks Expose us to Manipulation
ADRIAN KUZMINSKI
What is Truth?
Michael Doliner
Were the Constitution and the Bill of Rights a Mistake?
Victor Grossman
Cassandra Calls
Ralph E. Shaffer
Could Kavanaugh’s Confirmation Hearing Ended Differently?
Vanessa Cid
Our Everyday Family Separations
Walaa Al Ghussein
The Risks of Being a Journalist in Gaza
Ron Jacobs
Betrayal and Treachery—The Extremism of Moderates
James Munson
Identity Politics and the Ruling Class
P. Sainath
The Floods of Kerala: the Bank That Went Under…Almost
Ariel Dorfman
How We Roasted Donald Duck, Disney’s Agent of Imperialism
Joe Emersberger
Ecuadorian President Lenin Moreno’s Assault on Human Rights and Judicial Independence
Ed Meek
White Victimhood: Brett Kavanaugh and the New GOP Brand
Andrew McLean, MD
A Call for “Open Space”
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail