Speak Your Mind, Honesty Will Follow
by Guest Contributor Big Man, originally published at Raving Black Lunatic*
While cruising through the internet the other day, I stumbled across a blog post for a major publication that was shocking because of its blunt honesty. Those of you who consume the mainstream media know that on certain topics, particularly race, there is a lot of hemming and hawing, but very little blunt honesty.
Anyway, the post, which you can find here, was about the hurdles Obama will have to jump to get votes in areas where folks can’t fathom supporting a black man for president. It’s a topic most of us are familiar with, and it’s one that’s been discussed rather frequently in this campaign.
Here’s an excerpt from the blog where the reporter is talking to a guy in Kentucky about Obama’s chances in the state. The guy is explaining he won’t vote for Obama.
Race,” Patrick said matter-of-factly. “I’ve talked to people—a woman who was chair of county elections last year, she said she wouldn’t vote for a black man.” Patrick said he wouldn’t vote for Obama either.
Why not?
“Race. I really don’t want an African-American as President. Race.”
What about race?
“I thought about it. I think he would put too many minorities in positions over the white race. That’s my opinion. After 1964, you saw what the South did.” He meant that it went Republican. “Now what caused that? Race. There’s a lot of white people that just wouldn’t vote for a colored person. Especially older people. They know what happened in the sixties. Under thirty—they don’t remember. I do. I was here.”
Not that’s some blunt honesty for your dome.
Black people commonly say that we would rather an openly racist person to one that hides in the shadows, but, man, when you see that crap out in the open it is pretty jarring. I mean, it’s one thing when somebody is racist and they have no power over your lives, but an openly racist person that can affect your life is a frightening prospect.
For me, the scary part is that once you’ve established that someone or some people are just blatantly racist, what’s your next step. Can you really appeal to the better nature of a racist? If you become angry and denounce their racism, will they even care? They may try to avoid the public scorn, but will it affect their hearts in any way?
It sounds good to say that open racism is easier to combat, but really combating any injustice depends on the person committing the injustice feeling some shame, or having the power to get vengeance. I’m not sure either of those dynamics exist in a case like the one involving the guy from the New Yorker article.
How do you battle entrenched racism, particularly when folks believe that their racism is justified and reasonable? This guy, and many like him, clearly believe that black progress is a threat to the livelihood of white folks, and nothing anyone says will convince them otherwise. No statistics, no experts, no personal anecdotes can convince most racists that their racism is an incorrect emotion.
So, I wonder how we as a country, particularly we as black folks, should proceed. Clearly, we cannot afford to isolate ourselves and hope that racism will disappear on its own. Not only do we not have the resources to do that, but studies have shown that some prejudices can be erased with exposure to new experiences.
But, is it worth our time to engage and discuss racial issues with people who have clearly embraced a way of thinking that will never allow black folks to be full and equal members of society? How are we supposed to hold a conversation with someone who has clearly stated that they believe that black politicians are only out to help black folks? Even if we ask them what that says about white politicians, will they even care?
In the black community, we often liken ourselves to crabs in a barrel who pull down any other crab attempting to escape to a better life. We ruefully chuckle that this mindset is a “black think.” Yet, clearly, that’s one of the biggest lies every told to black people or told by black people. It’s a human reaction to view the progress of others as a threat to our own progress. It’s perfectly human to react with fear and lash out when we feel that chance for the “good life” is slipping away?
Obama has argued that if we improve the conditions of all Americans, we won’t have to worry as much about racial strife because prosperity breeds unity. Yet, I wonder if the prosperity only hides the fault lines that have existed and may always exist. I wonder what it takes to change the core of a man or woman.
Honestly, I’m just wondering.
*Latoya’s Note - I originally spotted this on TPM, so I linked there, not knowing that the real author of the piece was not the TPM poster.
Carmen Van Kerckhove is co-founder and president of 
Erica B. wrote:
It’s stuff like that which lets white people say, “I’m not a racist,” and offends them when they’re informed they are. That guy is blatantly, horribly, disturbingly racist, and happy to admit it! What “mainstream” racist — the kind with hidden prejudices — would want to be associated with that?
I have stereotypes and prejudices of my own, which I desperately try to get rid of because I do not want to be that person. But by seeing him as so terribly wrong, I make it harder to admit that I, too, can be racist at times, and I might be part of the problem at times.
I don’t know how to address it, either, though. My typical response to bigotry (and I must say, I have almost never heard anything this blatant) from other white people is to mumble something about “well, that’s not right,” and avoid the topic (or bigot) in future. That doesn’t change their prejudices, it just lets me pretend it doesn’t exist. Pretty useless response, I know — but I don’t have any evidence or inspiration to change their mind, and usually I hear this stuff at work not socially so I’m also trying to preserve a professional relationship by not challenging or offending them. The easy way out…
I am actively trying to make any closet “isms” of mine disappear. The first step is knowing they’re there, the second is knowing they’re wrong. I think that things can change and get better, but it is slow, painfully slow. It has to happen with individual people, because they are the ones who create and sustain institutional racism and discrimination.
Posted 15 May 2008 at 8:36 am ¶
nezua wrote:
dinosaurs were once a great threat to many other creatures, but they no longer are.
Posted 15 May 2008 at 8:59 am ¶
Kali wrote:
better to have it in the open - then white, middleclass ‘liberals’ can stop pretending that racism is so uncommon - and perhaps together we can work to reduce the cost and the pain of racism.
btw read the comments in the boston globe (in this democratic stronghold) to stories about PoC - they are hideous, much worse than those above.
Posted 15 May 2008 at 10:47 am ¶
aka lynn wrote:
A true lack of education has hindered this man from being able to recognize that those in power have only used him and played race as a devisive pawn.
Posted 15 May 2008 at 10:50 am ¶
James wrote:
No Big Man. It’s never worth your time to try to convince a racist that racism is illogical and dehumanizing.
Let’s be clear though - the patently irrational fear that an Obama Administration would “put too many minorities in positions over the white race” emerged from a person in Kentucky, not New York, or California, or even Texas. States and locales that embrace diversity - however pained and violent those places are - benefit on a capitalist basis alone far above their racially separated counterparts in this nation. Integration means more consumers, more capital, and more success for everyone.
The point: on a class basis alone, I don’t believe African Americans benefit from discussions on race with people who fear and/ or resent Black achievement, especially when that achievement towers over the social and economic lot of that antagonist and his group.
That Kentuckian reminded me of the residents of Sumter, Florida in John Singleton’s Rosewood, depicted as intoxicated, dirt-poor, yet unflinching racists who were moved to mass murder and ethnic cleansing by racist responses to Black sexuality and vitriolic rage over Black financial success.
Straight up - some people believe that Sen. Obama has a problem with poor White voters, others find his electoral difficulty only revolves around Appalachian White voters. Either way, I think that Sen. Obama’s virtuous Bryant Gumbel image of African American intellectual and professional skill jars people often falsely considered racially mainstream who do not derive tangible economic benefits from their racial makeup.
The Pennsylvanian and West Virginian voters who support the fantasy of a Clinton restoration express the ancient American overseer sentiment: Negroes are never better than me. So Big Man, when SuperNegro Extraordinaire shows up and requests their votes for President, none of us should waste any time with pained laments and open-armed wondering on how we can convince modern-day residents of America’s Sumters to respect Black people and disavow racism.
All we need remember is that there’s a reason they live in Kentucky.
Posted 15 May 2008 at 11:12 am ¶
eric daniels wrote:
I see no reason for black folks to be jarred when low- class white people say these things, in fact I feel empowered because I don’t have to hold anything back and can be as racially raw as I want to be just like Malcolm X was. I am not voting for Obama for this main reason,Adolph Reed said about him in a recent article that he cares only about his ambition not solving any problems. This thing about being jarred by
white folks being honest is weakness in my eyes.
This outta sight outta mind BS on race is more harmful than white people just being honest about their attitudes, don’t you people watch Fox News for 5 minutes you are getting ‘WHITE AMERICA’S viewpoint in bold, living color. There are black men, women and children dying in these “killing fields’ called the inner city by gangs and their dreams stifled as the result of economic polices implemented by the city, state and federal governments over a period that since 1787 has created a even bigger problem than these ” white numnuts” not voting fer Obama because he’s a nigra”.
Black folks have got bigger fish to fry and Obama has not addressed any of these issues in any serious way, Rev. Wright was right about him he is nothing but a typical politican who can speak like a pimp and convince you he will show you the world (i.e. the first Black President)but in esscence you will be a bigger slave because he will let African- Americans down. I would rather African- Americans reject this clown and talk about having….
safe neighborhoods
great schools (and teachers who want to teach black kids there)
the end of gang violence (some cities are like Russia with the gangs running the streets and politicans)
The gestapo (i.e. the Police) not shooting innocent black folks and actually doing their damn job to serve and protect the innocent
Young girls not getting pregant and boys being sexually repsonsible
And economic development instead some slick speech on Race.
I would rather have black empowerment than some slick Biracial hustler ignoring our true needs if I wanted that, I would have vote for Billary. At least he can play sax and feel ‘black people’s pain’ (lol) let white Americans in these ’states’ be themselves and have their racist attitudes they have cultivated them for at 390 years.
Posted 15 May 2008 at 11:14 am ¶
BORED KIDZ!!!! wrote:
“I thought about it. I think he would put too many minorities in positions over the white race.
That made me roll my eyes. Um, the US government is made up mostly of old rich white men. Whoever said that needs to STFU.
Posted 15 May 2008 at 11:14 am ¶
deb wrote:
I agree, aka lynn. Funny thing is, 9.9 times out of 10, “those in power,” will look like him. It’s so much easier to blame all that’s wrong about society on those who look least like you.
Posted 15 May 2008 at 11:19 am ¶
deb wrote:
I want to add that it just seems that so many people react this way out of fear. I guess I’m most bothered when that fear is unfounded, or based on stereotypes or memes.
Posted 15 May 2008 at 11:40 am ¶
Celeste wrote:
Blacks shouldn’t be in positions of power over whites….why not? Or is that against the natural order of things….Sigh.
Posted 15 May 2008 at 12:41 pm ¶
Ansel wrote:
There’s more of this blunt “I won’t vote for a black person” racism in this report from West Virginia.
Posted 15 May 2008 at 12:48 pm ¶
YamYam wrote:
This to me symbolizes the chasm that is the very great difference between someone who is an problematic racist and someone who is just another person that is a racist through the idiosyncrasy of their existence. The difference is made by circumstance, and so is the possibility of any reaction to it, but what I will focus on is the difference between the two.
The outburst of racism in this case, is political and not really personal: it is brought out by the existence of the popular democratic vote because, frankly, there is no other human inclination, to be found, than the act of accepting the power of another person, present in choosing your ruler, you president. “Real” racism - which this instance really isn’t - is about violence, exactly because hierarchical social divisions are maintained through power, and a non-segregated, popular vote mitigates this. This is why the racism experienced is of a different type; the modern type. It is the racism of opinions, the one of mind; the one that is the real lie beneath racial rejection. It is the racism that black people would- mentioned in the article - “rather an openly racist person to one that hides in the shadows” which means nothing more than to prefer one whom would have the courage to act like they think. This specific situation is not like that; it is cowardly. It seems that some white americans still want to get back at black people - with their vote.
It is not progress, and that is all we are talking about here.
Posted 15 May 2008 at 1:12 pm ¶
eric daniels wrote:
You people are naive, White People have always felt this way and it does not matter if it’s in West Virginia or New York, Obama is a biracial candidate and they still consider him black. Well you Carmen, L aToya and the rest of you can change the census forms all you want, these are the opinions of the vast majority of White Americans. You may not want to post what I have said and that’s okay but America still lives by the “one drop” rule.
Why can’t we just accept what Derek Bell said in “Faces at the Bottom of the Well” that racism is an integral part of the economic, politcal, judical and social constructs of this country and try to make like a little more sane for poor African- Americans and those who suffer the worst aspects of white priviledge. These are poor to middle -class whites in West Virginia and I have dealt with others through my life on various jobs whether they are gay, st8 or whatever. Being white is more important to them than anything else.
Posted 15 May 2008 at 1:13 pm ¶
Celeste wrote:
@Eric Daniels: I have never deluded myself that all parts of the US white population have made equal amounts of progress. There are some parts of the country that I just consider off limits for that reason. I don’t think that the majority of white america has these opinions. A lot do still think this way but I think we’ve at least made it to the halfway mark. I wouldn’t bet my life on it, though.
Posted 15 May 2008 at 1:29 pm ¶
eric daniels wrote:
Celeste at least those whites in that video were honest, Obama will lose worst than Mc Govern did, I don’t think we will win one state in the general. it took me nearly 35 minutes to vote for Bill Clinton in 1992 after the Sister Souljah crap he pulled at Rainbow Push, It won’t take the ’silent majority” of those whites who will not comment about how they truly feel.
Posted 15 May 2008 at 1:47 pm ¶
Celeste wrote:
@ Eric: I was much more pessimistic in the beginning of the race and thought that we shoudl pick Edwards because I liked his policy (despite him making his fortune with malpractice lawsuits
) and there wasn’t anything too black or feminine for people to get upset about. However, I’ve become more optimistic. I guess we’ll have to wait to see who’s right. If he loses for race reasons, I might just have to take my marbles and go play in another country.
Posted 15 May 2008 at 2:19 pm ¶
Bronze Trinity wrote:
I don’t think is Black people’s job to teach White people about why racism is wrong. Its up to White people to teach each other that. Somehow things have been twisted so that the onus has be put on the victims to teach the perpetrators the error of their ways, and if racism doesn’t stop then its the victim’s fault for not doing something. I have even heard people claim Black people should not be wasting their time complaining about White racism, but instead Black people should be proving to White people that they are just as White people. Furthermore, I don’t know if its human nature that people try to bring other people down when they see they are getting ahead. That may just be a capitalist or greed issue. It has to do with the attitude of the society and the individuals. If someone in your family does well some people will be perfectly happy while others will be jealous. If a Black person does well then some Black people will be happy and others will be jealous depending on their personal attributes and life situation. I don’t think its a human thing at all. Its more of the competitive mentality of Western society.
Posted 15 May 2008 at 2:34 pm ¶
Tiffany wrote:
I can’t wait till white supemacy comes crashing down then we’ll see what they have to say because it won’t last forever..
Posted 15 May 2008 at 2:52 pm ¶
eric daniels wrote:
Thank you Bronze that’s what I am trying to say, the WMSM has made race a politcal issue instead of a moral issue of right and wrong, now it’s where you stand on the politcal scale. If White Americans(and the rest of the black -hating idoiots) want to vote against their own intrests and like George Clinton said “Drown in their own crap” that’s not A.A. community problem anymore. 100 years of race talk is enough for me and any sane person.
You can give a drowning man a rope but if they are so full of hate for you I say let’em drown in their own crap.
Posted 15 May 2008 at 3:00 pm ¶
atlasien wrote:
I’m not so pessimistic. The implication here is that a white person has to be completely free of racism to vote for Obama, and that’s just wrong. There are plenty of people out there who are racist to small or large degrees… but they’ll vote for a black candidate anyway, if other factors are favorable to the candidate. The history of black candidates in recent elections has shown that. Take, for example, Georgia’s rural, majority-white Second district… represented FOR 15 YEARS by Congressman Sanford Bishop, a black Democrat.
The Bradley/Wilder effect is tangible, but it won’t be the single dominating factor in this race. With some extra hard work we can overcome it. One of my reasons for optimism is the massive change in Latino voting patterns toward Democrats. Asians are also following suit. The anti-immigration racism of the Republicans has screwed them, demographically, and Obama is poised to take advantage of that weakness. The key is new voter registration, hard work, getting out the vote, and more hard work. I encourage everyone to volunteer for voter registration drives in minority neighborhoods!
Posted 15 May 2008 at 3:52 pm ¶
eric daniels wrote:
Sorry atlasien, but this election cycle has taught me a few things, that the WMSM press is as racist as ever and Joesf Gobbels would be proud of the racism that is masquerading as journalism. Obama will not win one state in the general election and he campaigned as a race- neutral person and didn’t bring up issues regarding race or immirgration and he still got trapped as the “black candidate. Just because 20 percent of White Americans will vote for a black politican does not mean they will vote for Obama to be POTUS.
We are on the verge of another depression
gas prices soaring to near 4.00 and jobs being lost and a never- ending war that will ulitmately if we stay there take over the next
20-40 years will take over 100,000 lives in American serviceman and millions of Arab lives and no end to terrorism after that and the majority of these idiots given the choice between a white woman and a biracial man who has said they will end this war by 2011
and still they let their hatred for Black People prevent them for doing something intelligent and reasonable? I am sorry atlasien but I know when to leave to the table and take my winnings.
Posted 15 May 2008 at 4:21 pm ¶
RainaWeather wrote:
I agree Tiffany.
Posted 15 May 2008 at 4:33 pm ¶
gatamala wrote:
Folks like Mr. Patrick are the ugly core of a part of America that some folks have the privilege to forget.
That guy will never change. Perhaps his virulent, baseless beliefs have a 1/2 life like some isotopes. Little by little it will “die”, but some trace will always be there.
Rest assured, I will remember the sentiments of his ilk and the rest of those “hard-working” folks when I vote for MY interests.
Posted 15 May 2008 at 4:38 pm ¶
G.D. wrote:
To Eric:
I really don’t think it’s fair to call Obama a “biracial” hustler. Let’s be real—-if he actually addressed all the issues you mentioned when he started running, do you really believe that he would’ve gotten even this far in the race? Of course not! Just because he isn’t saying what you want to hear dosen’t mean he dosen’t care about those issues. He’s smart enough to realize that he can’t come at voters with those issues now (especially white voters) because that would’ve turned them off his message completely—I think that as soon as he gets into the White House, he’s gonna gradually address said issues, one at a time. He’ll be in more of a position to actually do something about these issues,and not just adress them in speeches.
I voted for him in the primaries mainly because he strikes me,frankly,as more real,down-to-earth, and more in touch with the real problems that voters are concerned with—people losing homes to high forclosure rates (especially here in the Detroit area) folks losing their jobs, things that actually affect us regular working-class/middle-class folks on a daily basis. In fact,he was just here in Sterling Heights,MI (north of the D) today to talk about the auto industry and walked off with an endorsement from one of the unions. A funnt thing happened while he was here—one of our local reporters from Channel 7–Peggy Agar –asked him a question about whether he would address striking GM workers’ concerns about getting their jobs back, and he said, “Hold on a minute, sweetie, you’ll get your turn.” She never got her question answered,though. Today WXYZ Channel 7 recieved a phone call from the O himself, apologizing for calling Agar “sweetie” and for not answering her question. My point is, he could have easily blown that off as not even worth his time to apologize about—but the fact that he was humble enough to put himself in check about that particular action jacks my esteem for him up a notch further.
I could care less about what some old white dude in Kentucky said, because his generation’s time has come and gone–they obviously can’t deal with the fact that times HAVE changed, and they’re gotten left in the dust. People will always be racist,especially if it means looking down on POCs to big themselves up, and this society in many ways keeps reinforcing that, which is sad. Being racist,however is NO excuse for disrespecting POCs, in any way shape or form. But the fact that so many white folks are voting in droves for Obama means that even they are ready for the change he keeps talking about. It’s sad, though, that some people can’t get past his skin color (which he can’t do a damn thing about) to find out whether he could actually make a difference in this country–they’d rather have a Bush clone like McCain—another old white guy in office just because that’s the way it’s ALWAYS been done—that is so damn pathetic,if you ask me.
Posted 15 May 2008 at 5:08 pm ¶
marge twain wrote:
“I thought about it. I think he would put too many minorities in positions over the white race. That’s my opinion.”
It would be ironic if this guy was going to vote for HRC, considering she has a majority-minority staff(currently 63.5%) which Obama does not. It seems like his post-racial approach, focusing on poverty and counting on racial parity to follow isn’t good enough for ignorant racists.
Posted 15 May 2008 at 5:38 pm ¶
Latoya Peterson wrote:
Excellent point, Marge.
Posted 15 May 2008 at 6:33 pm ¶
Jesse wrote:
Race is so often discussed in this kind of moral sense — like it’s all about this or that person’s feelings. It isn’t. “Black racism” to me is simply silly because black people will not (in the near future anyhow) ever be in a position to make white people’s lives tough. The reverse is not true.
Seeing this guy go off about how he won’t vote for a black man to me is almost a red herring. Obama is right about one thing: when you have shared prosperity, shared stakes, in society, then people can get along a lot better because everyone has a stake in the outcome.
I look at Europe. Almost every country in Europe seems homogenous to Americans, but most aren’t ethnically or culturally the same all over. Some have people who spoke vastly different languages and had different religions who now manage to get by, in part because they all found they had a stake.
I think the same can happen here. Once you ensure via public policy that people are treated with a modicum of equality, that nobody has privileges based on their skin color or whatever, then the power relationship changes. Racism loses a lot of bite when one party no longer has that much power over another.
If black people — heck, PoCs generally — had exactly the same opportunities as white people did, then the question of racism becomes individual and can be dealt with that way. Until then, I think we have to attack the rules of the system rather than worry about the individuals in it.
After all, the racist white guy didn’t ask to be born white. He didn’t ask to be born into the culture he is in. He didn’t ask to be bombarded by racist campaigns all his life. In that sense, worrying about changing the minds of committed racists seems like a nice idea but not ultimately terribly helpful.
Posted 15 May 2008 at 8:19 pm ¶
islandgirl550 wrote:
““I thought about it. I think he would put too many minorities in positions over the white race. That’s my opinion.”
Funny that this man thinks Obama would have too many minorities in high positions. Just look at George W. Bush’s during his first term. Lots of minorities:
Elaine Chao - Labor Secretary
Rod Paige - Secretary of Education
Mel Martinez - HUD Secretary
Norman Mineta - Transportation Secretary
Colin Powell - Secretary of State
Condi Rice - National Security Advisor
Posted 15 May 2008 at 8:22 pm ¶
Sarah J wrote:
islandgirl550 brings up a good point–George W. Bush brought in the first black female secretary of state, among many other minorities in his cabinet. But I bet no racist who voted for Bush will admit to that.
As far as the open racism is concerned, I do believe it’s better to have it out there. One of my best friends was in charge of the Obama office in Scranton, PA and I used her horror stories to tell middle-class white people in Philly and shock them. Because they may have some racism inside them, but they surely don’t like to admit it, and they don’t want to be put on the same level with people like that guy.
I mean, part of the strategy of civil rights marches and all was to bring out the really rotten racists to make the rest of white america realize how bad they were. Well, this could do the same thing–make the rest of white America realize that it’s still out there, that racism isn’t gone just because there’s an Oprah.
Posted 15 May 2008 at 10:08 pm ¶
eric daniels wrote:
Jesse no country will ever practice equality in any sense and in the states you have something called “the constitution” which means nothing is ever permanment in our politcal discourse. Obama tried to use that ‘colorblind’ crap and say if we could help everybody then race wouldn’t matter. If you had an advatage for 390 years why would you give up your priviledge even if you were the lowest class white person in this country.
I remember reading books about the Civil War and white condeferate soilders even the lowest class white did their best in their public writings to say the war was one of ‘Northern Aggression’ and in their diaries say it was about keeping Blacks in their place because the “South” depended on their free labor for the elite and for the white poor it was a feeling that “if you were white it was right”. That’s why after the war ended they could lynch, rape black women and murder black children and take their lands, without a care in the world. These are the heirs of those people, they fear racial retribution for their ancestors sin regardless of their denials about “Slavery being over”
Obama represents a threat to their white privledge.
Posted 15 May 2008 at 11:09 pm ¶
dramelyrique wrote:
eric daniels: You people are naive, White People have always felt this way and it does not matter if it’s in West Virginia or New York, Obama is a biracial candidate and they still consider him black. Well you Carmen, L aToya and the rest of you can change the census forms all you want, these are the opinions of the vast majority of White Americans. You may not want to post what I have said and that’s okay but America still lives by the “one drop” rule.
Wow. I don’t think Carmen, Latoya, and everyone else at Racialicious have ever argued against the reality that many Americans still believe in the One Drop Rule. In fact, I think that’s one of the reasons why they created this blog -to point out how racism still plays an enormous role in politics, the media, and just about everything.
Posted 15 May 2008 at 11:41 pm ¶
Whitney wrote:
And the sad thing is, is that if that man, JK Patrick, has any children, his racism and prejudices get passed down to them and teaches them to be racists. It’s an endless cycle that proves that we, as a country, have a long way to go.
Posted 16 May 2008 at 1:52 am ¶
jvansteppes wrote:
Nezua, I have to step in on behalf of dinosaurs and say that it isn’t fair to compare them to racists. It would be nice if racists evolved into birds though.
James: “All we need remember is that there’s a reason they live in Kentucky.” Remember that there’s more to Kentucky, or any stereotypical redneck place, than assholes like this. In brushing it off as just something said in Kentucky we run the risk of suggesting its essential to the state’s culture and that it will never change, and we also ignore that there ARE fabulous people who come from allegedly unlikely places.
Jesse, I wouldn’t rush to laud European nations for their handling of race, if you look at the treatment of Northern African immigrants/their descendants in France or the blood laws of Germany or those fucking Danish cartoons they’re actually extremely conservative…
Posted 16 May 2008 at 3:30 am ¶
Celeste wrote:
@islandgirl550@ yeah, bush brought in minorities but as far as I’m concerned a lot of them were collaborators. He used Powell’s excellent reputation to spread his lies @ the UN and he got Condi up on TV talking about mushroom clouds…. Mushroom clouds! Give me a white guy who won’t spread war mongering lies anyday before you give me a POC who will do his ill-conceived bidding. And now for my strongest point…on the Dave Chapelle racial draft the whites drafted Condi and the black team didn’t mind losing her at all. I don’t think racists like this guy they quoted don’t mind POC being in positions for power over whites if they know that they aren’t going to do anythign to dispurt any of the racist power structure.
Posted 16 May 2008 at 6:44 am ¶
Jesse wrote:
jvansteppes: I wasn’t thinking of the treatment of north Africans, but the fact that some countries (say, Belgium, Switzerland, Netherlands, Spain) had groups of people that were culturally rather more different from each other than African-Americans are from white people here, and they seem to be able to hold things together. That took a long time, but the interesting thing is that in those countries common problems finally got people to stop killing each other because one was a Walloon and the other a Protestant Frisian.
The conception of race is also somewhat different there. I’d describe the dynamic as more akin to what happened with immigrants here in the 19th century. It’s a lot more complicated than that, of course. But one thing there I noticed was that people are much more willing to think in terms of systems and the rules that make them. When they had riots in France, there was a strong right-wing meme that said there was some pathology about Muslims and Africans that said “they can’t be part of our society.” But there was just as strong a push-back which spoke of the systemic problems that created the situation in the first place. Discussing the rules of the system in the US is really, really hard, because we tend to individualize things here.
eric daniels, I think you missed what I was talking about. Let me give a real-world example: in the United States, we had the segregated South. The law said black people couldn’t go into certain restaurants and use certain facilities. They couldn’t even be in certain neighborhoods after dark.
So if I were a white person there and hated that system, and really wanted to sell that house to a nice black family I know because they needed it, I can’t do it. It’s against the law. So the rules of the system force me to behave in a racist way. I can’t hire that qualified black man to a job because the rules say I can’t, and the consequences for violating them are dire.
My personal feelings, racist or not, aren’t relevant anymore, you see? The system imposes its own logic.
Now, Obama (and I) agree that if you change those rules, then a lot of the problems of racism are easier to deal with. Because racist behavior isn’t written into the rules of engagement anymore. You can now choose whether or not to hire a black man or sell him your house. Now we can talk about people’s personal feelings towards minorities.
In one sense we still have all these rules, though these days they are tacit rather than explicit. Once you get the ball rolling to get rid of those rules — and to a large extent we as a society have, no question — then some other stuff can get dealt with.
Conversely, racism is a matter of power. Look up the case of Charles Stuart to see what I mean. Think of how different it would have been if the cops had decided to think in terms of evidence and not the rules that said black folks are criminals. White people don’t get rounded up as suspects when a neo-nazi does something.
But again, these things don’t happen because individual cops are racists per se. They happen because of the framework in which they operate.
Posted 16 May 2008 at 7:29 am ¶
Chris wrote:
I’m an educated black man and oddly enough it was not until I recieved my MBA that I truly began to see my race as an issue. I never believed that it really mattered and often thought blacks used it as an excuse when they didn’t succeed. As I became more aware of the inner working of America that all changed and Obama has helped to shed some light on that. While Obama has not played the race card the Clintons surely have. Blue color white America won’t vote for a black man. Sad to say, its more true than most educated people want to believe. There is a large portion of America that is still racist. Believe it or not - like it or not and some of those that are will happily tell you so if you ask. You might not be surprised that the BBC reported this more more openly than I’ve seen in the American press. Apparently some are ashamed to show the truth.
Posted 16 May 2008 at 8:14 am ¶
atlasien wrote:
@Eric Daniels: “Obama will not win one state in the general election and he campaigned as a race- neutral person and didn’t bring up issues regarding race or immirgration and he still got trapped as the “black candidate.”
How much money would you like to bet on the statement that Obama will not win one state in the general election? And who sold you that crystal ball… I think it’s defective!
I’d rather work for change instead of feeling overcome by defeatism. Putting off any positive action into the misty future when there’s less racism… that’s just not a viable option. If everyone thought that way, we wouldn’t get anywhere. So what if the media is racist. So what if Obama is facing a lot of racism. So what if there are a bunch of racist white people who won’t vote for him. So what if electing him won’t stop racism. So what if I won’t see the end of racism in my lifetime, maybe it will happen in my grandchildren’s ! You’ve got to pick your battles, and this is going to be an AWESOME battle, whether we win or lose, but I think we’re going to win! GANBATTE OBAMA!!!!
Posted 16 May 2008 at 8:39 am ¶
Anna wrote:
I live in Italy where a right-wing government was just elected (god help us everyone!). A part of this government is the Lega Nord that is a racist, bigotted party that wants to SHOOT all non-whites in Italy….this makes me feel so secure … I can only hope things will change by the time my 5 year old black son grows up…..the government changes every 2-5 years so…there is always some hope…
Posted 16 May 2008 at 8:45 am ¶
Ric Caric wrote:
Though I wouldn’t deny that there is significant racism in rural Kentucky or white Appalachia in general, I want to introduce another consideration about the report from Inez, Kentucky that was quoted above.
White people from Eastern Kentucky are subject to potent sterotyping as backward, ignorant, toothless, lazy, incestuous, drug addicted, welfare-collecting, hillbillies, ridgerunners, and the like. When Lexington television stations do interviews from Eastern Kentucky towns like Inez, they very often find people who have missing teeth to put on camera as a way to represent the prevailing stereotype of ignorance and backwardness in Appalachia.
Obviously, there’s a lot of overlap between the stereotyping of white Appalachians and the stereotyping of African-Americans. I teach at a local university and I find that the best way to help students understand the stereotyping of African-Americans is to compare it to the stereotyping of white Appalachians.
In that light, I’m suspicious that the openly racist person being quoted was highlighted as a way to stereotype the relatively poor white population of Eastern Kentucky. I also wonder how many people the reporter talked with before or after they spoke with the open racism. I bet that a more complex view of Appalachian thinking on race would have emerged if the quotes from “Patrick” had come out in relation to the opinions of several people on the Obama campaign.
I wouldn’t deny the importance of white racism in rural Appalachia. Some of my students experience a great deal of pain and disorientation as they separate themselves from the racism of their family and friends. I’m experiencing some of that pain myself because the success of Obama’s campaign has inspired my mother to come out of the closet with her own racism.
Still, it’s important to understand that the image of the whole region as racist is also part of a system of pejorative stereotypes that does a great deal of harm to people here.
Posted 16 May 2008 at 11:15 am ¶
aka lynn wrote:
The fact that whites are in control @ present doesn’t appear that color alone has served to advantage Patrick nor any other poor or working class member of society who just happens to have white skin. Even with white control, Patrick and his Kentucky peers are still without adequate education, health insurance, jobs, and etc.
Those in the elite 1% class are well aware of how to work whiteness to its advantage, and only in words do they make the poor whites feel that they share a one-ness and are part of the team. In order to align the white poor, our media pundits distort realities making it appear that discrimination is fully reveresed, emphasize that white males are under attack, and those of other racial and ethnic groups aren’t either American enough, trust worthy, or qualified to assume leading positions. Therefore poor/working whites more often then not vote against their economic interest without realizing they are in the same boat as their black/latino brethen. In the end, color is shared, interest is not.
Posted 16 May 2008 at 11:33 am ¶
Eric Daniels wrote:
Atlasien I bet a friend of mine his entire paycheck (which I will give to to AIDS hopsice care) if Obama loses every state,if he wins I will wear a thong and clear heels and his students can dunk me in a water tank (also for charity.
Posted 16 May 2008 at 12:45 pm ¶
Celeste wrote:
That’s one of my biggest problem with this slice of the electorate. It’s one thing to be racist, fine…. But at least vote your own interest because at least that would benefit the majority of people. But instead it’s like they’d rather hurt themselves than risk the possibility of doing something that would help them but as an “untoward” sideffect help POC’s as well
Posted 16 May 2008 at 1:01 pm ¶
Korolev wrote:
Despite living “down under”, I’ve only ever encountered one, really, really, quite openly racist person in my life, someone who USED to be my friend in fact. Actually, he was from the US, he just moved down here because he thought it was “white-ville”.
I learned a lesson from him - you can’t change them. I tried reasoning with him, but he just wouldn’t listen. No matter what I said. Racists can get over their racism, but often THEY are the ones who have to take the first step.
I’ve tried beating him over the head with the illogical points of his racism (namely, on a genetic level, all races virtually identical, and the differences are superficial at best), but he wouldn’t listen. I mean, the guy does science, but he refuses to listen to the scientific evidence against racism. He just point-blank refuses. He doesn’t argue against me, he just gives me a funny stare and stops acknowledging my presence for a good hour or two.
Sad thing is, he’s pretty normal, except around people of African or Arab descent. He has no real problems with Asian people or Indian people, but oh my does the hatred start to overflow the minute he hears the word “Black” or “Muslim”.
I learned that trying to confront them on race doesn’t really work. Racism is an inherently illogical belief - it’s founded on upbringing (his father is one of the staunchest conservatives I’ve ever had the displeasure of meeting) and environment, emotion and in some cases, unfortunate personal-altercations. Logic just doesn’t crack through it, and believe me, I’ve tried.
It’s usually the “Open-racists” which are the hardest, most stubborn to talk to. With “hidden-closet-racists”, they have at least SOME shame, some idea that what they say isn’t right. With Open-Racists, they have no shame at all, believe every hurtful, horrible thing they say, make no apologies.
Believe me, we don’t need more “Open-Racists” in this society. They are the worst to deal with, the most difficult to convert to the side of “non-racism”. With closet-racists, they often think they have some sort of logic or evidence for their belief, and usually when you show them the error in their arguments, they reluctantly admit defeat. With Open-Racists, they believe it because they just do. They require no proof - they hate purely based on their emotions, and it is extremely difficult to talk to them.
Posted 16 May 2008 at 1:14 pm ¶
Kali wrote:
@korolev
I beg to differ.
The open racists are usually not the smartest of people. They haven’t even figured out that it makes them look bad.
I fear the ones smart enough not to be caught saying anything overtly racist or incriminating - yet have enough power or influence to make the lives of people of color , unproductive and miserable at best and lay desolate entire nations at worst.
Posted 16 May 2008 at 1:53 pm ¶
jvansteppes wrote:
Jesse I’m sorry but I still disagree. On the topic of violence especially, skinheads in Europe are far more numerous than they are in the United States and Anna’s lament is fairly unsurprising. As for institutions, France banned the veil! Soup kitchens make an effort to serve pork so they can offend Muslims!
Eric Daniels, what’s wrong with a thong and heels?
Posted 17 May 2008 at 12:21 am ¶
Whitney wrote:
jvansteppes–”As for institutions, France banned the veil! Soup kitchens make an effort to serve pork so they can offend Muslims!”
That’s probably the most offensive thing I’ve ever read about. That’s just so horrible. If there is one thing that I respect, cherish, and advocate for, is the preservation of one’s culture and cultural traditions and one’s religion and religious culture (except if it causes direct bodily harm, and is nonconsensual like FGM and male circumcision).
I remember reading about a Muslim girl who wasn’t allowed to wear her hijab. I don’t remember what happened, but that made me remember an episode of Family Guy where a teacher makes a Jewish student take off his yamika.
Posted 17 May 2008 at 8:33 am ¶
ph2072 wrote:
“Obama has argued that if we improve the conditions of all Americans, we won’t have to worry as much about racial strife because prosperity breeds unity. Yet, I wonder if the prosperity only hides the fault lines that have existed and may always exist. I wonder what it takes to change the core of a man or woman.
Honestly, I’m just wondering.”
I believe that the more prosperous regular folks become, the more the upper- and ultra-upper-classes will attempt to remove themselves. It’s happening even now.
What does it take to change the core of a man/woman? Hard truth and years of work on the self. Can’t think of anything else….
Posted 17 May 2008 at 11:57 am ¶
eric daniels wrote:
jvanstepps, I am a st8 guy and I ain’t wearing a stripper’s uniform I trying to keep my godchildren from dancing the pole. Obama won’t win and I will gladytake my buddy’s check and give it to AIDS hopsice care and Lifelink (I have a Kidney Transplant) and I much rather see on the girl I date. (But she likes Obama)
Posted 17 May 2008 at 2:50 pm ¶
gorgeous black women wrote:
I’ve lived in the Northeast throughout my time in the U.S. and do you know what? I enjoyed reading that. Not the exact content but the honesty. I am oh so tired of people who lie for the sake of social desirability and then when you call them on their racist crap, they brush you off as just another paranoid colored person. I guess half the people of color in this area are paranoid.
It is also somewhat intuitive too and not ALL hateful. If you’re part of the majority, one that will likely remain in the ruling class even when they are in the minority, why would you want change that rocks a world you’re already very comfortable in?
Posted 19 May 2008 at 6:30 pm ¶