Elections: February 2008 Archives

Happy Valentine's Day!

Its Black History Month - did you notice? And we have a black man making history by being the most likely presidential candidate. It's rumored Madame Toussaud's added him to the presidential wax figures already. Everywhere there are whispers or internet videos of hope. There's a Ven diagram of people who neither hear the whispers, nor see the videos of hope. It has three or four circles, but I don't know how to name them without sounding like a hater. And I don't wanna start hating, too cliche on Valentine's Day, and will only lead to me going off on Obama's foreign policy and on my critique of the electoral system and blah blah. And I'm still in the contradictory zone, critiquing and feeling hopefully in the same breath.

Better to go read stuffwhitepeoplelike and calm down. I had a mixed girl total breakdown this week when I was informed about this blog, started reading it and seeing all the things I thought I uniquely liked that are actually just my white heritage preferences. Swimming, Japan, bicycling. Fortunately, my other half was able to make a slight comeback with a Facebook test that asked "How Black Are You?", where I scored equal to, or higher than, the blackest folks I know. Mind you the test was written by a four year old. The question that lessened my score was about Denzel Washington's best movie - I said 'Malcolm X', the test said 'Training Day'.

Things that operate in the pure humorous realm of stereotypes that ring alarmingly true always give me a good throwback moment to the sort of searching, often shallow self-reflection on race I did in college. I'm not a huge fan of race identity crises right now though, so let's talk about something entirely different: Self Love!

On Valentine's Day people buy each other lots of truly amazing things like cards, chocolate, flowers, teddy bears of various unlifelike sizes, expensive dinners, new electronic gadgets, and sexy underwear. Last night I performed at Aya de Leon's Annual Love Fest, an alternative Valentine's Day celebration focused on loving yourself. Not instead of loving someone else, but definitely before trying to gift someone else's love into existence. Aya asked me to perform because she knew me when I was a pleasure activist, heard me sing once, and when we ran into each other in the airport a couple months ago, I mentioned I was writing more on body image lately. As I still struggle with saying no to direct requests given with a smile, I said yes. So for two months I knew I was going to have to perform at an event about loving one's self. The pressure was on - did I actually have the inner-yummy to perform any pro-self material?

I kept coming back to the body. My body. The bodies of women of color, big women, sexy, scared women, women in places of warfare, women of privilege, all these bodies. Already in 2008 I have had some great moments with my body involving mirrors, exercise, cleansing, massage, hot tubs and pants being looser. I have also had some low moments involving eating too much, indigestion, realizing how close I am to being 30, hurting my knee while dropping heat on the dance floor, same pants being tight again and so forth. I don't really have bad moments with image in the public sphere, I've internalized the battle masterfully. It's my inner concept of myself that I hold my real outer self up to and shake my head judgmentally.

But it is a battle for anyone to actually really love the body in this modern society. There's no real precedent for it, as consumerism is predicated on not being or having enough. We hold perhaps only one common belief, under everything else: All society might fail completely if we loved ourselves. (Now my cynical self is pointing and laughing at my woo-woo Cali self-love self) With that in mind, engaging in the battle to not just love but adore and geek out over myself is one of my daily revolutionary acts. And the front line of that battle is the body.

I don't know what you did for Valentine's Day, maybe you spent it cuddled up with one or more others, or on your own. I had a remarkable productive romantic day. But I want to be the first person to come on Racewire and say now that the holiday gimmick is over, in the midst of all your political analysis, you can begin the potentially world-saving daily practice of giving yourself a hug, going to second, third and eighteenth base with yourself.

In Struggle!

Originally appeared here, Malena Amusa writes as if she were the President of the United States.

Morning ladies and gentlemen. I'm sorry to carry such bad news today. But one particular group of American voters has reached an alarming crisis situation. Though we saw it coming, we never prepared for this.

For now, and in these troubled times, never mind that the group represents the majority of new Hiv/Aids cases in the States or suffers more deaths from late-stage cancers than any other US demographic. And until I leave office, let's pretend that 60 percent of this group's child-rearing households are not single-parented and totally stumped about their kids’ college financial plans.

Please America, fear not what we know. Rather, fear what we have yet to learn.

Today, some spin-doctors say the most pressing threat to our democracy is this so-called rise of anti-American sentiment spawned from our errant and vicious displacement and killing of enough Iraqis to fill one-and-a-half-Manhattans--roughly 2,280,000 terrorists.

That's just not true America. In fact, our biggest menace can only be described in a question. In God’s name...

Between Barack and Hillary, how could the black female voter possibly choose a presidential candidate without abandoning her tribal loyalties?

Even Asians like Margaret Cho are concerned for the black woman especially since "there are too many people running."

How torn and weak must this typically strong-headed black female voter be, I imagine, and without the slightest clue where to bank her cash-only political agenda.

I mean, let’s consider her needs: her 9-5, her cranky kids, her bloated ankles, and pricey hair-care products. Think about it: will the answer to her nightly, beautifully sung gospel prayers be a black man who embodies her dream for racial equity in the economy; or will it be a white woman who represents her struggle for reproductive rights—after all, fewer unwanted children equals less crime. And what about her fight to triple her pregnancy-leave days? More than anything, she's got Hillary's back right? A recent study proves there's a primal yet unspoken bond between women who've both taken back their cheating dog of a man.

Still America, all votes aren't in yet. And though a small society of Super people will decide this election, we must assure the black women votes. Quick, we must meet her where she is--competing feverishly on American Idol and "just lookin"-shopping in upscale malls. Forget surveying a massive, random sample of black women--one or two perspectives will be just fine.

And journalists, you have a special, challenging duty ahead of you. First, you must not resort to your collegiate lexicon in reporting. Speak in her language. And whenever you interview a notable, A-list celebrity black woman, throw her a curve (basket) ball. One minute, inquire about Iran and China. Then as she scrambles for nouns and verbs, suddenly smack down the race and gender cards. Only then, I believe, will her knee-jerk reaction reveal the ancient secrets of black women's triple consciousness--where sex, color, and salary oppressions meet for a big dance-off.

And please, don't be scerrred if the black woman tries to talk family values and issue. Just do anything to stop her: go to commercial, turn off the recorder, jump up and yell "Clearance sale at Payless!" Finally, before she sprints out the door, promptly inform her of her group's rights to remain ignorant.

After all, white women can vote for Barack because he prioritizes children in his health care plan.

But black women can vote for Barack only because his face reminds them of a delicious peanut m-n-m.

And for her male counter-parts, lest we forget:

White men never shape political policy around race and gender.

But black men, when they can vote, measure the candidates’ array of black cultural accoutrements and then decide which candidate who's betta suited foh a brotha.

With that said America, we can turn this crisis around in 2008.

In the mean time, I'd like to thank everyone for supporting this great nation.

Thank you citizens, thank you Mexicans, and God Bless African-America.

Originally posted on thedailyvoice.com

Have we returned to the "White Primary" in American politics? With all of the flat and simplistic discussion of "race" vs. "gender" in the Democratic presidential debate, I think it's time we turn our eyes and ears over to the GOP for a moment. The nominating contest on the Republican side is in many ways a better reflection of issues of race, gender and power in contemporary America.

White primaries were the political response to the brief period of black enfranchisement in the Reconstruction era. Southerners, through the vehicle of the Democratic Party in the one-party "Solid South," excluded Southern blacks from voting in the primaries, and thus, voting at all. The 1944 Supreme Court case Smith v. Allwright put one nail in the coffin of white primaries, while the civil rights movement, especially Fannie Lou Hamer's and the Mississippi Freedom Democratic Party's challenge to the Democratic Party at the 1964 Convention and organizing for passage of the 1965 Voting Rights Act were other nails.

And we know the story of electoral realignment from here: Southern whites and Dixiecrats fled the Democratic Party for what hitherto had been the "party of Lincoln", while by 1972, Shirley Chisholm was making history seeking the Democratic presidential nomination.

More than forty years later, it seems that the modern Republican Party consists mostly of 21st century Dixiecrats and Know-Nothings. And while African Americans aren't de jure excluded from participating in the Republican primaries, de facto they are. The obvious is clear: all of the GOP presidential contenders are conservative white men (Alan Keyes' short entrance doesn't count, as he was never on a ballot anywhere). But more important to examine is the composition of the voters participating in the Republican primaries. The exit polls from the GOP primaries held before Super Tuesday (not including Wyoming for data reasons) show that in every single one, the majority of Republican voters are male, and white. African Americans make up no more than 3% of GOP primary voters (3% in FL, 2% in SC and MI, 1% in NV and NH, and 0% in IA).

Now more than ever, black voters are clear about the fact that the Republican Party does not represent their interests, whether around racial or economic justice, or frankly, even empty symbolic politics. It is an altogether different story as to whether the Democratic Party effectively represents black voters and issues of racial justice (political scientists Paul Frymer and Alvin Tillery, Jr. offer compelling arguments on this score).

White men, on the other hand, clearly see the GOP as representing their racial and gender interests (economic interests are a different story for working-class whites). This pattern of racial voting among whites, and gender voting among men, is what the media and pundits should be digging into.

Dorian T. Warren is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Political Science and the School of International and Public Affairs at Columbia University. He is also a faculty affiliate at the Institute for Research in African-American Studies. Warren specializes in the study of inequality and American politics, focusing on the political organization of marginalized groups. His research and teaching interests include race and ethnic politics, labor politics, urban politics, American political development, social movements and social science methodology.

I have a deeply cynical belief that if Barack Obama wins in November, we’re going to see even more racist Superbowl commercials next year. What’s the connection? The mainstreaming of “colorblind,” meaning race-silent, public policy and the largely held assumption that discussing race in policy and discourse is “divisive” have now more than ever led to outright racism disguised as risqué humor.

Electing President Obama would further enable this racism to simply be written off by whites in the United States by justifying it with their support for a Black president. Candidate Obama has made change the central message of his platform, and although his intention is to separate himself from Washington DC politics-as-usual, Obama’s Change has taken on metaphorical meaning for how Black leadership is evaluated in our society by whites, and how American society perceives itself to be distanced from the bad old days of Jim Crow, minstrel shows and mammy dolls.

This year’s Superbowl featured commercials using Indian immigrants, Chinese accents, Mexicans, and African tribes as punch lines that are yet another evolution in a pop-culture steadily increasing in racist iconography. Let’s not forget ghetto fabulous parties and comedy industry racism a la Michael Richards. These representations are written off as “all good fun” because this is what living in a “colorblind” society truly means: no one is safe from having their race, ethnicity, language, culture or religion appropriated, mis-represented for humor, or otherwise distorted in the interest of having a good time or, in the case of the Superbowl, making a buck.

We haven’t solved racism by becoming colorblind or supporting a Black presidential candidate, we’ve simply given permission for an already racist society to give up accountability for racist actions and activities. Let’s hope that if and when President Obama takes office, his presidency is used as an opportunity to open a broader examination of racism in the United States, rather than as the case in point to demonstrate the end of racism.

Just when you thought the race versus gender feud was the big story in the heated Democratic primary contest, now there’s increasing media hype around the Brown versus Black dynamic.

As the primary contests finally move to states where the electorates are not overwhelmingly white, the media seems to be getting more fixated on the question: “Will Latinos vote for an African American?”

Pitting one race against another seems to be an infatuation of the media. Sure, real racial conflicts exist between communities of color, but it pales in comparison to the tensions, distrust, competition and power imbalances that exist between whites and communities of color. By focusing so much attention on racial conflict between communities of color, whites seem to get a pass.

The question that still looms large is whether whites would actually vote for a Black man? Voting for Sen. Obama in a caucus or primary is one thing, but would whites actually choose him as President/Commander in Chief/Leader of the so-called Free World? We just may or may not get to find out.

Gregory Rodriquez wrote in the L.A. Times this week: ” The Clinton campaign's assertion that Latinos historically haven't voted for black candidates is divisive -- and false…"

A few weeks ago, Sergio Bendixen, a Clinton pollster and Latino expert, publicly articulated what campaign officials appear to have been whispering for months. In an interview with Ryan Lizza of the New Yorker, Bendixen explained that "the Hispanic voter -- and I want to say this very carefully -- has not shown a lot of willingness or affinity to support black candidates."

The spin worked. For the last several weeks, it's been on the airwaves (Tucker Carlson, "Hardball," NPR), generally tossed off as if it were conventional wisdom. And it has shown up in sources as far afield as Agence France-Presse and the London Daily Telegraph, which wrote about a "voting bloc traditionally reluctant to support black candidates.

The spin also helped shape the analysis of the Jan. 19 Nevada caucus, in which Clinton won the support of Latino voters by a margin of better than 2 to 1. Forget the possibility that Nevada's Latino voters may have actually preferred Clinton or, at the very least, had a fondness for her husband; pundits embraced the idea that Latino voters simply didn't like the fact that her opponent was black.

Rodriguez went on to cite the research of University of Washington political scientist Matt Barreto who has compiled a list of Black elected officials who received strong Latino support in the last several decades. Examples include: In 1983, Harold Washington received 80% of the Latino vote in Chicago; in 1989, David Dinkins pulled 73% in New York; in 1991, Denver’s Wellington Web pulled more than 70%; as did Ron Kirk in Dallas for three elections from 1995-99. Furthermore, former Los Angeles Mayor Tom Bradley also won clear Latino majorities in four mayoral reelection campaigns.

Historically, the hype that Latinos won’t support an African American doesn’t hold water.

Regardless of the outcome of this primary season, and whatever hype we hear from the media or the candidate’s campaigns, hopefully, it will not have all been in vane. Perhaps, it may even pave the way in the future for a lot more Latinos to be able to vote for Blacks and vice versa.