I was listening to Glenn Beck on my way into work, and he made the comment that he doesn't understand why Obama is giving a speech on race. He stated that the only person who is bringing race into the conversation is Rev. Wright. COME ON! I won't even discuss the pundits (Glen Beck included) that have spent the past months assuming that racial (and gender) groups are monolithic in their thinking and subsequently their voting. It is also not worth revisiting the discussion of Obama's blackness that dominated the airways at one time.
Racism is the elephant in the room. It is not anachronistic as many would like to dream. Obama isn't bringing it up. It's there. Perhaps his success in this race is stirring it up or bringing it to the surface.
I am listening to Obama's speech, and I must say I think he did a good job of highlighting the divisive nature of Wright's remarks. Those remarks aren't helpful no matter what direction they are coming from. It's quite refreshing to hear a politician talk about the complexities of race rather than simply from soundbites (I know I'm biased- we would all like to hear the complexities of our passions reflected in the political realm).
Let me just make the prediction that the pundits will grab onto Obama's words that Wright is "like family." They will focus on that fact rather than the story he told about his White grandmother. It is not about Wright, Ferraro, Obama's grandmother, you or me. It is, but it is bigger than that- BOTH, AND. It's not about pointing blame and deciding who is more racially biased. Racism is like smog in the air we breath. It's something we all struggle with and cough up sometimes. If we want to deny the individual acts (which have become less overt with time), we can see these dynamics reflected in our institutions (see my reflection from last night and my post on Katrina).
My other prediction is that some media will say "see, they still haven't gotten over slavery! I'm not to blame!" They will ignore his recognition of and validation of Whites' own frustration and feelings of resentment.
I hope I'm wrong about the spins. I know there are White allies who get it, and I know we as a country have the capacity to see the complexities of this issue. I just hope that those voices get some airtime.
Take home thought- race is a topic that is for all of us to grapple with. It's not an us or them issue. If we want to "get beyond it" then it's going to take us going beyond oversimplification and finger-pointing and coming together to have these difficult conversations.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
well said and so very true on every point....poetic even, "like smog we breathe"...undoubtedly and tragically the media will not "get it"...they'll continue the same nonsensical talk about "wooing the white vote" etc. but i too truly hope that it gets the general public thinking about race in non polarizing way and maybe understanding eachother's perspective. its so important that someone made a speech like that and phenomenal that it happened to be him (insert bias).
Oh, I can't take credit for the smog analogy. That's from Tatum's "Why are all the Black Kids..." If you're referring to the entire piece, thanks :)
Hey Dr. K:
This and your past few posts about the speech are wonderful!
It was an incredible speech, really. So refreshing to not feel talked down to, and pretty breathtaking to have someone tackle an issue this complicated and this electric head on - and to do it with such eloquence and insight. I do not currently support Obama's presidential bid, but I respect him tremendously.
A couple of things I wanted to respond to about this topic:
First, and most important, re: the conversation on race and the pundits' reactions - I think that the media's dissection of this speech is of course going to be less than ideal. They are a dull, blunt instrument. And as Obama himself said, one speech and even one historic candidacy is not going to be enough to simply change things overnight. The media will continue in the same vein they always do, parsing things out and hashing it up and basically avoiding Obama's brave call to open a true dialogue about these issues. I, too, was really frustrated by that response. But I did find this encouraging:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/20/us/politics/20race.html?_r=1&ref=politics&oref=login
Because I think that really, those are GREAT places to open this dialogue and start to make some real change happen, no? And if people keep talking, the media will eventually (albeit painfully slowly) follow.
Second, the politics (because it inevitably was a political speech, with a specific objective to accomplish in spite of the high-minded idealism in which it was couched): I agree with you that we can't hold everyone responsible for all of their acquaintances. However, Wright was more than just an acquaintance or a relative. He was Obama's spiritual advisor and seems to have been fairly close to him for a long time. It is absolutely unfair to judge Wright based solely on the inflammatory clips that are circulating at the moment. No doubt the man is an inspiring pastor with lots of moments to counter the ones being put forth publicly now. But what I find frustrating and disingenuous is Obama's skirting the issue of his ever having heard such things from Wright from the pulpit during their 20 year relationship. His stance on that has changed several times over the past week. It is also odd that Obama felt the need to "distance" himself from Wright early on in the campaign and yet how much distance could there really be if Wright was still serving on Obama's campaign until he quit last weekend? I don't have a good answer for what Obama could have done in the speech to satisfy this voter on this question, but I do know it didn't happen, and on that level (and solely on that level) for me the speech was not a success.
And finally, in your last post you said "...nor am I running for President." YET. You're not running YET. I still remember your sister telling telling me (before I met you) that you were going to be the first female POTUS. And I still believe you will be POTUS (though the second female one - wink!) Just wanted to remind you of your true calling. : )
Cheers!
Thanks for the "vote" of confidence, Michael. I hear the rationale that Obama could have left. However, I'm of the mindset that one person can not be everything yet alone perfect. For example, when looking for a mentor, one person can't give you everything you need. You might have one person who can give you one skill but be horrible in another. That doesn't mean, you drop the mentor. I think the same goes for the "team" of people around you. Wright is not one of those team members you might be bragging about, but I don't think he needed to be kicked to the curb. I'm sure he has something to offer and clearly helped grow Obama's faith. On a side note, I think faith leaders often get held to a higher expectation of perfection which is partly why we take such delight in seeing them fall. But I digress, I honestly see the situation as similar to Hillary and Bill Clinton. You could argue that because he perjured himself, she should distance herself from him. It's a relationship of choice. She stood by him, and I respect that. I would not argue that she should distance herself from him, but I don't think it would be a stretch to say that relationship between a preacher and church member and husband and wife are similar in the level of depth and commitment. People aren't always perfect in relationships, but that's predictable. Like I said, I can see where you are coming from, because we want our public officials to accountable for who they engage, but I also wonder if it might be possible to dig stuff up on most of us.
That's my .02 acknowledging that what Wright said struck a major chord with folks. I think it gets more complicated when you consider the nature of the transgression (e.g., provocative racial comments versus sex scandal) Check out my post about Time Wise's article to see an account of how loaded this issue is precisely because the content was racial.
Post a Comment