Log in

View Full Version : Could an Obama presidency hurt black Americans?


DroppinScience
07-22-2008, 01:25 PM
Now THIS is an interesting issue I hadn't fully considered before. While I don't think it would necessarily "hurt" African-Americans, but I do think that electing a black president would reinforce the perception that America has moved beyond racism and prejudice ("Look, we have a black President! Now our problems with race are behind us.") when the reality is there is still a lot of barriers for minorities in society. I have no doubt Obama would work to lift these barriers, but his election alone would not solve every problem, to be sure.

Anyways, just read this article and see what you think.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/07/22/obama.hurt.blacks/index.html

Could an Obama presidency hurt black Americans?

By John Blake
CNN
Decrease font Decrease font
Enlarge font Enlarge font

(CNN) -- "We had a dream. Now it's a reality."

For many, Sen. Barack Obama is an agent of change but some critics say he could make race relations worse.

That's the slogan on a popular T-shirt linking Sen. Barack Obama's presidential run to the Rev. Martin Luther King's dream of racial equality. It's one of several T-shirts -- including "Barack is my homeboy"-- that reflect African-American's euphoria over Obama's White House bid.

But there are others who warn that an Obama presidency could hurt African-Americans. They say that an Obama victory could cause white Americans to ignore entrenched racial divisions while claiming that America has reached the racial Promised Land.

Paul Street, author of the forthcoming book, "Barack Obama and the Future of American Politics," says Obama risks becoming an Oval Office version of talk-show host Oprah Winfrey. She and former Secretary of State Colin Powell are African-American figures whose popularity allows some white Americans to congratulate themselves for not being racist, he says

"They're cited as proof that racism is no longer a significant barrier to black advancement and interracial equality," says Street.

"This isn't new. Go to the 19th century and Southern aristocrats would point to a certain African-American landowner who was doing well to prove that whites are not racist."

Nick Shapiro, an Obama spokesperson, says that Obama believes that America has made tremendous progress in the past 50 years.

"However, the suggestion that somehow Senator Obama's campaign represents an easy shortcut is not realistic," Shapiro said in an e-mailed statement. "Senator Obama believes that we still have a lot of work to do, and that's not just true for the issues facing blacks or Latinos, but for women and other communities struggling to secure the basic necessities in life like jobs, housing, health care and quality education."

Are we a post-racial society?

Any suggestion that an Obama presidential victory could set back race relations may seem odd or even inappropriate. His presidential campaign has been framed by many observers as a glowing example of America's move to a "post-racial" society.

"Racial polarization used to be a dominating force in our politics, but we're now a different, and better, country," Paul Krugman, a New York Times columnist wrote last month about Obama's political rise.

The reaction in the African-American community to Obama's success has also been celebrated with joy.

When Obama became the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee in June, many African-Americans cried because they said they never thought they would live to see such a day. Vendors soon started selling T-shirts of Obama's portrait pasted alongside King in Walgreens stores and at online stores.

Yet there are a few political commentators who warn African-Americans that an Obama victory could be twisted to suppress the push for racial equality. Most of these commentators are African-American but they also include white, Latino and conservative pundits.

These commentators say that there is a subliminal appeal to Obama's presidential candidacy that has been ignored. Obama doesn't just represent change -- he represents atonement for America's ugly racial past for others, they say.

Steve Sailer, a columnist for The American Conservative magazine, wrote last year that some whites who support Obama aren't driven primarily by a desire for change.

They want something else Obama offers them -- "White Guilt Repellent," he wrote.

"So many whites want to be able to say, 'I'm not one of them, those bad whites. ... Hey, I voted for a black guy for president,' " Sailer wrote.

Sailer cited another reason why many whites want Obama as president:

"They hope that when a black finally moves into the White House, it will prove to African-Americans, once and for all, that white animus isn't the cause of their troubles. All blacks have to do is to act like President Obama - and their problems will be over."

Glen Ford, executive editor of the online journal blackagendareport.com, offered some white Americans a free solution to the race problem: "Millions of whites came to believe Obama could solve the 'race problem' by his mere presence, at no cost to their own notions of skin privilege," Ford wrote in an essay in January.

Other African-American commentators say the "post-racial" tag attached to Obama could be used to dismiss legitimate black grievances.

Andra Gillespie, an assistant professor at Emory University's political science department, says Obama's success doesn't mean America has become a post-racial society. She says it may signal the decline of individual racism but not another form of discrimination: systemic racism.

"It doesn't mean that there aren't prejudiced people anymore," she says.

Systemic racism is a form of racism that's entrenched in institutions. Some argue that it's the primary cause for intractable problems in the African-American community that range from substandard public schools to disproportionate rates of imprisonment, she says.

Electing a black president does not mean that America is ready to take on systemic racism, Gillespie says.

"A rising tide doesn't lift all boats," Gillespie says. "Just because he [Obama] gets elected doesn't mean the lives of poor black people are automatically going to improve."

It could actually get worse for poor African-Americans, she says.

"People could say if Barack [Obama] can succeed and someone can't get off of the stoops in the hood, it's their fault and it has nothing to do with systemic racism," Gillespie says.

D. Yobachi Boswell, a blogger for Black Perspective.net, wrote in January that the prospect of Obama victory was making African-Americans politically passive.

He wrote that too many African-Americans were "doping ourselves up on the euphoric opium" of a black president while forgetting "we need fundamental change, not just Negroes in high places."

Boswell says he's concerned that an Obama presidency would discourage African-Americans from keeping leaders accountable.

"We can't give him [Obama] a pass because he's black," Boswell says. "We just can't have a black face in a high place. We have to have people fighting for policies that actually help us."

Obama has responded to such criticisms before. In his "A More Perfect Union" speech in March, he dismissed claims that his candidacy was fueled by the desire "to purchase racial reconciliation on the cheap."

He acknowledged that racial disparities in education and wealth continued to exist and were linked to the legacy of Jim Crow and slavery.

"I have never been so naive as to believe that we can get beyond our racial divisions in a single election cycle, or with a single candidacy -- particularly a candidacy as imperfect as my own," Obama said during that speech.

A black backlash against Obama?

Despite what Obama has said, his presidency could provoke a black backlash because the expectations are so high, others say.

African-Americans who would expect a President Obama to be a vigorous advocate for their cause -- may be disappointed by Obama's approach to race if he becomes president, some say.

Paul Street, author of the forthcoming book on Obama, says Obama may be a symbol of bold racial change but he is personally cautious about race. A President Obama won't want to appear to favor blacks because he might lose political support if he appears as the "angry black man" in the White House.

Street says Obama understands that risk and has run as a "race-neutral" candidate who talks about racial oppression as something largely confined to the past.

"Barack plays a very active role in damping down race consciousness," Street says. "Race neutrality is one of the great characteristics of his campaign."

African-Americans may also be disappointed by an Obama presidency because they may have forgotten what Obama is -- a politician, says David Sirota, author of "The Uprising, "a book that examines how populist movements in America shape public policy changes.

"He's like any politician. He's cautious," Sirota says. "He's a potential vehicle for change, and I think he is a good vehicle, but he is just a vehicle."

His presidency may represent fundamental change but that doesn't mean he will initiate such sweeping changes if he's elected.

"Politicians, even the best-intentioned ones, are weather vanes," says Sirota. "If the wind isn't blowing in the right direction, they will perpetuate the status quo," he says.

It will take more than a presidential candidate to change the status quo -- it'll take a movement, Sirota says.

"My concern is that people will think that by simply electing Obama, change will come, whether it's on race or economic justice issues," he says.

"If people believe that, then real change will not happen."

yeahwho
07-22-2008, 02:07 PM
Another race scenario, how incredibly fascinating. The fishing expeditions and fuel for division just keeps getting thrown on the fire.

Cracks in the armor, doubt being dealt daily, appealing to the inner weakness of Americans and selling papers.

yawn... tired and driven, like a 1986 Ford Taurus.

Many people like listening to somebody who has the capability to talk like a grown up, fuck I could care less if Obama is green with pink and orange stripes.

NoFenders
07-22-2008, 02:12 PM
Racism will be alive and well as long as there's ignorant white and black people walking around. Obama being president will not do a thing.

It will be interesting though, to see how many black people vote for Obama compared to McCain, and the other way round, to see how alive and well racism is today. It should show us all something.

:cool:

DroppinScience
07-22-2008, 03:17 PM
Another race scenario, how incredibly fascinating. The fishing expeditions and fuel for division just keeps getting thrown on the fire.

Cracks in the armor, doubt being dealt daily, appealing to the inner weakness of Americans and selling papers.

yawn... tired and driven, like a 1986 Ford Taurus.

Many people like listening to somebody who has the capability to talk like a grown up, fuck I could care less if Obama is green with pink and orange stripes.

While the headline was oversimplistic, the article itself is quite nuanced and it's an interesting thing to think over for people truly interesting in obliterating racism, prejudice, and the social inequalities people have faced for centuries.

Here's the thing... Obama in office would represent a great symbolic victory, but as long as there are still urban ghettos and barriers to getting out of said ghetto, there will be a long way to go.

These are the things to think over, NOT about whether an article like this aims to divide and polarize.

yeahwho
07-22-2008, 05:26 PM
I have been thinking over racial inequality, poverty and social injustice since I was in grade school. Whatever the writer or anyone else thinks is going to change as far as prejudice, poverty and inequality due to Barack Obama being elected must have a predisposition to speculate and ponder aimlessly.

I did read the article. It is nothing more than complete bullshit. I can be the devils advocate just as well as John Blake. In fact even better. I have a bold yet very nuanced statement coming your way.

Are you ready? I'm going out on a limb here.

Black people will be slightly better off if Barack Obama wins the Presidential election rather than John McCain.

Whoomp there it is!

I'll throw in a few thousand "purdy" words and we're off to the races (descriptively) having yet another sort of bullshit conversation. Except, my conversation will be reality based.

NoFenders
07-22-2008, 05:58 PM
The more you emphasize on how in touch with reality you are, the more I question it.

:cool:

yeahwho
07-22-2008, 06:27 PM
The more you emphasize on how in touch with reality you are, the more I question it.

:cool:

It's a great place to visit NoFenders, I used to question it all the time. As far as race and that equation entering this election, it is and will be unavoidable. So what I think should be kept up front (and I think you'll agree) is the issues, all of them. Because Barack Obama is black, it has become a sideshow for some writers, I kind of find that racist, yet it is inevitable. Sticking to the issues would be a much higher road.

Obama Issues (http://www.barackobama.com/issues/)

McCain Issues (http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/issues/)

The very fact that Obama addresses Civil Rights immediately tells me the writer of the CNN article is lacking in any research skills and actually diverting reality at the readers expense.

RobMoney$
07-22-2008, 08:20 PM
Here's the thing... Obama in office would represent a great symbolic victory, but as long as there are still urban ghettos and barriers to getting out of said ghetto, there will be a long way to go.

Can you expand on this?

NoFenders
07-24-2008, 12:31 PM
Sounds like he's saying the white man keeps the ghetto populated. Like it's a racial barrier that keeps the ghetto from becoming Mailbu.

:cool:

yeahwho
07-24-2008, 12:53 PM
"CNN" and journalism in the same sentence really shouldn't be allowed. The topic is badly chosen and the writing is not based on anything other than "what if's" and the really tired subject of "Obama's Black!".

It sort of sums up how low and ridiculous the mainstream media can be. CNN can elevate itself to another level, but they rarely choose to. This article is just not very intelligent. It's insulting. I used to think that FOX and CNN were just a few clicks away form each other but now I think they may be only one click apart. Just add the flag montage's and a few more sound effects between stories and we've got the same channel.

yeahwho
07-24-2008, 01:31 PM
I am beginning to wonder if a John McCain presidency could hurt white Americans?

EN[i]GMA
07-24-2008, 02:25 PM
No.

Unconscious and otherwise covert racism are already generally ignored.

Look at the sentencing of blacks vs. whites for committing similar crimes in similar circumstances, or look at the "black tax." Look anywhere, really.

These more subtle forms of racism are prevalent and still almost entirely ignored. How many news stories have you heard on these issues recently?

Sure, they talk about "race" issues, but only what I'd call overt racism. Don Imus, for example. And really, this is trivial in comparison. The media gets in a firestorm over some old white dumbass saying something stupid and continually ignores the plight of young blacks getting sent up the river for crimes that whites routinely get off scot free for.

THAT'S racism, THAT'S injustice. This other stuff is trivial by comparison (though not trivial itself, mind.)

So no, it's not as if an Obama presidency will make the issue worse, simply because the issue is almost entirely ignored now, even BY Obama. Has he mentioned anything on these issues? Not that I recall.

yeahwho
07-24-2008, 02:35 PM
GMA;1601880']No.
So no, it's not as if an Obama presidency will make the issue worse, simply because the issue is almost entirely ignored now, even BY Obama. Has he mentioned anything on these issues? Not that I recall.

You've got to be kidding me, say you are. One of the finest speeches on race in the past 30 years, Civil Rights (http://www.barackobama.com/issues/civilrights/) at the top of his issues page and now all of a sudden there is some sort of National memory loss?

Race has never played a larger role in any presidential election in the History of the United States. It is mentioned and written about daily. I think the only reason for this thread on here and the many others is because of a new found awareness due to Barack Obama, who by the way has spoken more about the plight of racism in America than any other candidate in the history of the United States.

Now all of a sudden he's ignoring this?

NoFenders
07-24-2008, 03:17 PM
I think the only reason for this thread on here and the many others is because of a new found awareness due to Barack Obama, who by the way has spoken more about the plight of racism in America than any other candidate in the history of the United States.



Maybe because we'd all like to move on and not have racism be an isuue anymore??? There's only one way to do that, ignore it. Don't fall into it's trap. Yes, there are racist dipshits out there. But soon enough, it wont matter. Nobody will hear them. They will sufocate on their own hate.


:cool:

EN[i]GMA
07-24-2008, 11:01 PM
You've got to be kidding me, say you are. One of the finest speeches on race in the past 30 years, Civil Rights (http://www.barackobama.com/issues/civilrights/) at the top of his issues page and now all of a sudden there is some sort of National memory loss?

Race has never played a larger role in any presidential election in the History of the United States. It is mentioned and written about daily. I think the only reason for this thread on here and the many others is because of a new found awareness due to Barack Obama, who by the way has spoken more about the plight of racism in America than any other candidate in the history of the United States.

Now all of a sudden he's ignoring this?

OK, he has mentioned some of them.

But my broader point, which you ignored, still stands.

yeahwho
07-24-2008, 11:18 PM
Maybe because we'd all like to move on and not have racism be an isuue anymore??? There's only one way to do that, ignore it. Don't fall into it's trap. Yes, there are racist dipshits out there. But soon enough, it wont matter. Nobody will hear them. They will sufocate on their own hate.


:cool:
I agree with you on this point, the trap of making racism a central issue of any candidacy during war, fuel crisis and economical mayhem is sort of silly. Giant strides have been made, laws have been made and when not adhered to, these laws have awarded millions of dollars to people of all colors, sexes and religious beliefs.

Because of these awards every major corporation in the United States has been put on alert and hiring practices, workplace environments and consumer relations have become prioritized to avoid litigation and profit drainage due to as you say, "racist dipshits".

The government cannot stop personal lifestyles or individual freedom of thought, only encourage unity and tolerance. Ignorance is just ignorance and in our lifetimes, as since all recorded human history I feel as if a Utopian society in America will never materialize.

So yep, I agree with you that it would be beautiful to say goodbye to racism but I think you'll agree (as apparently the courts do) that much work has yet to be done to "live as one nation, under (insert belief or disbelief here) indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."

RobMoney$
07-24-2008, 11:23 PM
Sounds like he's saying the white man keeps the ghetto populated. Like it's a racial barrier that keeps the ghetto from becoming Mailbu.

:cool:


LOL, as if Italians and Jews didn't rise out of those very same ghettos around the turn of the century. In fact ghetto is a Jewish word. And no one's been discriminated against more throughout history than the jews, and they seem to have made it out of the ghettos just fine.

yeahwho
07-24-2008, 11:28 PM
GMA;1601995']OK, he has mentioned some of them.

But my broader point, which you ignored, still stands.

The broader point being what has been said about subtle racism? Or the broader point been what has not been said in the past sixty days since clinching the nomination. I'm slightly perplexed because honestly if it's because Obama is not pounding the drum as say a Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton then that is good. The bar has been raised on all of these issues to a level never before seen in American politics, so the broader point is probably not specific enough for me to address.

If this isn't specific enough (http://www.barackobama.com/issues/civilrights/) and you think it's just lip service that can be something more or less your faith in the political ability of Barack Obama. When you go to McCains website you'll see tumbleweeds and hear crickets.

Documad
07-27-2008, 07:29 PM
That article pisses me off. People are grasping for race-based reasons to criticize Obama without appearing to look racist.

Can we judge Obama on his own merit? Will he be criticized by the white media for not being black enough? Enough already. He HAS the black vote. Yes, there are leaders in the old guard (like Jesse Jackson) who are jealous that Obama has achieved so much without their help. Those leaders don't matter so much anymore. Yes, we have a TON of racial problems in this country and those problems will not be solved during the next 8 years. No president could do that. What we have to decide is which president will best serve all Americans.

DroppinScience
07-27-2008, 11:59 PM
Interestingly enough, the article was significant enough for Jon Stewart to have a whole segment with Larry Fillmore (i.e. "Senior Black Correspondent") and by the end of the debate, Fillmore broke down and cried: "Frankly, if everything goes great under Obama, I just worry you won't need me to complain over racial divisions" or something close to that.

It made me LOL. :D