The Literary Divide/Dr. Paul Barrows
   The use of race in politics in the U.S. is certainly not a new phenomenon. Indeed race and the exploitation of it for political purposes is as American as
Apple Pie. In the current presidential campaign, race has been at issue from the outset. From the very beginning, many in the Black community have,
rightly or wrongly, questioned whether or not this Black candidate with the funny sounding name “was Black enough.” Blogs created by supporters of
presidential candidates have put forth images of Senator Obama in traditional Islamic garb that he wore on the occasion of his visit to his daddy’s
homeland in Kenya playing to the Islamic phobia that has been manifested in the U.S. as a result of the reactions and propaganda related to 911 and the
wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Former President Bill Clinton slipped in the mire of racism when campaigning for Senator Clinton in South Carolina when he
made comments that gave the impression that Senator Obama was a “Black” candidate who had only a limited appeal to a narrow African American
constituency comparing his campaign to that of the Reverend Jesse Jackson.
    Race has recently become more of an issue when former Presidential candidate Geraldine Ferraro, a strong supporter of presidential candidate Senator
Hillary Clinton, made the statement that Senator Barack Obama has only achieved the success he has attained because he was a Black man — a novelty
at the point in our nation’s history. According to Ferraro, if Obama was a woman, or even a White male, he would not have attained the success that he has
achieved thus far in his presidential campaign. She further complicated the issue when she dismissed and reduced any African American that was critical
of her remarks to reverse racism thrusting a chilling affect on such comments within the public discourse. In the wake of the firestorm of negative reactions
to her racist statements, Ferraro was forced to withdraw her membership from Senator Clinton’s Fundraising Committee. Senator Clinton was criticized for
being very reserved and tepid in the distancing herself from Ferraro’s remarks.
    In perhaps the biggest brouhaha so far, the issue of race and racism reared its ugly head in the nation’s reaction to Senator Obama’s relationship to
Minister Jeremiah Wright, the fiery and controversial pastor of Chicago’s largest African American congregation. The maelstrom erupted in the national
media and in all of the political blogs when video footage documented some of the more controversial sermons delivered by Reverend Wright. Most
controversial was the comments that Reverend Wright made, in the wake of 911, that America got what it deserved as a result of supporting policies that
put the U.S. on the wrong side of the Arab/Israeli conflict. He put a spin on “America the Beautiful” by changing “God bless American” to “God damn
America” for it’s historic exploitation of African Americans from slavery to the present. And Reverend Wright also suggested that the U.S. government in
someway conspired to infect the African American population with the AIDS virus.
    In their initial reactions, the campaigns of both of the opposing candidates, Senators Clinton and McCain, ordered their followers to stay above the
fray and refuse to get involved in the hue and cry over Reverend Wright’s comments and his association with Senator Obama. While both deserve credit for
taking the high road and staying above the fray, it is also clear that neither Senator Clinton, nor Senator McCain, have the background, abilities nor
inclination to make a speech of any substance on the issue of race and racism and how American should address this as part of the current presidential
campaign.
    Senator Obama, to his credit, hit the proverbial “home-run” in a speech that he gave in Philadelphia, the “City of Brotherly Love” addressing race,
racism and his relationship with Reverend Wright and his church that many are comparing with MLK’s “I have a Dream” speech. Obama, in a manner
similarly to that of Tiger Woods, is, by his very being, uniquely suited to address these issues because of his life experiences and his genetic make-up,
i.e., the fact that he is a scion of an African dad from Kenya and a White American mom from Kansas who was born in Hawaii and raised in Indonesia
and who has also lived and worked in heart of “the hood” in Southside Chicago for most of his adult life. In our amalgamated ethnicity that most Americans
don’t like to own up to, Obama is about as “American” as one can be!
    In a most skillful, articulate and heartfelt way, Obama addressed all of the major issues in his speech. He started by giving our nations founders credit for
lofty ideals adding that, on the other hand, there was one major flaw from the very beginning — slavery and the historic racist treatment of African
Americans. He talked about that legacy right up to the present and how it manifested itself in the disparities in the lives and life chances of those who were
victimized by it; as well as the negative and bitter reactions that it generated by subsequent generations. He put the words of Reverend Wright within that
context while, at the same time, unequivocally stating that he totally disagreed with their content. As part of that same passage, he also put the
experiences and comments of his White grandmother within the same context saying that she often commented on how she was frightened whenever she
was in the presence of Black males and that she had often made derogatory stereotypical statements about African Americans that “made me cringe.” He
commented that he could no more dismiss himself from Reverend Wright, than he could dismiss himself from the Black community; just as he could not
have disavowed his relationship and love of his maternal grandmother for her faults and failures. What Obama did was put on the table the notion that most
of us don’t want to admit in this country and that is the reality that ALL of us have relatives and close friends who have racial biases towards one group or
another that may appall us, that we may shun or somehow put up with, without tossing them aside and refusing to interact with them.
    Obama also attempted to put into context the complex and controversial issue of the Israeli/Palestinian question. His reaction there was very shrewd. He
did not discuss the historic and contradictory relationships that African Americans have had with Jews. Blacks and Jews have long been political allies
particularly on issues and policies related to Civil Rights. African Americans, on the other hand, have also been sympathetic to the plight of Palestinians —
which is an issue that all political candidates want to steer clear of out of fear of a negative reaction from the powerful Israeli lobby. Instead, what Obama
did was to, in a manor that reassured the supporters of Israel, that he had always recognized and supported the fact that Israel had a right to exist and that it
was our nation’s most important ally in the Middle East. In the same breath, he also said that he did not support the radical Islamic Fundamentalists who
were fueling the fire of hate and dissent against Israel and the U.S.
    Obama did not support or dismiss the “God damn America” statement. He simply put in perspective how African Americans have a different view of the
greatness of America based on being historically oppressed and that this often manifested in the sermons of the African American church during what he
called, the most segregated hour in America which occurs every Sunday morning. He was shrewd in not discussing the controversial issue of the spread of
AIDS in the Black Community by the U.S. government. Some have reacted to this statement suggesting that this notion is not so far fetched when one
considers what the state of Alabama did with the Federal governments complicity in the Tuskegee Syphilis experiments where African American were
deliberately and unknowingly infected with Syphilis to determine how the disease ravaged the human body. Others have indicated that what the Federal
government did via the administrations of Presidents Nixon and Reagan in Operation Cointelpro, the discrediting of African American leaders and the
spread of Crack Cocaine and Heroin in the Black community, suggests that the notion that the U.S. government could be part of a conspiracy related to the
spread of AIDS in the Black community may not be so far fetched.
    The aspect most troubling about the hue and cry and media fallout from all of this is the hypocrisy and self righteousness of pundits like Pat Buchanan
who continue to stir up the heat on Obama but who themselves had nothing at all to say when it came to the hateful speeches and practices of all of those
ministers in the not so moral majority that supported his campaign and that most, if not all of the other Republicans — J erry Falwell and Pat Robertson, to
name a few. They also did not repudiate and disassociate themselves with the likes of avowed racists like Strom Thurmond and Jesse Helms who, in fact,
more often than not actually lent their support to their campaigns. The hypocrisy is so thick that you can cut it with a knife!
    How will the Obama campaign fare from here? My sense is that Senator Obama will continue to enjoy the support that he has had with his base and
the new and younger voters that he has brought into the fold. I believe that the comments he made about expressing his awareness and sympathy for those
White workers who have felt victimized by the issues of bussing and affirmative action may also be a bit more inclined to support his campaign. Has the
issue of Reverend Wright been put to rest? Most who have had open minds should have been reassured. Many who were against Obama will probably
continue to be against his campaign and will certainly try to extend the “shelf-life” of this issue. It is highly unlikely that neither the Clinton or McCain
campaigns will use any issues related to Reverend Wright out into the future. That may not be the case in terms of their supporters. Time will tell …
Obama hits a home run with his speech on
race and racism