On Piers Morgan's program last night, Lee Daniels (the director and producer of the hit movie Lee Daniels' The Butler) was a guest along with two of the film's cast members (Lenny Kravitz and Cuba Gooding Jr.). During the segment, Piers asked Lee if America is a more or less racist country since Barack Obama became POTUS. Lee responded by saying that sadly, America is more racist since then. In addition to Lee's remarks, the clip below also contains comments by Lenny and Cuba.
I don't think America has become more racist since Barack Obama became president. Instead, his presidency has caused the racism simmering below the surface to rise to the top. The people harboring racist views already felt this way before Barack Obama was sworn in as POTUS. His presidency has just allowed them an excuse to spread their venom. The same thing happened during the Rodney King and O.J. Simpson trials back in the 1990s. As I've said before, America has come a long way when it comes to race relations. However, events such as the presidency of Barack Obama demonstrate that we still have a lot of work to do.
What are your thoughts on the state of racism since the presidency of Barack Obama?
19 comments:
I think America has both more tolerance and more intolerance. Different Americans are moving on different tracks.
I agree, it's not necessary more racism, the temperature of racial intolerance is much hotter.
People often fear and loathe what that don't understand. But, on a more positive note. many of the younger generation have continued to shed the old ways of thinking and interacting.
Here come the longwindedness...
I partly agree with your last paragraph of the post, in that I also don't believe America has suddenly become more racist.
But I also don't believe racial animosity that was lying in wait just erupted once Obama became President. That's probably true in some cases, for people who were and will always be racist, but where we're actually seeing this becomes a subjective game of "OH SHIT!" where we're willing to call something racist based on no other factor than a person's skin tone; i.e. some idiot wearing an Obama mask, morons with moronic signs, a black teen killed by a non-black perpetrator, a black man arrested by a white cop.
Those I focused on because they're tied to Obama, which brings me to a reason I think we may seem a little more racist today. And that's that more of a spotlight is being placed on all things race. When POTUS speaks up on these matters, or when his supporters are so quick to cite racism in even basic criticism, we seem like we're doing worse.
When so many people shout that there are wolves on the hill, regardless if they're really up there, we think that something must be up there, or else why keep shouting it?
I can only speak from my perspective on this, regardless of my race, my class, my anything -- just as an individual. But when people were fired up in the streets over Bush, giving him abysmal approval ratings, burning him in effigy, calling him a war criminal, and on and on, it was supposed to be because those were the legitimate gripes.
If a guy held up a sign that said "Death to Bush" or "Bush is a Terrorist," "Bush is a Fascist," then we all took it on face value that, hey, this guy thinks Bush is a terrorist and a fascist.
But when any type of criticism comes out about Obama, there's a large segment of America that doesn't take it on face value. "Socialist" is code for "Nigger" suddenly. Birthers are racist, truthers are inquisitive. It becomes Pop Psych 101, and there must be some deep, dark racial animus there. Obama's skin color is the first thing looked at, and one of the only things talked about, when trying to decipher the reasoning behind the anger.
Many of the very people calling racism on a lot of situations are only thinking about it racially. That might be called for in some cases, but not always. Racism definitely stands out amongst basic gripes, and there have been ample cases where racism was obviously the driving factor. But continuing to call shit racial/racist based on no other factor than someone's skin tone, then, yeah, it definitely seems like we're more racist.
It's a self-fulfilling prophecy. State that all these folks are racist and hate a black President, and then say every criticism and gripe and hateful word is based only on his race. Of course we're more racist if someone's skin color is the only standard of judgment. We deserve to be more racist.
On a personal note to touch on something Kravitz spoke on, sparked by Oprah's account: I went to a new high-end sidewalk restaurant here in VA, and the guy told me I should try Anthony's Pizza across the street, because the prices were too high. Now, if I weren't white, this would be obvious racism to many. So I think it's funny at times how a person's skin color is judged for a variety of reasons. Maybe the dumb-ass who refused Oprah was racist. Quite possibly. But being a minority, that's going to be the only aspect looked at -- ever.
Fair or no? It seems to me like a hyped version of Death Wish. Bronson gets his revenge on the thugs that deserve it, but then starts to believe every schmoe with a Mohawk or leather coat needs killin' too.
Are we more racist now than we were before President Obama was elected?
I think there has always been a racist streak in our American culture (actually it's sadly human and in all cultures). But Mr. Obama's presidency brought it to the surface.
Mr. Obama's presidency is the first one I remember where people of a certain region and political party sent photos around in emails showing Mr. Obama as a witch doctor with a bone through his nose and photo shopped images of the first family as apes.
Both of those images speak to cultural racism. IOW, they are images whose only purpose is to demean and dehumanize their targets: African-Americans.
It is true that images of GWB as an ape were seen on the internet while he was president, but white folks as apes was never used to demean an entire race as those images were used to demean African-Americans. In our shameful past, African-Americans weren't even considered WHOLE citizens!
So there has always been this demonization of an entire race just because of who they are.
Thankfully, most of that is behind us. But not all of it, as we have seen since Mr. Obama and his family have been in the White House.
Also, thankfully, young people do not carry with them the hatreds and prejudices that the older generations do. Every day in this city I live in, it is a common, every-day sight to see young people, of all cultures and skin colors just hanging out together, guys with guys, girls with girls, mixed race couples, whatever, and no one thinks twice about it. It just is normal.
That's a good thing.
Most of the hatred and prejudice we've witnessed, IMO, probably comes from older folks and young folks who haven't the intelligence to rise above it.
Healthysouls: In addition to not understanding things/people different than they are, some folks have no interest in trying to understand. However, as you alluded to, the younger generation does give me hope.
Josh: As you probably know, I don't think basic criticism against President Obama is tied to race. I think most Obama supporters fall into this camp. When people call President Obama a terrorist/communist or compare him to Hitler, I just chalk that up to partisan buffoonery. Anyone labelling that stuff as racist is off the mark.
Instead, what I'm talking about are instances like the ones included below.
White house watermelon email
Tweets about Michelle Obama
While every one of the Michelle Obama tweets in the slideshow isn't racist, they all fall into the ignorant category.
Racist images of the Obamas
In regards to #17, someone in the comments section pointed out that a depiction of a lynching wasn't the intent of the hanging chair.
As for the birthers, I think it is racist to still question the legitimacy of the presidency of Barack Obama after it's been proven he was born in the U.S.
Let me also mention the right-wing noise machine. Although they aren't all racist, many of them are willing to play the game and make racially tinged statements against the president that they never would if he were white.
Sarah Palin accusing the president of "shucking and jiving"
The president's so-called "hip-hop bbq"
Shaw: Anyone who doesn't see the difference between depicting President Bush as an ape and doing the same to President Obama is either ignorant of or in denial of our nation's history. I too have seen similar images (interracial/same-sex couples, people of different races just hanging out, etc.) in the town where I work (Ann Arbor). Sadly, there are still areas of the country where this wouldn't fly. However, the fact that there are places such as where you live and Ann Arbor makes me optimistic about the future.
There is certainly racism directed toward Obama. As tough as my personal standards are on what constitutes something that's racist, it's pretty damn obvious that some people just do racist shit for whatever reason (ignorance, spite, trolling with memes just to troll, whatever). But as far as there actually being more in America at large, that's what I was getting at with my contention that some folks just see everything as racist because Obama's black, not just the stuff that certainly is.
I wasn't attempting to place you in that category. You've never went partisan SNAFU on me and accused me of being a troll and a shill despite many disagreements, so I wouldn't lump you in with nutters who instantly become unhinged over the slightest disparities in worldview.
I don't think it surprises anyone that a President would be despised by many. We've only been dealing with that since Washington (but for this past decade-plus, it's become downright sinister). And if one is so inclined to hit someone where they think it hurts, Obama is low-hanging fruit when it comes to moronic stereotypes people have to choose from.
But I agree that most of that stuff is stuff I'd consider to be racist. In general, they're the type of insults one would expect to be thrown at Obama, unfortunately. It's the equivalent of saying someone is like Hitler, in the sense that it's just so easy to do; it's just always there.
(Do folks here--race and politics aside--find that stuff to be offensive, or yawn-worthy? Not part of some point or anything; just my curiosity.)
Though I disagree about birthers. That the towers weren't brought down by manual explosives strategically placed has been proven as well, yet the fringe of the truthers hold on out of hatred of Bush. I expect that to be the case with many birthers and Obama. They hate him, and it doesn't necessarily have to be his skin color. I'm sure some racists join right in and fly their flags, though. But politics is polarizing enough without having to bring skin color into it. That might be icing on the cake in some instances, but folks believe some whacky shit for a range of reasons.
And people still question the legitimacy of Bush's presidency. For any minority who believes he was involved in a conspiracy to steal it, where only spun evidence is able to make that case, I wouldn't put that on Bush being white but rather on him being Bush -- the President Mr. Obama can thank for making it so damn cool to treat political rivals like dogshit. It seems to have lived up to the "give an inch, take a mile" saying; the flood gates opened up.
In answer to your question, I find most of the racist stuff to be offensive. This is esp. the case when they bring Michelle and his daughters into it. However, some of the attacks have gotten boring and predictable. Some of the stories I don't post about because I don't have the time. Even if I did have the time there would be some stuff I'd ignore because of the "been there, done that" factor.
Even I get ticked that they bother to bring the family into it. Not that I'm an Obama fan, obviously, but I can empathize; and if it were my family, I wouldn't handle it nearly as well. Especially if I were POTUS. I'd be tempted to go dictator-style on somebody.
That stuff goes beyond in my mind and stands as either total ignorance that there is no coming back from, or such an emptiness and need for attention that one must become scum-of-the-earth to get noticed.
Malcolm: ...his presidency has caused the racism simmering below the surface to rise to the top.
Agreed. Strongly.
Josh: [I dispute that] Birthers are racist.
The Birthers are most certainly racist. Mitt Romney's dad George ran for president and nobody said a damn thing about the fact that he was born in Mexico. I actually agree with you about the Oprah handbag debacle, however. I think the reason the clerk didn't want to show her that ridiculously overpriced handbag was not necessarily due to her being Black. I wasn't there (while Oprah was), so I can't say for sure either way.
Josh: And people still question the legitimacy of Bush's presidency. For any minority who believes he was involved in a conspiracy to steal it...
bush never won legitimately. Whether or not he was involved personally in the schemes to steal the elections, I can't say. It was most likely only people working on his behalf (and without his knowledge) that helped steal the presidency for bush both times (the primary players being Katherine Harris, Jeb Bush and the Conservative SCOTUS judges the first time, and Kenneth Blackwell and Mike Connell the second time).
Saying that everyone who is a birther is only so because they're racist, is a statement that cannot be supported with anything even remotely resembling a fact. Anecdotal stuff, such as nobody apparently saying a damn thing about Romney's dad--which I'll take your word for they didn't; it's long before my time--doesn't make much of a case when you want to impugn an entire group of people as outright racists.
Partisans? Probably. Bitter? The evidence is there. Out of their clocks? It would seem so, along with moronic truthers, mouth-breathing moon-landing deniers, and wide-eyed grassy knoll hangers-on.
But to gloss over the fact that people LOVE the wildest conspiracy shit one could throw out there, including silly stuff that literally billions of people in the world cling to, and then associate anyone believing one out of infinite conspiracies as racists -- well, that's just as out there as people who believe Obama is a Kenyan socialist Muslim hell-bent on destroying America.
It's a sweeping generalization based on nothing but anecdotal things arranged in an order which point to a presupposed conclusion. Which one am I even talking about there -- the birthers or the ones calling them all racists? There is no difference. (But let me be clear that I'm not busting balls on that front; we all have our gris gris.)
No doubt about it that if there's a white racist out there who hates Obama's ass simply because he's black, then that person is probably a birther or far more likely to be one. No doubt that many birthers are probably racist. But to insist that the only reason a person would subscribe to a conspiracy theory about a black man is because of racism, then that is a conspiracy theory.
In every other single solitary instance of a President having outlandish, moronic conspiracy theories floating around their heads, most of which are just laughable, the only time it's ever been called racist to believe it is when it's a non-white President. And not only that, but the standard seems to be that one goes from zero to insta-racist if one subscribes to this conspiracy theory. Just doing so seems to be the standard y'all are saying makes one a racist.
Does no one else see how stupid that is? I think even my buddy Tommy Sotomayor would be poundcaking some folks off of that standard.
Josh: Does no one else see how stupid that is?
OK, not every last one is a racist. There are also the stupid and the liars. I think most are racist though. Will there be any birthers who object if Ted Cruz decides to run for president? I doubt it.
Josh: "That stuff goes beyond in my mind and stands as either total ignorance that there is no coming back from, or such an emptiness and need for attention that one must become scum-of-the-earth to get noticed."
Agreed. There's no 3rd choice.
I think most of the birthers fall into the racist camp. Of course, this is just a feeling based on what I've seen. Because we've never had a non-white president until now, some of the accusations of racism could be off the mark. However, I find it suspicious that of all the presidents we've had, the question of President Obama's place of birth still comes up (even after it's been well-established).
Because of the way you phrased your sentence about the legitimacy of Bush being president (regarding people thinking he was involved in a conspiracy to steal the election), I have to follow up on that. Do you believe there was a conspiracy not involving Bush to steal the 2004 election? Just asking.
Dervish: I agree with you about the 2004 election. I mean come on, the election comes down to the state where Bush's brother just happens to be governor! Plus when you throw in the other people you mentioned, the whole situation stinks. As you probably know, there are lunatics who think President Obama stole both of the elections he won! Just imagine how they'd react if he was in the similar situation (vote-wise) as Bush was in 2004... the only difference being that the outcome hinged on the vote tally in Illinois!
I was thinking about doing a post on how Ted Cruz' potential White House bid will put the birthers in a quandary. It's going to be interesting to see their reactions if he does run.
The only real reason I know about any Bush election conspiracies is that I personally know dozens of people who still insist to me that Dubya and Jeb conspired to steal it, along with Republicans -- twice. And many of those same people believe Bush blew the towers up. And they bring this up regularly whenever someone drops Obama's name. "Well, Bush!"
If these things had legs, they'd be handled by now. Not enough Republican-friendly media in the entire world to offer cover. No way they could say "phony scandals" and have the media sit down like scared dogs in the corner. Thus these things stand as nonsense to me, with "evidence" of wrongdoing working like creationists trying to put the Bible in a science classroom.
So my personal experience with conspiracy theorists takes it beyond any one thing. Most of the Bush-haters I know believe EVERYTHING negative said about the man, from fake national news stories and conspiring with Bin Laden to secret Illuminati status and purposefully rigging New Orleans to kill black people.
I believe the Secret Service (I cringe to say that!) when they say Obama has had more death threats. Makes sense. Racists are vile f'n people, and Bush made it very cool to hate POTUS. And I think it's obvious Obama's the recipient of more pointless criticism on a wider level, thanks to Twitter and Facebook and YouTube being more popular now than ever, coupled with mega-vacations and golf outings which give fired-up people more reasons and more outlets to express their disgust in distasteful ways.
But if we're speaking strictly about theories which paint a President as a criminal or some sinister being, then it seems to me Obama has it easy. I've seen nothing that will linger over his head for life. Though I could be wrong; time will tell.
While I certainly agree that there are plenty of racists in the birther movement, I also realize that very few people knew anything about Obama, including a lot of the same schmoes voting on factors not even closely related to politics. And this basically put a man in the White House who wasn't vetted out fairly and wasn't examined and a man who, if you do manage to call his past into question, has a skin color that serves as a shield just as much as it serves as a magnet for bullshit stereotypes and hatred.
It's easy to believe wild stuff about a man you don't really know anything about. If somebody said your new neighbor was a weirdo, you'd probably be more inclined to believe it than if it was said about a neighbor you had for years and knew. We believe some whacky, silly, disturbing stuff as people. I'm in no way excluded. His race, as I said, just seems to me to be the icing on the cake, not necessarily the driving factor.
(Hell, I'd agree with the name and "most" if that were the reason given; that seems more of a reason to me for a right-wing white Christian than it being a light-skinned mixed man.)
Maybe I'm wrong. But I've been trying hard these past few years to demand a higher standard of evidence before I go believing something. Being a partisan was mentally draining me.
Josh: First off, I mistyped. Instead of the 2004 election, I meant to refer to the 2000 election. Now, do you think the outcome of the 2000 election was above board?
I can't understand how some of you on the right still think President Obama wasn't properly vetted and that we really don't know anything about him. The man wrote two books, what else did you need to know?! lol
Wanna read my book? I was an astronaut who really invented the Internet.
Seriously. Trust somebody's self-appraisal? I don't trust it. That goes for damn near all the schmuck politicians, city board members, community organizers, lobbyists, union leaders, social advocates, and on down the line, right, left or center. Public leeches.
What I really wanted to know included: Was the Ayers thing legit? Because it seemed fishy. Didn't know the guy that well? Hmm. The maniacal preacher? As a non-religious person, that kinda shit troubles me. Let's hear more about it. 20 years! Inspired a book. Can I know more? No? Oh, it's racist to keep bringing it up? My bad. Let's just take the word of the man who's trying to win a contest. Pure propriety there.
I wanted to know about Obama's Senate days when he was running for election and the personal records of his opponents were mysteriously being released to the public, previously under court-mandated lock and key.
I wanted to know not about what he toked on in college but what he studied, what his writings were, where his head was at as a community organizer. Inside the Law Review, please. What did he do, with whom did he do it, and what sort of gains were made? Ah, I see. I don't need to know if he ever made a real difference in the real world, or how. He's so well-spoken and inspiring.
These little curiosities were racist in 2008. I wouldn't be asking that of a white candidate, according to media. I would take the candidate's word for it, or I would believe the first piece of spun fabric put out saying "There was nothing fishy about those Senate races. Don't worry."
As for 2000 being suspect: Apparently not to an abnormal level. I mean, HBO movies aside (Go Kevin Spacey!), they had ample time to deal with that stuff, for 13 years now. If there was anything there concrete that went beyond seeming wrong, they would have done Bush like OJ and gave him his nefarious election comeuppance for waterboarding.
Democrats own the world here. Minus a few obstructionist Republicans, they can do what they want. Obama can bitch-slap Congress, and has. Holder does what he wants. Democrats have exponentially more political capital to spend.
Or--and this seems rather likely to me--they don't want to call the Bush boys on their wrongdoings because they were also trying to stack the deck in recounts, being D-distract happy and attempting to cook books.
Above board? Probably not. I don't think any election is, from prom queen to POTUS. But I don't think it's the huge conspiracy a lot of folks claim. Especially those liberal folk I know when I head down to the District for live work. My lord; these people H-A-T-E Bush. If Bush were black, in all honesty, I might seriously believe they were racists.
D-district, even.
Josh: I'm not referring to any so-called self-appraisal by President Obama in his book(s). What I'm talking about is how he discussed his family, educational background, etc. However, if the reincarnation of "Honest Abe" Lincoln wrote a positive book about President Obama, you probably still wouldn't believe it, lol.
I don't think I really believe anything nefarious about the guy.
Though I see him as little more than another big-government schmoe who wants government to do for people by way of more government.
There are probably plenty of positive things I would believe about his life until he became a politician.
Josh: So I guess you must think Reagan and Bush II were big government schmoes as well.
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/06/paul-krugman-ronald-reagan-barack-obama-keynesian-economics.php
So since President Obama became a politician, everything about his life is a lie?
Bush was a big-government schmoe! Massive spending, massive spying.
And "lie" is harsh. Political nonsense is more like it, like not even being able to speak real talk but rather with highly-polled and calculated words and phrases. Forked tongue.
Post a Comment