As I said in this thread, I do think Obama is successful with whites when compared to other ethnic groups (excluding blacks) in part because whites are more emotionally invested in the idea of racial progress. In a way, many are just as eager as black people to see a black president, but for different reasons. Some people call this “white liberal guilt”–which admittedly has negative connotations. But it doesn’t have to be seen that way. I think it’s a natural consequence of history and race relations to this point.
Diogenes and plenty of individual white Dopers may strictly be voting on the issues. Oprah and monstro may be voting for Obama because they like his message, not because he’s black. The president of NOW may be voting for Hillary because she thinks Hill is a powerhouse leader, not because she’s a woman. My Asian-American neighbor may be basing her vote purely on name recognition. My ex-boyfriend’s Latino best friend may be basing his vote purely on who he thinks can pull off healthcare reform.
But when we look at whole groups of people, isn’t it interesting to see that there are differences? We should be able to talk about where these differences might be coming from without someone piping up with denials about themselves. One takes on a certain doth protest too much appearance when they do that.
As a black woman, I’d be offended if someone told me the only reason why I was voting for Obama is because he’s black. But when we consider that Obama is racking up close to 90% of the black vote, I’d have to be a fool to deny that racial motivations have anything to do with why so many black folks are on the Obama train. In sum, I think a lot of white people are way too sensitive to any commentary that suggests their demographic group is not 100% objective and rational with their decisions. Being less than objective and rational doesn’t necessarily make one a racist, it just make you human.
I’m saying nobody has a claim to victimhood becase they got called “redneck,” you fucking sophist. The fact that you have to go back 15 years to find a single case of arguably racially motivated violence against white people only underlines my point that white people are not a victimized class.
I don’t think it’s “one drop” with Obama. It’s simpler than that. The social reality is that you are what you look like. Obama looks black, therefore that is his status in America.
Aside from that, there is also the fact that he has chosen to self-identify as black, has a black wife and kids, goes to a black church, etc.
How about last year?Here is an interesting article about what is a “hate crime”. Interesting stats from the FBI:
Blacks (and Hispanics and Asians, etc.) commit hate crimes. There are a-holes of all colors, creeds, orientations and classes. If I beat the shit out of someone because I think they are a rich snob I am committing a hate crime based on class. Anyone can be the victim of a hate crime. Whether it’s white on black, straight on gay or what have you, there will always be someone being victimized. Hate is hate. And it’s wrong.
Anyone can be a victim of a hate crime but that does not mean that all classes are equally victimized. Simply being called a “redneck” (aside from the fact that it’s not a racist word) does not carry any of the freight or history of being called a “nigger.” Trying to equate the two experiences is lame and self-absorbed.
No. It was the follow up comment that “Educated and enlightened liberals are supposed to know history, right?”, which wasn’t you. I thought it was glib and uncalled for, since the point is the same: the expression has its roots in the racist American south.
For what little it is worth, I have decided to vote for Obama and I have been encouraging others to do so. The best part is I have been convincing people by sending them off to read his positions or in a few cases taking apart that damn Email that has been flying around the Internet try to make Obama appear to be a Muslim terrorist sympathizer and an Atheist at the same time.
I respect his accomplishments, his policies and the fact he is a great speaker.
I think he can motivate the country and the world if given the chance.
All of that said, deep down inside, I take delight in knowing that I a descendant of white Europeans will be voting for this good man who is classified as black by color of his skin. I think there is something of a “white guilt” to my own feelings.
Keep in mind though, that I am voting for the man and not just a “Black Man”.
That’s funny, because I think your comment about educated and enlightened liberals was literally begging for a glib smackdown, as was your remark about the antellebellum south. Were you being ironic or do you really think it’s a sign of unenlightenment to call Obama black?
I was simply rejecting “the one drop rule” as an explanation for why Obama is categorized as “black” because I think almost everyone who talks about him would consider the “one drop rule” to be antiquated BS.
Incidentally, I’m not convinced that the Wikipedia article is correct in saying the term originated in the early 20th Century. Casual googling reveals debate raging on the topic… some assigning it to the antebellum NORTH. I was wrong, or at least imprecise, so I wish I had merely said that the expression was an artifact of historical racism that most people don’t think much of anymore, and it isn’t the “rule” they go by in determining the cultural labels they slap on people. I think Dio’s notion of self-identifying is more to the point, although it’s interesting that even very light skinned African Americans “look black.” Not racist, but interesting.
I agree the “sting” of being called a racist name is much worse for American blacks vs. whites, but only for those of a certain age- those who were around to be denied service, to be openly insulted, to witness govt. sanctioned racism, etc.
But a black guy born in 1980 or so personally knows nothing of the above, or very little of it, and I’d guess whites or other races in certain areas today are made to feel as blacks did back then (to a degree). In any case, the historical significance or the deemed severity of an insult should not come in to play when dealing with such a situation.
So let’s play the game, “Who’s Suffered More!” Was it the African-American for suffering through slavery, servitude, Jim Crow laws, segregation and discrimination for the past 400 years? Or the Jews for over 3000 years of oppression, genocide, discrimination and hatred? Or maybe the Native Americans who were kicked off their native lands, slaughtered, minimized and had their culture destroyed? Is it worse to call a black man nigger or a Chinese man a chink? Is it worse to use the word fag or kike? If a black woman is beaten up is that worse than if a black man is beaten up because women have been oppressed for so long? :rolleyes:
Comparing racial (or class or gender or orientation) hatreds is lame because no matter who is victimizing whom, there is always a victim. Hate is still hate. It’s not a contest to see who suffered more, it’s about dealing with the problems and working past them. The people who commit the crimes, no matter who or what they are, are the problem.
However, none of this has squat to do with your OP. You don’t feel like you are assuaging any “white guilt”? Good for you. I don’t have any because 1. None of my ancestors were ever in a position to suppress, oppress or depress people (when they came here in the late 19th century they lived in inner city slums and scraped to get by) and 2. I have never been in a position to suppress, oppress or depress people. I shouldn’t have to answer for the sins of my forefathers (if they had any in this case) and I do my part to be fair and equitable to people I work and interact with. I treat everyone as an individual, good or bad. I will not make a judgment about a group based on the behavior of one person.
I just hope that people will not call me racist because I will not vote for Obama.
I’m afraid your white guilt is showing. You always use blacks to make your case, never Indians — a far more victimized group. And when you’re cornered, you move your goalposts to redneck versus nigger. Since you live in the Great White North where whites from Appalachia are out of sight and mind, you think whites can’t be victimized. And so since you’re not a victimized class, I can call you a dumbass whitey. 'Cause you really are.
But he is categorized as black, so what other explanation do you have to account for this?
Actually, the concept has been in practice for a long time, to help ensure that children of slavemasters could stay in bondage. Post-Reconstruction marked the time when the rule saw widespread legal codification.
I disagree. If that was the case, many if not most African Americans would not be called black. Everyone would either be called “mixed” or they’d be classified based on their actual skin color, instead of casually lumped into the category black. Demographic statistics would more often include “mixed” people. The 6 o’clock news wouldn’t refer to a criminal suspect as “a black male”, even if the black male was light-skinned.
Don’t know what world you’re living in, but in mine, none of the above is going on.
Comparing racial (or class or gender or orientation) hatreds is lame because no matter who is victimizing whom, there is always a victim. Hate is still hate. It’s not a contest to see who suffered more, it’s about dealing with the problems and working past them. The people who commit the crimes, no matter who or what they are, are the problem.
[/quote]
I’m not comparing any of that. I’m just observing that white people can be excluded from that whole group of perscuted classes. White Americans are the one class that’s never been subjected to institutional racism or persecution.
I don’t feel any guilt for the same reasons. I’ve never done or thought anything to feel guilty about and I’m not responsible for anything my ancestors did.
I wouldn’t and haven’t and won’t.
I guess the crux of my OP is that it’s insulting either way to assume that people would base their assertions on race. I assume that conservatives who oppose Obama are doing so because he’s a liberal, not because he’s black.
