Showing posts with label race. Show all posts
Showing posts with label race. Show all posts

Saturday, May 31, 2008

Why an Obama presidency is good for American feminism

Obama is not so much a progressive candidate, as Clinton is a regressive one. And by extension so are the 2nd wave feminists supporting her. It has been disheartening to witness the unwavering, even hardening of support from so many white women for Clinton as her campaign has taken a turn toward open race baiting, and racial divide and conquer tactics to muster up votes.



The moral bankruptcy of this form of feminism has become clear to anyone who is willing to take a critical look and see it.

Steinem, Ferraro, Jong and others aren’t advocating for a radical change in the white and male power structure as much as they are seeking to take over its reigns. What appears to be an irrational fear on the part of these white women that if Clinton doesn’t get the nomination NOW feminism has lost its shot makes total sense if their form of feminism is about finally wielding power like white men do, not creating a radically different power structure in and of itself.

Call it the white (wo)man’s last stand, or so to speak.

As the bi-directional influence of globalization becomes clearer and undeniable, in order to compete globally Americans of European descent will have to give up white privilege, or at the very least expand it to an “American privilege” that includes its citizens of color. New centers of power both economic and cultural are taking root among brown and yellow countries in the world, and who better to negotiate with them than America’s own brown and yellow people? The value of a Thatcher-esque presidency, rife with social impact on gender relations for Americans, will be lost on the rest of the globe’s citizens of color who aren’t likely to suffer a kinder, gentler white supremacy when they are holding so many of the cards now.

Those who wish to see Obama become president right now are angling for America to stay relevant in this new global reality. Those who wish to see Clinton win are angling for whiteness to stay relevant in this new global reality.

In a post-Obama presidency, any white woman who runs and wins will not easily be able to wield power in a racially supremacist kind of way as all prior 43 presidents have done to varying degrees. In a weird kind of way an Obama presidency might force white feminists to give up their (nowadays not so) latent white supremacy if they want a shot at the title down the road.

Technorati Tags: - -

Enter your email:


Powered by FeedBlitz


Thursday, May 22, 2008

An Open Letter to the Baby Boomers

Much is being made of the Democratic nomination process between Senators Clinton and Obama as a battle between competing aggrieved groups (women vs. blacks). Given that much of the media is owned and operated by Baby Boomers, it stands to reason that many pundits would opine on the contest in terms of these kind of identity politics. Clearly Obama has been fighting to get out from under this kind of victimhood masquerading as empowerment, and that's why young people who've grown up in an integrated society where women are expected to occupy the workforce are flocking to him in droves. Clinton is fighting a battle that for Gen-Xers and Millennials has in many respects already been won, and they simply can't relate. And frankly, we've got bigger fish to fry.

Clinton has been trying her best to bring Obama into her frame, and the media has lately been playing along. On the gender card tip she's thrown Gloria Steinem and Erica Jong at him. Bill, Bob Johnson and
Geraldine Ferraro shuffled from the deck of race cards. And even she has joined the fray with her thinly veiled southern strategy-type pronouncements.

But yesterday Clinton made statements that did worse than wade in the gutter of gender victimizing, race baiting, divisive politics.
Comparisons, though sometimes inflammatory, can often be instructive in understanding the gravity of contemporary political realities. But Clinton - sans irony - compared the disenfranchisement of Michigan and Florida voters in the 2008 Democratic nomination contest with one of the major U.S. social movements of the 20th century, and in effect denigrated a core life changing juncture in her generation's coming of age in order to pander for votes. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't believe anyone in Florida or Michigan was lynched, firebombed or disappeared in fighting for their right to the vote.

Clearly Clinton's moral relativism (read: lying) seems to mean nada to most white women Boomers who are after the crown, principles be damned. I have to wonder about other Boomers out there, though, like Glenn Loury who support her because it's their generation's "time". Does he still think its acceptable to support this candidate when she would willingly sell out one of their shared formative experiences? And does he and other thinking Boomers really think this kind of behavior would stop once the power was seized? I've got to ask: can you people come to your senses on this woman and these kind of tactics already? Or will this really require an actuarial solution to be rectified?


Technorati Tags:
- -

Enter your email:


Powered by FeedBlitz


In Defense of the Guilty White Liberal

Finally a white person publicly states the obvious:

Guilt is good, people! The only people who don't suffer guilt are sociopaths and serial killers. Guilt means you have a conscience. You have self-awareness, you have—in the case of America's history of racism—historical awareness. Just because things have gotten better in the present doesn't mean we can erase racism from our past or ignore its enduring legacy.


It's a shame that the country had to go damned near off the deep end for folks to be able to come to their senses.


Technorati Tags:
-

Enter your email:


Powered by FeedBlitz


Wednesday, May 21, 2008

Obama's VP?

Senator Jim Webb (D-VA) tackles the race issue from the working class white perspective, making a clear case for the VP slot in an Obama administration...




Technorati Tags: - - - -

Enter your email:


Powered by FeedBlitz


Sunday, May 18, 2008

Racial Passing: A Concept Whose Time has Passed?

Senator Obama's meteoric rise from obscurity just 4 years ago to his almost certain clinching of the 2008 Democratic Party nomination (and barring a kamikaze move by the Clintons, the presidency) has raised the specter of race in both public and private conversation to levels not seen since the Civil Rights era. And what has become clear is that there is no longer a consensus on the assumptions that most folks make both privately and publicly about identity and culture, and how they relate to the political sphere. The fact that there are differences in perspective, especially along generational lines as opposed to racial ones, appears to be a strange shock to a lot of folks in the 50+ set. It's as if the Baby Boomers took the Civil Rights Movement as the end in itself, and not the means to the end - which was supposed to be a color-blind, more racially equitable society.

Clinton minions who wish to see her secure the nomination at all costs are consistently the worst perpetrators of this strange myopia, insulting the generations who grew up in an integrated society because they don't (and can't by definition) subscribe to the neurosis of that barrier-busting generation. Senator Obama spoke directly to this generational divide in regard to the African American community when he tried to give some context to the anger expressed by Reverend Wright in the clips aired ad infinitum on Fox News, et al. The Reverend was not to be outdone by the Clinton crew, and his fratricidal impulse in defense of his generational worldview nearly derailed the aspiring candidate. A lot of black folks wondered aloud what the hell Wright was thinking. Did the brother have his eyes on the prize or what?

For me these are the moments when the long view is instructive. A suave, black gentleman friend of mine aged 72 years young regularly puts these issues of race and identity in perspective for me. A life-long New York city native who grew up in Harlem and now lives in Brooklyn, he remembers when sanctimonious Northern cities were (informally) segregated, and shares strategies with me on how he worked his way up the ladder in the architectural world to operate his own design firm. He is not just a student of history, but lived it.

Over brunch on Sunday we talked about an issue that is basically taboo in discussions about 20th century black life – namely the tensions between the light skinned (biracials) and dark skinned (blacks) where issues of leadership are concerned. Yes, there were the Marcus Garveys out there, but on the whole it is biracials who occupied the higher tiers of black society. One need only look as far as Reverend Wright, with his even lighter skin and even more European-looking features contrasted to the biracial Obama, to see an example of this. Could the Reverend’s public unhinging have to do with his deep-seated frustrations at not being allowed to play the leadership role that Senator Obama has been occupying in our brave new “postracial” world – as Obama hinted at in his speech on race? Is the Reverend suffering from a jealously heightened by a form of tragic mulatto-ism?

During our conversation my friend mentioned an interesting factoid of which I was not aware, that if true, adds a further dimension to the discussion. Apparently, the member of President Truman’s inner circle who convinced him to integrate the military was actually a black man “passing” as white. Passing is a phenomenon generally vilified by black folks; a famous fairly recent example is Henry Louis Gate’s posthumous outing of Creole writer Anatole Broyard, resulting in his daughter Bliss’ memoir One Drop. However, since One Drop rule made it traditionally impossible for the biracial leadership to get really close to the annals of power it could only be “passing” blacks or sympathetic whites who could turn the ears of powerful men to do the right thing. I’ve wondered if that ever stuck in the craw of biracials like Gates or Wright who might have had the same vision as an Obama, but the times wouldn’t allow them the space to lead beyond the Jim Crow era race categories.

Obama is messing with black people's minds as much as white's because he is a biracial that is not out there solely representing the black struggle, as was the case for the majority of the Civil Rights leadership of the 20th century. His platform and worldview can be summed up as a rising tide lifts all boats. There is no denying that things are still bad for many black folks and there is a lot of work to be done. However, opportunities for black advancement have improved in the post Civil Rights era -- along with the minds of many white people young and old about the intelligence and leadership capabilities of people of color. If this were not true, Obama would not be winning!

It is precisely because Obama is biracial, not just genetically but also culturally and politically, that many white people feel comfortable in his ability to represent the needs and desires of all Americans not just black ones. His biracial appeal to whites is also the reason why black people eventually came out overwhelmingly in support of him; they recognized that he was being taken as a viable presidential candidate, and not just seen by whites as running for the president of black America.

One drop rule may have once been agreed to by whites and blacks alike – as a necessary mechanism of economic control for the white elite while also a way for blacks to foment solidarity for the freedom struggle. But in President Obama’s America will it still be necessary or even possible? Will newly biologically white folks (read: passing) need to hide African descent in order to advocate for black advancement when there is a bi-racial president advocating for all people's advancement? When there are blacks, biracials and other people of color (not proportionally representative but getting there, albeit slowly) in leadership positions in government, business, academia and media across the board? And just where does that leave the Reverend Wrights of the world?



Technorati Tags: - - - - - - - -

Enter your email:


Powered by FeedBlitz


Tuesday, January 15, 2008

Return of the King



I don't know whether to laugh or cry at Aaron McGruder's take on how MLK would respond to today's black community.

Technorati Tags: -

Enter your email:


Powered by FeedBlitz


Saturday, January 05, 2008

It's No Fluke

Hillary's core demographic roots for the upstart at New Hampshire's 100 Club Dinner

Political bloggers from the left and right wrote enthusiastically last night about the response Obama received at the annual Democratic Party pow-wow in Milford, New Hampshire. Apparently, Clinton was trounced once again by the Obamania that has taken over voters young and old, Democratic, Republican and Independent. Today's polls seem to indicate that he may indeed take New Hampshire next!


Technorati Tags: - -

Enter your email:


Powered by FeedBlitz


Friday, January 04, 2008

Obama, Not Bill (or Hill)

A victorious Obama at the Iowa Caucus


As I have been saying to friends for months and months now, which was alluded to by former South Carolina Democratic chairman Dick Harpootlian in this article, is that blacks, not whites, are the Doubting Thomases where an Obama presidency is concerned.

His victory in Iowa, "which is as white as vanilla ice cream … will let African-Americans in South Carolina know that he can go the distance."

Wake up black people! Bill Clinton was NOT the first black president. Barrack Obama can be, if you would simply support his candidacy like the 95% white state of Iowa did tonight.


Jim Crow is over.



Technorati Tags:
-

Enter your email:


Powered by FeedBlitz


Thursday, July 26, 2007

Montessori's School of Hard Knocks

Hip hop finally joins the fray in attempting to reverse the literacy crisis among young black American boys. Effective or tasteless? You be the judge...





Technorati Tags: - -

Enter your email:


Powered by FeedBlitz


Monday, July 02, 2007

Latifah is to Diana as Angelina is to Pearl?

Todd Boyd, professor of critical studies at the USC School of Cinematic Arts, makes the ridiculous claim here that Angelina Jolie playing the role of the multi-racial widow of slain journalist Daniel Pearl is akin to Queen Latifah acting the part of Princess Diana.




















Purportedly part Iroquois, actress Angelina Jolie (above left) is pictured next to widow Marianne Pearl (above right), who was nicknamed "my mulatta" by husband Pearl.





Queen Latifah pictured above her doppelganger Lady Di.


Technorati Tags: - -

Enter your email:


Powered by FeedBlitz


Tuesday, February 27, 2007

Southern Gothic



Click on me for video clip

StoryCorps



Technorati Tags: - - -


Enter your email:


Powered by FeedBlitz


Port Chester rejects govt-imposed legal segregation

NEW YORK, NY February 27, 2007 — A New York village that's almost half Hispanic, but governed mainly by whites has asked a federal judge to let its politics evolve naturally, instead of canceling elections and imposing a new system to give Hispanics a greater voice.

An attorney for Port Chester says "an organic and natural system is beginning to take hold" to benefit Hispanics. The attorney says cutting the village into districts to increase Hispanic representation, as the Department of Justice requested, would officially segregate the village. The attorney spoke during closing arguments on the government's request for an injunction against village trustee elections scheduled for March 20th.

The Department of Justice claims the village's elections violates the Voting Rights Act.


When will African Americans begin to question the efficacy of civil-rights era tactics in improving their lives and their status within America - TODAY? What is it that Hispanics get that blacks don't?


Technorati Tags: - -


Enter your email:


Powered by FeedBlitz


Friday, February 16, 2007

My Day Job

StoryCorps Griot is a national oral history project that is designed to collect the stories of African Americans. An airstream trailer outfitted with a soundproof recording studio will travel around the country for the next year to reach out to nearly 2,000 families. Yesterday, I welcomed the press to its Atlanta launch.







WABE's Senior Vice President John Weatherford introduces me.














Weatherford and I standby as Griot's first interview participant Reverend Chuck Barlow tells the audience about his work in the community.

















Reverend Barlow, Barlow's sister Cheryl, and WABE Board member Kevin Ross listen in.

















Photos courtesy of David Barasoain


Technorati Tags:
- - -


Enter your email:


Powered by FeedBlitz


Tuesday, February 13, 2007

Monday, February 05, 2007

Negro Hysteria Month

This Onion satire, which a good friend sent to me, brilliantly encapsulates so much of what is wrong with Black History Month.

Nation To Celebrate First-Ever Black History Month History Week
February 5, 2007 | Issue 43•06

WASHINGTON, DC—Saying the time had come for America to recognize "some of its most unsung heroes," President Bush issued a statement Tuesday announcing the creation of Black History Month History Week, which is to be held in the last seven days of February and will honor the men and women who pioneered the commemoration of Black History Month.

Nation To

Officials unveil a new commemorative Gerald Ford stamp.



Technorati Tags:
-


Enter your email:


Powered by FeedBlitz


Saturday, January 20, 2007

The Enemy of My Enemy is My Friend?

In the clip below, Dr. Marc Lamont Hill discusses on Fox News Live Desk why the black leadership hasn't yet come out in full support of Barack Obama's presidential candidacy. Republican strategist Leslie Sanchez nails the fears of the established black leadership on the head when she states that "Barack Obama doesn't need a connection with African American leaders to build a connection with African American voters."

The zinger is Martha MacCallum's follow up comment: "Yeah and I don't know, David, you know, politically whether he wants to be going around the country with Al Sharpton."




Dr. Hill assures the panel that the black leadership is not against Obama per se; they just want to to see him "take a stand." A friend of mine has an interesting take on what steps the black leadership may actually take if Obama refuses to "take a stand" and tow their party line:

"Obama's biggest danger may be if the civil rights establishment tries to deliberately sink him by embracing him, accusing mainstream white institutions of "anti-black racism" for campaign tactics against him. I have a feeling that that's a big part of what sunk Harold Ford, Jr., perhaps deliberately by the NAACP, when they made a lot of noise about how campaign ads against him were anti-black racism."

This recent statement may be an indication that those tactics are not so off.


Technorati Tags:
- - - -


Enter your email:


Powered by FeedBlitz


Thursday, January 18, 2007

Kian and Remee Hodgson

Biraicial parents Remi Horder (far left) and Kylie
Hodgson (far right) with their daughters Kian
(middle left) and Remee (middle right).


People continue to believe that "black" women cannot give birth to white children. Is Remee really black? If her parents and sister weren't in the picture, would anyone think she had African ancestry? When Remee grows up will she be "passing" if she calls herself white?

Their Wikipedia entry points to 6 other examples of "black" and "white" fraternal twins (how black is Kian - isn't she just a black/white mix like each of her parents?) where scientists erroneously describe the one in a million chance of its occurrence. (Creoles, Puerto Ricans and Dominicans know better I'm sure.) Of course, anyone with some knowledge of Mendelian genetics knows that it's really more like a one in sixteen chance to produce a purely white child from a biracial couple's mix. Since our culture has a habit of one dropping people with African ancestry, the fact that there is equally a one in sixteen chance of producing a purely black child from a biracial couple's mix is unknown to most.


Technorati Tags: - - -

Enter your email:


Powered by FeedBlitz


Monday, January 15, 2007

MLK Enlisted in Iraq Anti-War Effort

Slipping in middle eastern music and photos of our soldiers currently abroad (look closely at the end), Alex Therrien produces a 9 minute MLK video that actually is a film against the Iraq war.




Technorati Tags: - - -

Enter your email:


Powered by FeedBlitz


John Edwards - More Black than Obama?

Yesterday, John Edwards threw down the gauntlet to the newly minted Democratic majority congress by calling for them to cut the purse strings so the US can stop the Bush "surge" in Iraq. Edwards accomplished two important political goals at this speech:

1) he positioned himself against the other Democratic presidential frontrunners - Clinton and Obama - as the anti-war candidate
2) he aligned himself with the majority of American voters who want this war to end

I predict the leftwing mainstream media will spin the crap out of the meaning of the speech. And from all accounts, they've already begun. This morning on NPR's Brian Lehrer show guest commentator Juan Williams dismissed Edwards anti-war credentials because he voted for the Iraq war resolution. Apparently, like the Bush camp, Williams believes that politicians cannot change their minds lest they be weak or opportunistic.

Both Williams and Lehrer concluded that Edwards' positioning of himself as the anti-war candidate is an appeal to the Democratic base, while Clinton's response proves that her camp is attempting to appeal to the general population. This of course is poppycock. Apparently, like the rightwing mainstream media, the American people's repudiation of the Iraq war vis a vis the Democratic sweep of the 2007 mid-term elections has gone down the Williams/Lehrer memory hole.

Interestingly, Obama's camp has not yet responded to the Edwards speech. Williams and Lehrer glossed over this fact and instead concentrated on Obama's amount of foreign policy experience, and whether or not he has made his supposedly "mainstream" position on limited support for the war clear.

The two of course could not explain why Obama hasn't yet responded to the Edwards speech because they missed the third, more subtle political goal Edwards was shooting for: positioning himself as the real "black" candidate for the 2008 presidential election.

Obama has been playing a very slick game up until this point by keeping one foot in the black camp and the other in the biracial one. He has been coding his biracial consciousness underneath his status as a 2nd generation Kenyan-American. To my knowledge no pundit has yet caught onto this game, but Stanley Crouch has come awfully close. Since Crouch's November 2006 editorial, Obama has continued, albeit cautiously, riding between America's newly resurgent black/biracial color line. That is, until Edwards' speech at Riverside Church yesterday.

The Southerner Edwards has been making subtle overtures to black America at least since Kerry's failed 2004 presidential run, where Edwards served as the Vice Presidential candidate. When it became clear that the RNC was pulling a jack move in Ohio a la Florida circa 2000, Edwards called for a full recount while Kerry basically conceded. Kerry eventually came around, but the damage was already done and the presidency went to the Bush camp.

Edwards' second significant appeal to blacks was the launch of his 2008 presidential campaign from the ruins of New Orleans, where he lauded the efforts of the black children rebuilding a flooded house directly behind him as he announced his bid. In the speech he linked New Orleans, the Iraq war, the genocide in Sudan, global warming, poverty and the need for a new energy economy.

Edwards' most clear challenge to Obama as the candidate for black America, however, is evidenced in yesterday's speech at Riverside church.
Forty years earlier in an anti-war speech held at the same church, MLK called the Lyndon administration "the greatest purveryor of violence in the world today" for its prosecution of the war in Vietnam. Taken with his call for an Ohio 2004 vote recount and his campaign launch, Edwards' alignment with black America's ultimate political symbol on the eve of black America's most significant national holiday is calling Obama out on his game.

In effect, Edwards is rejecting America's two color lines and attempting to force Obama to do so as well. The more Edwards appeals (or appears to appeal) to black interests, the more Obama will be pressured to "out black" him - lest he be considered a traitor to the race and lose the support of both blacks and whites who are vested in the African American race category.

Obama's next move will be the most crucial in his political career. If he can deflect Edwards' attempt to force him onto the black side of America's color line - meaning maintaining biracial consciousness without losing the trust and support of black Americans while also keeping the support of white Americans looking to deflect responsibility for continued black American poverty - than the Jim Crow era of black/white racial endogamy may truly be over and a new three-tiered political system based on color has re-emerged.


Biracial America's Formidable Opponent




Technorati Tags: - - - -

Enter your email:


Powered by FeedBlitz


Friday, December 22, 2006

What Black Men Think

Good friend and fellow blogger Alice Backer links to the thought-provoking video clip below of African-American men countering some time honored, yet worn liberal myths.



Technorati Tags: - -

Enter your email:


Powered by FeedBlitz