Iowa Results: Race Invisibility or Invisible Race?

As news broke of Barack Obama's victory in Iowa, one of the country's whitest states, political pundits of all stripes quickly told us that we were witnessing a historic shift: the end of race and racism as campaign issues. Even CNN's dour conservative political analyst Bill Bennett waxed multiculti as he proclaimed that Obama "taught" African Americans that race wasn't an issue they needed in order to succeed in politics. Though enthusiastic about the Obama victory, Bennett's more jocular colleague Jack Cafferty was not quite ready to intone a full-throated Kumbaya. But he did declare that the Illinois senator's win "gives him currency in a state where the color of his skin may be an issue."

NBC's Tom Brokaw credited the Mike Huckabee victory in the Republican caucus to "his defense against illegal immigration," an issue not viewed in racial terms by white voters. On all parts of the political and media spectrum, pundits and politicos are interpreting the Iowa results to mean that we inhabit a color-blind electoral system.

While watching a black man win the vote of an overwhelmingly white electorate is especially welcome in such racially-charged times as ours, and while the victory of a poor (at least in terms of electoral cash) populist preacher over the preferred Republican candidates of corporate America is refreshing, we are hardly entering the age of race invisibility in politics.

Instead, Iowa points us towards the age of invisible race politics.

To his credit, Barack Obama has carefully cultivated an image as a "change" candidate who takes the higher ground, one that talks about race - but not racism. Iowa confirms that, in doing so, he can make even the whitest electorate feel like it's voting to overcome the catastrophic legacy of racial discrimination, like the Oprah viewer that gives himself or herself a racial pat on the back for really, truly liking her show.

"[Obama] is being consumed as the embodiment of color blindness," political theorist Angela Davis told the Nation magazine recently, adding that "it's the notion that we have moved beyond racism by not taking race into account. That's what makes him conceivable as a presidential candidate. He's become the model of diversity in this period...a model of diversity as the difference that makes no difference. The change that brings no change."

It was interesting to watch Obama deliver the most memorable and moving caucus victory speech in memory, one that included King-like intonations and references to the activists who "marched through Selma and Montgomery for freedom's cause" in the 1960s. Such inspired, impassioned pleas follow a campaign trail-tested rhetoric in which racism such as that surrounding the Jena Six case remains a largely unspoken part of Obama's speeches and policy platforms. He appears to be more comfortable getting choked up when speaking about the fight against the racist past than he does during those few times he talks about the racist present.

On the Republican side, Mike Huckabee also did his part to promote invisible race politics. The GOP underdog did so in no small part thanks to the issue of immigration, a very racial electoral wedge that many voters believe has nothing to do with race.

By focusing on "illegals," "illegal aliens" and other racial codes, Huckabee and other Republican candidates get to ride the juggernaut of anti-immigrant, anti-Latino sentiment gripping the country - without appearing racist. Pundits have even taken to calling the immigration issue the "New Willie Horton," in reference to how, during the 1988 presidential race, a political advertisement deployed by George H.W. Bush against Democratic rival Michael Dukakis featured a black man convicted of murder who raped a woman after being furloughed. Many African Americans and others deemed the Horton ads a thinly veiled appeal to anti-black sentiment in the electorate.

Latino leaders and editorials in Spanish-language newspapers have denounced Huckabee for openly touting the endorsement of Jim Gilchrist, one of the co-founders of the anti-immigrant Minutemen, an organization denounced as a racist hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center and others. In an election that will witness the largest Latino voter participation in history, how well the veil of legality hides the racial aspects embedded in the immigration issue may determine the fate of Republican candidates like Huckabee.

Regardless of the outcome of this year's election, the success of Barack Obama and the immigration politics of Mike Huckabee signal clearly that we are well on our way to a new era in race and politics. Obama's story and his echoes of King make us feel good about ourselves and God knows this country desperately needs that. The question we need to ask is: "Are we willing to push him to talk seriously about those echoes of the racial past in the present that he so skillfully avoids?" And as far as Republicans like Huckabee, we have to ask, "How long are we willing to accept their unskillful use of the racist appeals inherent in their rants about immigrants and immigration issues?" Failure to ask these and other questions will leave us vulnerable to the silent poison of invisible race politics.

Comments

[clr2]

ILLEGAL ALIEN isn't a "racial code". It is the name for people who come to our country ILLEGALLY. I don't care which countries ILLEGAL ALIENS come from - they are here ILLEGALLY and are costing our country BILLIONS of dollars.

[Politihal]

Sadly, race is very much a part of Senator Obama's campaign, and, of course, it is. Racism, of all kinds, is very much a part of America's reality. He, better than anyone, knows this. He also skillfully plays it to his advantage.

While Mr. Obama mostly avoids reference to race, he leaves his wife and others to do his bidding for him. He is, after all, courting both the black and white vote through this two-pronged, brilliantly formulated, highly nuanced campaign. And by virtue of his political skills, he has avoided offending both whites and blacks.

There have been accusations made against Senator Clinton for striking a southern nuance when speaking to a black audience. It seems remarkable to me that no one has called out Senator Obama for doing the same thing. Last night he intoned that pitch because in his speech he was talking to African-American's whose vote he needs and wants to tear away from Hillary Clinton come South Carolina.

Were the press to question the Senator on this, they would be labeled racist.

So, on the one hand, the press is backed into a corner on this issue, afraid to question the Senator on the question of race. On the other, most American's are rooting for Senator Obama to become the first black president, if only to assuage America's time-worn guilt.

But all of this is a scary road. Are we just burying the reality of racism for a brief historical moment, only positioning it to rear it's ugly little head at a more inopportune moment?

I'm with you. Senator Obama at some point needs to address this issue if he hopes to become ALL of America's president.

Halli Casser-Jayne
The CJ Report
http://www.ablahblahblog.com

[standforpeace]

I've always pointed out the racism inherent in our primary process -- we allow two overwhelmingly white states to play a disproportionate role in making the electoral decisions for a country that is far more tthnically/racially diverse. However, looking back at Iowa, this may be the only electoral reality by which a Black candidate can have any shot at all of claiming the nomination. Obama clearly won the confidence of white Iowans by minimizing talk about the need to combat continuing racism in the lives of Blacks, Latinos, etc. He could get away with that because Blacks make up such a small share of the voters in Iowa (and New Hampshire). If the first primary had instead been held in a state with more Black Democrats, Obama would have been forced to outline his plans to improve the life chances of this core part of the Democratic constituency and would likely have suffered a white backlash. Now, at least according to a recent story in the New York Times, he can build support among Blacks in more racially diverse upcoming primary states merely by this demonstration that whites will vote for him and he is therefore electable. In other words, more Black voters will come over to his side now that a vote for Obama does not seem to be a wasted vote. So the supreme irony here is that Obama may improve his chances with Black voters by his deliberate refusal to take on the tough and polarizing issues that come along with any real efforts to actually do something about racism.

Although a victory for Obama is definitely a symbolic win in the struggle against racism, there are millions of Americans who are counting on the Democratic candidate (whoever that is) to mount a substantive fight against systemic racism. I'd be willing to get behind any candidate of any race that took on that challenge.

[Researchguy66]

um, yeah...no more race...I bet that takes the sting out of poverty, violence, inequitable treatment under justice, separate AND unequal educational systems, once again. But hey, at least it will all still stay the same with a black man in office. Makes me feel better.

[OtayPanky]

Yes, racism remains a real problem in our society.

And so does sexism...and gender bias...and a whole bunch of other biases that make life more sucky than necessary.

But anyone who is actually a viable candidate for president, including Obama and Clinton, has a different role to play than (say) the role of MLK.

Even while invoking the historic work of King, Abernathy, Marshall, Evers and countless others - work that has actually propelled him to the front of the pack (for today at least) - the most important point is: IT DOESN'T MATTER THAT HE'S NOT A WHITE MAN.

Just like it doesn't matter that Oprah's not a white woman.

This was, indeed, MLK's vision: that we'd be judged by the content of our character - not the color of our skin.

And by extension, not our gender, nor our gender orientation, either.

We've still got a long way to do. And those who are called to inherit King's mantle of preaching and teaching (whether they're secular or sacred in their backgrounds) have a valuable role to fulfill in our society.

But those who have the capacity to transcend the normal labels - and are able to shine brightly in a way that has NOTHING to do with their race, their gender or their gender orientation, have an even more valuable role to play.

And right now Obama is playing that role...and we are a better people for it.

[DudeE]

I used the same 'pat on the back' analogy on Arianna's thread you would've thought I brought a skunk to the party.

I think many liberals *do* feel good about their opportunity to vote for an African-American President. This is neither her nor there... it just is. It's something we've been going through in society for decades. We've elected African-Americans to Congress, appointed them to the Supreme Court, elevated them to CEOs of companies... all of this a good thing.

But we're in this strange world where we know race is still an issue but we refuse to acknowledge it as such. The downside is the tendency to look to this single act as transformative on society. The election of Mandela didn't eliminate issues of race - ironically it elevated issues of race.

I think we do need this dialogue. It does need to be in our face. We shouldn't be afraid to speak candidly about how race bears on our daily society. And I'm a bit discouraged at the number of people who want to pretend that we're so far beyond it that it's not at all an issue.

[Qbear]

If anyone thinks Iowa was color blind and that Republicans weren't racist on Immigration,,,,watch Latino/as flock to Obama in Nevada and Texas...it will be a learning moment. Also the win in Iowa was the opening of flood gates in every Southern State with near majority Black voters....Southern Tsunami.
Louisiana, Mississippi, Georgia, South Carolina, Alabama....it's TIME!

[RealBlackGirl]

Obama does speak to the racism of the present regularly, but the press is too uncomfortable to report it. As he moves toward the nomination the real narrative is how the punditocracy struggles with white privilege and guilt.

[ADVOCATE4ZPG]

This blogger, Mr. Lovato, follows the wearisome--and well-trod path--of conflating control of sovereign borders and who is LEGALLY entitled to dwell therein with some oblique appeal to the PC bugbear called "racism." Obama has carefully avoided using this term because, in no small part, it is losing its ability to "sting the conscience" of those targetted for 'moral manipulation.'

[ianrey]

Racism may not be dead as a political issue, but Obama's win in Iowa is certainly encouraging. I've heard time and again how "Obama can't win because people say they will vote for him but then latent racism will cause them to switch." Ask yourself this: do you think that there is any significant number of Clinton, Edwards, or Richardson supporters that loved everything about Obama but wouldn't caucus for him because he's black? It's got to be miniscule.

Now, there may be sections of the country where racism may be more prevalent, but I doubt that it exists among progressive voters more than it does among conservatives. In other words, if you're racist enough to vote against Obama because he's black, you're probably not a Kucinich supporter anyway. It's certainly not true that most conservatives are racist, but it is unarguable that most racists are conservative.

I have railed against the electoral college for several general elections, but this may be an element of genius about it: the anti-black vote is sequestered, confined within the borders of states that are the reddest anyway. If there was a state called Racistsippi, Obama would never win it, but neither would Clinton. Even if a conservative candidate wins 80% of this state, he (not "or she") wins the same electoral votes that he would with a 51% win, so the 30% racist camp is mitigated as it would not be in a national percentage vote. Something to think about.

[thoughttheater]

To see a tongue-in-cheek review of the Iowa primary in pictures...link here:

http://www.thoughttheater.com/2008/01/presidential_politics_picture_prognostications.php

[lanefiller]

Anyone interested in what Huckabee is really like face to face should try this funny (but it actually happened) column:
http://goupstate.us/index.php/lanefiller/2007/11/02/title_14