Racism and President Obama

[Benedict]

I have no problem with it, except for the fact that a lot of the people I've talked to don't seem to know anything about politics other than "a black man is running for president!".

Outrageous. Thank god there aren't any ignorant, ill informed types rushing to support McCain simply because his opponent is black.

At least there's one side we can trust eh?

 

[Benedict]

That's certainly a big "if," because it requires good governance and some rather tough political decisions. If Obama and the Dems win sufficiently big to get significant majorities in both houses of Congress, they will be in a position to pull it off -- they'll have the political power, and they have access to plenty of people who, if anyone, are competent enough to sort it out.
.

Fingers crossed the win is going to be relatively dramatic, if he gets in with a strong mandate for change then I think he'll inherit the presidency at a good time. He can ram home the message that the world is already knee deep in shit of his opponents making and shift a lot of the blame for things being bad to start with while being well positioned to take the credit for things getting better.

And if the economy's not hugely better in 2012 than it is now the re-election of Obama will be the last thing on all our minds as we're scrabbling in the dirt for cockroaches to eat.

 

[dteowner]

Don't really understand the justification comment either. Was a black candidate previously cheated in some way?

"Firsts" always generate special emotion. I'm not equating "justify" with "vindicate", ala OJ getting off because Rodney King got beat up. Obama's the first black candidate, so it's understandable that it resonates with blacks.

 

[dteowner]

Outrageous. Thank god there aren't any ignorant, ill informed types rushing to support McCain simply because his opponent is black.

At least there's one side we can trust eh?

I'm pretty sure that wasn't his point, Benedict, and I'm pretty sure you know that.

 

[magerette]

It's really interesting to see how people react to Obama/McCain depending on where they are and who surrounds them. Both Squeek and I have made the point that our votes won't count because our state is 90% leaning the opposite way; I think this makes us more vehement supporters of our candidates. Obama polls higher among whites in states with low black populations, or in highly urban, west coast/east coast states with younger populations, and in areas with a history of racial division ( including the South) or older populations, he polls lowest. So many factors in this election are tied to race and racial perceptions.

Still, on the "so many black people are just voting for him because he's black" point, I don't think that's any different than someone carrying their home state, or pro life soccer moms voting for Palin because she's Jo Six Pack. As we've talked about before, the vast majority of voters tend to vote for who they identify with and feel most comfortable with, not necessarily on who has the best platform.

 

[JDR13]

Outrageous. Thank god there aren't any ignorant, ill informed types rushing to support McCain simply because his opponent is black.

At least there's one side we can trust eh?

Brilliant, I guess that would explain why over 85% of blacks are voting for Obama, while whites are approximately 50-50.

 

[JemyM]

There's an interesting paradox there. On the face of it, refusing to categorize people by race, religion, or creed seems like a great idea. Equality, fraternity, and all that commotion. However, in practice it almost always simply means that any problems caused by friction between groups with different races, religions, or creeds become impossible to address -- if you can't even speak of them, then how can you possibly try to fix them?

Your suggestion folds itself. If a group isn't recognized, it can also not recognize itself to have specific problems.

There are special problems related to being a foreigner, but the only specific issue related to be an arabic foreigner is that you might require an arabic translator. There are also problems related to being unemployed, maybe even an umemployed foreigner, but yet again, the specific etnicity of that person is in pretty much every case useless information. In each case groups are recognized by their social status, not their race.

The practical upshot is that it makes it even easier for the dominant ethnicity to marginalize the minority ones. I know from people who live there that this is very much the reality in Sweden; what drives them particularly up the wall is precisely that Swedish discourse makes it impossible for them to even express their concerns, let alone address them. If there is no "Finnish community" or "Arab community," then what possible problems could such a community have?

What you are suggesting here is counter productive. Racism and xenophobia exists indeed, but racists are not a respected group. Human rights is recognized as a core value, it is part of the constitution, it is taught in school and it is expected by government officials as well as press, tv, media etc. There are also many instances within the Swedish society that works against racism and recognize racism as a problem. Thing is; these counter groups are not ethnically exclusive. Having a group with arabs only fighting racism is as dumb as it gets as it pretty much increase the problem rather than fighting it.

It's actually easier to simply go on the agenda to say "do not discriminate people by etnicity", rather than "we arabs do not want you to discriminate us because we are arabs".

 

[Prime Junta]

Brilliant, I guess that would explain why over 85% of blacks are voting for Obama, while whites are approximately 50-50.

Blacks have been voting 80-90% Democrat since LBJ. Obama is polling lower among them than Gore or Kerry in 2000 and 2004.

[ http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/when_did_blacks_start_voting_democratic.html ]

 

[magerette]

No thread on racism and Obama would be complete without this example of the Ay-rab Buh-rock Who-sane factor:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Wroj0FLvzs

As one commentor put it, "This makes me ashamed to be a multi-celled organism."

You'll note that even Ms Toothless scorns the racial argument, focusing instead on that Ay-rab thing which is more socially acceptable and/or patriotic.

 

[Zaleukos]

JemyM: There are plenty of ethnic "communities" in Sweden though, "recognized" or not... Living in Södertälje which is something close to the world capital of the Assyrian people makes that rather obvious

 

[Prime Junta]

Your suggestion folds itself. If a group isn't recognized, it can also not recognize itself to have specific problems.

The point is that groups *do* recognize themselves. Problems happen if the dominant discourse fails to recognize them -- as is the case in Sweden or France. Finns in Sweden are quite conscious of their separate identity, for example.

Your attitude is exactly the same as that of the Turk who refuses to acknowledge that a Kurdish community even exists, calling them "mountain Turks" instead. To address problems you have to start by recognizing the existence of the community experiencing the problems.

I don't feel like having this discussion right now, though; I'm too preoccupied with the Wall Street / Washington DC carnival. Perhaps we can get back to it some other time.

 

[JDR13]

Blacks have been voting 80-90% Democrat since LBJ. Obama is polling lower among them than Gore or Kerry in 2000 and 2004.

[ http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/when_did_blacks_start_voting_democratic.html ]

Ok, now show me the same chart detailing whites....

My point being that if even more blacks voted for Gore and Kerry and yet they still lost, what does that tell us about Obama's lead in the polls?

 

[Prime Junta]

Ok, now show me the same chart detailing whites...

It took me all of three minutes to find that one. Why don't you try doing some homework for a change?

My point being that if even more blacks voted for Gore and Kerry and yet they still lost, what does that tell us about Obama's lead in the polls?

Oh? Silly me, here I was thinking that your point was that blacks vote for Obama because he's black and not, for example, because he's a Democrat.

 

[JDR13]

It took me all of three minutes to find that one. Why don't you try doing some homework for a change?

Because I know this means more to you than it does to me.

Oh? Silly me, here I was thinking that your point was that blacks vote for Obama because he's black and not, for example, because he's a Democrat.

No, silly you for only seeing the point that you wanted to see, not that it comes as a surprise.

I never said anything about blacks in general or their voting, it was Benedict who blew my original statement a wee bit out of proportion. I will admit to being surprised about the black Democratic statistic though. I knew more blacks were Democrats, but I had no idea it was that large a percentage.

 

[Benedict]

I never said anything about blacks in general or their voting, it was Benedict who blew my original statement a wee bit out of proportion. I will admit to being surprised about the black Democratic statistic though. I knew more blacks were Democrats, but I had no idea it was that large a percentage.

:lol:

Maybe you should ask yourself why you're so ready to believe that black people are voting just because he's black while white people are voting because of candidates policies.

Or for that matter why you're so ready to believe that black people don't know anything about politics. I bet you think they have smaller brains too?

I call HATE CRIME!

 

[JDR13]

:lol:
Maybe you should ask yourself why you're so ready to believe that black people are voting just because he's black while white people are voting because of candidates policies.

Gee I don't know, maybe because that's what the data supports at first glance?

Or for that matter why you're so ready to believe that black people don't know anything about politics. I bet you think they have smaller brains too?

Wow..... speaking of smaller brains.

 

[Benedict]

:lol

I had stopped being serious (not that you tend to pick up on that, in spite of the winking smiley), but seriously, what data is this that supports your view at first glance?

I submit it to you, sir, that there was in fact no data, and the data indeed contradicts your views, views, I put it to the jury, founded on nothing more than simple RACE HATE.*

*(I've stopped being serious again now. Thought it best to be unequivocal)

 

[JemyM]

what data is this that supports your view at first glance?

first glance

 

[JDR13]

Pay a lot of attention to what's going on do you? How about the polls shown by the media that detail black-white voting? Or have you not turned on a television lately? Also, it's not "my views", I'm just telling what I've seen.

The constant and unnecessary use of the race card is getting old real fast. The only thing unequivocal here is your obvious ignorance.

 

[JemyM]

The point is that groups *do* recognize themselves. Problems happen if the dominant discourse fails to recognize them -- as is the case in Sweden or France. Finns in Sweden are quite conscious of their separate identity, for example.

I am not blind to the fact that even non-whites are racists. Recognizing your own group is promoting racism. You must see "race" as important to do so. In every situation recognizing race as a "group" beyond modern medicine and maybe identifying a suspect, is a pathway to racism.

Your attitude is exactly the same as that of the Turk who refuses to acknowledge that a Kurdish community even exists, calling them "mountain Turks" instead. To address problems you have to start by recognizing the existence of the community experiencing the problems.

I can see why a groups geographical or social situation needs to be recognized but I see no reason whatsoever to recognize their ethnicity. Since they are living in Turkey, they are turks by the sense that they are humans living in the geographical region of Turkey for all administrative purposes. Custom traditions are allowed in a free secular democracy unless they interfere with others freedoms and by that regard any group may express their local traditions and culture. Politically, if you ignore the aspect that Turkey isn't as free politically as Finland, how is the "kurdish community" different from the "Kuopio community" or any other city or geographical area?

I don't feel like having this discussion right now, though; I'm too preoccupied with the Wall Street / Washington DC carnival. Perhaps we can get back to it some other time.

I'll would be interested by your perspective. You have a different perspective on cultural identity than I have.