Until now Barack Obama’s broad appeal has been his ability to transcend a race-based candidacy. Those outside the United States were often surprised to find out that his viability among Black Americans was less certain than among White Americans (among Democrats at least). The most common question - “Is this man Black enough for the African American community?”
The race monster in America has a way of drawing in participants no matter how sincerely they attempt to avoid it. Like potholes covered over with paper, the racial troughs of American society are simply waiting for a passerby to fall in – often by a push.
Hillary Clinton’s recently remarked that “Dr King’s dream began to be realized when President Lyndon Johnson passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964. It took a president to get it done.” Perhaps a forgivable gaffe except for the reason it was given. The ever calculative Clinton machine does not proceed on whimsy. Every word, tear and blink is a choreographed advertisement for a sociopolitical product. Why did she choose to say these words, and why now?
Firstly, I must posit that the content of the comment is not nearly as charged as the debate surrounding it. Irrespective of the legislative particulars of the civil rights movement/Amendment, there is no doubt that social justice movements are dead without political leverage. What is bothersome is the race-bating tactics that have been used in order to draw in a candidate who has built a base of support on very non-racial grounds.
A comment like that of Senator Clinton is not the sort that can be ignored. The circus commentary that is our media coverage would undoubtedly spin any failure to respond as relative weakness to Clinton’s assertiveness, especially just before the South Carolina primary in which half of the expected Democratic voters are Black. After the bait was laid, Obama essentially had no choice but to respond, after which, the debates turned into a competition of who is better for the African American community. Given our 24/7 news frenzy, by simply participating in such a dialogue, Senator Obama’s role as the race-based candidate is being amplified to a point of inaccuracy.
If poll figures are any measure, Obama seems set to win the battle over South Carolina, but the victory has come at a huge cost that will do irreparable damage to his national campaign. By engaging Mrs. Clinton in these race debates, Obama has lost the one thing that set him apart from all previous African American candidates for national office – he did not emphasize his Black identity. Now many more Americans than did a few weeks ago, will view Obama as just another Black candidate.
Surely this points out a fear among White Americans to vote into office someone who is “too Black”, but surely this is not a surprise. What I do not hear about much these days though is the extent to which the MLK/LBJ comment was most probably a calculated effort to paint Obama as the “Black Candidate” in the run-up to the South Carolina primary.
The Clinton camp has masterfully played to the fears of White America while simultaneously handing out her long list of Black friends. Bill Clinton was the country's first Black President? After Reagan and Bush Sr. he might as well have been labeled the countries first Chinese President as well. Even if Clinton loses South Carolina, she has succeeded in caricaturing Obama as another oversensitive African American candidate who gets all up in arms any time somebody says the smallest thing about race. How can we vote into office such a touchy self-victimizing Black guy? For Clinton, South Carolina is a small price to pay for the rest of White America.
Sometimes the only thing more dangerous than being racist is being a little racist.
3 Comments:
And in the world outside, the Americans have a reputation for being such a simple people, when it comes to politics at least. Either-or. You're in or out. No frills. An American is hardly conceived to be calculating in such obscure ways - your candidates can touch on the few core values of the electorate and Bam! get the job done.
Following this campaign, I'm realizing that we are all wrong. Its the European politicians who're doing it all wrong, whose attempts at trapping their opponents never go unnoticed, and always cause a public outcry, eliminating any actual effect the attempt might have had. Honesty prevails at the expense of any potential excitement.
Americans are damn good manipulators, and that layer of ignorance, unintelligence and simplicity an equally good cover-up.
Good stuff. Though I tend to doubt that the Clinton camp could have predicted that those comments would have a negative effect on Obama's support among African Americans - it's hard to know how people will react to something like this. Even if they could have made a reasonably reliable prediction, they would also know that they'd take a hit as a result of certain people viewing those comments as demeaning of Dr. King. And given how risk averse they've been, I can't see them jumping on that tactic - especially not as the front runner campaign.
But while I doubt intentionality, I think your analysis of cause and effect is great, and important. Obama was trapped.
And what a closer.
Good post.
Post a Comment
<< Home