How Obama beat the black race-haters
Monday November 3, 2008
The combustible black jazz and social critic Stanley Crouch has a powerful piece up today talking about how Obama trumped the Farrakhans of the black community. Excerpt: So much focus on the range of black Americans, especially in our news...
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Add to Facebook
Add to StumbleUpon
Advertisement
Advertisement
Search This Blog
Recent Posts
About Crunchy Con
Rod Dreher is an editorial columnist for the Dallas Morning News, and author of "Crunchy Cons" (Crown Forum), a nonfiction book about conservatives, most of them religious, whose faith and political convictions sometimes put them at odds with mainstream conservatives. The views expressed in this blog are his own.
Subscribe
Archives
Blogs Worth Reading
- Front Porch Republic
- The American Conservative
- Patrick Deneen
- Conventional Folly
- The American Scene
- First Things
- Andrew Sullivan
- The Plank
- Eunomia
- Get Religion
- Postmodern Conservative
- Alex Massie
- The Corner
- Contentions
- Sharon Astyk
- Barry Ritholtz
- The Oil Drum
- Mere Comments
- First Principles (ISI)
- Brian Kaller
I'm still trying to figure out what "black" means in this current political context.
This is a real question. If Obama looked more like Yankee ballplayer Derek Jeter (see URL) who is also mixed race, would he still be considered the first "black" president?
Crouch is always a good read. But cannot help but think that there's a closet somewhere with Farakhan, Sharpton, Jackson and Wright sitting tight until Wednesday, having been told to be quiet and await the windfall. Jackson, of course, looks forward to his son getting Obama's US Senat seat. None of these hacks are above nondescript envelopes of nonsequential large bills in exchange for a few months of peace and nonthreatening nonappearances, with hopes of federal social services funding goodies once the Obama Adminsitration takes over. Note that Michelle Obam spent the better part of December 2007 hanging around Sharpton's Harlem office, kissing this cheat's ring. There had to be a reason why she did so.
I just think a lot of white folks don't really understand the black community, and I'll even include myself to an extent. I can add that I'm married to a black woman.
I'm 34 and lived with the advent of hip hop. Hip hop is really not any more misogynistic than super popular white 80s Hair Metal bands like Motley Crue or Guns and Roses. Rather than being a tribute to crude materialism, like the white suburban or yuppie lifestyles, a lot of hip hop is just simply over the top and self-mocking, or has roots in the colorful funk movement.
Interestingly, my black in-laws can't stand Jesse Jackson, Lewis Farrakhan, or Al Sharpton. And judging by their reasoning and experience, I'd say that a lot of blacks feel the same way. My wife understands that there's a backlash against these sort of clowns and the attitudes they present that she's had to deal with in work scenarios.
Two of my brother-in-laws, who have been incredibly accepting of me, have served honorably in the U.S. military. I'm a Liberal Democrat who thinks that the U.S. military has been an incredible force for integration.
What I'm trying to say is that more blacks support Obama's mainstream approach and the spirit of that approach than get credit. I also believe that the right needs to understand that folks like Rush Limbaugh (who accused Colin Powel of supporting Obama - just 'cause he's black) are just as bad as Jesse Jackson, Lewis Farrakhan, or Al Sharpton.
I also believe that John McCain has run an incredibly honorable campaign, leaving Jeremiah Wright out. I think McCain felt that Wright, whether you think he sucks or not, wasn't a fair representation of the black community.
I would like to ask the following: What does it say that so many white folks ate right out of Bush's hand after 9/11 and blindly supported the invasion of Iraq where there were no WMDs?
It is significant that you--and not Crouch--brought up Wright. Likely because Crouch understands the context of Wright's influence and message and understands it has little to do with the Jackson/Sharpton axis.
I do think Obama's race/religion speech at the peak of the Wright story was a significant moment, but I'd argue he could give that speech precisely because of Wright's influence. Sitting through 20 years of Black Liberation Theology mixed with liberal, mainline protestantism--as opposed to listening to snippets on Youtube--has likely halped shape his post-Jackson/Sharpton ideology.
Wright said some dumb things. He also said some things white folks don't like to hear and can't really process. But there's little doubt that Obama has been influenced by Wright's ministry, creating many of the things that allows Obama to break from the Jackson/Sharpton world.
When Obama stands up side by side with Bill Cosby, publicly denounces the rap "culture" and exhorts black families to turn the TV off, save their money and actually GET MARRIED, then and only then will I believe that he has "rejected" the Farrakhans and Jacksons of the world.
Nota bene: I'm not going to hold my breath waiting.
Your servant,
Lord Karth
I agree with Brian. I am a black person, raised in a Baptist, southern household. I think that Mr. Crouch is writing a column aimed at white people, and that white people for some reason still don't understand the black electorate. Why else would the Jacksons and Sharptons get so much airtime and be the subject of much handwringing?
There are as many leaders in our community as there are in the white mainstream community, but always the cameras are pointed at a few hacks, which are supposed to speak for one heterogeneous group to a willingly ignorant group.
I and many of my friends would be proud to be a part of Wright's church. What did he say that was untrue or bad? His only sin was making white people uncomfortable. Well, maybe one signs of a true "post-racial" society is that everyone feels a little uncomfortable at times.
Up to now, we have had a situation where one group gets soothed and catered to, and to hell with everyone else. I feel uncomfortable every week, reading, watching, or listening to the pundit class, whose callousness and ignorance about my community are often on full display. I feel sick watching YouTube videos of partisans reveling in their anti-black attitudes. I shiver when I read about plots to invade schools and mutilate scores of african american students. Sharpton, Jackson, Wright and Farrakhan? No comparison.
Sharpton and Jackson are products packaged to white americans, designed to tease, but not overly provoke. For all the heat Wright and Farrakhan have taken, when have you seen their followers advocate violence or anything other than hard work, self change, and self determination? Those sound like conservative messages to me. Many whites just don't like the packaging.
Karth, thanks for illustrating the racism and ignorance that is mainstream in our society.
Maybe Obama and Cosby will give that sermon, but maybe-just maybe-they will target "real americans", with their negative saving rates, 50% divorce rates, and rampant consumerism.
lord karth, I'll second longdeshizi and add that Obama's most consistent message has in fact been that parents need to raise their kids, turn off the TV, make sure they are prepared for school, get married and provide their kids with stability and high expectations. But perhaps since it's not specifically framed as a black man talking to all the dumb, irresponsible black people, you missed it. Why is Obama responsible for delivering special messages to black people anyhow (who obviously NEED special messages- roll eyes)? What racist rubbish!
Since Wright has come up, one thing needs to be constantly made clear: before Bush-era triumphalism, "God damn America" sermons were S.O.P. for large swaths of the Christian right, who thought we were all going to hell in a handbasket for our sinful, Clinton-and-Hollywood-led ways. Respectfully, it's not all that far from Rod's p-o-v. And Wright's version of the jeremiad, in which racism is the sin for which America has never atoned, has a long and storied history in American Christianity, black and white.
Longdeshizi @ 10:25 AM writes:
"Maybe Obama and Cosby will give that sermon, but maybe-just maybe-they will target "real americans", with their negative saving rates, 50% divorce rates, and rampant consumerism."
Let's see: black Americans have to deal with the following:
a) an 80 % illegitimacy rate and a miniscule marriage rate;
b) A "rap/hip-hop" culture that not only illustrates but CELEBRATES mob violence, the degradation of women and rampant consumerism ("bling-bling", "Pass the Courvoisier", "East Coast/West Coast" shootings, countless songs about "b!tches" and "hos", etc.);
c) A very vocal separatist movement. Malcolm X's teachings still attract quite a bit of attention and endorsement, if Minister Farrakhan's and Rev. Wright's ministries and support levels are worth anything.
d) a black-on-black violent crime rate that is on a par with South Africa.
That's not racist, and frankly I don't give a fat rat's pointy tail if you think I am or want to call me racist. That's YOUR problem. Not mine. Those points are descriptive. I see this each and every day, mon ami; about 50-60 % of my Syracuse clientele is black. I've sent more kids and families to counseling and programs of various sorts to deal with exactly those problems than I'd like to think about. Whites and rural people have problems, some different, some not, and I will call (and have called !) them on those problems, too. But do not, if you have any intellectual consistency at all, deny that those problems I describe exist.
If the cloak fits, my friend, wear it or freeze in the wind.
Your servant,
Lord Karth
I was struck by a small point in the Crouch piece. The Republicans have made Patriotism cheesy (and have also made America undeserving of it, but thats a bigger issue.) And here is another reason that young people have flocked to him: contrary to popular opinion of my generation (ironic, apathetic, unpatriotic) we actually WANT to feel some patriotism - but we cannot because it has been tainted not just by Republican policy but also by rampant Republican aesthetic and linguistic kitsch. Obama has opened a path by which my generation can return to some sort of pride and dare-I-say-it Patriotism. And he is reaping the rewards.
Karth,
I'm thirding. Why is Obama obliged to get on a soapbox and berate his own people for YOUR PLEASURE? As the 10:45 post points out, Obama has been emphasizing the need to rebuild black culture and community, but not in the manner that I suspect would satisfy you - wherein he loudly castigates his own people for a specifically White audience.
My favorite Obama commercial is the one where he tells Americans to turn off the tv and read to our children. I don't think that the message would have been better if he had said that people of color should turn off the tv and the whities should continue bad habits.
I also agree with the people who say that white people generally don't understand African Americans. I thought it was very telling that the people who were in relationships with African Americans were the ones who most consistently kept saying "you don't get it" back when the Wright thing was going down around here. No one would listen to or accept anything they said. But it really ought to give people pause when those who are in the best position to see things from both sides consistently tell you, "you don't get it."
me @ 10:45 AM writes:
"Why is Obama responsible for delivering special messages to black people anyhow (who obviously NEED special messages- roll eyes)?"
Because he has attracted some 80-90 of the black vote in most areas of this country. Which is fine; who they choose to support is their problem. If he wants to do them a service--to truly BE a leader--he can tell them the hard things as well as the easy things.
Too many politicians in the past have, to whites, browns, blacks, and, presumably, pale greens. (Our situation with regards to entitlements is a prime example of this, as is our situation with regards to the recent bank bailouts.) If this character wants to really be "a voice for CHANGE", he can deliver those special messages. Otherwise, he's the same as any other snake-oil salesman or timeshare peddler looking to dip their snout into the public trough.
Your servant,
Lord Karth
That last should read "80-90 percent". Let's be perfectly clear here.
Your servant,
Lord Karth
My 2 cents on Wright:
I come from a Jewish clan whose older members are unfortunately somewhat susceptible to the Obama = new holocaust meme.
They like to jump on Wright's anti-Americanism. My standard rejoinder is to ask whether or not Jews currently living in Germany should be expected to express their love and devotion to the German state. The answer, naturally, is that no minority living within a state that very recently abused it in the most terrible of ways should be expected, within a generation or two, to learn to love that state.
Now before people jump on me for comparing the Holocaust to the persecution of the blacks in this country, I acknowledge that the difference in scale between the two events is considerable.
This underlying tension is probably what McCain--smartly--never went after Wright despite the prodding from certain circles inside the conservative punditocricy. McCain and his advisors recognized the combustability of the issue and that attacking Wright only underscored the argument for Obama.
Karth,
My life experience belies your crass encapsulation.
Mine, and that of millions of my brothers and sisters.
I am starting to feel that sickness I alluded to earlier, and it's only Monday. Your comments would have a better place on a Stormfront thread.
Lord Karth, dems always get 80-90% of the black vote. Why wasn't Kerry or Gore called to account over delivering "hard messages" to black people then? Besides, Obama has been delivering the messages you speak of, he's just addressed them to Americans. Are black folks not Americans? Are they some special category who are so dumb that they won't realize they are included in group "Americans"? Besides,it's not like whites and hispanics aren't having kids out of wedlock, listening to porno-rap and watching too much TV. Should Obama offer proportional "special messages" to each group according to their own particular rates of dysfunction? Even though the same message applies to all?
Mike F. @ 10:57 writes:
"Why is Obama obliged to get on a soapbox and berate his own people for YOUR PLEASURE?"
Since when is it "for [MY] PLEASURE ?" Black people have problems. So do white people, Hispanic people and Amerind people. Maybe, if they idolize someone to that level, they'll actually listen and pay attention to that someone. Perhaps they'll take his advice where they wouldn't take yours or mine. I just want to see some of those problems actually solved.
Believe me, my friend, it's no "pleasure" to have to go to a jail and see a young man who is accused of dealing drugs, or visit a child in a foster home whose mother smokes crack 3, 4, 5 times a day. If some people who are in those situations actually listened to someone proposing solutions and paid attention to those solutions, I'd sleep a he!l of a lot easier at night. I don't really give a flaming hoot whether it's someone like me or someone like him.
Now, if you'll excuse me, I have a foster-home visit to go to. Another city kid with a parent with drug problems that I need to see.
By the way, if it makes any difference, the girl and her mother are white.
Your servant,
Lord Karth
What the Karths of our nation don't get is that there are so many leaders and ordinary people trumpeting the positive messages in the black community. Many of these are in the church, some are in advocacy organizations.
When I lived in Maryland, I had a chance to work with many of these organizations. There are so many tireless, thankless people in the thick of it trying to turn things around. And it has been working, despite conventional wisdom.
Compare the black america of today with that 40, 30, or 20 years ago, and you see a steady track of progress on internal social issues. No, our status is not equal to whites on many issues, but we have not started in the same place.
If Obama is the first black leader you have heard to speak these positive messages, perhaps some of you should visit some churches on the other side of the tracks one sunday. Those messages are as ubiquitous as rap music in our communities.
Lord Karth needs to read Obama's Race/Religion Speech, his Father's Day speech, and his NAACP speech. If only conservative politicians were this candid and upfront with their social conservative base.
Karth, perhaps you should find another line of work. I'm sure that chip on your shoulder is very evident to the people you encounter in your social work. When people who are supposed to help you have the internal hostility and disdain that you do toward the subject of help, it can make things so much worse.
Hopefully you won't take this thread out on your charges, like many small minded people would.
Karth,
Sorry I did not mean to imply that you would actually enjoy Obama scolding black people. I guess what I was implying is that, when Obama tries to address the problems of the Black community - he will have to do it in a quiet manner that will ensure that blacks do not feel like he is doing it for the pleasure of white folks. There are a lot of raw feelings and wounded pride involved, and when Obama tries to address dysfunction in the black community - if he does it right it will be in a manner that will be for the most part imperceptible to white people. We are not, nor should we be, invited.
It is so interesting to just read comments on here sometimes. I can hardly stand not voicing an observation. Having read Longdeshizi , Daniel, and Me respond to Karth in the way they do makes it seem so hopeless that there will ever be much progress. Karth it strikes me is making points based upon statistic, and I presume unmanipulated fact. (Living in an area of primarily black people I can attest on the surface to what he says, so it intuitivly makes sense to me.
Then into the fray jump the usual ideologues on the attack. Having nothing to say they attack the persons character with suggestions that the person is not even qualified for their job, which probably, based on the sound of it eminently qualifies him to make the observations he did, or call him racist to try and shut down statements of social observation that any honest person must own to.
How can there be any useful dialog on this subject when there seems always to be those so willing to start the namecalling game so common to certain political types. Hmnnnn, quite an interesting matter.
And btw I have read Stanley Crouch. I think the guy is brilliant. If I were black I would be quite cautious of saying he writes for white people. It seems demeaning to black intelligence to suggest that because someone writes well, thinks well, speaks well he is not talking to blacks. Crouch seems to not always talk the party line maybe that is the issue. Crouch is pretty damn smart in my opinion and points to the broadness of black thinking even though those who want to control black thought do not like and need to find ways to shut it down.
The above arguments between Karth and his detractors remind me of arguments between men and women - i.e., arguments based on observations versus arguments based on feelings.
Y'all ought to chill and read THE FIVE LOVE LANGUAGES. What we have here is [a] failure to communicate.
November 4, 2008: a day that will live in infamy.
This "white man's burden" schtick is getting soooooooo old. So is labeling a whole community based on the actions of a few. I would think that this debacle of an administration and election would have taught alot of you to look inward at your own unkempt houses, rather than continue to vilify others.
Teenage pregnancy, crime, out-of-wedlock relationships: Wright and countless others preached against all of these every sunday. Community organizations work to ameliorate these blights. But blacks are still pathological because Wright makes white folks blush.
You're right; we will never see eye-to-eye on these issues. Too much baggage.
Observations and facts? If his list of facts is what passes for objectivity around here, I can see why the neocons have completely misread the electorate in the last few years.
Wait a minute - Obama HAS given the sort of talks Lord Karth has said he ought to be giving. He just hasn't addressed them specifically to African Americans. The fact that this doesn't seem to count in the eyes of Lord Karth is telling and very problematic. Is he saying that African Americans aren't Americans? That they are too dumb to realize that they are included as Americans when Obama talks unless he specifically says "African Americans"? Either proposition is wrong and racist.
The African Americans I am close with greatly resent the idea that because they are successful they are under some sort of obligation to give other blacks "a good talkin' to", especially since African Americans aren't the only ones who need a good talking to. It's racist, condescending and unfair to insist that any African American bears a special responsibility not just to promote healthy, responsibly behavior, but to single out African Americans for that message. That's the basis for my response to Lord Karth - not ad hominem pot shots. (And his figures are inflated, but that's really not in the least bit relevant to the matter anyhow.)
Lord Karth says;
*Because he has attracted some 80-90 of the black vote in most areas of this country. Which is fine; who they choose to support is their problem. If he wants to do them a service--to truly BE a leader--he can tell them the hard things as well as the easy things.*
And, as everyone around here has been telling you...HE HAS. Once again, he talks about being a father, working hard, making families important, the importance of turning off the TV and reading, the importance of education etc. Are you objecting that he doesn't say ONLY blacks need to do this? The only change he would have to make to speeches he's been making for months is to say "Now I'm only talking to black folks here." And you think this would make his speech MORE effective? Please. Lots of whites, hispanics, asians, etc have the same problems. That's why he speaks of these problems to everybody.
Lord Karth also says;
*Now, if you'll excuse me, I have a foster-home visit to go to. Another city kid with a parent with drug problems that I need to see.
By the way, if it makes any difference, the girl and her mother are white*
The question is why does it make a difference to you? Why mention it? If these are problems that exist across racial lines (and they do as you've proved) then why shouldn't Obama talk to AMERICANS rather than just African-Americans.
There is an interesting article at the same site referenced above by Jeffrey Hartm, a speechwriter for Reagan and Nixon. He worked at the National Review for four decades.
Hartm is one of a long list of high profile Republicans that are voting for Obama. Hartm's summary:
"Obama is the Real Conservative"
"One thing I know is that both Nixon and Reagan would have agreed with Obama's speech against the Iraq war ... But all the organs of the conservative movement followed Bush over the cliff - as did John McCain.
Republican George W Bush has not been a conservative at all, either in domestic policy or in foreign policy"
How many of you actually listened to the two sermons that were the major source of the few second clips? How many of you know that Rev Wright was G** Damming the Bush administration for wanting to start an unjust war in Iraq that would kill innocent people. Wright's sermon has excellent points! The pastor in my all white church made a similar sermon; however, it was delivered in a different manner.
I think Rev Wright's sermon was at a far higher intellectual level. I had to do considerable reading about the war to understand what he was saying .
I find it amazing that many people posting have all the answers. Obama should or should not have done certain things. Sterotyping by race and other factors.
How about trying to step into other people's shoes? How about realizing that we all look at things from our own narrow perspective? How about more listening?
How about loving your neighbor even if you disagree with them, which would include not demonizing Rev Wright.
an observer: "Karth it strikes me is making points based upon statistic, and I presume unmanipulated fact."
That's correct. Blacks have a higher crime rate.
http://www.city-journal.org/2008/18_2_criminal_justice_system.html
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.