I agree here for the most part. People are simply acknowledging that we’ve finally had a change. Though, I’m sure the reaction would have been exactly the same regardless. If Hillary won it would be “First Woman As U.S. President” … If a Latino won it would be “First Latin President”… etc…
If you were the first person in U.S. history to have a black friend, it might attract some attention, and with good reason- you’d be making some history. Pretending society is colorblind will not kill racism.
I think this is pretty contorted reasoning. After endless focus in the press about latent racism - “Obama can’t connect to working-class whites,” “the Bradley effect!” “Wright Wright Wright Wright Wright,” and so on - Obama did win. Many of the effects will be subtle and hard to measure, which will result in people denying they exist, but I think it’ll have an impact all the same.
This. I was at the Grant Park rally, and you know who was crying? The older Black folks (including, touchingly, Jesse Jackson). You know who was cheering? The younger everybodies (oh, there were some tears, too, but it was the older black folks who were sobbing and to whom I offered all my Kleenex.)
Let them have their moment. This is a huge deal to them, and you know what else is a huge deal to them? The fact that it’s *not *a huge deal to us younger people. The very fact that a whole generation could go, “Wait, why is it even newsworthy that he’s black?” is their victory.
I have a similar moment every time my son or his friends look at me like I have three heads because I say something about a “brave” kid being out of the closet at 13, or a courageous gay couple adopting a child. They just don’t see why it’s noteworthy at all, and that’s fabulous. They think my stories of my gay (sometimes in the closet so deep even they didn’t know it) male friends contemplating suicide rather than being openly gay in high school are bizarre, and I couldn’t be prouder. They have no idea why I’m proud, because it’s just what is, to them.
Ditto my teenage son’s reaction to “Free To Be…You And Me…” He couldn’t understand, even when I explained it, why anyone would bother to write a song about how girls can be anything boys can be, much less a whole album of them. He thinks it’s a very weird CD.
The legislation of tolerance is probably necessary as political theater, but it’s the unconscious shift in attitude between generations that’s the real death knell of -isms.
Plus, of course, people just like superlatives and record making. We find some way to make every news item either the biggest, best, latest or first somehow.
In fact, CNN’s headline yesterday amounted to “no matter what, this is an historic election… at the end of the day, we’ll have either our first black president or our first female vice president.”
Or our “44th White President”
The FBI supposedly have investigated over 500 death threats since Obama announced his candidacy.
Because blacks were the only ethnicity that were kept as slaves.
And “First Black President” just has a nicer ring to it.
On MSNBC last night, one of the commentators pointed out that people are quicker to let go of negative stereotypes if they personally know a person of a stereotyped group. Like if they hear all curly-haired people are lazy…but then they meet Jane and she has curly hair and is not lazy…then they dismiss the stereotype as nonsense.
The commentator said that having Barack Obama as president gives every person in America the ability to “know” a black person, in a way that is different than how we “know” black celebrities. Now everyone has a black friend. And that will be very important to helping stop racial fear, prejudice and negative stereotypes.
I am not sure if I buy that completely, but it’s interesting. And would be awesome if it turns out to be true.
First black president? I wonder what his recently deceased grandmother would say about that?
A Roman Catholic believes the Pope is God’s vicar on Earth and his word holds true in heaven. It’s hardly prejudice to worry slightly about your President taking marching orders from someone you didn’t elect, much less whos faith you don’t share.
That’s a ridiculous comparison.
Did you notice that the new Vice President elect is a Catholic? Aren’t you worried about him taking his marching orders from the Pope?
Seriously, the Pope is a religious leader, who has enough trouble telling his bishops and priests what to do. The laity can make their own minds up about whether to follow his guidance, just as the laity in other denominations and religions can take or leave what their religious leaders say.
And prejudice against Catholics is at the same moral level as prejudice against Jews, Muslims, Hispanics, Asians, and any another social group that’s suffered from prejudice.
I think she’d be terribly proud.
But you were talking about her race, right? I think she knew that her grandson looks black, and that he even wrote in his first book that he basically identifies as black because that’s how people treat him. (IIRC there was a quote to the effect of ‘if I robbed a bank, people would identify the robber as a black man, not a biracial man’ - but I don’t have my copy at hand.)
Certainly not, but I wouldn’t have worried about it with JFK either. Still, there was a reason the British Parliament made crowning a Catholic monarch illegal and especially where religion is concerned times change slowly.
It’s on the same moral level, but don’t pretend Catholics have been getting lynched in America for the past 200 years.
The first Catholic nominated from president (Al Smith in 1924) lost badly (and it took, IIRC, 103 ballots to nominate him, since the Dems required a 2/3 vote to nominate). The second won, just barely, and with the third (Ronald Reagan) it was never mentioned. Nor was, except in passing, for John Kerry. I expect that one consequence of this will be that the next time a “black” (he is, after all, as white as he is black) is nominated, it will be noted but you won’t have 20% (or whatever the number was) of white men going around saying, “I could never vote for a black”. There will still be such people, but they will be lost in the noise.
Yes, there was a reason: they were anti-Catholic bigots. I’m sure some UK Dopers will be along at some point to back me up on this.
Nitpick
In this country ( both the geographic region and later in the actual U.S. ) American Indians were also kept as slaves, particularly early in colonial history. Charleston was actually an early exporter of Indian slaves to the Caribbean ( as well as a transshipper of African slaves ).
Thie difference was primarily one of scale after the early 1700’s.
I’m 37. I held it together pretty well during the acceptance speech, but lost my shit entirely when the families were on stage. I was blubbering like an idiot. These two lovely young women, 19 and 21, with whom I had worked on the campaign were sitting with me and put their arms around me. I choked out “I never thought I’d see the day,” and I realized that deep down inside, I just never really thought we’d have a black first family. I also realized that the two young women thought I was just overcome at Barack’s victory. They just didn’t get that it was the race thing that put me right over the edge. And I didn’t try to make them understand, either. Because the fact that they didn’t get it was a beautiful thing.
I’m ten years younger, and white. I was on those buses in Louisville as a child when schools were desegregated and people were throwing things at the black kids coming off the bus because they didn’t want those kids in “our” schools.
Someone on NPR today was talking about how this affected those involved in the Civil Rights movement, and it occurred to me that I was involved in the Civil Rights movement - a child and a pawn without a choice - but aware enough to recognize the ugliness and the reason I was being used as a pawn.
I’d like to think it was due to a growing enlightenment of the American people, but the more likely reason that Reagan’s Catholicism was never mentioned was because he was a Presbyterian.
I dont want to get into an arguement I merely wish to express my opinion - from the coverage that has been shown here the way this looks is that Obama has been voted for on the basis of the colour of his skin. Im fed up of hearing about the fact he is black. The big thing here should be what Obama is going to do for the US and how he is going take care and help his country grow. I do agree it is amazing that obviously things have progressed but for heavens sake please praise Obama for the things he is going to make happen for the US and not the colour of his skin. Ill leave now…