Today’s Washington Post had what appears to be a no-brainer on the front page: “Blacks forming Rock-Solid Bloc Behind Obama”. Of course we are. We tend to vote democratic anyway, and the current GOP ticket leaves much to be desired for a liberal democratic leaning demographic that believes in merit. If it was Edwards, or Clinton instead of Obama the numbers would look the same. In an election like this there are no black independents. There are blacks who are predisposed to vote for McCain/Palin either for ideological reasons or because the GOP line is much shorter–blacks in the DNC are a dime a dozen, while blacks in the GOP are as rare as….well did you watch the Republican National Convention?
So how blacks vote isn’t really the story. The story is really about the nature of democratic discourse within black communities now that Obama has a legitimate shot.
Now it certainly seems as if blacks are talking about politics much more often:
“All we talk about is Obama,” said Julie Griffith, the chief executive of a Houston public relations firm who attended a recent convention of black MBAs in Washington. “We talk about the campaign. We talk about Palin. We talk about a possible assassination attempt. We can talk about Obama all day.”
When several black protesters heckled Obama during an appearance in St. Petersburg, Fla., asking what has he had done for the black community, many African Americans expressed outrage — toward the hecklers.
“We can be black all day” after the election, said Griffith, the Houston executive. “We’ve got to get there first. Obama’s not about black issues. He’s the people’s president. We are going to do what we’re going to do. If some black people aren’t with that, I say to hell with them.”
The ideal circumstance here would be vigorous debate about what types of political benefits will blacks gain from an Obama victory. Granted, we know what we’d get from McCain/Palin. Worse than nothing. Fair enough. But that’s really only part of the picture. Particularly because as we consider bailing out Wall Street to the tune of $700 billion, it appears as if in the course of making a deal that both sides could agree on, Obama tossed progressives overboard again.
“Michael Baisden and Tom [Joyner] and Tavis [Smiley] could talk about Jena all they want,” Jackson said, referring to radio and TV personalities who had pushed for large protest marches for the embattled men. “But Jena didn’t have anything to do with winning . . . what?”
“Iowa!” the audience roared back, without any dissent.
I wonder how the Jena 6 felt about that? One of the biggest criticisms of the Bush presidency is that, well, he doesn’t brook criticism. And his people impose discipline on the rank and file.
What do we lose practically, when we do the same thing?
There's a Black Party?
Where do I get my registration form for that?
If Black political dissent against Obama — or any candidate, FWIW — were to organize and abide by the rule of machine politics, they probably would have some effect.
Admittedly, that's a huge 'if'. That which usually represents Black political dissent amounts to chaotic shouting and militant posturing after the fact. But while the exercise of dissent is central to Progressivism/Liberalism and most Blacks vote (ostensibly) left-of-center, very, very few Blacks are Progressives. I'm less sure it's correct to equate Black political dissent with Progressivism. Or any 1 political ideology, for that matter.
I've argued that Obama's candidacy, win or lose, takes the national spotlight away from the group formerly known as the Civil Rights Establishment – because Obama has worked his campaign magic without any apparent need for their consent or approval. Aside from that, he simply outclasses them in terms of American political savoir faire. You don't get to be editor of the Harvard Law Review, not having written a single article in it, without having some extraordinary political skills.
As much as I think Obama has collected the last bushel of cherries to be picked for 'first blacks' there are still several trees left on the Right side of the political spectrum and perhaps for Blue Dogs as well. It leaves open the question of what the average hard working activists, pundits and other politicos are to do whether or not Obama wins the White House.
An underlying assumption that I have here is that the past two decades of CBC legislation has been all about nothing and the reason that there is no national black political agenda. That is to say no agenda other than spreading racial fear and distrust of the GOP – in the face of the destruction of Trent Lott, Ron Paul and George Allen over racial remarks. The reality is that Jena has little to do with anything other than Jena, and the journalistic coattails of any major media editor who decides that 'the blacks' need a little more coverage. The incredible success of Obama demonstrates how little has been articulated as a black political agenda.
Tavis Smiley deserves credit here in highlighting by Obama's dismissal of his Covenant with Black America how unconnected are the real political games at the national and local levels. But this also brings to light a deeper issue that as far as I know only Lani Guinier has the temerity to address – as little as she counts nowadays. That is that the creation of majority minority districts as a consequence of Civil Rights agitation has created the net national circumference of black political action. If Maxine Waters isn't whispering in the ear of the Clintons, then nothing is happening for South Central, and this monopoly of black political power established a generation ago has yet to be updated and reformed. Except by the GOP which has dynamically attacked those districts for partisan gain. In other words, black national political representation is deadlocked and moribund in the Democratic party because the same incumbents and their designees have had a deathgrip on minority voting districts since their inception. Hell, I was DJing for Maxine Waters receptions when I was 19. I'm 47 years old.
I understand what you're saying. But I'm not really talking about the civil rights establishment, but rather the black electorate. Very different animal.
The web shouldn't really be an arbiter but the only other option is black talk radio. To the extent that black criticism of Obama can be placed into camps I'd think they are overlapping–the nationalist camp, and the progressive/left camp.
I love your blog professor. It is one of the last sites that did not surrender to Obamamania without critical analysis. I am disturbed that the black community could enter lock step behind this man and never ask for anything in return. This preoccupation with occupying the White House may prove to be no victory at all. Examine the minute or no discussion of the social distress that engulfs the African American community. The idea that Obama cannot discuss race or must remain race neutral tells me that America can only accept a black who does not make them feel uncomfortable. Obama is a star in the vein of an Oprah, JORDAN, AND Tiger Woods. His victory may represent a problem for future black candidates who must circumvent the landmines of race without an identity complex to buffer the slings of racial discourse in the body politic. When are we going to see an increase of the numbers of black congresional reps, How about a some black governors and senators? That is the true test of the Obama breakthrough. Blacks have sold all their political aspirations into Obama. He does not feel the same way about them as will never reciprocate that love in public or in his policies.
Thoughts about Obama and Black Politics
if the number of black republicans are so few, why are there so many of them as pundits and chairperson of this or that speaking on behalf of McPalin?
Just wondering, because it seems like every time I turn on CNN and the like there is a new black republican on there.
From the Archives: Obama and Black Party Discipline http://t.co/Tqn78may