Barack Obama keeps referring to himself as a black man. Indeed he goes out of his way to stress that he is "African American." His parents as well as his friends all called him "Barry" when he was growing up, but Obama insisted on being called by his African given name: Barack. For two decades now he has attended a church which describes itself as authentically"black" and unashamedly "African." If this seems strange when you consider the fact that Obama has one black parent and one white parent, it is.
Obama's racial self-definition is derived from the famous, or infamous, one-drop rule which continues to hold sway in America but nowhere else. In other countries, say the nations of South America or Africa, if you have mixed blood you are considered mixed-race. It would be absurd to call a person who is 50 or even 70 percent white a "black" person. Why then does the United States use this weird rule according to which a single drop (or any visible presence) of blackness makes you automatically "black" and "African American"?
Many people think that the one-drop rule is a product of slavery. Not true. During slavery, the general rule was that slave status passed through the mother. In other words, if a white slave master had sexual relations with a female black slave, the offspring would automatically be considered a slave. By contrast, in the relatively rare case that a black slave produced a child with a free white woman, the offspring would be legally counted as white and therefore free. Obama has a white mother and a black father: in the antebellum South his racial status would pass through his mother.
The one-drop rule was a product of segregation and Jim Crow, not slavery. It developed in the postbellum South as a way to enforce a strict line of demarcation between black and white. Without such a rule an intermediate class of mixed-race mulattoes would make segregation increasingly difficult to enforce. Consequently the Southern ruling class mandated that even a modest trace of African heritage was sufficient to count as "black."
Strangely the one-drop rule has outlived segregation and is today embraced by the very groups the rule was designed to subjugate. Today the NAACP and the Black Caucus live by the one-drop rule, defining as "black" and "African American" anyone who has any discernible evidence of black ancestry. Reading Obama's The Audacity of Hope and his recent speech on race, I see no awareness of these ironies and no attempt to intelligently grapple with them. He is content to maunder about "complexity" and the need to "come together" despite our differences.
The deep question for Obama is not merely "how can America transcend race while continuing to have race-conscious policies?" but also "how can America transcend race as long as the one-drop rule remains intact?" Far from producing answers, Obama shows no recognition that these are even questions that need to be addressed. Meanwhile, Garry Wills in the current New York Review compares Obama's race speech to one of the great speeches of Abraham Lincoln. When I read this on the plane I almost lost my peanuts!
How embarrassing it is to see intellectuals like Wills and sophisticated magazines like the New York Review of Books and the New Republic fawn and grovel over Obama! You can be sure that if a white political candidate mouthed Obama's vague and vacuous nostrums, these liberals would not be issuing such hosannas. In this sense Geraldine Ferraro was right, not so much about Obama as about his white "amen corner." They are giving Obama something he has never asked for as a presidential candidate: intellectual affirmative action.
Reader Comments ( Page 5 of 37)
61. Hostility to all things European?
Mokele Mbembe
I should clarify the statement. Hostility to all things European in origin; ie white. It was one of the first things I noticed about him.
janesophie1 at 11:21AM on Apr 14th 2008
62. Last and final in my comments on this crap. America needs a wake up call and a serious kick in the rump with the truth. Racism has demented the minds of academic fools who actually think accumulated data held in the brain over a period of time is knowledge. The fact is all the shit about race is just that. If black people wanted to claim race supremacy they'd have a helluva lot better defense than anyone. Black genes are dominant. White genes are recessive. Sci-Fact not fiction. If something is dominant it is stronger. If something is FIRST it is pre-eminent. If black people were the first on the planet, the first to leave the original point of origin, to populate Europe, Asia, The Americas and the rest of the world, and African markers can be found--and they can--in every racial group on the planet, including the whites of the white: Scandanavia and Russia--then it tells you AFRICANS MIGRATED and left their genetic signatures everywhere they went. Physical changes were brought about by geography, environment, diet and mixing. PERIOD. This white racism crap was created to justify the slave trade. It is a brilliant strategy to justify 5 percent of the people on the planet's attempt to dominated the other 95 percent. That 5 percent are those whose black ancestors were the most radically changed by getting caught in the mountains of Europe during the last ice age. Who turned white do to lack of exposure to the sun. And over time, suffered permanent mutations. Only white begets white. A dark skinned anything, black latino, Italian, etc. will result in a tanned offspring because these people retain more melanin as a result of their African roots. THESE ARE FACTS idiots who embrace this stupidity that has destroyed entire cultures and threatens the planet.
Melaniki at 11:49AM on Apr 14th 2008
63. Robert- I agree...I've said for a long time that Germany is far more democratic than we are, an irony after WWII.
Strados at 11:39AM on Apr 14th 2008
64. If things European in origin are a problem....maybe we should have more obvious commodes?
Strados at 11:40AM on Apr 14th 2008
65. Ganesha D'Souza is an elephant-boy darky that craves White girls .
So he dated the skank Ann Coulter , who now claims to support fat-ass Hillary Clinton .
But Ganesha D'Souza's real claim to fame is when he conducted sex research in Amsterdam's red-light district .
That's when he got cornholed by two English sailors .
Dan Fogelberg at 11:43AM on Apr 14th 2008
66. so pile it up in the corner, pile it up in the corner, pile it up in the corner....it helps the flowers grow
Strados at 11:46AM on Apr 14th 2008
67. The posts on this blog today are like turds in a toilet. Whether they go down spinning to the left or to the right they all end up in the same place with equally little worth. I'm outta here. [poof]
Mokele Mbembe at 11:49AM on Apr 14th 2008
68. His brilliance is unquestioned and ability to lead is there. - Botts
His brilliance is unquestioned? Are you serious? he's a bright guy, I'll give you that, but "unquestioned brilliance?" We'll see how sharp he is when he goes head to head with McCain, when he alone is on the spotlight. I have nothing against Obama, but I have this strange feeling that when he is not up against Clinton-lite, but a seasoned veteran, his "brilliance" will fade and a more apt description will be "vacuous."
Monty at 12:01PM on Apr 14th 2008
69. Go easy on Wills Dinesh. He just doesn't want another Bush. I saw a lecture he gave that he provided a legitimate argument for why Bush is the worst President in the history of the United States. Can you hold it against him for groveling? I guess I should rephrase that...are you going to hold it against him? Are you going to vote for Mccain that voted against an MLK day? Perhaps Hilary whom is as evil as Oprah and Martha Stewart. Obama seems like the best of the worst to me, but that isn't saying much.
MrWiteKES at 12:12PM on Apr 14th 2008
70. "His brilliance is unquestioned? Are you serious? he's a bright guy, I'll give you that, but "unquestioned brilliance?" We'll see how sharp he is when he goes head to head with McCain, when he alone is on the spotlight. I have nothing against Obama, but I have this strange feeling that when he is not up against Clinton-lite, but a seasoned veteran, his "brilliance" will fade and a more apt description will be "vacuous."" Monty
Your points are well taken. Whether or not he can "play" the game of politics is in question. His intelligence will never be in question.
I have a strange feeling myself, that when it is him against the seasoned vet, that he will completely and utterly destroy him. The only thing that can hold him back, is what you see now. The Muslim talk (As if that is a problem), the radical black talk, and the inexperience talk. And of course we can't forget about the uneducated voters who only vote one way because they're indoctrined to do so.
And I thought it was hilarious the crap that he received for his "bitter" comments. They were right on the money. And this is why I say he's brilliant. He knew Hillary and Johnny Boy would get wind of it, and try to play off of it. Why? Because it proves how scared they are of losing to him. So what is he doing? He's taking their criticisms throwing it right back in their face.
Brilliant move.
Botts at 12:12PM on Apr 14th 2008
71. reply to: 64
"Ganesha D'Souza is an elephant-boy darky blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah" - Dan Fogelberg
Great point Dan!!!!
Monty at 12:18PM on Apr 14th 2008
72. Okane, you friggin idiot: Islam is a RELIGION, not an ethnic group, nor a race. Obama's father has nothing to do with him.
Not that it would bother me, mind you, but he has never been a Muslim. He was raised with no religion and became a Christian in his 20's.
Sheesh.
Linda at 12:21PM on Apr 14th 2008
73. Nobody cares about your feelings, Monty.
Linda at 12:50PM on Apr 14th 2008
74. Rev... I, too, am from Dayton and can see the way a person of mixed ethnicity can be treated. Dayton is a good example of how poorly race issues have been dealt with.
As for this blog... it is the most ignorant arguement I've ever heard. I read this blog quite often and have to say that those that claim the "right" on here tend to lean towards ignorance. It is sad because I typically lean more right and cringe everytime people like brian post anything. this is what fuels this blog.
The extreme idiots of both sides bantering back an forth. It has nothing to do with the intelligence of the man blogging. Most of the time his words are forgotten and all of you argue what ever you want. I mean... even Mr. Hays has gone from making valid arguements to crazily repeating himself over and over.
Here is the thing... politically, I am technically middle of the road, but lean a little more right when it comes to handling social programs because, let's face it, the "left" hasn't really done well with it. I am an atheist. Relgion plays no part in my opinion other than my amazement that people still believe in fairy tales.
Tom at 12:55PM on Apr 14th 2008
75. reply to: 73
What about my feelings Linda?
Monty at 12:54PM on Apr 14th 2008