Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Rich: 'Obama doesn’t transcend race. He isn’t post-race. He is the latest chapter . . .'

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
bigtree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-01-08 10:19 PM
Original message
Rich: 'Obama doesn’t transcend race. He isn’t post-race. He is the latest chapter . . .'
November 2, 2008

Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner

By FRANK RICH

{snip}

Early in the campaign, the black commentator Tavis Smiley took a lot of heat when he questioned all the rhetoric, much of it from white liberals, about Obama being “post-racial.” Smiley pointed out that there is “no such thing in America as race transcendence.” He is right of course. America can no sooner disown its racial legacy, starting with the original sin of slavery, than it can disown its flag; it’s built into our DNA. Obama acknowledged as much in his landmark speech on race in Philadelphia in March.

Yet much has changed for the better since the era of “Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner,” thanks to the epic battles of the civil-rights movement that have made the Obama phenomenon possible. As Mark Harris reminds us in his recent book about late 1960s Hollywood, “Pictures at a Revolution,” it was not until the year of the movie’s release that the Warren Court handed down the Loving decision overturning laws that forbade interracial marriage in 16 states; in the film’s final cut there’s still an outdated line referring to the possibility that the young couple’s nuptials could be illegal (as Obama’s parents’ marriage would have been in, say, Virginia). In that same year of 1967, L.B.J.’s secretary of state, Dean Rusk, offered his resignation when his daughter, a Stanford student, announced her engagement to a black Georgetown grad working at NASA. (Johnson didn’t accept it.)

Obama’s message and genealogy alike embody what has changed in the decades since. When he speaks of red and blue America being seamlessly woven into the United States of America, it is always shorthand for the reconciliation of black and white and brown and yellow America as well. Demographically, that’s where America is heading in the new century, and that will be its destiny no matter who wins the election this year.

Still, the country isn’t there yet, and should Obama be elected, America will not be cleansed of its racial history or conflicts. It will still have a virtually all-white party as one of its two most powerful political organizations. There will still be white liberals who look at Obama and can’t quite figure out what to make of his complex mixture of idealism and hard-knuckled political cunning, of his twin identities of international sojourner and conventional middle-class overachiever.

After some 20 months, we’re all still getting used to Obama and still, for that matter, trying to read his sometimes ambiguous takes on both economic and foreign affairs. What we have learned definitively about him so far — and what may most account for his victory, should he achieve it — is that he had both the brains and the muscle to outsmart, outmaneuver and outlast some of the smartest people in the country, starting with the Clintons. We know that he ran a brilliant campaign that remained sane and kept to its initial plan even when his Republican opponent and his own allies were panicking all around him. We know that that plan was based on the premise that Americans actually are sick of the divisive wedge issues that have defined the past couple of decades, of which race is the most divisive of all.

Obama doesn’t transcend race. He isn’t post-race. He is the latest chapter in the ever-unfurling American racial saga. It is an astonishing chapter. For most Americans, it seems as if Obama first came to dinner only yesterday. Should he win the White House on Tuesday, many will cheer and more than a few will cry as history moves inexorably forward . . .


read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/02/opinion/02rich.html?_r=1&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&ref=opinion&pagewanted=print&adxnnlx=1225589467-HoybFj+WCR6KqxwXUWxYJQ


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
VoodooGuru Donating Member (327 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-01-08 11:01 PM
Response to Original message
1. Count me as a Frank Rich fan.
And once again he's quite insightful, I think.

This is in fact a new chapter in race relations in the US. It won't always be pretty. It's not very pretty right now, in fact. But I hope - audaciously - that a lot is about to change, when Barack Obama proves himself up to the task. He reminds us both how far we've come and how far we've yet to go.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
misanthrope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-01-08 11:29 PM
Response to Original message
2. He's wrong...
...on this count: "America can no sooner disown its racial legacy, starting with the original sin of slavery, than it can disown its flag..." It's far deeper than that.

America's racial legacy started from the moment Europeans landed on American shores. Racism was the driving force behind the genocidal drive to wipe out the indigenous people of the continent and the spread of Manifest Destiny. America can no more separate itself from racism than humans can from carbon. It is part and parcel of not just our governmental framework, but the crux of our cultural existence.

And if things continue down the path the right wing has envisioned, it will never proceed any further. The ignorance they foster is the fertilizer to such prejudice.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Quantess Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-01-08 11:39 PM
Response to Original message
3. What a steaming pantload.
Edited on Sat Nov-01-08 11:42 PM by quantessd
The way I see it, Obama is an exciting and energizing leader, who just happens to be black. Half black, even.

When I look at Barack Obama, I don't see black man, I see Presidential.

Edit to add that I'm 100% caucasian. I think Obama would/will be an excellent President, and I don't care what the color of his skin is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bigtree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-02-08 07:03 AM
Response to Reply #3
4. It never really mattered to those who used my light brown skin to marginalize me
. . . or discriminate against me, what percentage 'black' I was. If I could have gone these 48 years without it making any difference what color my skin was, then I could proclaim it irrelevant, perhaps. But the color of my skin has been a factor in difficulties I've faced as well as a familiar comfort to my family and an interest to many folks I associate with.

Fact is the color of my skin is a reflection of my heritage. To me, it is as indelible as the many notions and preconceptions some have about those with dark or light skin. I anticipate that it will always be a challenge to some to transcend the many notions about race which have been perpetually built up and torn down. And it will always be my own challenge to define myself in ways which transcend my skin color. Part of that is a self-consciousness borne out of a lifetime of experiences which have challenged me to either completely reject my heritage or threaten to isolate myself from the majority of America in embracing it.

Obama does, indeed, 'happen to be black.' But I reject the suggestion in your remarks that we (and he) should somehow reject that identification as if there was some necessarily negative association to be derived from that identification and acknowledgment of that identification in our society. These notions about race and these expressions toward and against one race or the other which so offend us don't have to force us to reject our identification with those aspects of our heritage which bind us to our beginnings and roots just to avoid sparking those offending remarks and actions.

We shouldn't be forced to reject our unique heritages and stuff that pride down just to provide some false check on demagoguery or discrimination. Our own individual or collective pride in our uniqueness isn't a sin.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue May 07th 2024, 05:15 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC