What's Really Important Wow!!! There’s Racism in America!?!
The editorial board of the Post recently made a comparison between Senator Barack Obama’s mention of his white grandmother’s racial fears, and the rhetoric of Reverend Jeremiah Wright, Obama’s friend and pastor of twenty years. They stated: “But to have placed those fears of an old woman as somehow parallel and equal to the rantings of Obama’s chief spiritual advisor just won’t wash.” Most of the nation clearly interpreted Obama’s statement as an attempt to confirm that racism does, and has existed in American culture for quite some time, often hits close to home, and exists in both blacks and whites.
It’s mainly been the right wing media attempting to turn his statements into something else – ranting in anger before a congregation, or crossing to the other side of a street out of fear, are only different faces of the same coin. Perhaps the Post agrees with remarks by conservative pundit, Pat Buchanan who referred to Obama’s statement while on MSNBC on March 21, by saying, “it ghettoizes him, takes him back to his base.” For all the Post’s admirable attempts to print opinions from all sides of the political spectrum, it still remains far to the right itself, often employing right wing spin to make its case, one often molded to fit its own bias.
Did we honestly expect to get through an election cycle that has an African-American male running for President without the issue of race surfacing sooner or later? And is it not better to have it come out now, while we are still eight months out from the national election? That many are shocked, or say they are, both by some of Reverend Jeremiah Wright’s statements, and Obama’s post-Wright speech are either not really paying attention to life on the planet and in their nation, or they are simply disingenuous.
There is and has been at least two Americas (as well as many others) for a long time, white and one black. There are no doubt preachers in both black and white churches influenced by this, especially if they grew up during the era of segregation. This is not shocking. What is shocking is that it has taken so long to become an issue in a national election.
Might some of Reverend Wright’s statements appear disturbing to some people? Sure. Does it cause anxiety for some that Senator Obama is a member of the reverend’s church, has known him for twenty years, and refers to him as a friend and mentor? It might. Does it make Obama a racist? Not really. Might he feel some resentment on some level, having grown up in an America that doesn’t exactly treat half of his DNA make-up with respect? Yes. I’d think he was untrustworthy if he didn’t. I don’t want a man running for president who is in complete denial regarding the prejudice aimed at the community of which he has been a part for the last few hundred years. Does it mean he won’t be fair with all people? No. In a man with real integrity and honesty it is very possible this experience and empathy might make him even more sensitive to the needs of everyone.
I find racism disturbing period, but, it is part of our culture. Any kind of prejudice demonstrates limited thinking, and yet our society is a repository for all kinds of prejudice-based bigotry. Our nation is replete with people who have in some way been directly or indirectly discriminated against. Do I have to mention every ethnic, religious and “fill in the blank__________” group of people, including “women,” that fall into this category? Do I have to remind every individual who for whatever reasons has felt himself/herself discriminated against in any fashion, if not only economically or socially? I think not. Most of us have been on the short end of the stick for some reason or other in our lifetimes. It’s a good lesson in empathy and compassion, albeit one not always learned.
I’m not sure which is more surprising, that Reverend Wright said the things he did, or that so many Americans are so bent out of shape because they finally found out. How many “white churches” have preachers who in their own rhetorical styles incite some racial or bigoted responses of their own? Overall styles may differ between most white and black churches, but this is a natural result of varying cultures. So what?
Reverend John Hagee recently endorsed Senator McCain’s campaign, which McCain accepted, and then repudiated after some of Hagee’s remarks were made public. Then Hagee turned around and stated that it was McCain who had sought his endorsement, and not he who volunteered it. The media hasn’t given this news anywhere near the coverage they gave to the Obama/Wright story. Where’s the outrage?
Reverend Hagee is the one who called the Catholic Church the “Great Whore,” and just happened to mention that the Anti-Christ will be Jewish, and that Muslims will be in the Devil’s army at the time of Armageddon. You think he might ever make inflammatory remarks in his church?
John McCain has claimed that Reverend Rod Parsley is his “spiritual guide.” There is an interesting article about Parsley’s endorsement of McCain, as well as some of his rather extreme views regarding those he considers the enemies of Christianity at motherjones.com. Parsley is the leader of a 12,000 member congregation in Columbus Ohio, and quite politically influential in that state. According to Mother Jones:
Parsley has written several books outlining his fundamentalist religious outlook, including the 2005 Silent No More. In this work, Parsley decries the "spiritual desperation" of the United States, and he blasts away at the usual suspects: activist judges, civil libertarians who advocate the separation of church and state, the homosexual "culture" ("homosexuals are anything but happy and carefree"), the "abortion industry," and the crass and profane entertainment industry. And Parsley targets another profound threat to the United States: the religion of Islam. In a chapter titled "Islam: The Deception of Allah," Parsley warns there is a "war between Islam and Christian civilization." He continues: “I cannot tell you how important it is that we understand the true nature of Islam, that we see it for what it really is. In fact, I will tell you this: I do not believe our country can truly fulfill its divine purpose until we understand our historical conflict with Islam. I know that this statement sounds extreme, but I do not shrink from its implications. The fact is that America was founded, in part, with the intention of seeing this false religion destroyed, and I believe September 11, 2001, was a generational call to arms that we can no longer ignore.”
I had not been aware that part of the United States’ “divine purpose” was defeating Islam, or that it was even part of an “historical conflict.” I don’t recall the Founding Fathers mentioning it.
I realize many Americans are now convinced, in no small part by the ceaseless rhetoric of the Bush Administration, that America is at war with Islam. We have been repeatedly told they hate everything we stand for. Is it that, or do they resent our many decades of interfering in Middle Eastern governments, based on what we want, not what they need? Whatever the case, Reverend Parsley appears to represent that which he claims to fear, namely religious bigotry and exclusivity. What are the chances that Reverend Parsley makes inflammatory remarks against other races, ethnic groups and those he judges unworthy by disagreement, in his own church?
I don’t necessarily disagree with many of Reverend Wright’s statements. Is there, and has there been, anti-black sentiment in the United States? Have whites and blacks been competing on an equal playing field? Is there cause for resentment on all sides of this? I know slavery was real. How does this compare with Hagee and Parsley’s shameless opinionated bigotry against other lifestyles, and religions? Where’s the outrage against them, and Senator McCain?
The point is not that such rhetoric in churches is outrageous, but that perhaps it is not uncommon. We are all in some way exposed to extreme viewpoints by some of those we associate with. And, I can’t imagine many organizations more susceptible to strong and extreme opinions, than those based in religion. When you believe in absolutes, it’s easy, and almost mandatory, to dismiss others who don’t share those beliefs. In fact, many religions claim it is dangerous to associate with those who disagree. After all, what could be more corrupting, or threatening than to associate with those who don’t adhere to “the word of God” as one sees it?
The time has finally come for an open dialogue on racism in America. We are all affected by it in one way or another, and now is as good a time as any, and better than most. In fact, the present political climate demands it! The United States of America cannot hope any longer to successfully deal with the rest of the world, politically, economically or socially, as long as it continues to be a nation divided by its own denial, fears and prejudices. There should no longer be two Americas based on color, a reality based in ignorance and fear, not the religious morality we hear about constantly, and see demonstrated much less often.
Comments
I applaud Senator Obama for his speech, his intention to get a dialogue started. Racism will continue to prevent the US from being the great nation we have always claimed it is, by allowing inequality to exist, by denying the basic freedoms and rights we believe we have, when we read the Constitution. This article brings some light to bear on racism that goes unchallenged, even as these hypocrites blast Rev. Wright: http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20080327_is_wright_right_about_racism/
Posted by: dougt | March 29, 2008 09:29 AM
Hi there old friend,
I just need to comment that I am both black and white, however, we felines don't experience the prejudice of one color over another. We just hate all other cats.
Kidding aside, when I was listening to Obama's speech on racism, I found myself holding my breath at many points, thinking, "Is he really going to pull off saying what he is saying?" But he masterfully not only brought up subjects that we, as a society, shy away from, but I found myself at the end of the speech feeling that even though there is still racism in America, the mere performance of this black man in a race for PRESIDENT has demonstrated that as a nation, we have overcome a large part of our prejudice. This made me rather proud of our nation. It also reopened a discussion that was timely, and people are probably realizing that they have really released their prejudice about color and are focusing on the man.
I too, don't disagree entirely with Rev. Wright in the way that America has behaved with the rest of the world, but to continue to damn the nation for ignorant acts of the past (or present for that matter) is not fair. What we need to do is pull together aside from our differences, and get rid of the people who make those kinds, and other harmful kinds of decisions. It's time for everyone to examine what is important to them; hating others or embracing others for a higher cause, being victims or being victors over victimization. This is what Obama is about, in my opinion, but then I am partial to cool black and white cats.
Posted by: Al | March 29, 2008 01:19 PM
I couldn’t agree more that it is time for a dialogue on racism. But in order for this dialogue to be productive, there is something we need to do. We need to acknowledge and actually understand that we cannot possibly know what it is like to be black.
Those who express a desire for such dialogue but then immediately start talking about how far we have come and how much we have done obviously do not understand this. It is one thing to claim empathy or sympathy for those on the receiving end of discrimination. It is quite another to be able and willing to see that our sympathy most likely contains elements of that same discrimination. Unless we live with an intrinsic, unchangeable part of ourselves that can, at any moment of any day, without cause on our part, bring down on us demeaning and humiliating treatment by another, then we cannot know what it is like to be black. Unless we start with that understanding, how is it possible to have a productive dialogue on racism?
Posted by: Trish | March 29, 2008 02:46 PM
It's too bad that people are more willing to complain and criticize than to actually enter a dialogue about things with which they disagree. Of course racism still exists in the United States, and the fact that we have an African-American running for president doesn't even begin to address the issues - and denials - that are deeply embedded in our society. When we hear all manner of comments from people that are essentially some version of "I'm not racist, but I won't vote for Obama because he's Black and/or his minister is a racist".... uh.... yeah, that's racist.
Posted by: Renee G | March 30, 2008 09:14 AM
This is a key Trish. One can not really truly empathize with what it is like to be so easily singled out for discrimination. What it must feel like to so often know that a person is just looking at you funny because of the color of your skin. It's creepy. And I'm not sure how good it would feel to know that just 150 years ago your people were owned as slaves, and pretty well dehumanized. Damn right there would be some resentment and bitterness. That's human nature. It would and could be dealt with, but it is a lot of baggage to carry and would take a lot of soul searching to conquer.
There is healing to be done on both sides. I'd imagine there is a lot of subconscious guilt to be dealt with, knowing deep down one is part of a race that treated another race so badly, and not so long ago. The denial is bad enough.
Posted by: Stephen | March 30, 2008 12:35 PM
Trish,
I agree, who can know what it is like to be black unless they are black? But since we can't all change our color readily in order to fully have an experiential understanding, where do you suggest we begin? Do we all hang our heads low because of guilt and NOT have a dialog? Do we follow the footsteps of history and wait for a revolution in order to provoke change. Isn't a dialog a first step, and sooner rather than later (barring, of course, changing our color and REALLY knowing what it is like to be black)?
Do we deny that we have made progress on this front? I have seen blatant racism when visiting other states and frankly I didn't think a black man would get very far in a campaign for President in this country based on behaviors I have seen. I was thrilled to see Obama as a front runner, not only because I think he is the best PERSON for the job, but also because it superceded what I perceived as almost insurmountable racism. In order to come as far as we have on this issue demonstrates we DO acknowledge there has been and still is a problem, and secondly, if there is a dialog prior to undertanding that we cannot know what it is like to be black, perhaps it might open the eyes those who have harbored racist sentiments, either overtly or subconsciously.
Trish, it has to start first with a willingness to have a dialog, whether one is racist, sympathetic, or actually black. Waiting for people to all get on the same page may be waiting too long and continues to postpone what is most necessary.
Posted by: Al | April 1, 2008 10:27 AM
Al, I appreciate what you are saying and as I stated first, I am in total agreement with a dialogue on racism.
My comments are directed toward those who think they are starting a dialogue with words like “we have come so far and done so much.” This indicates a lack of understanding that the only people who can make that judgment are those who are supposed to have benefited from “all we have done.” Such statements are not openings for a real dialogue. They are smug assumptions that we know what is needed for black people to feel they are not discriminated against. My point is, only black people can know that and when we understand that, the real dialogue will begin.
Posted by: Trish | April 2, 2008 05:36 PM
Trish, are you saying that "we" as a nation have not made progress concerning racism? Is abolishing slavery, establishing black voting rights, desegregation (Brown vs. Board of Education), civil rights, Equal Opportunity, Equal Housing, and now a viable black candidate for President not progress? It appears that these are evidence that the country, slow as it has been, has made progress, and they are also facts. Is it enough? No. Do African-Americans still suffer bigotry? Yes.
Your statement, "This indicates a lack of understanding that the only people who can make that judgment are those who are supposed to have benefited from “all we have done.”, is smug in itself; that we can't all celebrate together when strides, even little ones, are made. It also assumes that all non-black people feel that they have done enough and aren't we all good little boys and girls. I think this assumption by you is a bit cavalier. This battle is not one-sided. What I am hearing you say is that everyone has to work hard to change the course of a huge blight, but only African-Americans (or others who suffer bigotry) can make a judgment about the extent of progress made. Isn't this a little bigoted on your part as well as the “we” and “they” language you are using?
Do you think everyone is so stupid that they cannot observe that much, much more needs to be done even though some progress has been made? This reminds me of Christians saying that all you have to do is confess you are a sinner, accept Jesus in your heart, and you can be a good and virtuous person and go to heaven. What about people who do good works without the confessing of sin and accepting of Jesus? Are their good works null and void? Are they not good and virtuous people? Do they not already understand that they don't know how to be perfect? Or do they actually need to say the words?
I still stand by what I say; that I am surprised and amazed and heartened that even though tremendous bigotry still exists, the nation has come farther than I thought it had come. This was unexpected progress (in my eyes), and I am not unhappy about that. Even as deep wounds don't heal overnight, this wound also won't heal overnight, but I am delighted that we ("we" being all-inclusive) still strive to correct this horrible wrong. Or should we not continue to strive until we confess our sins?
Posted by: Al | April 3, 2008 12:37 PM
Al, no, I’m not saying that “we” as a nation have not made progress. Of course we have made progress. I am not talking about us as a nation. I am talking about us as individuals.
I am saying that if “we” as individuals who are white, really want to have meaningful dialogues with individuals who are black, it might be more productive to ask rather than tell. Why should such a dialogue start with self-congratulatory statements about how much has been accomplished? Wouldn’t it be more fruitful to start by asking what needs to be done?
Abolishing slavery was of course a good thing but that accomplishment might not seem too pertinent to a 20 year old black man who has been on the receiving end of bigotry throughout his life in school, in stores, in restaurants, on the street and on the job. And our accomplishments are not quite so grand as you make them sound. Yes there has been progress in civil rights but there are still too many places in America where black voting rights may be assured by law but are not in practice; where desegregation in schools is not only not complete after all these years but has even slipped backwards; where equal opportunity in jobs and housing may be guaranteed by law but is circumvented by individuals and businesses.
I am not thinking or saying that anyone is so stupid they cannot observe that more needs to be done. I am suggesting that it might be wise to approach doing more by asking those most affected what they feel and think about what needs to be done instead of assuming that we know best.
I’m not clear on your comparison of Christian confession of sin with what I said. A parallel that comes to my mind is with a store that guarantees customer satisfaction. Who can judge if the customer is satisfied? The store or the customer? The store may try to claim the customer should be satisfied, but only the customer knows if they are truly satisfied.
Posted by: Trish | April 3, 2008 06:31 PM
Trish,
Thanks for your reply. I understand what you are saying, but I am talking about "we" as a nation. Making progress in the fight against racism is a joint effort. Whether you like it or not, anything that affects one, affects all.
A discussion is a civilized method of coming to productive conclusions. I would think that part of that discussion would include questions to and from both sides of the table.
I just feel that making the statement "We need to acknowledge and actually understand that we cannot possibly know what it is like to be black." is moot. Of course we who are not black already KNOW we cannot possibly know what is like to be black anymore than a man cannot possibly know what it is like to be pregnant. It's a given. Further, telling people what they should be saying or thinking is not providing a conducive environment for an open forum.
This appears to be to be an attempt (albeit well intentioned) at Political Correctness as a condition for having a meaningful discussion. Why make statements that further serve to divide people that are already divided by requiring them to say "uncle?" This is not about saying uncle, this is about solving a problem. Let's just bring everyone to the table and have a meaningful discussion that will serve to air differences, acknowledge similarities, and heal a nation.
As a nation, like it or not, we cannot stop people from thinking and saying what they want. We cannot take that individual right away from anyone, whether it is racist or not. I would like to punch people in the mouth who make derogatory, racist comments, and I would like to confiscate all the guns in the United States, but I can't because I would never seek to deprive anyone of their individual rights, as repugnant as they may be. But what we can do is come together and overcome through addressing behavior, passing laws, and yes, having meaningful and ongoing discussions.
No one is saying that our progress has been perfect but it is the effort that demonstrates a willingness (the first step) to cure this ill. It takes a lot of re-education, overcoming long held traditional belief systems passed on from generation to generation, legislation, and time. And of course there is also the driving force behind everything, as well as the largest obstacle; money/power.
Posted by: Al | April 4, 2008 11:25 AM
Al, racism aside for a moment, there was a time when I also might have wanted guns confiscated, but that was when I actually thought our government (mostly Federal) was trustworthy. The Bush Administration has enlightened us all (at least those paying attention) that this is not the case. This is especially true when Dick "who gives a damn what the public wants" Cheney declared himself King (or is that God), at the same time as the rest of the Federal government became incompetent by reason of political nepotism taken to an extreme. I'm a much stronger proponent of the Second Amendment than ever before, as a hedge against a Federal government gone bad.
Hopefully, this paranoia will end when the Bush Administration is 86ed out of office (be nice if that would occur before their term limit expires), but having now seen how corrupt our government can become, it's doubtful. I keep saying that the only plus to come out of Bush et al was the exposure of the arrogance and self-serving sense of entitlement of many in the Federal government, and how that government has morphed into an oligarchy when most of us weren't paying attention. This of course would be less problematic if the government actually showed any sense of responsibility towards the welfare of the citizenry, or any ability above the level of mediocrity. Our corporate run government has not demonstrated that it is citizen friendly!
Sorry to deflect the main topic, but your comment about guns caught my eye.
Posted by: Stephen | April 4, 2008 12:25 PM
Stephen, I watched the Manchurian Candidate, which aired last night (curious timing) and all the behind the scenes manipulations were not far fetched. The ominous feeling I got from that movie brought to mind immediately the current administration and their jockying around the terrorist/torture issues. In their minds, any means justifies the end, and the end usually isn't what is in the best interest of the country, or even what we think is is.
And it seems like the more unlikely that Republicans can be re-elected, the more arrogant and "pious" they become.
You actually make my point about the value of individual rights. They are precious to me and whether we agree with them or not, we have to be careful to preserve them. To dismantle any of our rights is frightening and moving in the wrong direction, in my opinion.
Posted by: Al | April 4, 2008 01:03 PM
From what I can see, both of you, Al and Trish are on the same side, but just focusing on two aspects of the same equation. While it's true that a white person can't totally understand what it is to be black, the fact that Senator Obama is running so successfully for the nomination, demonstrates that a lot of people in the nation have moved quite far in the direction of overcoming some of the basic prejudice involved.
I find it quite ironic that Obama is in fact only half black, the other half being white. I realize that in the mind which is pre-judging, a person who is in any way part black is considered all black. This is the nature of prejudice, which is blind. (Isn't it interesting that the reverse is not also true?) Having black skin and being raised by a white grandmother may give him a unique perspective, a little empathy that runs in both directions.
It's quite possible that because of Obama's heritage, and having lived in other nations, and being personally exposed to Islamic traditions, he might just be the ideal person, at this time, to lead the nation; he could be a focal point for uniting rather than dividing. I'm amazed at how many don't see this, but instead, prefer to give into their deep rooted anxieties instead. (Aren't even most of those who aren't aware of any prejudice within themselves still perceiving Obama as being a black man, rather than a white man as well?) After all, Obama is a human being, and an individual, not just an object. It's quite possible his background gives him the desire and ability to bring people together, rather than divide. We shall see what we shall see!
Posted by: Stephen | April 5, 2008 11:49 AM
Stephen, I guess what I should have said a long time ago is that I agree with Trish on a theoretical level, however, for people to understand that they don't know what it is like to be black, while a virtuous perspective, does not take into account reality. Where I depart from Trish is that a discussion can be productive even if not all are going into it with that understanding or even with the "self-congratulatory" attitude. ALL need to come to the table and the hope is that they come out of it with understanding and a forward movement, but to say a dicussion is not going to be productive unless everyone is on the same page is a condition that just cannot and will not be met. If everyone were on the same page, then where would the need be to have this discussion? Anything else is just picking knits, in my opinion.
Posted by: Al | April 6, 2008 11:48 AM
I understand Al.
What really needs to be put forward in our society, is a reminder of what it's like to be discriminated against for anything - the color of skin, gender, financial status, educational level, likes or dislikes, long or short nose, fat or skinny, beautiful or not, whatever! We still live in a very petty world paradigm ruled by the insecurity driven defensiveness of the vast majority of people, and translating into a pathological need to discover someone/anyone to feel "better than." When that hurdle is cleared, we will see a much brighter world.
Posted by: Stephen | April 6, 2008 02:48 PM