White Guilt Not the Problem with Obama Surge

Virginia Congressman Tom Davis flatly said that whites could rid themselves of 400 years of guilt by voting for Democratic presidential contender Barack Obama. Davis's proof of this was a voter survey in his district that purportedly showed white voters by a good margin backed Obama over Clinton. Davis was recently cited and commended by the Lehrer Hour Duet of Mark Green and David Brooks. His quip may have been flippant, or said tongue-in-cheek. But then again maybe he actually believes that whites are so guiltridden they'll vote for Obama.

If so, he's hardly the first to say that. Black conservative pundit Shelby Steele kicked up a fuss when he argued pretty much the same thing in his book on Obama. He cast him as the breathing embodiment of black victimhood and white guilt over it.

And from across the pond, Trevor Phillips, controversial chairman of Britian's Equality and Human Rights Commission also recently weighed in on the white guilt equals Obama surge. He claimed that Obama is cut whole cloth from white guilt and that if elected he would set back race relations by letting whites that vote for him puff their chests out, pat themselves on the back, and proclaim that racism is dead as a doornail.

Davis, Steele, and Howard got it wrong. After all how do you measure guilt whether it is racial or personal? Psychologists say guilt stems from a deep feeling on the part of an individual that they committed a wrong through neglect, dislike, or injury to another. It manifests itself in anxiety, remorse, anguish, and depression. Obama is a candidate for president, not an innocent victim that someone splattered on the side of the road in an accident, or a child or relative that someone harmed and now feels an acute need for atonement.

Moreover, he's hardly the first African-American politician who's gotten elected wholly or with substantial white votes. The list stretching back years to Los Angeles Mayor Tom Bradley to Massachusetts governor Deval Patrick is legion. Former Tennessee Congressman Harold Ford, Jr. in his run for the U.S. Senate is oft cited as a victim of white polling voting booth duplicity. Yet he still got more than 40 percent of the white vote in his election defeat. Obama's fresh face, new politics pitch for hope, change, and unity has touched a real nerve with whites, especially young whites. This has nothing to do with race, let alone any guilt over slavery or lynchings (not even concepts in their thinking).

The deluge of court rulings, legislature knock downs of affirmative action statutes, the frantic sprint by colleges and government agencies, including moderate Democratic president Bill Clinton to water down affirmative action programs, and the overwhelming cheer by white voters in Northern states of anti-affirmative action measures should have long since killed any notion that the majority of whites are hopeless bleeding hearts when it comes to giving a preferential leg up to blacks and minorities.

Now having piled on all the dismissals, qualifiers and retorts to the racial guilt theory about Obama, the nagging question is not so much whether some whites think that punching the ticket for Obama salves some vague stirrings of racial guilt over the treatment of blacks. It's why race is still such a taboo subject that it pricks so many fears and sensibilities that the media and much of the public has given Obama a feather touch when it comes to a laser scrutiny of his past, politics, performance record in the Illinois legislature and the Senate, as well as not demanding to know how he'll implement the changes he says he's about once in the White House.

This writer has continually argued that if there's a racial tilt it's in not holding him to a tough standard of scrutiny. This does a horrible disservice to voters. In turn voters, and that especially includes the true believer Obama backers, do a horrible disservice to themselves in not demanding that a hard standard of accountability be applied to him.

The media maniac over loose cannon statements by Obama's radical, afro-centric spiritual mentor Jeremiah Wright hardly fits that bill. That's just standard cheap, tawdry, shock journalism to grab headlines, sell papers, and get the gossip tongues wagging.

Ultimately, the debate over whether Obama benefits from racial guilt is facile, dime store psychology, and ultimately irrelevant (a guilty vote is still a vote). What's relevant is for the media and the public to do its job and dissect Obama's positions as it does with any other credible and bona fide candidate for the highest office in the land. Until it does that the gates will always be wide open for the Davis's and Steele's to scream that he's where he is because of racial shame. In fact, Obama instead of publicly cringing at even the most tepid criticism should scream loudest of all against any media and public preferential treatment of him. He should be the last one to want anyone to think that he's a balm for any white supposedly tormented by racial guilt.

Earl Ofari Hutchinson is an author and political analyst. His new book is The Ethnic Presidency: How Race Decides the Race to the White House (Middle Passage Press, February 2008).

Comments

[WillBFair]

I've looked at his policy positions, and they're laughable. He promises to convert the red States, reform campaign finance, and meet with dictators, along with other fanatsies. He wants me to spend my days working for political change. I'm sorry, but I thought that was his job. I've got my own work to do. He adopted economic policies and healthcare reform from the Clintons. And if he does get anything done on the environment, it will be because Al Gore has changed public opinion. He talks about Hillary's 'old politics' and 'a new generation of leaders', which civilized people might think is pure bigotry. And his arrogant act is funny, especially since his own ideas are absurd panders to the young and naive, and he took everything workable from others. If he wins, we'll have to support him, but it won't be much fun, because the arrogant act creeps me right out.

[Ides]

Starts off well and then ends on the wholly untrue note that Obama's pass has not been scrutinized. The New York Times did a piece in 2005 on Barack Obama's entire legislative history. The Chicago Sun-Times and Chicago Tribune, two very politically different papers did an excoriation of his past and after 12 years and exhaustive Q&A's with dozens upon dozens of reporters have determined, "Well...not much to say."

The problem is, the media responds to smoke, and there was no smoke at first. Then there was smoke. Now it turns out there was no fire.

The question to ask is, why are people giving McCain a free ride on Hagee and his "spiritual guide" Rod Parsley? Why is he getting a free ride on the surge? Why is Hillary Clinton getting a free ride on 8 years of tax returns and 6 years of earmarks? Why has her legislative history been COMPLETELY ignored by the press when it is so easily accessible?

The question isn't why Obama hasn't been as "outed" as you would have liked, the question is, why are the other two candidates being given the soft touch.

[vsign]

The internet is giving Barack Obama too much influence. I think the new technologies are propelling an unproven and unprepared candidate to leadership on the world stage. I compare it to germany when the new technologies of the microphone, radio, film propelled a man to the world stage because the people thought they could win with him.

This is like germany when the new technologies influenced the people so much that they worshiped a man they thought was superior and he sadly was not. Unintended consequences for the voters. Do the right thing, Barack, and step off the podium immediately. You are dangerous.

[provgrays]

vsign makes the laughable argument that technology alone is responsible for Obama's rise. By that logic, anyone who uses modern technology will become influential. This argument is absolutely rediculous.

As to white guilt driving Obama's success, why didn't Shirley Chisholm, Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton win the presidency?

[BeyondGoodAndEvil]

What a terrific post. I'm glad someone has finally addressed this absurd issue. As a white woman, I feel no misogyny towards Hillary Clinton nor do I feel any white guilt. However, I do support Obama over Clinton for a myriad of reasons, none of them to do with guilt or hatred of Clinton. I don't respect Clinton, admire her, believe her or trust her with America's future or the Presidency.


It's been exasperating having to read and hear the MSM spin on Obama supporters as cultists and Obamabots. From what I have seen on this blog, Obama supporters seem more well informed about their candidate than Clinton supporters. Each issue brought up about Obama is trivial. None of the issues the press alludes to as damaging, are anything but an excuse for Clinton supporters and the right wing (not that there seems much difference between the right wing and the Clinton supporters at this stage) to continue on with their false claims that Obama is arrogant, inexperienced and untrustworthy. Clinton's campaign has done a brilliant job of transferring her flaws onto Obama, to deflect from her real character and proven deception to the public. None of us who want to vote for Obama, think he's perfect, but he's a a lot better than any Presidential candidate I've seen in the last 30 years.


A lot of Obama supporters have come to him after initially supporting other candidates. We have been won over by his record, his inspirational message, his willingness to engage voters in the process, his thoughtfulness, his temperament and creative thinking. His record isn't perfect but I can understand every vote, and every non vote.


I don't agree that the media scrutiny hasn't been tough enough, because the media has jumped on any story and blow it out of all proportion, and then when it's proven false later - like the NAFTA incident, there is no correction in the media later when the truth is finally revealed, therefore the damage sticks. Perhaps I don't see that there hasn't been enough scrutiny, because I have personally already scrutinized him and done all my examination already. The fracas over the Reverend seems absurd because Wright isn't running for President. Obviously a few statements that make people uncomfortable, are probably not representative of the 3000 or more sermons the Reverend has given over the years. I'm tired of the negative campaigning and believe it's the reason only half of the country votes.

[harriscrl3]

It amazes me that people can say dumb crap like this and actually think its true. If anythign I'm more inclined to believe that its the fact that Obama is HALF WHITE is why he is appealing to whites NOT guilt. If he wasnt raised by a white mother did they take that into conideration when they came out with their dumb theories about guilt. I never liked Shelby Steele but I at least thought he had intelligence. I doubt white America particulary older ones would be giving him the time of day if he didnt have such rich ethnic background. Then again I'm a pessimist so who knows. But to say that its guilt is outright absurd. I'm more likely to believe that if it wasnt for his charisma his fresh face then its the racial and ethnic diversity of his background. Guilt? Puleeze

Carol

[mrdontplay]

just something to speculate about.

hey i think people are picking Barack because his wife wears very nice clothes.

I caint wait until this bs is over, Hillary please drop out ok

[AnotherTry]

When will the issue become what we all know it should be about: Rich versus poor. There it doesn't matter what color your skin is. Poor is poor and rich is rich. Last time I checked, Obama wasn't a poor black man, rather a rich mixed-race man.

When looking at America in this way, John Edwards should have been the nominee. Since he's not, I'm going with the woman for no other reason than we need women to be in the highest positions in the world, no matter what color they are. Obama is just another man.

[MrWinky]

Hillary once again marches out her favorite sock puppet, Earl.

[LeftLeanWing]

The real argument against 'white guilt' is that Obama gets less white votes in those states that probably should have more to be guilty about. Mississippi, Georgia, Louisiana, Massachusetts ( hey, I lived in Boston for 15 yrs. At that time 1974 - 90, there were sections in town black people couldn't live or even visit friends,... South Boston, Charlestown, North End ... most black folks over 45 still think of Boston as the most racist city in America, Yeah it was that bad . )

While those states that have little or negligible non-white racial diversity have been voting for him in droves - Utah, South Dakota, Wyoming, Alaska etc.

[kevski]

You want white guilt visit the Daily Kos, be prepared to laugh your ass off!!!!

White yuppies with a pro black rhetoric, it doesn’t get any funnier that that,
my face hurts from laughing so much when I visit that site,

they make up for any guilt that the rest of us are lacking LMAO

[ozamerican]

"Ultimately, the debate over whether Obama benefits from racial guilt is facile, dime store psychology, and ultimately irrelevant.."

Agreed. And I think this entire facile argument is being made by people who are over 50 years old. The rest of us simply don't care that he's black.

In fact, it makes more sense to say that people who are still prejudiced are voting for Hillary (which is why she's resorted to playing the "black" and "hussein" cards). There are many people, like myself, who simply cannot fathom why others would consider his skin color a factor in judging his qualifications to be president.

It's like watching creatures from an alien planet engaged in some sort of weird exploration of the earth. If they find it uninhabitable, it's because of the limits of their own constitutions, not ours.

[tbone99]

I think B.O. attends a church in which black pride and self sufficiency is cultivated so why should he be ashamed of being "black" , as if noticing that, is an insult? I 'd like to see where H.C has called B.O." hussein" .This is just propaganda from his supporters, not reality, and not worthy of his campaign promise of a new politics.

White guilt is not the issue in Obama's ' surge', but perhaps our fascination with the new and different is- and who can blame us , given the political cast of characters we have to choose from.

[LeftLeanWing]

" but perhaps our fascination with the new and different is- and who can blame us , "

That's how we go Bill Clinton remember ? He wasn't exactly mainstream when he was 1st elected - a Governor from Arkansas. Or are you are thinking that Obama is just some sort of novelty instead ?

- on the 'Hussein' reference, remember Clinton Supporter - former Senator John Kerrey ?

[accountability]

"In fact, Obama instead of publicly cringing at even the most tepid criticism should scream loudest of all against any media and public preferential treatment of him."

I couldn't agree with you more Mr. Hutchinson.
the statement above is one of the things that I felt was some how "off." I couldn'ty figure out what he could do about it.
I mean he couldn't take out an add in the times decrying the media for letting him float for awhile. He couldn't say in a debate... hey, please give me some tough questions, and give them to me first. It isn't fair to Hillary, it isn't fair to me and most importantly it isn't fair to our country.

Several months ago when I was a much more avid supporter of Obama and the bias was still so blatant I would email Mtthews and the rest begging them to stop giving Barack such preferential treatment. I saw the incredible anti Clinton coverage and I feared a backlash against him and for her because of how they were covering them... Plus I know that the ReThugs are and have been digging deep for anything they can bring up as a negative no matter how far removed from the actual reality. He needed to be pushed and toughened up. I asked and asked but it got worse for a long time ... when the SNL skit came out... a couple of days later they started attempting to be more fair or at least less blatant for some of them.

So what could he do?
I don't know.

The tone of the media and the anti Hillary Obama supporters really soured me, plus some of what I perceive to be less than aboveboard with the whole racism thing has made me uncomfortable. I will still support him if he should win the nomination just as I will Clinton... I'm just not excited by him or her anymore when before I liked them both so much.

whatever.
As long as it is a Dem is my mantra these days.

[Powderhound522]

Unfortunately, our media is so piss-poor that NO candidate has his (or her) positions or claims thoroughly scrutinized.

Instead, we get awful horse-race coverage which consists of an odd and uninformative mix of "meta" coverage like who is winning the perception battle, whose "storyline" is being accepted, and gossip like "Obama's pastor hates America" and "Hillary's supporter says something dumb".

I'd be thrilled to see in-depth, fair coverage of ANY candidate, be it McCain, Hillary, or Obama. Maybe if we had that sort of coverage, then shit-for-brains would never have been elected.

[GREATERSC]

Amen!!!

[tbone99]

Do we know where these candidates stand in repairing New orleans,, the iraqi refugee problem, Chinese killing Tbetans, no bid contracts, private security companies, testing in schools, off shore banking.Hell no , but we do know where B.O kids were baptized and how much Hilary tips.
Millions of dollars to fight each other that could go into ads against McCain.

SIGH

[Nommo]

You, of all people, Hutch should know that there is no such thing as "white guilt". It ain' t in their makeup.
Ask the indigenous people, those that are still on the earth. Ask those who live with the results of their warmongering. Ask those people whose resources have been stolen wholesale. Ask your ancestors, Hutch.

You will see, finally, when the chips are down, what happens in November. Perhaps you will even be thrilled, but if history is any indication, at the last minute the whites will bail on Obama. Like all those Lovecraft stories about thresholds and crossings, they will not cross, and Black people will be left holding the bag and Hillary will be free to continue her thieving, whorish ways or McLoon will just drop the rest of the arsenal on any dark nation that has not had a taste of American diplomacy/­imperialis­m.

As I said at the beginning, there ain't no such thing as white guilt. It ain't in their makeup.

[GREATERSC]

Nommo

Lets atleast give it a chance before we come to that conclusion. Hope is a powerful word.

[Nommo]

Yeah, like I hope that pretty soon, I will be living on another part of this planet if I have to continue living here at all.

Both eyes out for the Mothership,
Nommo

[1will]

I'm white and I feel no guilt for the past. If you think that proves your theory so be it.
I'm responsible for only my own actions and had nothing to do with stealing anyone's lands, wealth or slavery. If you feel so bad about the past why not sign the title of your stolen lands (your home) over to the nearest Native American.
Should I feel guilt over what my ancestors did or didn't do? Am I responsbile for an entire race? Nope.
Should I hold you accountable for the 50% of violent crimes committed yearly by black people that make up just 12 1/2% of our population? Do you feel guilt when you open a newspaper in any major city and see the murderers committing the crimes? Nope. You are responsible for your actions not an entire race.

[AuntSam]

Do you feel any responsibility to care for your fellow Americans - man/woman/child? Have you done anything to give back and help America and Americans? Should you (or anyone) feel guilt about the past? No, but you should care. Do you feel empathy for injustices done to others?I hope so. A country filled with good neighbors and positive processes is best for all. What is that phrase...'All men are created equal.....

[Nommo]

You just proved my point. Black people gave two and one half centuries of free labor. That is where the wealth of this nation comes from and that is what your eurotrash ancestors walked into. Why did they not stay where they were? Any Black person here has ancestral roots that go back to well before there was a United States.

As for violent crimes, you are responsible for millions upon millions of the indigenous people, and all the crimes white people have committed against Africa, Asia, Central and South America, you are guilty of crimes against the environment, the sue of weapons of mass destruction against Iraqi citizens, depleted uranium, cluster and phosphorus bombs,
poisoning of the environment of the "mid east".

Further, I did not ask you to prove anything. However, if one throws a hook often enough, there is some dumb fish out there who will bite. Thank you.

[pbr90]

The white guilt issue for electing Obama or its ultimate anticipated impact of relieving whites of that racial guilt for electing Obama doesn't hold up for a number of reasons, the most obvious of which i that he is half white.

That alone suggests that he doesn't fall into the paradigm that lends it credence. This was pointed out by blacks themselves in asking themselves "whether he was black enough." Presumably knowing their own race well enough, the effort to transport that guilt onto Obama should not work by his own strategy of playing racial polarization as Juan Williams put it, and distancing himself from blacks when convenient to do so. That ploy may work for blacks when they are unaware of it, or for whites when they are unaware of it, but not for blacks and whites together who see it together. Shelby Steele properly labeled it early on and idenitifed the syndrome as two faced in his book about Obama, and shows that blacks may be more aware of it than whites.

That any election must be based upon black and white rather than red, white, and blue is disingenuous regardless of what blacks feel, or what Obama feels. For 200 years, blacks even through civil rights have been invested in red, white and blue, not black or white, in elections. This is a novelty of no small proportions.

But the sexism and age discrimination that Obama brings to the election is as serious as the racial discrimination he brings, first on one side, then on another. Few people of race, white or black, have the ability to do what he does on race because most are either white or black and identify with their race however they reconcile white guilt. He plays by none of those traditions and some think it is advantageous; others think it very disadvantageous if not unjust, and anything but racial transcendance.

[GREATERSC]

pbr90

Your arguement is rediculous. When people look at Obama all they see is a black man. Case closed on that subject. The media is the nut cases who were saying is he black enough. Case close on that subject. Sexism and age discrimination, what is it? You have no arguement. You did not say anything. oh it must be young handsome fitt black male. Compared to Hillary. Case closed on that subject. Next time you make a comment, think before you type.