On Wednesday, Vivek Ramaswamy, a business leader and author of “Woke Inc.” who aspires to be the 2024 conservative Andrew Yang, was on “CNN This Morning.” The candidate and Lemon disagreed on whether the Civil War was fought to grant blacks constitutional rights, including the right to self-defense.
The TL;DR summary of Ramaswamy’s case is as follows: Before other rights could be exercised, blacks in the postbellum South needed to gain the right to self-defense, and the Second Amendment was a vital deterrent to racial violence.
Lemon’s case, in a nutshell: Because I’m black, your “explaining” of the Civil War to me inevitably fails unless you agree with me.
I know CNN Morning TV isn’t really a debate competition, but Ramaswamy won his first debate of the 2024 campaign.
The controversy erupted after Ramaswamy linked the Civil War and the years that followed with extending gun rights to emancipated blacks, referring to a notorious comment from then-Vice President Joe Biden from 2012. The Democratic Party, according to Ramaswamy, intends to put black people “back in chains” with gun control laws.
“The Civil War wasn’t fought for poor black people to have guns,” Lemon countered.
“Actually, you know, funny fact is, black people did not get to enjoy the other freedoms until their Second Amendment rights were secured,” Ramaswamy said. “And I think that that’s one of the lessons that–“
“But black people still aren’t allowed to enjoy the freedoms,” Lemon protested.
“I disagree with you on that, Don. I disagree with that. And I think you’re doing a disservice to our country by failing to recognize the fact that we have …” Ramaswamy responded.
“When you are in black skin and then you live in this country. Then you can disagree with me, but we’re not. You mentioned there are three different shades of melanin here?” Lemon said.
“For you to compare it to 1865, and 1964 is actually — I think it’s insulting to black people. It’s insulting to me as an African-American, I don’t want to sit here and argue with you because it’s infuriating for you to put that to put those things together. It’s not right. Your telling of history is wrong.”
Ramaswamy then inquired as to whatever aspect of his past was incorrect.
“The Civil War was fought. You’re making people think that the Civil War was fought for black people, only for black people to get guns. And for black people to–” Lemon said.
“A civil war was fought for black people in this country to get freedoms, a noble mission,” Ramaswamy countered. “And I think that even after we succeeded, we had to actually secure those freedoms.”
Lemon apparently had enough of his producers telling him something — which I’m assuming wasn’t, “Keep it up, Don, you’re doing superbly!” — after a little of back-and-forth that basically had Lemon saying he was upset and called Ramaswamy’s argument reductive.
“Please. I cannot keep a thought if you guys are talking in my ear. So hang on one second,” Lemon said, addressing his producers and taking his earpiece out. “So, to say that that black people — say what you said again?”
“Black people secured their freedoms after the Civil War — it is a historical fact, Don, just study it — only after their Second Amendment rights were secured,” Ramaswamy said.
Without Lemon’s earpiece, the two debated on the significance of the Second Amendment in securing freedoms in the South, as well as the role of the National Rifle Association in training blacks to handle firearms.
Then it just went into Lemon circling back to his race, and did you know he’s black? Because he is dark. And he’ll tell you that because he’s black, he’s right on everything regarding black people.
Here is the complete debate:
Ramaswamy followed up on Twitter to clarify the point he was making. He also noted the irony of Lemon’s filibustering on set.
.@donlemon should actually study civil rights history before spouting off about it. Shouting down ideas you don’t like & restricting what you can say based on your skin color won’t bring us together. Open debate will. I’ll keep going on any network to debate the other side &… pic.twitter.com/P67ScBDAhO
— Vivek Ramaswamy (@VivekGRamaswamy) April 19, 2023
Whatever the case, the appearance certainly earned Ramaswamy some plaudits from conservatives on Twitter:
Loved you on CNN this am! 💯 Don Lemon loves to preach/play the 'Victim Mindset'. Vivek for PRESIDENT.
— VENUS (@Vanessa04428061) April 19, 2023
I like watching Vivek Ramaswamy argue with Don Lemon on CNN
— Clara Jones (@debbieformola) April 19, 2023
Don Lemon is the epitome of victimhood when he is the farthest from a victim. Learn from Vivek, Don! He succeeded through hard work and he never claims victim for HIS skin color! You might gain more fans if you are actually truthful on the air!
— DEI must DIE (@azmaga123) April 19, 2023
This is common practice from activist journalists like Don Lemon who immediately pull the race card when they can’t sustain an argument. Dunno but Vivek’ asking color is similar to Don’s! And he’s right, let’s discuss issues not skin color!
— 🇺🇸🇵🇷Dania Alexandrino🇺🇸🇵🇷 (@DaniaPeriodista) April 19, 2023
To be sure, Ramaswamy has yet to make a significant impact in the polls. According to RealClearPolitics’ polling average, he is at 1%, trailing someone who has declared he is not running (Mike Pompeo, 1.4%) and a career NeverTrumper we hope declares she is running just for the hours of unintentional comedy it will provide (Liz Cheney, 4.0%).
That considered, Ramaswamy has a greater chance of staying in the GOP contest than Don Lemon does of staying at CNN.