cc: First Lady Michelle Obama, Advisors David Axelrod, Ms. Melody Barnes, Robert Gibbs, Ms. Valerie Jarrett, et al
From: Clarence B. Jones
Re: Sgt. James Crowley and Professor Henry Louis Gates
Date: July 27th, 2009
In a short period of time, more comment and "advice" has probably been offered on the above subject than any other matter crossing the president's desk since inauguration. It's come from print, electronic media and political pundits. My reaction to this outpouring of debate? Well, at least we're talking about it.
Did Professor Gates handle things perfectly? No. Is it possible he saw an opportunity to acerbate the situation and shine a brighter light on the problem? Did Sgt. Crowley, in spite of his superb record of training and raising other officers' awareness on the dangers of racial profiling, overreact in arresting Professor Gates in the premises of his own home? Possibly. This is not the core of the issue, however.
Because race relations in the United States is the giant elephant sitting in the national living rooms of America. Everyone knows it's there; few want to acknowledge it's presence. In a speech commemorating "Black History Month" Attorney General Eric Holder (an African-American) said, "In things racial we have always been, and I believe continue to be, a nation of cowards." He was criticized for such remarks. A classic example of the need to kill the messenger. He's right, of course, and the fact that at this late date there is a message that still requires delivery is a reminder of how historically afflicted we are with amnesia about race in America.
Our country has moved from a Civil War through post-Civil War "Reconstruction," through the institution of racial segregation, through the Supreme Court-mandated end of public education segregation, through the Civil Rights Movement, 1964 Civil Rights Act, the 1965 Voting Rights Act and finally landed here -- with the election of an African-American president in 2008. Somehow, against all reason, this long road has been traversed without ever having provided a political structure or process to engage in a sustained and deliberate national dialogue about the historical consequences of slavery and segregation in America.
Nelson Mandela and the African National Congress had the wisdom and the courage to understand that it would be impossible for there to be a sustained and peaceful transition of governing from apartheid to a multiracial South African society based on equal justice before the law without the new South African government providing a mechanism for people publicly and nationally to confront the past abuses of apartheid and its probable future consequences in new South Africa. Thus, his creation of a national "Truth and Reconciliation Commission."
I am not suggesting that the issues of race raised by "Crowley Gates" can only be addressed by the establishment of some kind of post-slavery, post-racial segregation "Truth and Reconciliation Commission."
I am suggesting, however, the idea of designing a mechanism to solve an obvious, concrete and urgent problem is an American tradition. We didn't ignore the obstacles of World War II; we began the Manhattan Project and developed a tool to confront them. Why should the endemic issue of cultural racism be treated instead by continually lying to ourselves about its existence?
President Obama, you might want to revisit and reconsider the efforts effort undertaken by President Clinton in 1998 in his "President's Initiative On Race: Taking Action To Help Build One America." Notwithstanding the advice and counsel of such an eminent historian as Professor John Hope Franklin (and others), this initiative, by an elected white southern president, encountered resistance and some criticism.
However, 2009 is qualitatively different. Successfully running a "color blind," race-neutral or racially agnostic campaign for president is different from governing as the first elected African-American president. As president, you cannot be racially agnostic or "neutral." As president of the United States, in the face of actual or apparent racism, morally you cannot sit on the fence. You must confront our national elephant and enable a national dialogue about the day to day exercise of police power in communities across America and it documented consequences on African-American and Hispanic men.
Mr. President, you seem to instinctively and politically know this. Yes, it is so: commenting on the Crowley Gates incident, is "part of your portfolio."
Despite looming issues of health care, the banking crises, Jobs Recovery Programs or Afghanistan, the giant elephant of race in America's living room remains, casting its shadow across our nation, and possibly the success of your own re-election. You run the risk of eroding your moral capital and credibility if you refuse to finally constructively find a way to tackle this issue head-on.
Moreover, I respectfully suggest you unavoidably risk diminution and erosion of your political capital if you fail to exert -- no -- seize the leadership on issue of race relations in America. A Presidential National Commission of Race and Reconciliation is something you should now seriously consider.
If not you, who? If not now, when? Congress passing a resolution "apologizing" for slavery is not enough. Not even close.
Sgt. Crowley and Professor Gates having a beer at the White House with you is an important symbolic gesture. Perhaps all across America, on the day when this is scheduled, a police officer and a black or Hispanic man should have a beer together in their respective communities.
Yeah, I know it sounds hokey. But something must be done to enable us as a nation to acknowledge the presence of the giant elephant. It's not going to leave our house without presidential leadership. It's not going to leave until we as a nation have the courage to lead it from our living rooms, and out of the front door of our national house, once and for all. It starts with you, President Obama.
Clarence B. Jones, author of What Would Martin Say? is the Scholar in Residence at the Martin Luther King, Jr. Research and Educational Institute at Stanford University. He was counsel, advisor and draft speechwriter for Martin Luther King, Jr.
This problem will resolve itself in the next 100-years. It is only when there is parity in demographics of diverse ethic racial groups. Not rationality or reasonableness will resolve these racial conflicts but hard realities of demographic equilibrium.
Some of what I am hearing in this discussion:
Some people want to hear an acknowledgment of historic racism and the impacts that racism continues to have, in their view, today.
Some people feel that blacks are already given advantages over white people, and should stop "whining" (my word) about racism.
Some people feel that since they are, in their view, "color-blind" and not racist, they don't understand why we have to be having this conversation.
Some people believe that white people are inherently racist and that will never change.
It seems to me that we could start by acknowledging these various feelings and beliefs, not agreeing with them, not disagreeing with them, just trying to understand what they are and what experiences led to them. Perhaps if we understood each other better, we could move on to the next step (whatever that might be).
I think that the difference between President Obama's two comments about the Gates/Crowley situation captures this well. The first statement addressed who was right and who was wrong. The second expressed a desire to understand what caused the two men to act as they did.
Mr. Jones, please elaborate on the structure of what you are proposing.
However, my concern is that since blacks control the negative racial climate in America the dialogue will be lopsided in favor of blacks. For one thing, there are only black spokespeople in America, no white spokespeople. Has anyone ever heard a black spokesperson encourage blacks to get along with anyone other than themselves? In reality, intrest on the part of blacks to get along with whites is nonexistent. So yes, we do have a long way to go.
I would like to recommend a book to Clarence B. Jones, Drinking From The Cup, by Doug Saint Carter. Thank You.
Talking about LOPSIDED DIALOGUE ! NO, we are not DRINKING FROM THE CUP !
JIM JONES is DEAD ! KOOL-AID.
(I am a fan of Charles Darwin)
Why would you be irritated? I would be grateful that someone cared enough to ask police to check on the security of my residence, and would have realized that when I break into a door, that looks suspicious.
What I don't think is that we need to hear more from academics or politicians or other various blowhards. We need a conversation which consists of participation from those who continue to be wronged by our society: Black, Hispanic, Asian, Native American, and White POOR AND WORKING CLASS.
Enough from the professional class on both sides of the racial divide. They have it pretty good. I think a discussion between working class whites and blacks will reveal that we in fact have more in common with each other than we do with members of our own race in the elite classes. Not only will that do a lot to heal the racial divides, but it will also wake people up to how the elite have abused us by playing us against each other.
There's about a nickel's worth of difference between a black living in the projects and a white living in the trailer park. It's time to make more people realize that.
God bless you and your family and remember, when you waste your time trying to prove your worth to others you oftentimes forget to appreciate your true value.
Majority white Americans are not interested in having dialogue on race relations because they have little benefit from doing so. Polarized racial relations benefits white political establishment.
If President attempts to force the issue and initiates such dialogue, he will be forced to abandon it midway by the white majority or be stigmatized as black president.
Nice piece, thank you.
Edmonsky,
"Majority white Americans are not interested in having dialogue on race relations because they have little benefit from doing so. Polarized racial relations benefits white political establishment."
I agree, but polarized racial relations benefit some in the African-American political establishment too, mirroring the American political landscape. In other words, the process has been a slow go. Like watching ice melt in the middle of a Michigan winter.
less blanket statements thank you.
oh and take your fancy pants polarized this and thats with you too.
But in all seriousness, this incident is insightful about how we DON'T deal with our racial problems.
From the black perspective, I see a nation where race is only a problem when minorities are involved, not when white Americans are "at fault." A Pat Buchanan can sit on TV all day and cneverh having met the woman, call Sonia Sotomayor "affirmative action baby," claim she's unqualified, call her a racist, and in the next sentence wax poetic on the virtues of the white woman from the Great White North, Sarah Palin.
I see a nation where an accomplished, law-abiding black intellectual is arrested in his own home for the "crime" of standing up to white policeman. Apparently, he didn't stay "in his place" and "got uppity," the luxury of exercising his freedom of speech not available to him, but in a strange twist, Caribou Barbie -- who cannot form a coherent sentence -- is free to jabber all she wants and abuse the powers she once held as governor.
I see a nation where "the rush" is not to judgment, but to avoid dealing with the real problem: the inherent, systemic racism in America.
"As always, whitey now sits in judgment of me, preparing to cast my fate."
http://www.wtop.com/?nid=104&pid=0&sid=1725138&page=2
As Desmond Tutu named his book "No Future Without Forgiveness."