Some of those who read the article took offense at their perception that the author was labeling all white liberals who don't support Obama as racists. Regrettably, they were unable to get beyond protesting loudly, "I am not a racist." Hush, no one said that you were.
The thesis of the piece is not that white liberals who question Obama's policies are racists. It fascinates me that when the term racism appears in any piece of writing, particularly by a black person, that the immediate reaction of so many whites is to become indignant at being called a racist. Makes it sort of difficult to get to the heart of the matter being discussed.
Harris-Perry's essential point can be summed up in these lines:
The 2012 election may be a test of another form of electoral racism: the tendency of white liberals to hold African-American leaders to a higher standard than their white counterparts. If old-fashioned electoral racism is the absolute unwillingness to vote for a black candidate, then liberal electoral racism is the willingness to abandon a black candidate when he is just as competent as his white predecessors. (The Nation)Harris-Perry only arrives at this point after carefully explaining the concept of electoral racism: Electoral racism in its most naked, egregious and aggressive form is the unwillingness of white Americans to vote for a black candidate regardless of the candidate’s qualifications, ideology or party. Harris-Perry is also careful to affirm that positive movement has been made beyond such electoral racism in its most blatant form.
She then tackles the issue of the criticism of Obama, who has actually accomplished a great deal, and how the liberal base appears to hold Obama to a far higher standard than the most recent Democratic president, Bill Clinton. Essentially, Perry's discussion is informed by the noble savage archetype that has characterized much of the European interaction with indigenous peoples or with those of African ancestry for generations. (See for example: Noble Savage, Magical Negro, or On Being a Noble Savage) Essential to this archetype is elevating the non-white to a favored status as noble and honest, an admirable race in spite of its oppressed status. This archetypal pattern is particularly seen in American culture, indeed it is promoted in much of early American literature in works such as "Uncle Tom's Cabin" and "The Last of the Mohicans." These unrealistic portraits lead to expectations that are based on a glorified and mythological image rather than the realities of the people of color.
Perry questions whether those archetypal patterns are informing the differing expectations that generate what she labels electoral racism in which some liberals held such unrealistic expectations of Obama that they were bound to be disappointed with the reality of his presidency. In simplistic terms, take Bill Maher's comment, repeated with approval by Michael Moore in which Maher asserts that he voted for the black guy but got the white guy. (See clip from The View) In other commentary, Maher laments that Obama is too professorial and not a real black president, "the kind that lifts up his shirt so that you can see the gun in his pants." (Frances Martel, Bill Maher Disappointed that Obama Isn't a Real Black President, 5/29/2010)
I don't suggest that Maher is a card carrying racist but there is inherent unrealized racism in his observation. What is Maher's definition of blackness? What is there about Obama that's not black enough for him? What is there in Obama's demeanor that makes Maher define him as acting white? Who is Bill Maher to define what it means to be black? A similar observation with regards to unrealized racism is asserting that, "All Asians are good at math." It doesn't have to be a negative observation, but simply a sweeping generalization that presumes to define an entire group based on a perceived characteristic.
The animosity against Obama is couched in very personal terms. Some accuse him of intentionally betraying liberal or progressive causes, of being a sellout who has turned to the dark side and abandoned all progressive goals. That goes far beyond being disappointed and desiring a change in his policies. It's the worst type of character assassination. Perry raises the question as to why so much vitriol is directed towards Obama on this very personal level when in comparison with Bill Clinton, he has accomplished as much and in many cases more than Clinton. I recall when Clinton signed DADT into law; he didn't get nearly the attacks from the left for signing the bigoted law as Obama has received for not fighting for an anti-discrimination provision in the bill repealing the law.
Race informs all aspects of life in this country. To pretend that it doesn't is naive and unrealistic. Interestingly, I've seen this same article shared by many of my black Facebook friends. Those who have shared it have found it credible. This doesn't mean that black people are always right; however, it does reflect a difference in perspectives along racial lines. The question to ask yourself is do you use these differences to engage in honest dialogue or do you shut down into a defensive posture in which you deny that there is anything to be discussed? I truly appreciate those of you who have elected the first option. I have found your perspectives affirming and comforting. It is through such honest exchange that we all learn and grow.
Sheria, Some thoughts (and no, I'm not going to start with I am not a racist!)
ReplyDeleteFirst, I agree that in prinicpal and practice minority/marginalized groups do tend to have to work harder and perform to a higher standard. I can remember in younger days having to "prove" myself in order to compete with men for the same job to which they were automatically considered well suited.
And I won't say that there is not validity to the perception that more was expected of Obama and that part of that is probably because he is a man of color but I think he bears some responsibility because he promised to fill some very tall orders and like most pols he laid it on pretty thick. It got him elected.
I really didn't think he was going to walk into the White House (on water)and save the country in 90 days. He also had to contend with a less than cooperative Democratic majority in Congress and then a divided Congress midterm.
If I have any critism of the President I would have to say it is the amount of time he spent trying to appease the Rethugs. I think most of us on the left wanted him to stand up and thumb his nose at them (it would be undignified for a man in such high office to moon them).
An observation about race - when I meet someone for the first time, the first thing I notice is color which gives me a clue to their ethnic background. I think that might be something left over in our DNA where we try to identify other members of our tribe. Sight and smell and sound probably had a lot to do with survival for our ancient ancestors in being able to identify friend or foe. But we are no longer Neanderthals and we must rein in primitive responses and look for common ground; a point from which we can start to build mutally enjoyable and respectful relationships.
If we allow race to be the elephant in the room who no one wants to talk about, how can we ever move forward? When someone who is black tells of living under Jim Crow laws and how they were humiliated and threatened and marginalized, we need to listen and not immediately jump to the defensive as if we are being personally accused. Perhaps if we can listen and empathize and acknowledge the validity of their experiences we can change the attitudes of blacks who see all whites as their enemy. Only then can we move into a place of peace, love and understanding.
"WE must be the change we wish to see in the world." Ghandi
Let me clarify that I do not believe all black people see white people as their enemy but I have met black people who are very distrustful of white people. Either by personal experience or from ancedotal experiences of others. And visa versa. These are the attitudes we need to change and we need to start in childhood. But until we have serious conversations on a large scale that's not going to happen.
ReplyDeleteSheria,
ReplyDeletePart One of Dino Response:
I've found Melissa Harris-Perry a subtle analyst and have been delighted to see her on MSNBC – seems they're trying to lure her into becoming a regular. I don't know if that would ultimately be good for her, though – she's a high-powered scholar and we need people of such caliber doing just what they do. Her distinction between old-guard electoral racism and lib-guard electoral racism makes sense to this dino. Chris Matthews made a similar point the other day, perhaps with a nod to MHP: a lot of people might vote for a black candidate once and then abandon him when he doesn't do everything they had hoped.
Sure, there's probably a hint of the Noble Savage stereotype underlying it all – that's a plausible suspicion. When we make a list of what the president has accomplished, it's impressive, especially given the extent to which the opposition against him is vehement and implacable beyond all reason, and certainly racist in some instances. (I think it's a toxic mix of hatred for liberalism generally and unacknowledged but intense disrespect for and fear of people of African descent, black males in particular.)
Yet his accomplishments tend to be forgotten almost immediately or dismissed as worthless compromises. If he dropped by the homes of some of his erstwhile supporters and personally handed them a million dollars, they'd be unable to recall that salient action a week later, it seems. Sellout! Republican! Etc. The admittedly disappointing moments in Barack Obama's presidency, I suggest, have at least as much to do with the weaknesses of our dysfunctional, corrupt and geriatric political system as they do with any substantive character flaws or failings on his part. It's true as Rocky says, of course, that every president gets elected by making unrealistic promises (to a childish electorate, I might add) and then looks foolish when he can't fulfill them.
The rhetorical task the president faces is a difficult and interesting one: how to be bold and assertive and yet not subject to plausible charges that he's "an angry black man." We want him to crush the brazen dirty-rotten lying right-wing scoundrels to dust, and it's an irony of racial history that he, as a black man, can't be seen wanting to do that. His dilemma isn't entirely dissimilar to that of a powerful woman, is it? If a woman asserts herself, she's a rhymes-with-rich; if she doesn't, we complain about her for being an emotional weakling or an incompetent and take it as an instance that women should never be trusted with responsibility. The first woman president is going to have to be nothing short of Queen Elizabeth I to get around THAT problem. Maybe a "Cult of the Virgin Chief Executive" would do it.
Part Two of Dino Response:
ReplyDeleteBut more to the point is the despair that understandably sets in as we watch so many media figures trivializing and ignoring President Obama's initiatives. Nothing he says or does seems to make a dent these days. Everybody knows how the story runs, right? Obama says something gracious and reasonable, the Republicans become outraged and scream NO! COMMUNISM! KENYAN FASCIST MOOZLUM! and go back to talking about the pressing need to slash social programs so we can cut all those oppressed "job creators'" taxes another ten percent. I don't recall Bill Clinton being trivialized or ignored in that manner. Hated, maybe, but not dismissed with utter contempt. Someday President Obama may be a revered figure, but while he's in office I suspect he will always have the odd sensation that almost nobody's paying attention, nobody's giving him the slightest credit. So be it – maybe that's the price our first African-American president has to pay for doing this job, even if he does it very well.
Finally, on Bill Maher, yes, I know what you mean – I remember an instance or two in which Maher evokes an image of a "gangsta" black president and sort of wonders where that gangsta is when we need him most. I'm certain that he means well and is just playing around with a persistent cultural stereotype to get his point across (to be fair, what he does is rough, almost Aristophanes-style comedy and satire, and you have to be outrageous if you're going to keep that kind of thing going), but still, it's open to charges of being tinged with racist ideology. I doubt that Maher fully understands the danger to Obama's effectiveness presented by such stereotypes, as I've outlined the problem above. White people seem to have a love/hate relationship with the more violent side of so-called rap and hip-hop culture: they admire the tough talk and imagery, the macho posing and preening, but they're terribly afraid of what they suppose "the real thing." Which is preposterous, given that most of the actual violence done by young black and Latino "gangsters" is perpetrated against others who look like them, not against white people. But there you have it. Best for liberal satirists not to put that image of President Obama (who is after all an Ivy-League lawyer and intellectual, not some phony badass hipster) in their heads. By contrast, I think Jon Stewart usually gets Obama about right, and he's been consistent in pointing out the ridiculousness of some Obama supporters' expectations.
Dino and Rocky, thank you for such thoughtful consideration of my post. Each of you added to my own insights on the matter of race relations in the U.S. Of course, I'm not surprised. I've come to expect quality discourse here at the Zone. I always feel safe here among y'all, safe enough to let my southern shine through.
ReplyDeleteHmm. My wife is an African American and I am a Caucasian American. I wonder how she feels about racism, really. She doesn't talk as if she is distrustful of whites, but she does tell me she hopes our child comes out black.
ReplyDeleteIt is all very confusing.
Sheria,
ReplyDeleteDamn, that's a good post - again.
"What is Maher's definition of blackness? "
I Watch his show, but it often leaves me angry, either at the idiots he dignifies by invitation, or at him and his convictions on subjects he knows less than nothing about, like medicine and chemistry, engineering and married life. . . I have to keep reminding myself that he's really just a comedian looking for laughs.
But shouldn't that be "all y'all?" Forgive me, but I'm still learning to be Southern and I don't always know when to use the double plural.
Sheria,
ReplyDeleteThanks -- I always look forward to your posts, which are both erudite and good reading.
Capt. Fogg,
Some of those guests are embarrassing, including those on "our side." New Rules is good, though. At least Maher rejects the false equivalence trap that some of the less harshly satirical comics fall into on occasion.
Sheria’s gifts to us are always the most challenging … and the ones I always learn from.
ReplyDeleteBefore responding to this post, I was curious why Melissa Harris-Perry left Princeton for Tulane, so I looked up her bio. Married to James Perry, a former mayoral candidate of NOLA, there is no surprise in why she gave up her Princeton post. Perhaps more surprising was this discovery about her: Like Barack Obama, she too is from a biracial family. “I’ve never thought of myself as biracial,” she says. “I’m black.”
My oldest friend from high school is married to a journalism grad from Tulane (who later studied law and became a judge); all of their adult children self-identify as black. Our African-American friends and neighbors and fellow citizens are all biracial to some degree. Yet, as Sheria has taught us, there is always the one drop of blood.
“It is all very confusing,” Yet, I can also appreciate why one might chose to affirm one side of a family over the other.
In my family, there are a rich side (paternal) and a poor side (maternal). The academics, scholars, and writers in my family are from my maternal side. These are the people who influenced my core beliefs and sense of self. On the paternal side is a closed club of self-congratulatory cousins with an undeserved sense of entitlement … all Republicans. Why the hell would I want to identify with people who do not share my values! Sometimes we make a conscious choice for a good reason.