Today in Post-Race History: Semantic Antics
(originally posted at mybestfriendgayle.)
httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LmE7tuR0364
(Oh, BHO. You’re so funny!)
I will (try to) be brief: I hate this joke.
Then again, when’s the last time you heard me say that I like what this cat has to say about race?
Why? Put simply, it’s dismissive.
The statement, “I was black before the election,” is carrying an implicit, unspoken claim with it. What BHO seems to be saying is: White people knew I was black and they voted for me anyway. White people supported me and I’m black, so they’re not going to not support me because I’m black. In other words, if they weren’t acting racist then, they’re not acting racist now.
BHO’s quip not only neutralizes President Carter’s (correct) statements about the racism evident in these protests, it dismisses any conversation that thinks critically about the racist motivations of some of the protesters. The joke is an enabler, allowing these folks to continue their antics without confronting the potential core of their inspiration. Clearly, as some of the protest signs show, many of these folks aren’t out marching because they have solidly logical objections to health care reform. So why not seriously consider the very real possibility that racism is alive and well and working overtime during these demonstrations? Well, as I’ve said before, you can’t become–and, I guess, remain–president without making white people feel safe. So instead, BHO lets these white folks off the hook. It’s akin to the “But my black friend said…” defense. You know the kind. Someone says something racist to you, you say it’s racist, and they reply with “But my (other) black friend doesn’t think so.” So it must be all right, right?
Further these kinds of comments diminish and potentially damage other claims by black folks and other PoC in other walks of life about racist behavior. That’s really dangerous. Instead of having a frank conversation, or even giving an honest, thought-provoking follow-up answer, BHO decides to pretend like it’s not happening, like it doesn’t exist. My student loan debt feels like a theoretical construction to me, too. I wonder what would happen if I pretended that it didn’t exist.
Not that I expect much from a guy who agreed to allow his campaign to pretend he wasn’t black African American. If it wasn’t obvious already, that (EPIC FAIL! of a) race speech was a mere political tactic. Change you can believe in?
That is all.
(h/t to Stephanie C. and Fallon for indirectly encouraging me to write this. Thanks, y’all.)
Yeah, white Uncle Sam would just garnish your wages and tax returns for not paying your student loans. That’s how real the consequences are for pretending you don’t have student loan debt which is equally the case for Ms. Hill who was beaten by a racist white man at a Georgia’s Crak-er Barrel because she was black and woman.
Yeah, white Uncle Sam would just garnish your wages and tax returns for not paying your student loans. That’s how real the consequences are for pretending you don’t have student loan debt which is equally the case for Ms. Hill who was beaten by a racist white man at a Georgia’s Crak-er Barrel because she was black and woman.
@fallon: when i read about ms. hill on your blog, i was absolutely stunned.
@fallon: when i read about ms. hill on your blog, i was absolutely stunned.
I find this post to be a bit problematic:
With statements like “Not that I expect much from a guy who agreed to allow his campaign to pretend he wasn’t black African American” it seems you have intentionally chosen to take quite the myopic view on the issue.
Politics is a game of chess, not checkers. Yes, a lot of African Americans would have been elated to hear Obama speak out against the racism at the protests– it would be our chance to have a serious debate and discussion about racism. But that is all that would come of it, a discussion and debate. The reality of the matter is Obama would be portrayed as playing the “victim” card, and that would not bode well for him or the social policies he is trying to enact to improve the lives of minorities.
So the simple question is: would you rather have someone who simply talks about racism or a person who is willing to and is in the position to enact policies to improve the lives of minorities?
The answer is very simple for me, I would rather have the latter. And Obama is the latter, just take a look at his social policies.
Chess, not checkers!
I find this post to be a bit problematic:
With statements like “Not that I expect much from a guy who agreed to allow his campaign to pretend he wasn’t black African American” it seems you have intentionally chosen to take quite the myopic view on the issue.
Politics is a game of chess, not checkers. Yes, a lot of African Americans would have been elated to hear Obama speak out against the racism at the protests– it would be our chance to have a serious debate and discussion about racism. But that is all that would come of it, a discussion and debate. The reality of the matter is Obama would be portrayed as playing the “victim” card, and that would not bode well for him or the social policies he is trying to enact to improve the lives of minorities.
So the simple question is: would you rather have someone who simply talks about racism or a person who is willing to and is in the position to enact policies to improve the lives of minorities?
The answer is very simple for me, I would rather have the latter. And Obama is the latter, just take a look at his social policies.
Chess, not checkers!
Hello Hello,
I am, in reality, literally near-sighted, but I’m not sure how I intentionally took a myopic view with the quote you chose. I mean, what I said about the campaign was true. They literally did not talk about race until they had to. I’m sure there’s the 60 Minutes interview with David Axelrod floating around the internet somewhere to prove that last point. And if I am all myopic, I suppose I get that from his track record. Obama on discussions of race? EPIC FAIL. I’d get into that, but that needs more than a comment.
Secondly, there already was discussion and debate about racism before BHO made this statement. I think my point was to suggest that as president his statement was especially dismissive of that conversation and in effect had the power to shut it down, and I think it’s troubling for a guy who has seemingly inspired this new national convo on race to do that.
You’ll have to verse me on these social policies he’s working on to specifically improve the lives of people of color. Granted, I haven’t paid that much attention of late because of other priorities, but last time I checked, his general answer to any “How are you going to help black people” questions has been “Well, my general policies will help them, too.” But again, for me, that wasn’t really where I was trying to go with this post.
I’m not sure about your “either/or” question. But to sort of answer it, I guess I’d like to have someone who says things like, “Racism is real. And racism was at work during these many of these protests.” And I think BHO could’ve said that without taking the position of a victim. He’s good with words like that. And even if media attempted to portray him as such, I don’t think that would be anything new or something the administration couldn’t handle–or ignore.
King me.
Hello Hello,
I am, in reality, literally near-sighted, but I’m not sure how I intentionally took a myopic view with the quote you chose. I mean, what I said about the campaign was true. They literally did not talk about race until they had to. I’m sure there’s the 60 Minutes interview with David Axelrod floating around the internet somewhere to prove that last point. And if I am all myopic, I suppose I get that from his track record. Obama on discussions of race? EPIC FAIL. I’d get into that, but that needs more than a comment.
Secondly, there already was discussion and debate about racism before BHO made this statement. I think my point was to suggest that as president his statement was especially dismissive of that conversation and in effect had the power to shut it down, and I think it’s troubling for a guy who has seemingly inspired this new national convo on race to do that.
You’ll have to verse me on these social policies he’s working on to specifically improve the lives of people of color. Granted, I haven’t paid that much attention of late because of other priorities, but last time I checked, his general answer to any “How are you going to help black people” questions has been “Well, my general policies will help them, too.” But again, for me, that wasn’t really where I was trying to go with this post.
I’m not sure about your “either/or” question. But to sort of answer it, I guess I’d like to have someone who says things like, “Racism is real. And racism was at work during these many of these protests.” And I think BHO could’ve said that without taking the position of a victim. He’s good with words like that. And even if media attempted to portray him as such, I don’t think that would be anything new or something the administration couldn’t handle–or ignore.
King me.
If he had said: “Yes, racism definitely plays a part in these protests!”, what are the positive outcomes? Besides the flurry of discussions and debates that would occur, how would that benefit the black community in the long run?
The simple fact that he refused to run as the “black” candidate won him the election. If race played a central role in his campaign, he would not have made it past the democratic primaries, let alone be the president. That is the reality of the situation. That is why I use the chess analogy– improving the lives of the black community is not simply about being vocal about racism in America, but rather being in the position of power to enact policies that would improve the lives of the black community. By becoming president, rather than being vocal about racism during his campaign, he guaranteed he had a position to make policies that would benefit minorities.
Still chess, not checkers!
If he had said: “Yes, racism definitely plays a part in these protests!”, what are the positive outcomes? Besides the flurry of discussions and debates that would occur, how would that benefit the black community in the long run?
The simple fact that he refused to run as the “black” candidate won him the election. If race played a central role in his campaign, he would not have made it past the democratic primaries, let alone be the president. That is the reality of the situation. That is why I use the chess analogy– improving the lives of the black community is not simply about being vocal about racism in America, but rather being in the position of power to enact policies that would improve the lives of the black community. By becoming president, rather than being vocal about racism during his campaign, he guaranteed he had a position to make policies that would benefit minorities.
Still chess, not checkers!
I’m not sure I know what you mean by “positive outcome.” But I suppose not doing damage to those of us who actually aren’t in the position (of power) to pretend that racism doesn’t exist and/or to those of us who engage in discussions of racism and work to dismantle it might be a couple decent results.
And since you still haven’t learned me on these policies that would lead me to believe that BHO plans to break, as my friend would say, his contract with white America and hook up Negroes, I’ve yet to have the opportunity to realistically think, “Oh, there’s BHO being all tricky and politically savvy regarding this whole race thing,” in a way that benefits more than his political aspirations.
What I’m tracking in this post and in others I’ve written about him is his, I guess, rhetorical record which, so far, is all we have to go on. And that history shows that BHO acknowledges or ignores race based upon the political climate and whether or not it would behoove him to do so. His refrain has been “(In exchange for the presidency) I’m not going to make white folks feel bad about racism.” And it seems as though you might find that a strategic move and a reason to be hopeful. I suppose we’ll have to wait and see. I find nothing that compels me to have the same hope. I find the strategy in need of critique, troubling and not the way one dismantles racism.
Double jump.
I’m not sure I know what you mean by “positive outcome.” But I suppose not doing damage to those of us who actually aren’t in the position (of power) to pretend that racism doesn’t exist and/or to those of us who engage in discussions of racism and work to dismantle it might be a couple decent results.
And since you still haven’t learned me on these policies that would lead me to believe that BHO plans to break, as my friend would say, his contract with white America and hook up Negroes, I’ve yet to have the opportunity to realistically think, “Oh, there’s BHO being all tricky and politically savvy regarding this whole race thing,” in a way that benefits more than his political aspirations.
What I’m tracking in this post and in others I’ve written about him is his, I guess, rhetorical record which, so far, is all we have to go on. And that history shows that BHO acknowledges or ignores race based upon the political climate and whether or not it would behoove him to do so. His refrain has been “(In exchange for the presidency) I’m not going to make white folks feel bad about racism.” And it seems as though you might find that a strategic move and a reason to be hopeful. I suppose we’ll have to wait and see. I find nothing that compels me to have the same hope. I find the strategy in need of critique, troubling and not the way one dismantles racism.
Double jump.