Being politically incorrect: Race and name do matter
Many optimists think Main Street voters have moved beyond the “Guess who’s coming to dinner” syndrome of 1967. They think that all Barack Hussein Obama Jr. must do to win the Oval Office is to compete fairly and squarely with Hillary Clinton and John McCain.
Among other arguments, they point to the support of white voters for Obama in Georgia and several other states on Super Tuesday and later in Louisiana, Nebraska and Washington.
I would love to be persuaded but fear their optimism is like the hopes in 2000 of those who thought Christianity could no longer be a deciding factor in modern US elections. They rejected right wing fundamentalists as politically puny bags of hot air. Look what happened since.
The Clintons and others have already poked at Obama’s race and Muslim middle name to stoke doubt and fear at this early stage in the contest. They are hardly likely to switch off when the real bloodletting starts.
Just one generation ago, black people sat at the back of buses in several parts of America. It is laudable that some of them have reached extraordinary heights so quickly in almost all spheres of American life. But let us not be hasty.
Partly because of laws cloaking racial prejudice, one in six black males has been or is in prison and one in three is likely to be imprisoned during his life time.
Perhaps, the era of overt racism is over but covert racism is hard to eliminate in one short generation. Added to these are anti-Muslim feelings. I want to be wrong but see little evidence that Main Street voters are ready to choose Obama as President over a war hero and conservative white male, John McCain.
Obama is credited with attracting crossovers, independents and young people. This is possible in a primary faced with a cold fish like Clinton, who is less ethical to boot. There’s no real proof at this time that Obama can pull it off against McCain. Even Clinton may lose to McCain, especially if it is true that Southern white males prefer to vote against a woman in any case.
White people may have gone beyond race during the past 40 years but new racially prejudiced people have entered Main Street. Many are Hispanics, Koreans, Asians and East Indians. There is little to suggest that their majority will vote positively for a black President.
The intention here is not to berate people for prejudice or intolerance whatever their color and origin. The point being made is that political battles over the Oval Office are won on Main Street, and Main Street may not be ready for Obama even if he wins the Democratic nomination.
Capturing the nomination requires persuading persons well versed in politics. Being elected President involves overcoming a lot of irrationality born of the fears of Main Street voters about such daily personal struggles as livelihoods, medical care and redress for injustice.
Obama’s success so far brings optimism to those who hope for fair leadership and beneficial change in politics and governance. Such people usually have full stomachs, basic security and some education.
The Main Street’s masses are not so well cared for by destiny or society. They are lower middle class, low income or poor so they are less moved by the language of change and ideals. The change they want is to escape the indignities of daily life inflicted by low incomes and unpaid mortgages.
As yet, Obama has not said much to these people. The only real path to victory for him is to win over their minds and hearts. Inspiring thoughts mean less to them than putting more on the dinner table.
The dinner table’s composition has changed since Poitier, Tracy and Hepburn played out their drawing room comedy and John F. Kennedy resurrected Camelot. People drowning in bills want reassurance that their leader has the guts and fire needed to quickly deliver a better future. They do not care to understand the thoughts of a new Camelot Kennedy.
It may be politically correct to argue that being black and of partly Muslim blood is a minor not major hurdle for Obama. But sweeping these things under the rug does not remove the bump.
It may also be wise to acknowledge that many non-white Americans will hold Obama to a higher standard of proof to win their votes over McCain. Many of them are too young as Americans to be traditional Democrats or Republicans so they look at politics through a different filter.
10 Responses to “Being politically incorrect: Race and name do matter”
This is all correct Brij, but the war and Bush fatigue will cancel that out if Obama can derail Hillary. With Hil, the war is mooted, since she voted for it, and Clinto fatigue almost rivals Bush fatigue. The wildcard is then Mac's insane stance on the war, but that's matched by the Hill haters. Obama does not have that worry, so unless McCain tries to niggerize Obama like Hill is doing, I think his hands are tied, because Obama will rap him across the muzzle with the first 'jive talker' type remark, and ridicule him as a relic from a declasse racist past.
Brij, much of the problem in the previous post, which caused comments from myself and and a couple others at the time and to which you now seem to be responding, rested with the rhetoric you employed and the way you expressed your concerns of racism in America and its impact on the presidential race.
Instead of speaking of covert or institutional racism, you spoke of whether rich white men are okay with their daughters marrying black men, as if that is the succinct way to understand racial issues in contemporary America. Instead of being the basic way to understand those relations, it sounded to me as if people think the U.S. is still awaiting the outcome of Brown v. Board of Education and what to do about those sit-ins; i.e., that America's race relations today are still best understood in the terms of the 50s and 60s.
To deny that that racism is best understood with questions from the 50s and 60s is not to assert that racism is dead. It is instead an appeal to a middle ground.
As a final comment, my reaction was not due to me being politically correct, as suggested in today's essay, which suggests that the thoughts are based on a denial of reality and a wish to pander to political appearance. It is actually what I think based upon my experience (that there is racism in America and it is not the same as it was 40 years ago, and to couch it in 40 year old terms shows a misunderstanding of the current situation) and my admittedly informal study of the issues. The term “politically correct” nowadays is periodically used to express a genuine phenomenon, but more often seems to be a term thrown out to belittle the opinions of others.
My two cents. And I won't think you are just being politically correct if you disagree.
Some people still view the USA as if it's pre-1965, which of course is incorrect, or believe those systematic oppressive regimes of racism and sexism still exist, and because they cannot prove it (because they do not still exist, nor did they ever exist in the form these people believe they did or still do), they say it's “crypto-racist” or “crypto-sexist” and of course, everything normally spoken is actually “in code” to conceal the latent or covert institutionalized racism or sexism that doesn't exist.
Some people still view the USA as if it's pre-1965, which of course is incorrect, or believe those systematic oppressive regimes of racism and sexism still exist, and because they cannot prove it (because they do not still exist, nor did they ever exist in the form these people believe they did or still do), they say it's “crypto-racist” or “crypto-sexist” and of course, everything normally spoken is actually “in code” to conceal the latent or covert institutionalized racism or sexism that doesn't exist.
Sometimes, when DLS seems to stray into sanity for a few posts, he rushes back into the void with one like this.
Sometimes, when DLS seems to stray into sanity for a few posts, he rushes back into the void with one like this.
You only wish. Do you really resent that myths you may hold are only that, myths?
You only wish. Do you really resent that myths you may hold are only that, myths?
'or believe those systematic oppressive regimes of racism and sexism still exist, and because they cannot prove it (because they do not still exist, nor did they ever exist in the form these people believe they did or still do), they say it's “crypto-racist” or “crypto-sexist” and of course, everything normally spoken is actually “in code” to conceal the latent or covert institutionalized racism or sexism that doesn't exist.'
Spoken like a true limousine liberal. Haha.
'or believe those systematic oppressive regimes of racism and sexism still exist, and because they cannot prove it (because they do not still exist, nor did they ever exist in the form these people believe they did or still do), they say it's “crypto-racist” or “crypto-sexist” and of course, everything normally spoken is actually “in code” to conceal the latent or covert institutionalized racism or sexism that doesn't exist.'
Spoken like a true limousine liberal. Haha.