Andrew Sullivan from The Daily Beast declared that the Old Confederacy is turning to Romney over Obama and it is because they are racists. This was from "This Week With George Stephanopolus" this past Sunday on ABC.
I have heard this bandied about quite a bit recently and I imagine that if Romney happens to win the election, we will have many pundits claiming that the issue of racism is still alive and well in America and that we are not as progressive on race as we hoped we were in 2008. I expect it to be asserted rather strongly that Romney will have won the election because of the votes of racist Whites who hate Black people. In addition, I think that this accusation will be used to morally delegitimize the Romney presidency and to rally the Democratic base in opposing Romney as the equivalence of a moral crusade against the evils of racism.
If that happens, who exactly will be playing the race card? Will it be those voting for Romney or those trying to coalesce political power for their side for the next election?
Will it be true that those voting for Romney are racists who hate Obama just because he is Black or because he affirms positions that are favored by the African-American community? Can't people just have a different opinion?
These questions need to be asked and answered accurately IF the accusations begin to fly.
So, let's try to look at this objectively. In my opinion, calling people racists in America in 2012 when they hold different political or economic perspectives is a violent act of rhetorical aggression and is a power play. Unless you can see inside someone's heart or unless they prove themselves to be racists by their actual words and actions, I think it is best to leave that designation off the table. Sure, it is an argument neutralizer and it gives the one accusing a sense of moral superiority, but it accomplishes nothing. How can one battle personal racism when from their perspective, they are just trying to make good decisions?
When I was writing this, I ended up in a conversation with two men at a coffee shop, one White and one Black and both from a more liberal political persuasion. They were actually talking about some of this and I overheard and joined the conversation. We all agreed that Race was a major issue, but it was not THE major issue. The underlying issue behind Race deals with economics, personal preference, and protecting our own lives. It is about money and power and who has the money and who wields the power and what for. We fear the "other" and anyone that we think is a threat. Those are the real issues that divide us.
The truth is, people will vote along the lines of what they think benefits them and what they think is best for the country based on their own personal worldview. I am not saying that there are no racists that exist, but the vast majority of White people who are voting for Romney are not doing so because Obama is Black and they hate Black people. That is a false argument. Rather, they are voting for Romney and against Obama because they believe that Romney's policies are better for themselves and the country as a whole. And, those who vote for Obama do the same thing. The reason that this belief and resulting action falls along racial lines has to do with what we fundamentally believe about what benefits us and what we believe is best for the nation. But, it begs the question: Why is that often so different according to race?
As human beings, we act in our own self-interest or according to what we think the best course of action is for ourselves and others. This should be self-evident. For White people who are Conservative politically, it might benefit them to have lower taxes, less social programs, and an America where it is easier for them to get ahead. In voting for those who promote those things, one does not have to be racist. One only has to see life from their own point of view, which is something that we all do naturally. It takes supernatural help to consistently see life from the other's point of view. For Black people who are Liberal politically, they might think that it benefits them or their race in America to have higher taxes on the wealthy, more social programs, and an America where it is easier for them to get ahead because of past inequalities and injustices. Or, perhaps they just see the policies of the Democratic Party as what is best for the country. It does not mean that either side is racist.
At the end of the day, both the Republican and Democratic parties are acting in THEIR self-interest as well so that they can grasp and maintain power. They are not really acting in the interests of the people or the long-term good of the nation. Recent events should bear that out. Republicans are accused of acting on behalf of the rich and the Democrats and the pundit class lined up behind them make much hay over the idea that Republicans are for the wealthy class. But, radical historian Howard Zinn, a friend of Leftists everywhere, once stated, "The Democrats are part of the upper class that is more willing to make concessions to the lower class in order to maintain their power." These accusations go both ways.
The truth is that we live in a society where a majority of Whites from certain regions of the country vote one way and a majority of Blacks or Hispanics vote another way. It does not mean that they are racists. But, it does mean that a large number of people from each race has been convinced that a certain political party or candidate best benefits them and their vision of the country. We need to ask why that is and how much our racist history plays into current divisions. While we might not be active racists at this point, we do participate in a racialized society as to what we think benefits us and the nation. These differences often manifest racially. For the Christian who is interested in "other-focused" life and ministry, it behooves us to figure out why the racialized division exists, what we are doing to contribute to it, what our hopes and dreams are, and why we tend to stick together according to race, class, and economic status when we express our opinions about what is best for ourselves and our nation. Then, we need to make sure that WE are acting from a "Kingdom of God" perspective and an identity in Christ instead of an identity rooted in class, race, social status, or economics. We need to think about others and not just ourselves. That might not change anyone's vote (I am not saying it should) but it will cause us to interact with people who disagree with us more charitably so that we can be a blessing to them instead of an obstacle.
Until we move past the verbal flamethrowing and accusations and begin to explore what really benefits our nation as a whole even if it hurts my own personal position, we are going to keep alienating each other, even if we don't intend to. Christians, out of all people, should lead the way in this because we are a people who should understand the difference between acting in our self-interest and acting in the interest of others. There might be really good reasons to vote for the candidate of your choosing, but if we look around and notice that the people who look like me are voting for one candidate and the people who don't look like me are voting for the other guy, then perhaps I need to think through some of the things that I care most about and ask how those positions are influenced by my race or social position instead of God's perspective.
We should flatly reject calling people racists just because of who they vote for. But, we should also think through what we are promoting and what we are rejecting and then think about how we can live to benefit others and bring reconciliation instead of just thinking about how to improve our own situation. More dialogue and personal sacrifice and less division, please.
I guess after a while, terms like 'baby killer' and 'not an American' come home to roost.
Most Americans are puzzled by the venom. I suppose some assume the unthinkable . . . that racism is behind extreme comments.
yet still, there have been some comments that are . . . well, here's an example . . . you judge:
'foodstamp President'
even the middle of the road media was shocked at that one
I don't think that 'racism' would ever have been an accusation UNLESS some politicians, thinking that they were playing to a racist base, went 'all-out' for effect;
and that,in itself, was a terrible indictment of a wannabe leadership that pandered to the worst among us, and did not consider the majority who opposed Obama.
Posted by: Christiane | October 31, 2012 at 03:14 PM
Christiane, I am not saying that certain people have not used racial dialogue. But to say that people are against Obama because they are racist is just flat wrong. It is the "guilt by association" fallacy at its finest.
Now, I do think that one should wonder why most of the people of their race vote for one guy while most of the people of other races vote for the other guy. It might not be because of racism but because of built in situations in our systems that tie back to our racial histories. Perhaps we can turn our attention to those things?
Posted by: Alan Cross | October 31, 2012 at 03:44 PM
Alan,
Are you saying there is no one who is voting against President Obama because of race?
Posted by: Todd | October 31, 2012 at 04:19 PM
No. I am not saying "no one." There are plenty of classical racists out there still. I am saying that "race" does not have to be a reason to vote against Obama or for Romney. There are plenty of other reasons that one might have.
I AM making a secondary argument, however, that should be considered when it comes to these types of things. Even if you are not overtly influenced by race, it is prudent to notice when you are making decisions according to power and wealth and the majority of White people see it one way and the majority of Black people see it another way. While you might not be acting racially, you might be influenced by a set of criteria that is connected to race in some kind of way, at least in historic power arrangements. But, saying that all those who vote for their interests or their vision for America are racists if they do not like Obama misses the point, I think. There is something that goes deeper than race. It is self-interest and self-preservation and a society based on that the way that we are will not prosper for long.
Posted by: Alan Cross | October 31, 2012 at 06:51 PM
Alan--I basically agree (if I understand fully)how you develop your argument. If I were to cast a piece of it in different words I hear you saying that the ways in which we use "racist" and "racism" are no longer useful. They don't serve the purposes of good language which brings clarity and light to that which we seek to dialogue about together. But the critique you render of how we ought think about our lives and world basically makes the case that we continue to live in a world of bondage that is racist. You just don't use the word.
On one hand, when a word ends up obfuscating and paralyzing conversation--we might as well get rid of it. "Sin" is a word like that.
We desperately need to be able to identify "sin." But at the same time, if people do not hear the word from a Biblical framework, and it shuts down understanding, ought we use it?
But then taking words off the table is an act of power and we should be careful about taking prophetic words off the table that speak to abuse of power--unless we are sure they have been heard and have been heeded.
Posted by: PJ Hannam | November 01, 2012 at 11:48 AM
Philip, thank you for taking the time to interact. I guess that what I am saying is that the personal critique of someone as a "racist" because they vote a certain way or according to their own interests is an impossible assertion to make. It renders the real definition of racism moot. But, we would all do well to recognize that we still benefit from systems established to promote one group over another. While we might not personally harbor racism in our hearts, we might unknowlingly choose to give power to systems and structures that affirm one group of people over another because we consistently choose that which benefits us and our situation, even though it does not benefit others. We get away with this because we say that everyone has access to success if they just work hard. That is true, to an extent. But, it fails to take into account years of history that told a different story. People begin to see themselves and their position in life and society differently after they have been told who they are. We see this in abusive relationships. We do not blame the victim of abuse for seeing themselves in a less than favorable light. We understand that abuse happened and we try to bring healing. We get that when it comes to individuals. Why do we not get that when it comes to groups?
My point is that we do not rectify the situation when we then accuse individuals of nefarious motives when it comes to their choices. We say that racism is evil but selfishness and acting upon personal preference is okay - that is what America is all about. When people choose a politician because he benefits them personally, we should recognize that choice for what it is. It is not necessarily racism. But, then we should take the critique further and recognize that what was once racism had its roots in selfishness and personal preference and using our power to advance ourselves over others. We have rejected racism without rejecting personal selfishness, greed, and personal preference as a nation. So, we keep doubling down on what got us in this situation in the first place, except now it is less about race and more about self and power and money and greed.
I am trying to make a nuanced argument and am perhaps doing it poorly, I admit. But, I think that many White Christians are no longer working from a racist perspective, but are still working from a self-centered or self-promoting perspective in that what they affirm is what ultimately benefits them and their view of what benefits the nation without considering the plight of others. On some of this, they might be right. For example, a strong case can be made that reducing the Federal debt and lowering taxes can be a good thing. Also, eliminating abortion and having a society that affirms righteousness are also very good things that are not selfish and protect the weak and are good for our nation. So, we should affirm those things. But, when we do so without simultaneously taking into consideration the other views of minority populations on issues that they hold dear, we might be promoting righteousness on the one hand while also promoting an unbalanced equation on the other hand so that we personally benefit while feeling good about ourselves for being against certain things even though we don't do much to change them.
This is why being personally involved in community development work in a sacrificial way is so important. We cannot be against abortion effectively without also giving our time, energy, and treasure to help the children already born into poverty and difficult social situations. Economic and moral equations always have two sides at least. The fault of our current political solutions is that we often only affirm one side of the equation and forget how the other side affects people. This is why both sides are so disastifying and why only a renewed understanding of the Kingdom can help us.
In my attempt to say that those who vote for Romney may not be racists while also calling us to look at the systems that we affirm, I am really calling for a deeper understanding of how society works and what it means to take an holistic approach to life from a Christian perspective.
This is what I am trying to do in my book that I am working on. It is not an easy task.
Posted by: Alan Cross | November 01, 2012 at 12:12 PM
Are we sinners?
Should sin not be called sin even if the offender meant no harm? Should cancer be considered a structure of sin--or is it just a sickness unrelated to sin?
Maybe we should simply diagram what has changed and what has not changed. I think personal prejudices have significantly shifted. I think ideas about races having certain "places" in society have greatly shifted. I think explicit, oppressive, laws that were racially targeted have mostly been eliminated.
I think the prison doors have been unlocked. Lincoln emancipated the slaves in 1863. Doors were unlocked one hundred years later.
The stories we discussed yesterday about the pastors who committed suicide reflected a society so 'locked down' that those who wanted to change could not change.
Today the prison cells remain--but when persons come to the point of calling these cells places of bondage that they will leave--the doors can open. Suicide is not the sole solution.
But other bondages are being layered on the old system. Violence, prisons, fatherlessness, drugs and poverty climb in bed with an old system that renders some people "invisible."
It is not fair to say, "Well, it's all racism." But neither is is fair to attempt to understand it and ignore how racism is woven throughout.
Maybe we can't use "racism" with multiple and nuanced meanings because we have been unwilling to walk hand in hand. Most of my adult life has been in 'black churches.' And most of that time I have not spent too much time talking with my brothers and sisters about race. Usually it has felt like too much work.
I feel like relationships are different than 35 years ago. But I don't know if that is because I am at a different spot or because the world has moved. I think both.
I don't think we can be faithful to Jesus and stuck on issues of race. And I don't think we can be faithful to Jesus and not see those issues, repent, and walk in relationship.
My number one issue with Republican party IS what I would call racism. And the most clear evidence is what I would call "Invisibility." I believe the ultimate expression of racism is genocide--to make ultimately invisible. The party knows it cannot sustain as an aging white party. But if another election can be purchased with various coded appeals and 'making invisible' of others--they are still willing to take that path.
Will Romney come to Alabama? If you took a map of Montgomery and stuck a pin on three places in Montgomery where you believe the heart of the Republican Party most resonates--where would you stick the pins? What about the Democratic Party? What about Romney? What about Obama? What about Jesus?
If ten percent of the GOP had the heart of a Jack Kemp the entire conversation would change. That is not because he was a perfect answer. But he had the eyes and heart to see and address blacks (and others)with a passion for how conservatism could bring justice. I think the conversation does not change because masses intuitively sense there is virtually none of that in the GOP or Romney campaign.
Posted by: PJ Hannam | November 01, 2012 at 01:43 PM
Philip, that was brilliant and I agree completely. I really have nothing to add.
My original post was only meant to address the individual nature of racist thought that would have one person say that they were superior to another because of the color of their skin. I don't think that is what motivates us. But, the rest of what you described is still there and as Christians, it is something that we should be addressing instead of ignoring. But, we often do not have eyes to see.
Right now, I am at my son's football practice at an expensive private school here. I do not belong. I tried to meet the other dads early on and talk with them. They did not want to know me and would barely respond when I introduced myself to them. For weeks, I tried, but I am not one of them, I guess. So, after awhile, I quit trying. I can't break in. I sit in the car, read, or sit by myself, watch my son, and look forward to going home. I am incapable of building relationships here because of either my defect or their's. Some days, I think it is me and it gets to me and I doubt myself. Other days, I think it is them and I feel anger. But, standing outside a closed social system breeds feelings of rejection, doubt, anger, and even worthlessness because you don't appear to measure up. Most people don't go through this, I know, but I am an analyzer so I experience emotions on a different level sometimes.
The good news is, I have a pretty strong sense of self and I get to go home. I don't worry about these guys too much and it is easy to forget about them. But, that isn't right either, is it? When I put my hand out to introduce myself and the guys look away and walk away, I am supposed to keep pursuing. I know this. But, I don't. I am tired. The day is long. I don't want to fool with it anymore.
Now, take my micro-emotions of rejection, alienation, fear, frustration, anger, and callousness and expand them over a people and a society and over hundreds of years and I do believe it explains much of what we are seeing culturally. Only Christ can heal that and the systems that perpetuate the division must be addressed in the ways that you described.
May we all regain energy from the Spirit for the hard work ahead for THIS generation.
Posted by: Alan Cross | November 01, 2012 at 05:45 PM