'White enthusiasm for Obama is driven by his race. But there’s nothing wrong with that fact. Those who criticize it are simultaneously too idealistic and too cynical: They assume that it’s possible to simply ignore Obama’s race, while also imputing unsavory motivations to those who are inspired by it. The truth is that whites’ race-driven enthusiasm for Obama is an almost unreservedly positive thing — both because electing a black president is a good thing in its own right, and because of what that enthusiasm says about race relations in America today.'
Talk about a series of extremely contentious assertions presented as if they make a logical case!
It is not possible to ignore Obama's race? For a start, what race is Obama? He is half American and half Kenyan. I'm not sure that qualifies as any particular race. And thats absolutely fine with me. Because its completely trivial. Who cares where his parents came from? No one. Of course, what the author is ACTUALLY talking about is not race, whatever that means, but skin colour.
For my money, the real question is what kind of man is he? That is the only question worth asking.
What exactly does it mean to be 'inspired by Obama's race'? Given that his
So: what they actually mean when lefties talk about being 'inspired by Obama's race' they mean animated by their feelings of guilt after being constantly pounded with the Black fantasy/caricature.
Let us contrast this with Martin Luther King Jr. While not forgetting history, Martin Luther King wanted dark skinned Americans to benefit from the American dream- the full potential of what America is and always has been for light-skinned Americans. He wanted dark-skinned people to be treated exactly the same- not better, differently or specially. He understood that equality before the law, and later on equality in the social sense, were of inestimable value. It would mean that people could just forget about skin colour. They could lead their lives without any reference to it- like what went on during the Bush administrations for instance. Only liberal/lefties talked about Condoleeza Rice's skin colour. Pretty much everybody else thought of her as a dignified and effective servant of American foreign policy, in the same way Donald Rumsfeld was a slightly less dignified but just as effective servant of American defense policy. The Martin Luther King Jr dream is not just achievable- it has already happened.
Sadly, the lefties are not on board. And that is because they don't share the Martin Luther King Jr dream. They have the Black fantasy/caricature and they aren't giving up on it. They want to club light-skinned Americans over the head with it to extort wealth and power without the drudgery of having to work for it. And they don't intend to give it up- not now not ever. Race relations have definitely worsened since Obama came to power. And that is because rather than getting any closer to the Martin Luther King Jr dream, the self-declared keepers of the Black fantasy/caricature now feel that they can turn the extortion dial up to 11. Want to pass legislation that will take the US health care industries into public ownership? Declare all opposition to it racist! Want to shut down debate at town halls? Declare it racist! Want to get out of an embarrassing situation with a policeman? Declare him a racist!
Over and over again, being Black is used as a way of avoiding the dull plodding drudgery of obeying the rules all other Americans live by. Its a free pass, a shortcut, a last refuge. Martin Luther King Jrs dream is slipping away, lost in a tide of resentment and alienation on the part of light-skinned Americans.
But back to the original story- lets take this sentance: "The truth is that whites’ race-driven enthusiasm for Obama is an almost unreservedly positive thing ... because electing a black president is a good thing in its own right". Thats not even a tautology- it's the supporting of one assertion by making a second assertion. Let us parse that using the Martin Luther King Jr test. What should matter to voters is the content of a candidate's soul, not the colour of his skin. There are millions of dark-skinned men in America who no sane person should want as president- because of the content of their souls. Exactly as there are millions of light-skinned men in America who should never be president for exactly the same reason. A completely trivial and unworthy reason for voting for someone would be skin colour. And yet, here we have a lefty asserting without reserve that doing so is a good thing 'in its own right'. Apparently, thought of any kind eludes the left.
Lets now take the second part of that sentance: "The truth is that whites’ race-driven enthusiasm for Obama is an almost unreservedly positive thing ... because of what that enthusiasm says about race relations in America today." What does it say? It mainly says that during the eight years of President Bushs terms, skin colour became to a very large chunk of Americans much less important, and the content of their souls (or at least what they could ascertain about the content of one mans soul from attack ads and stump speeches) much more so. For that, President Bush should get great credit. And the discernable steps backwards that race relations have suffered under President Obama can to a large extent be blamed on him and his coterie of hard left ideologues. Barack Obama was a direct beneficiary of Americans determined to see the Martin Luther King Jr dream become a reality.
And his response to that amazing good fortune? To try to supplant it with the dismal Black fantasy/caricature...
There are millions of people in America who were alive when the Jim Crow laws were still in operation, and when a dark-skinned person in America was seriously discriminated against in many humiliating ways. But forty years have passed and the world has changed, even in deepest darkest Alabama and Mississippi. Many older dark-skinned Americans are still bitter about the discrimination; perfectly understandable because it happened to them, and in some cases ruined their lives. But for the succeeding generations, of which there are now two, real discrimination has all but disappeared. And certainly in the twenty first century, there are no barriers to success for dark-skinned Americans other than attitudinal and competence ones.
Black in America is not a race, it is a culture. Millions of dark skinned Americans are not Black- they are dark-skinned Americans. They serve in the Police, Army, Navy, as teachers, businessmen, journalists and a million other jobs- as Americans. Blacks, dark-skinned people who do not see themselves as American at all, but Black, have a separate culture, pseudo-history, set of social mores and moral code. They live their lives in opposition to America, indeed hate it, and join religions like islam which they percieve to be fundementally opposed to America and Americans. They boil with rage at America, and fantasize paranoid fantasies about it continually.
Unsurprisingly, it is virtually impossible to be Black and employed in America. It's not hard to think why. Big attitude and open hostility don't go down well at job interviews. Neither do bizarre and obscene dress. And bizarre and extreme language. And a complete absence of skills. And extremely low educational attainement. And the absence of a work ethic. Apart from 'singing' hip hop, running highly politicised and ungodly 'churches', and going into professional sports, there is virtually no workplace in America who will employ Blacks. Martin Luther King Jr was not Black- he was American. The 'Reverend' Jeremiah Wright, Barack Obamas 'pastor' for twenty years is Black. It really isn't tough to spot the differences.
The continued existence of Black in America is the cause of 99% of racial tensions. That is because it seeks out confrontation, it wears its hostility as a badge of pride, and its attitude to America is one of extreme negativity. Most lighter skinned Americans are perfectly comfortable with dark-skinned Americans- but they have a big problem with Blacks. And always will. Another side effect of the continued existence of Black is the emergence of Latino, its Mexican immigrant counterpart. Latino hasn't metastisized into something as inimical as Black yet, but I'm not optimistic.
One of the defining characteristics of the 2008 election was that a large chunk of Democrat voters, a great swathe of independents and even a few Republicans with very poor judgement came to understand that Barack Obama was a dark-skinned American. Only too late they saw he was not- he's Black.
All the fancy suits, Harvard pedigree and whatnot only served to disguise the reality of Barack Obama. He was never Martin Luther King Jr the sequel. He is Jeremiah Wright with a politicians sense of when NOT to reveal that he is Jeremiah Wright.
Will the general run of the American voting populace take the correct lessons away from the events of the last eighteen months? I want to say yes, but my head says no.