It IS about race, and we'd better talk about it
"Religion and race are still powerful forces in rural America, and whether Obama can gain ground in traditional rural safe havens for Republicans could hinge on whether voters focus more on economic issues or cultural values when they go to the polls. Likability is also likely to be a strong factor.
"Republican Barbara Dettloff, 72, a retired bartender from Racine, Ohio, an Appalachian river town with about 750 people, voted for Bush in 2004 and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney in this year's Republican primary. She's voting for Obama in November because 'I think he's nice and I think he's sincere in what he says.'
"But, she added, 'I'm probably the only person in this town that does.'
"Indeed, many of her friends have told her they're either not voting for Obama or are staying home. 'They just won't vote for him because he's black,' Dettloff said."
There it is. Barbara Dettloff has matter-of-factly acknowledged what we'd better admit and discuss: Some people won't vote for Obama because he's black.
I'd love to think that it's about the issues and the values about the candidates, but whether hidden or overt, when some voters look at the candidates and see that one is white and the other one is black, and that's all that matters to them.
I've been reading commentary and posts recommending— and sometimes urging—that the discussion about Obama be his positions, talents, and values and not his race. That's great, if voting for a black candidate isn't an issue for you.
But race is an issue for millions of Americans, for whatever reason. And I contend that ignoring the race issue is dangerous, because assuming color blindness allows people who are color "sighted" to act on racial feelings without judgment. If no one calls them on their prejudice, hatred, preconceptions, traditions, ignorance, or any of the other self-justifications people use for not voting for a black person, it's as bad as giving those justifications—no matter how specious or reprehensible—tacit approval.
The race issue has to be discussed openly. Every self-justification masks racism, and only racism. Justifications need to be laid open, dissected, and then shown for what they are—indefensible.
I can already hear the argument that doing this would make a campaign of hope turn ugly. I will state unequivocally here and now: It already is ugly.
Even if an open discussion about why "they just won't vote for him because
he's black" doesn't result in one vote changed, I want all those people whose racism has heretofore been unchallenged to know that they've been outed.
Talking about racism against Obama isn't what's ugly; the racists are.
Certainly, racial stereotypes and discrimination will cost Obama some votes. Stereotypes, however, are notoriously hard to change. In the end, bringing up race only plays into Republican desires to associate Obama with Rev. Wright, Louis Farrakhan and Obama's parenthood and upbringing. It is a fight best fought on its particulars, rather than widening the debate to America's racial schism. Placing Obama squarely on the side of the black minority will only consolidate white racism against him.
August 17, 2008 2:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ripper,
Please note that I want to get into particulars:
What makes the other 749 people in Racine unwilling to vote for a black person? I doubt that there's one global reason, and I think that each of those people would be hard pressed to give anything but a knee-jerk response to the question, "Why?"
I had an uncle who'd migrated west with other Okies when he was a child, and he held deep prejudices against any race other than Caucasian, as well as for gays, liberals, etc. But out in the world of a very diverse Bay Area, he couldn't avoid interaction with just about every kind of person alive.
Without any sense of irony, he developed friendships with individuals of other races while still spouting racist memes when anyone was stupid enough to discuss politics with him. And, two of his sons turned out to be gay, one of them being an early AIDS statistic, dying in 1985.
I don't think he had the capacity to reconcile his acceptance of diverse individuals with his global prejudices, but nonetheless, he ended his life having embraced his son's life partner and happily socializing with black, Filipino, and Mexican individuals—specific people he'd gotten to know. But would he have voted for a black man? Never. One of the people he knew? There it would have gotten trickier.
Could he have defended his knee-jerk resolve? He might have said something about what his parents and family went through and about not being able to trust people like that, or some such thing. And challenged about those beliefs, he likely would have blustered and become self-righteous, but even he would have had to acknowledge somewhere inside that his justifications didn't hold water.
This is something that has to happen case by case. It has to happen with individual, and likely very uncomfortable, discussions, confrontations, interventions, or whatever they end up being. We can't rely on others to do it. Each of us has to confront the racism we see.
August 17, 2008 3:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Why can't we just say: Well, he's half white, so he can't be all bad. (Just kidding.)
Anyway, as I see it, there are three negatives that Obama has to overcome: He appears black, his name sounds suspiciously Muslim and... wait for it, but it's true... he's super intelligent and articulate. I don't know whether you realize how susipicious the common American is of intelligence, but take a moment to realize how many times in the movies the bad guy is an evil GENIUS. Bush may be dumber than a stump, but he's just a good old boy, right?
August 17, 2008 3:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, man, you are so right.
We're no longer a country that admires what used to be called a Liberal Arts education. Intellectuals are regarded with suspicion, whereas they used to be looked to for their wisdom and guidance. (See the 1951 The Day the Earth Stood Still, in which the common folk look to the scientific community to help them with their spaceman dilemma. I wonder what the remake will do.)
John McClane is the quintessential example of that. He's inarticulate and street smart, but he outsmarts all the eloquent and cultured Die Hard villains. I don't think that James Bond's Eton College education and multilingual talents get much attention today. It's the physical prowess, courage, and cunning that matter.
Obama's got the intellectualism as well as the race issue against him. And, within the racism, the "uppity" factor can't be ignored.
August 17, 2008 3:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think there is a lot of white tribalist sentiment out there still, some of it even organized like in Idaho.
They had a get together there near Hayden where they advertised via leaflets how they were going to have live minorities present. But the minorities were going to be released on a hunting range patrolled by "well-armed" security forces and used as target practice by the white militants there.
They were just "funnin'" of course, but it shows how deep that visceral hatred goes.
This was only 20 years ago, but that kind of virulence is still around in unorganized pockets everywhere.
I agree with Facilitatrix, racial considerations will be a factor in some people's voting coming up, but how much I don't know.
I hope the issue comes up in the upcoming debates. I think Barack needs to get a question from the moderator that will allow him to face the issue squarely and attempt to speak some good words on it.
August 17, 2008 4:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Might be even more fun if McCain has to answer whether he thinks race has been an issue against Obama, or whether he thinks the e-mails being passed around about Obama being a "secret Muslim" should have been repudiated by the media and by McCain himself, you know, in the interests of fair play.
August 17, 2008 4:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
So basically, a 72-year old Republican from Ohio, who lives in a 750-people town, is the new Oracle of Race Reality.
I think she was chosen for the discussion because she and her town-folk fit so convenitently into the beloved stereotype: a backwater, low-information voter.
And she allows certain people to push a pre-emptive excuse that if Obama loses the election, it will not be due to some specific shortcoming, but because of his race.
It's astonishing that in their devotion some Obama supporters would be so blind that they will not see the racism that's so inherent in this silly excuse.
August 17, 2008 4:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
What is much, much more astonishing is the malice (or is it, ignorance?) of those who attempt to dismiss the persistent and endemic bigotry of white America.
August 17, 2008 8:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hi Lalo,
"It's astonishing that in their devotion some Obama supporters would be so blind that they will not see the racism that's so inherent in this silly excuse."
In the same sense that the democrats have been accused of "class warfare" everytime they have endeavored to point out the growing class inequalities in our country?
That puts a de facto gag order on any discussion of any inequality.
As far as excuses, I for one don't think racism will be a decisive factor either way. If Obama loses (and he won't) it won't be because of his race (I pray).
There are a LOT of low-information voters out there I fear.
August 17, 2008 4:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hard-core racists, at least in this day and age, are mostly going to be people who, like Facilitatrix's uncle before he moved to the Bay area, simply have not had much exposure to those of other races or (as was the case in the South in which I grew up and some big cities today) have not had exposure to those of other races who act, expect to be treated, and are treated by others as equals. ------- If they are ever going to shift from that "can't vote for a black" position, it's going to be because they come to see Obama as a "person" not a "black person." And Obama himself, by NOT playing on his race, is doing the best job toward that. His supporters can do it by focusing on him as a PERSON.
And don't laugh and ignore the "he's half-white" argument. Seriously. Thousands of southerns spent decade "explaining" the achievement of any black by pointing out that that particular person had "white blood" in him. With a straight face and believing in their hearts that that is what made a difference. So point it up every chance you get. Racial prejudice is - by definition - illogical, so use illogic against it.
Another thing that I've actually used is to express strong distaste about voting for someone who is divorced. -- Hey, this truly was as big a demarcation several decades ago as being a Catholic was later and race is now. Nowdays, of course, the rigid won't-vote-for-blacks people are most likely big Reagan supporters and certainly are prepared to vote for McCain. -- So,
let THEM rail at you about how ridiculous that kind of thinking is, that what matters is who the man is - not some fact in his past about which you have no knowledge - that you need to make the best choice for president, not someone to marry into the family, etc. And then, of course, you conclude with something like "Well, I tell you what. I'll try to set aside McCain's divorce and see what he's like as a person, a leader, if you'll do the same - set aside Obama's race and see what he's like as a person, a leader."
Calling someone a racist or pointing out that they are racist is only going to freeze them in place. Trust me - I know this personally from many discussions with family members and neighbors in the 50s and 60s!! It has to be approached obliquely, indirectly if there's any hope of shifting those views. Letting THEM convince YOU that some other arbitrary decision makes no sense is the best way. (Also learned back then.)
Analogies - it has to be analogies. People with fixed racial prejudice have been "imprinted" with an automatic response when race is mentioned. And they *have* to be that knee-jerk because if they ever let themselves think about it, really think, about the issue then that certainty cannot be maintained. To judge someone by skin pigmentation rather than their actions? It's insane ... so you cannot let yourself think of it that way.
Nothing defeats racism like familiarity and sharing experiences with those of the other race, having attention turned elsewhere. George W. Bush gets some credit here: simply putting Colin Powell and Condi Rice in that position has accustomed people to "seeing" blacks in the ranks of powerful leaders. Don't doubt that that has tremendous impact, simply because racism itself is quite simply irrational and superficial.
August 17, 2008 7:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Granted: race has beent he dominant issue since the founding of the Republic. Calls to "talk" about it are welcome -- but also, at this point, tiresome, because the calls are so empty. Admittedly, with all of (white) America apparently decided that even to acknowledge that bias exists in this country to to "play the race card," it would be salutary to begin at that point; but if white America has decided to follow this country's age-old practice of imposing a code of silence -- well, what is Obama to do? This election is indeed a referrendum on America, if it is willing to transcend its history of prejudice.
August 17, 2008 8:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Elizabeth 2
I agree with you that the country -particularly - the New South is changing rapidly - my hope is that the new young voter demographic now readily taking part in our electoral proccess- is in the words one articulate twenty something young woman - "Dude we are so over the race thing .."
Plus Obama appears to be gaining growing support in the Armed Forces -and the military is also race neutral ( were but it gender neutral - ).
We are going to win come November ...there are more of us then there are of them ..
August 17, 2008 8:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
One of the most wonderful things I have seen in this campaign was one of those charts on CNN or somewhere breaking down votes by race and age. For the group under 26, there was literally no difference between the results for black voters and white voters. That gave such hope - and pride!
August 17, 2008 9:10 PM | Reply | Permalink