The Last Word... On Racism, And Barack Obama (For Now)

It was bound to be the case that the issue of race would follow us into this election. Had Barack Obama not succeeded in... well, I can agree to "cornering" the nomination, at any rate... we'd still, I think, be dealing with an ugly aftermath of accusations and finger pointing.

But he's the nominee, and given our painful, difficult ways of talking about race in this country, it's no surprise to me that the undercurrent of everything in this campaign is about race. It's also not surprising to me that what's been said about race, and racism has largely been ugly... and unhelpful.

What has surprised me - though probably shouldn't - is that it remains impossible to challenge some notions of how we talk about race now. And without challenging some of these preconceptions, I think, the discussion we're having - and not having - is really going nowhere, fast. And just as crucially, I think what we're saying about race and racism and how it relates to Barack Obama are setting up a lot of ugly conflicts to come.

Underlying all of this, I find, is the storyline which developed during the primaries, and hasn't really abated: it's a combination of white guilt for our shared history of slavery and segregation and a sense that racial prejudice permeates even the most innocuous discussions.  Combined, they've developed into the unpleasant assertion that not voting for Barack Obama, for nearly any reason, will boil down to "racism."

It's an ugly charge - and, to be fair, it's not a universal sentiment - but as with so many discussions about race that we claim to be having, but really aren't, the charge of racism is meant to shut down a discussion, not open one up. We can't actually figure out where actual racism is in play, versus racial prejudices of all sorts, or simply reasoned discussions of politics and the issues that lead people to differing conclusions about the candidate they prefer.

In part, the problem is our language - as I mention above, there's a distinction, and a valuable one, to be made in separating "racism" from things like prejudice and resentment. Not everything tagged as "racism" these days actually meets the definition. But then, defining racism is very much part of the struggle we have, and how we define racism, and who gets to make the definitions, I think, is a big window in the element of "white guilt" at play this election season.

That's because, in many ways, we've made the discussion of race a question of authenticity, and as a society, we've largely given over to letting the aggrieved set the defining. That means, often that we really only allow a discussion of race to happen when a grievance is identified, and the definition of racism in these instances comes from those who have been wronged. For many white folks - especially white liberals, this has led to a definition of race issues set by black leaders and others in the black community. It's "inauthentic" for "those who haven't experienced it" to define things like racism... or sexism, or homophobia, for that matter.

What this has done, in practical terms, is stifled a key piece of the conversation; if we can't challenge the definition at some times and in necessary ways, then we're sort of stuck with an amorphous term that's mainly a litany of grievances, some fair, some not. And on top of it making it too easy to throw around "racism" as a charge when it's not necessarily accurate, it also allows for a dissent that doesn't get discussed - some people will simply decide "I don't care if you call me racist - I know I'm not" and not re-engage.

Thus we get a lot of discussions of the old "Southern Strategy" of Republicans, which relied on "coded referencing" (to "crime" and "states rights" and other issues) that were meant to appeal to white prejudices without explicitly endorsing racism. It's an ugly aspect of our recent history to be sure; but many people don't really understand, or misuse the conception. The idea was, and is, to get a voting decision based on prejudice that's meant to obscure the very prejudice involved. And that's different from an outright racist appeal.

I don't think the Obama campaign has helped this conversation lately by more or less implying that on some level the McCain appeal to white voters plays to race. It's clear that there will be a segment of voters who vote on race (and that, it should be noted, will include a not small swath of black voters picking Obama because he's black), but implying that every appeal - whether it's the "experience" issue, or the Iraq issue, or oil drilling - has a racial component renders the racial discussion almost moot.

Moreover, the notion of "white guilt" has paralyzed a necessary discussion that shouldn't be put off; I've been surprised by the number of white people who have said in so many words that they feel constrained to raise objections to Obama, or to think about not voting for him, for fear of being perceived racist.

And because of where I sit on this, I'll just say it: I'm still not thrilled with Barack Obama. I'm not excited about his positions on a variety of issues, I'm not impressed by the campaign he's run up to this point, and I'm not convinced that his Presidency will be an improvement for the issues I care about. I think Obama has struggled to gain ground, not because race is a barrier to making progress, but because he's made this so personal, so much about believing not in a cause... but in him. And not believing, in him, has to be about rejecting who he is, not what he believes or proposes to do (if, really, we knew what any of that was). And if we can't have a discussion about our issue based concerns without someone leaping up to say "J'accuse" and throw around "racism"  - because this personal - then I can't talk about this election. And that hurts. A lot.

I don't want to end with hopelessness; I think beyond the noise, under the popular culture, there's been a political shift that could really have more impact: and that's the integration of new political voices into our discussion, especially minority ones. That both The Atlantic and The American Prospect have been shamed into adding minority views to their lineup (The Atlantic replaced Matthew Yglesias with Ta-Nehisi Coates, while TAPPED has added Adam Serwer of Jack and Jill Politics) is a welcome development, and more outlets, I think (I can think of Washington Monthly, HuffPo and Talking Points Memo just for three) will feel compelled to follow suit.

The positive effect, I think, is not what people expect: it's not that this will expose white folks more directly to the black experience... what I think is even more helpful is that the black experience will get a reality check that's been considerably overdue; that is, that not every white person agrees with the way the black community defines how we talk about race.. or even that not every black person has signed on to precisely the same list of  assessments about the problems we have... or their solutions. That feedback, the intergrating of our discussion... is the real path, I think, to a conversation, a hard one, about where we are with race in this country.

And when I get back in a couple of weeks, people, I expect to see progress. Go make it.

Comments

[Redstar]

"I think Obama has struggled to gain ground, not because race is a barrier to making progress, but because he's made this so personal, so much about believing not in a cause... but in him. And not believing, in him, has to be about rejecting who he is, not what he believes or proposes to do (if, really, we knew what any of that was)."

BINGO. WEBOY FOR THE WIN!!!

Great post. Now go!!

I'll be mulling this one for some time...

[lambert strether]

This is a great post on a hard topic.

"I don't think the Obama campaign has helped this conversation lately by more or less implying that on some level the McCain appeal to white voters plays to race. "

Nor did the Obama supporters online help the conversation by making "You're a racist" about the second or third move in any discussion with somebody who supported [not Obama], and didn't want to hear about their personal conversion narrative.

Nor did Obama help matters by (in essence) calling for a national conversation on race in his Philly speech, and then never following through when the Wright matter cooled off.