Jackson and Obama: Political Blackness Redefined

This week Amy Goodman's Democracy Now broadcast featured a discussion with Reverend Jesse Jackson that focused on race and the primary elections.

Much of the conversation centered on the Reverend's support of Barack Obama, and the perceived split of support among Black leaders and celebrities for various candidates. But what was really intriguing was Jackson's take on Obama's political handling of racial issues and his relation to the civil rights legacy which paved the way for his historical bid for the Presidency.

Goodman kicked off the sequence with a clip of William Bennett trumpeting the rise of the new black man via Obama's Iowa victory.

97 percent in fact, Iowa, rural white, farming state. Barack Hussein Obama, a black man, wins this for the Democrats. I have been watching him. I watched him on Meet the Press. I watched him on your show, watched him on all the CNN shows. He never brings race into it. He never plays the race card. Talk about the black community, he has taught the black community you don't have to act like Jesse Jackson, you don't have to act like Al Sharpton.

If you have been around racial politics long enough, you recognize the subtext of this argument. Obama's not a scary black man. He won't make white people confront racial inequities, deal with issues of privilege or the structural racism that undergirds this country. You get your chocolate without the calories and perhaps, without the nutrients as well. Reverend Jackson attributes the Iowa victory to the "maturing of America." I can buy into that thinking up to a point. After all, when white Iowans went into those voting booths they did punch the card for a brother. But was that a calculation that he was a safe bet? It takes me back to that scene in Spike Lee's Do the Right Thing, where the Italian Pino says of black celebrities that he really likes, "They're not really black." In the minds of white voters is Obama really black?

Reverend Jackson puts Obama's victory into a larger context of political and social struggle. He rightly runs down the battles that were fought in the streets, the courts, the White House, the jailhouse, the conventions and back rooms for at least four decades prior to the Obama run. What's noteworthy is that in every battle Jackson describes the push and pull that blacks had to engage in with the establishment (read Democratic Party and it's leadership) as opposed to the blatantly racist Jim Crow crowd; from MLK's forcing LBJ's hand on the Civil Rights Act, to challenging the party's values when it refused to demand the release of Mandela in apartheid South Africa. It begs the question: Will Obama, the beneficiary of the struggle, push the party on key issues of race? Will he do what Shirley Chisholm was unable to do, and force the party's platform to reflect the needs of all the people? Will he speak up against three-strikes laws, push for the repeal of welfare reform or stop the unfair the deportation of Haitian immigrants? Or will he play it safe and talk about racial unity with great eloquence, but very little substance? Jackson didn't go there in his public speculation, but somebody should.

Some would say that it's good that Obama doesn't address race directly. Here again, Jackson diplomatically puts such thinking into the uniquely American context.

Well, there's a sense in which many Americans want to focus on racial reconciliation, and they ignore racial justice and racial equality. And you cannot ultimately get past those concerns...But Barack does not remind America of the unfinished business very much of racial justice, racial equality, but he need not. It's self-evident that that needs to happen.

If it is so self-evident, why does the good Reverend then go into detail about what he called "the state of emergency in Black America?" The list of racial wrongs was daunting: increased incarceration rates, voting rights violations, mortgage foreclosure crisis and the general abandonment of civil rights for blacks and Latinos. Jackson is right when he says that you can't take a pass on people's mental and emotional blocks on race. You have to confront it. Isn't that exactly what he is doing with his January 22 march on HUD and the housing crisis? Isn't that what he and countless numbers of civil rights and racial justice leaders have done for decades? Why lower the bar now? Obama may be successful in moving ahead politically by creating an image of being civil-rights-lite, but will communities of color reap the benefits as well? That's yet to be seen.

Tammy Johnson is policy director at the Applied Research Center.

Comments

[vbond]

Go with me on this...

You can have the most prominent black man in America be the one who heads the Rainbow PUSH Coalition OR the one who lives in 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

Which would you choose?

Right NOW.

[TheKiddy]

Speaking as a white with lots of pathologies and neuroses and you name its, and a person who finds Barack and Michelle Obama to be an attractive, smart couple that would be great to have in the White House, I still would point out that as Jesse Jackson said in an Op-Ed a couple of months ago: John Edwards, and not Obama, is the one talking about the issues that most impact the lives of the majority of Black Americans and of working people and the poor and offering solutions. Ok, so what to do? Count on Obama coming through? Go with the symbolism? This is a tough one. I support John Edwards, not because of his whiteness and my whiteness, but in spite of. He stands where I stand on almost all of the issues and I think will do more than either Obama or Clinton to help working Americans. This is a tough primary election for all of us for lots of reasons.

[duboisist]

A very interesting, well reasoned, balanced argument.

In the spirit of Dr. King's birthday, I keep offering quotes from his "Drum Major Instinct" sermon:

"... the presence of this instinct explains why we are so often taken by advertisers. You know, those gentlemen of massive verbal persuasion. And they have a way of saying things to you that kind of gets you into buying. ...
I got a letter the other day, ... "Dear Dr. King: ... you are categorized as highly intelligent, progressive, a lover of the arts and the sciences, and I know you will want to read what I have to say." Of course I did. After you said all of that and explained me so exactly, of course I wanted to read it."

http://www.stanford.edu/group/King/publications/sermons/680204.000_Drum_Major_Instinct.html

[sdskelton03]

How exactly does repealing welfare reform and doing away with three strikes laws help blacks?

It seems to me the consequence of those moves would be to introduce another black generation to a lifestyle of dependance and to overcrowd black neighborhoods with thrice convicted felons.

[LarBear]

Let's please stop this whole myth about Race Cards being played by other than the Media and Talking Heads (Including Campaign Workers)...

If we have a "Black America" as Oprah, Cosby, Sharpton, Jackson and others claim, then we still have Segregation being done... Clearly, in America, we have People of many differing skin colors... Black, White, Red, Yellow and Brown and all shades thereof... However, I do NOT think "Black America" is about skin color. It's more about the last vestiges of Segregation... Beats me why Oprah, or Cosby, want a "Black America"...

With Media designated "Black" Leaders like Sharpton, Jackson and others, clearly they have a positional/financial interest...

Every child in America, regardless of skin color, needs a self sponsored Education (NOT a "Teaching Based Schooling," as we have now!). Also, needs to learn to speak clear "American English." Needs to have similar Opportunities, Hopes and Dreams. In my observation and opinion, raising Children, regardless of skin color, to be a "Black American" is NOT and will NOT do that...

Obama as President might be the best, or worst Event, Historically, for "Black People." Might create more "Segregation" of the "Black Community," NOT less... No, Talking Heads, I am NOT attempting to scare People away from Obama. I do NOT ever want a Black President, nor White, Brown, Yellow, or Red, President...

What creates a "Black American"? Is a "Black American" a skin Color? Is a British Citizen of Black skin, becoming an American Citizen, automatically a "Black American"? Does learning Ebonics make one Black? Is "being Black" really anything about skin color, or is it about unwittingly continuing Segregation? Why would any Parent want their child to be Segregated by skin color? As Willie Nelson said, "Mammas Don't Let Your Babies Grow Up to Be Cowboys." How about, Let's all assist our Babies to grow up to be American! We say on one hand, be proud of your skin color, but don't notice my skin color?


How about we ask every Candidate if they will Pledge to work to finally end "Segregation" in America?

[RusStyles]

Actually, I've always said that Obama could do without...No, better off without Sharpton's blessings. And tough Jesse has endorsed him, he's been more critical than complimentary. And, that's good. Because Obama wouldn't have zero chance to win by over-trumpeting civil rights issues. Black-specific issues. He's united/we are as one approach is smart, ethical and--really--the only winning strategy. Or message. This appears--to me--common sense. I don't understand this author or others questioning Obama's message.

[AnninCA]

Obama's strength is that he's unreal, doesn't really have a record, doesn't propose a plan, and reminds me of a narcissist's dream come true.

Whatever you want him to be, he is.

LOL*

[MadMadWorld]

She's essentially right. How can you bridge a divide if you do not acknowledge the divide exists?

How can this be considered a win for progress when African American issues go unmentioned so as to make you more palatable or less threatening to the status quo?

Edwards is right - There are two Americas. There can be no hope until there is first truth.

It's like a rehab meeting. You must first speak the truth before you can move on.

[walkswillhaunt]

This piece offered some provocative thoughts, but I also found it somewhat offensive. I'm white, so I might not know what I'm talking about, but -- are three-strikes, welfare reform and the deportation of Haitian immigrants really the most important issues to black Americans right now? Seriously?

I don't mean to minimize them as issues -- these are important topics -- but I assume that black Americans, white Americans and all other Americans are most interested in issues that are broad in scope and are the true root causes for struggles. It's mind-blowing to me that the word "education" doesn't appear in this essay. The short-changing of schools that serve primarily minority populations is surely a top concern. And Obama has surely talked a lot about education. The subprime lending crisis -- or, as I think it should be termed, the predatory lending crisis -- is another example, and Johnson did mention that here.

Finally, to answer the rhetorical question, "In the minds of white Americans is Obama really black?" I'd say, "Who cares?" I'd no sooner vote for someone *because* he's black than I would vote for someone *because* he's white. I support Obama for his ideas, his vision and his ability to take the American dialogue past an awful lot of what's discussed in this essay.

[YankeeCanuck]

Ms. Johnson, Reaniel is correct.The Iowa Democratic caucuses are very public stand-up-and-be-counted meetings. I was there, and I can tell you that in downtown Des Moines people of all colors and persuasions were swirling around in public discussions for their preferences. It may be chaos, not that democratic, call it what you will, but at the final count you could not have guessed any candidate's group by the visible ethnicity of its members.Attendance was three times that in '04. No matter what I may think about the huge sums candidates have raised, the positive thing is that they got Americans off the couch and out into a very cold night to stand publicly for their candidates.

[nihilon_x]

Let's stop analyzing Obama's "blackness" and focus on the issues he brings to the table. The war, education, recession -- these are things that reach far beyond race and these are the things that will most influence voters come November. Obama is not just some symbol -- he is a candidate just like any other working hard to get our vote. Trying to frame him in terms of "blackness" (while ignoring his inherent half-"whiteness") limits his appeal to the general public and only damages his chances at being elected.

[Reaniel]

Ms. Johnson,

They didn't go in and "punch the card for a brother" in Iowa. They voted in a very public environment (a room where all other caucus go-er are all watching).

[liberalrebuttal]

What are you going to say when President Obama actually does things that benefit the Black community as opposed to just say he will and doesn't do it?

Huh?

You don't get it do you? Barack Obama as President will be the best thing that ever happened to not only Blacks, but all of the American people. I don't get why you don't see that.

I don't understand why you don't get why he can't fully "advertise" that ? You don't realize what we really have in Barack Obama do you? You are holding something that you think is just a shiny rock. But what you are really holding is a priceless diamond.

WAKE UP MY SISTAH!

WAKE UP !

[JoAnnCr]

First, Obama is middle class, has never lived as a child in poverty, in fear of gangs or with constant discrimination including poor education.

Contrast this with John Edwards's life. His family was poor when he was born. They struggled all their lives. He worked through all of his schooling. Others gave him a leg up to move ahead.

Do you think that made a difference in understanding the plight of African Americans?

What is special about John Edwards is that he wants to extend the ladder back down for others who also need a leg up as he received. John Edwards realizes that just as he had difficulty being the son of a millworker, the person who had it worse than he did was the son of an African American mill worker.

How far do Obama or Edwards go to help? What do their positions say?

What about education?

John Edwards has a program that would have the status and excellence of the military academies and would be open to the top students. Once they graduated, they would go into the difficult areas and teach. Edwards also has a program for free preschool which would not only help give kids an early start on their education but would give kids a place to go so their parents could work.

What do they do on trade? What do they do on health insurance? What do they do to fight against drugs? What do they do about predatory lending? What do they do about environmental protection where poorer areas are more at risk than richer areas? What about energy independence that helps disadvantaged Americans?

All these plans for the candidates need to be looked at before you determine the real interest in African Americans and their plight. Is it public school educated white boy who grew up struggling and poor or the private school educated boy with a Kenyan father who grew up in the middle class?

No judgement. No race card. Just facts. The disadvantaged have waited to long for a real change.

[c.w.]

This is an excllent, nuanced piece. It reminded me of what Cornel West said about Obama months ago: "He's got folk who are talking to him who warrant our distrust."