A Teachable Moment on Race
April 8, 2008
Forty years ago, this nation came to grips with the stark reality that racial segregation and the unfair treatment of African Americans was still with us, almost two centuries after the founding of the Republic. After a year spent researching the urban unrest that had erupted in several cities in 1967, the National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders, headed by Ohio Gov. Otto Kerner Jr., released its findings on Feb. 29, 1968.President Johnson asked the 11 Kerner Commission members to determine what had happened, why it had happened and how it could be prevented in the future. The Commission found that our nation was moving “toward two societies, one black, one white - separate and unequal.” White racism had left African Americans with diminished education and job opportunities, inferior housing, and segregation into communities where a destructive environment fostered crime and despair.
Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and other civil rights leaders embraced the findings of the Kerner Commission. They reminded their fellow Americans that the words “All men are created equal” were an aspiration, not a lived reality, for far too many people.
Tragically, Dr. King was assassinated a few days later on April 4, 1968, and over a hundred cities experienced racial uprisings borne of the frustrations of losing both a leader and a dream. Also lost on that bitter day in 1968 was the best chance to continue the national dialogue on racial and economic justice that the Kerner Commission members had started.
Over the last 40 years, the struggle for civil rights by African Americans sparked comparable movements for Asian Pacific Americans, Latinos, gays, differently-abled people, women and others. Whether working separately or together, our goal was never to hurt or take rights away from advantaged white men. Shakespeare could stay in the canon of great literature, as long as Maya Angelou and David Henry Hwang could join him.
In the political sphere, however, the unfinished business of the civil rights movement was manipulated by some politicians to pit white voters against minorities. Frank dialogue about educational opportunity, housing decay and court-ordered busing was replaced by coded terms such as “welfare mothers,” “states’ rights,” and “law and order.” Instead of saying, “Be scared of those dangerous minorities,” a candidate could promise to be “tough on urban crime.”
Forty years after King and Kerner called for us to dialogue about race, the reaction to Barack Obama’s “A More Perfect Union” speech on race has evoked two types of reactions. Some teachers, preachers and community leaders see the speech as a way to renew discussion of how far we have come and how we each can contribute to making things better.
Unfortunately, there also are those who have been replaying a few seconds of sound bites from over 30 years of Rev. Wright’s sermons in an attempt to appeal to visceral emotions and bring down the Obama candidacy. While it was correct for Sen. Obama to denounce the parts of Rev. Wright’s sermons that supported misinformation about AIDS and support for Minister Farrakhan, Obama correctly pointed out that the history of race in this society is charged and full of misunderstanding on all sides.
For African Americans, as for some Asian Pacific Americans, the church is part spiritual home, part social-service provider and part community-rallying center. If listening to the snippets of Rev. Wright’s sermons has raised questions for you about African American churches and the background of Black Liberation Theology, then you owe it to yourself and to the interracial dialogue envisioned by King and Kerner 40 years ago to take a deeper look.
Here are a few Internet resources that put Rev. Wright’s speeches into the context of African American sermonizing styles and the history of a church experience that was born under slavery:
» Rev. Martin Marty, one of the leading historians of religion, and a white minister who has attended Sen. Obama’s church and served as a mentor to Rev. Wright when he himself was studying at the University of Chicago Divinity School, has written a thoughtful supportive commentary at tinyurl.com/ 2amde2.
» Others supportive of Rev. Wright, Trinity Church and the black church experience can be found at the “Truth About Trinity” blog at tinyurl.com/25rrtl.
» National Public Radio interviewed both Rev. James Cone, the creator of Black Liberation Theology, and Rev. Dwight Hopkins, who teaches at the University of Chicago Divinity School: tinyurl.com/ 2gy9t6 and tinyurl.com/yvmmc7.
» More on the black church’s history and the use of race in campaign discourse can be found at tinyurl.com/yozt6h, tinyurl.com/ 2abucu, and tinyurl.com/2nqps7.
Comments
26 Responses to “A Teachable Moment on Race”
Got something to say?
Apologists for the racist and anti-American rants of Rev. Jeremiah Wright need to investigate the “theology” that Wright teaches at his church. It is nothing like Christianity as most people understand it. The brand of theology which Wright has been teaching Obama and the others is called “black liberation theology.” Wright admits this and it is stated on the church’s website. Black theology is based upon the premise of the white oppressor against the black oppressed. This is why, for example, that Wright refers to Jesus as black, and his killers as white. This is the only way the story of Jesus fits within this brand of “theology.” Rev. Wright cites James Cone, another proponent of black liberation theology, as his theological inspiration. Here are just a couple of James Cone’s quotes: (1) “To be Christian is to be one of those whom God has chosen. God has chosen black people.” (2) “While it is true that blacks do hate whites, black hatred is not racism.” (3) “All white men are responsible for white oppression.” (4) “Theologically, Malcolm X was not far wrong when he called the white man “the devil.” (5) “If there is any contemporary meaning of the Antichrist, the white church seems to be a manifestation of it.” (6) “Black theology refuses to accept a God who is not identified totally with the goals of the black community. If God is not for us and against white people, then he is a murderer, and we had better kill him. The task of black theology is to kill Gods who do not belong to the black community … Black theology will accept only the love of God which participates in the destruction of the white enemy. What we need is the divine love as expressed in Black Power, which is the power of black people to destroy their oppressors here and now by any means at their disposal. Unless God is participating in this holy activity, we must reject his love.” *** These statements, and this “theology,” are fundamentally racist and divisive. The fact that Obama has chosen to belong to this racist church for 20 years speaks volumes about his character and judgment, and flies in the face of his pronouncements about his ability and intent to “unite” this country.
African Americans can’t use the Civil Right to get everything they desire in their life anymore. Through all the years after the Civil Right Movement, the whole society see the results. The blacks should take responsibility for themselves and their life first and foremost. Stop being a victim of external factors, rather than look at themselves inside and find the causes. Personal responsibility and competence should be emphasized rather than color and race. Some of blacks miseries are caused by their irresponsibilities rather than the society. If they are objective and responsible, they could find all the causes of their miseries by self-inspection. Listen to what Mr. Bill Cosby said. Tell the truth no matter how hurtful it is. In the long run, it will make you a better and stronger person.
Dear Mr Jones and Mr Liu,
Thanks for your comments. Dr King was right when he said that we must deal with the triplets of racism, poverty and militarism. To focus on one and not the others will not end the problems we are seeing. I would prefer to encourage and not blame the victims of the intolerance that has created such wealth and power disparities in this society.
I hope you will take the time to look at the links I included at the end of my article. Yes, personal responsibility is important, but societal issues are still important as well. When you walk into a job interview as an African American, you are facing a negative presumption that is still around, even after so many years of success by African Americans.
Thanks again for taking the time to comment.
Phil
who doesn’t have an uncle like
rev wright? he acted up once and
we all had to explain to the kids
why(politely) he wasn’t invited
to the next bar-be-que
I believe Otto Kerner was Illinois governor Jr., no big deal; just pointing that out
Let me ask you something Mr. Nash; this is not a loaded question, it’s a serious question:
If Dr. King were alive today and saw that 70 percent of black babies were born out of wedlock?
I’m just asking
Thanks
Phil, you just don’t get it. You can’t say “why I hate xyz people” in Asian Week, yet Obama told America he will still go to a church that teaches that “white people hate black people” week after week. The teach-able moment is the realization that such pastors and churches exist in America, and are given a full pass by INTELLECTUALS SUCH AS YOU. Thank you very much for putting things “into context”, but if you put the clips into the full bun with lettuce, tomatos and pickles, it still means that Wright built a church on the the writings of Cone’s war against the white “enemy”. Tell me Phil, does your religious belief include that Jesus was black and that all white Americans are your enemy? Do you REALLY want a president who goes to such a church, whether or not Obama is aware of the spiritual roots of Cone, Wright and Hopkins? I may be the only Asian Week columnist that thinks such a theology is wacky and too dangerous for any potential US president, what really scares me are all of the Obama supporters who have absolutely no problem with that. Obama has no guts when he states he fully supports the church except for the wacky statements he disagrees with. Obama supporters are effectively making the same statment. I have much more respect for the people who go out on a limb to defend the statements of Wright, which afterall are either correct or believed to be correct to some degree by his intended audience, AIDS conspiracies included. Like I said, the day America is ready to elect Obama is the day that the Sharptons and Farakhans will have a fair chance at getting elected as well, and I hope that day never comes. What kills me are Asians who decided that we’re definitely no white people, and then buy just as blindly into black model instead.
Asians are hated by blacks and whites, and likewise we have commited hostile acts and thoughts against both groups. Only when we fully renounce ALL hatred against ALL races will we stop this endless cycle. And that means condemning racial dividers like Wright, and not supporting those like Obama who have built their spiritual foundations on them.
Dear Arthur -
You continue to falsely portray Rev Wright, Black Liberation Theology and Trinity Church, despite my best efforts to present evidence to the contrary. There is a difference between hating white people and hating a system that gives whites an unfair advantage in everyday transactions and (until very recently) in law as well.
There are many whites who go to Trinity Church every week, and many whites who have written columns and commentaries on behalf of Rev Wright. White people who do not spend part of their lives helping to change the unfairness of the system are understandably uncomfortable when people such as Dr King, Rev Wright, and others call them on their callous disregard for their fellow human beings. But I know from personal experience that many Black Liberation Theology advocates (and advocates of comparable liberatory theologies for Asian Americans and others) are, almost without exception, loving toward people of all backgrounds but angered by the persistence of racism, poverty and militarism.
A black man who is not angry about the persistence of white racism is either fooling himself or who has bought into the system and is dead inside. We as Asian Pacific Americans go through every day with a presumption of competence in many venues thanks to a model minority stereotype (although when you speak with an accent, the presumption changes to “you are incompetent until you prove you are competent”). African Americans, however, start and continue with a presumption of incompetence, even if they are able to become President of the Harvard Law Review, as Sen. Obama did.
African Americans definitely need to take ownership of their own community problems. And, despite lack of media attention, many are.
But, to ask them to not be angry is not healthy, in my opinion. People such as Rev Wright grew up under segregation, yet he personally has done a lot to help America - including volunteering for military service on several occasions when “patriots” such as Bush and Cheney sought deferments. Rev Wright has done a lot to provide social services to inner city communities not served well by government agencies, and has kept good relations with many white ministers in his years of ministry.
Yes, bigoted or false statements by Pastor Wright or anyone should be condemned. Obama has done that. And Obama has continued the proud tradition of Rev Wright in terms of grassroots community service. We should honor him for that.
You can stay fixated on a few out-of-context quotes and believe what you want about blacks who fight for their liberation from white racism (while continuing to live with and earn the respect of many whites). I, however, would prefer to celebrate Rev Wright’s many achievements, condemn the remarks that deserve condemnation, and move on to the major economic, military and social issues facing our nation, which Obama is in a good position to solve (according to most polls I have seen).
Thanks again for continuing this dialogue, but I guess we will have to disagree to disagree.
Phil
Wright did not grow up under segregation. He grew up in the north and went to an elite magnet high school in Philadelphia. Neither Bush or Cheney have ever uttered speeches declaring that God should condemn America for its sins committed against persons of a certain color or who has or has not been called a epithet for African Americans.
The problem people have with folks like Obama, Michelle and Wright is that no matter how many good things they have to thank for, in the end they believe they are still doomed by their race and an unfair American system, that’s why white folks are ticked off. Obama was hurt because he was black when he was small Heck, I was hurt for being Asian when I was small. When Obama was talking about there being one America, not a black and white one, that was brilliant. But he forgot about his ties to Wrights’s church, and the theological roots in indentifying whites as THE ENEMY, no matter how polite they are sitting next to whites in the pews.
I do not like candidates to identify ANY law abiding Americans as the enemy, be it white people, oil people, military people, Christian people, gay people or anything people, unless they have actually declared war on the US, such as terrorists who have stated that we are the enemy. Am I the enemy in Cone’s doctrine? I can’t tell because there is no place for Asians in the world of Black Liberation Theology except as Korean store owners to get angry at, as critics have noted that BLT attacks Whites AND Asians. If affirmative action gives blacks parity with whites in admissions, the Asians will still be ahead, what does BLT have to say about that if we have more than they do? Will you support Asian quotas like Chinese for Affirmative action did? If somebody calls ME the enemy, what I am supposed to call them?? If Martin Luther King calls for judging people by the content of their character, and not by the color of their skin, and to love people of all races, I can buy that. I cannot buy into someone whose faith is based on a church that believes in “white superiority and black inferiority” and the belief that America is founded fundamentally on racism.
The mask has come off the real Barack Obama and what he is made out of, not the packaged product he has tried to sell America. This is not a diversion. It is a disqualifying matter of character, and makes Obama un-elect-table in the general election.
Dear Arthur,
When Wright grew up, there was still segregation, even if he was in the north and in a magnet school. He still had to deal with a presumption of inferiority. Today, there is still segregation, although not by law the way it was in the 1950s.
You want to believe that Wright is evil. You want to believe that you are the enemy in the eyes of those who want liberation (i.e., those who believe in Black Liberation Theology). You choose to side with so-called “ticked off” whites, who get mad when patriotic, America-loving people like myself, Obama and Wright point out that the system is broken and needs to be fixed (although, as I said before, we hate the broken SYSTEM, not individual whites).
You are willing to overlook how Bush and Cheney have done far more to destroy American’s economy, security and standing in the world than Wright or Obama ever could.
I’m sorry, but we will have to agree to disagree.
Phil
Mr. Nash:
would you take a position on the comments Bill Cosby made at the 50th Anniversery of Brown vs. Board of Ed; you know what i am talking about.
Thanks
Phil Nash: I don’t know if Rev. Wright is evil, but it is apparent that he is a racist. The real issue is, why has Obama attended a racist church for 20 years and consider the racist pastor his “mentor and spiritual adviser?” I don’t think there is any argument that if Hillary Clinton had attended a “white centered” church for 20 years where the pastor blamed “black people” for all of society’s ills, she would never again enter the political arena. The double standard must stop. Racism is wrong, period, no matter who practices it.
kwaninator: Rev. Wright is not Obama’s “crazy uncle,” he is his “mentor and spiritual adviser. We don’t choose our uncles; we do choose our advisers, ostensibly because we agree with and value their opinions. Making excuses for racism is not the way to solve the problem of racism; in fact, it only enlarges the divide between the races. If all Americans stood together and opposed racism from every quarter, it would simply disappear.
Dear Mr Jones,
I believe you are in error to characterize Sen. Obama and Pastor Wright as “racist.” As you have read in my entries above and in other threads, hating a system of unfair white privilege is not the same as hating individual white people.
Blacks have had very little official power to change things in this society compared to whites, but they have done far more to make this society a fair and just one on a per person basis than any other group, in my opinion.
You are exhoring all of us to “stand together and oppose racism,” and I agree wholeheartedly. I suggest that you and every reader of this thread spend your time addressing the unfair white privilege that continues to contaminate our society rather than spend so much time addressing people who are trying to fix it who have made misstatements for which public apologies and corrections have been made.
Many whites have attended Pastor Wright’s church over the years, and you can read some of their letters supporting him in the links I posted in my other article. Please read these before commenting further.
Note to “reader”: I do not know what you are referring to, so please be more explicit in your question.
Thanks to both of you for writing.
Phil
Phil: Rev. Wright acknowledges that he subscribes to black liberation theology. He also admits that his theological mentor is James Cone. Please read some of Cone’s statements in my post above, and inform me as to how they are not racist. Thank you.
Dear Mr Jones,
De-contextualized statements are useless in evaluating a person or a movement, in my opinion. If we did that, even the Bible itself has some statements that are pretty hard to justify.
Rather than go line by line to evaluate each statement for its offensiveness, let’s assume there were some offensive statements made, accept the statements made by Sen. Obama, and move on to issues such as the destruction of our economy by Pres. Bush, the war in Iraq, and other issues that will make a difference for the American people over the next four years.
Republican politicians are big on “forgiveness” when they make transgressions. Let’s just say there were some transgressions here and allow for some forgiveness.
We are witnessing the “Dean Scream” equivalent for Sen. Obama in this Wright controversy. Gov. Dean’s entire platform and life of service was undermined by the media’s endless fixation on his yelling over the crowd at a campaign event (and it was a deception, as the directional mike did not pick up the roar of the crowd). Dean had touched a nerve by vowing to regulate the media industry, so he was undone by this “scream” tactic a few days later.
Rev. Wright, Sen. Obama and each of us have had successes and failures, and things we are proud and sorry about in our lives. Reducing the presidential campaign to a few sound bites is not, in my opinion, a good way to evaluate a candidate. Believe me, there are comparable things that are going to be said about Sen. Mc Cain and Sen. Clinton, and I will just as vigorously object to a reduction of their lives and positions to a few sound bites.
I have already pointed out the many salutory effects of Black Liberation Theology, not only for African Americans but for Asian Americans and all Americans. Rather than continuing to hyper-focus on the quotes you mention above, please call Trinity Church or speak to someone who is knowledgeable and supportive of Black Liberation Theology and see if you can have a dialogue about their positions. I’d be interested to hear the result of your conversation.
Thanks again for your honesty and your continuing commitment to dialogue.
Phil
Phil: I agree that “de-contextualized statements” are not necessarily useful in this context, however, I have not relied only upon those statements. I have read some of Cone’s books, cover to cover, and believe me, they are a depressing read. As noted in my last post, the fundamental basis of black liberation theology is the struggle between the “white oppressor” and the “black oppressed.” A serious problem I see with this kind of analysis, from a theological point of view, is that it is premised upon our differences, rather than our similarities. It is premised upon conflict rather than reconciliation. One has to contort Christianity beyond all reason to come up with such a “theology”, and to do so, speaks a lot about their character. Read some of Cone’s books; they are all about “white” versus “black.” Why use such language unless one is attempting to drive a wedge between the races. Other language could be used if the struggle were indeed between the oppressor and the oppressed (e.g. the ruling class against the middle class and poor; the elite against the “rest of us”, etc.) But no, Cone, Rev. Wright, Hopkins all frame the issue as a white against black issue. I don’t believe that this has anything to do with “Christianity,”; I believe it is a cynical attempt to use the story of Jesus to propagate their “theology” of hate.
Regarding the damage to this country wrought by the Bush administration, you and I have no argument, there.
Comparing the “Dean scream” to Obama’s 20 year relationship with Rev. Wright is not, in my opinion, a fair analogy. One was a one-time mistake (if you want to call it a mistake); the other is a long-term relationship which I believe speaks to Obama’s character and judgment. I know that if I walked into a church and heard a pastor say even one statement derogatory of “black people” or “Asian people” or “hispanics” or any other group, I would be out of that church in a minute, without any further desire to listen to another one of that pastor’s sermons. The fact that Obama has gone back for 20 years and considers Wright to be his “mentor and spiritual adviser,” is telling.
You had mentioned that there are comparable things going on with McCain and Clinton. Unless I am unaware of which “things” to which you are referring, I don’t believe that to be accurate. Yes, McCain has accepted the endorsement of some pretty unsavory “religious” leaders. Clinton, may have done so also, but I am unaware of such. These examples, however, do not in any way rise to the level of the relationship Obama has with Wright and his church.
Finally, thank you for your very civil manner of reply. It is becoming increasingly rare on the Internet nowadays.
Mr. Nash:
I think that blacks have more hatrad and are color-centric than any others. I used to work at a black ghetto store and I came to know a lot of blacks. I came to realize that what dragged blacks down is their thinking and their inner struggles and the negative feelings inside them, which they are reluctent to confront and change. The only person in this world you can change is yourself, and in the same time, it is very difficult. It takes discipline and will-power to achieve it. Donot make more excuses for yourself and it will destroy you in the long run.
For example, I came to know some black families who have filed for bankrupcies several times and their ways of handling money is just so self-destructive. As a reult, their credit score is low. When they apply for morgages or loan, they will be rejected or have to pay higher interests. Then, the blacks came back to blame the financial institution for refusing their loans or morgage applications because they are black (color of their skin). It is just ridiculous. They blame everything they can’t get on the color of their skin, rather than take responsibilities for their life and their decisions. We should look things in a more objective and scientific way rather than to be politically correct.
Dear Mr. Jones,
Thanks for your reply and for your efforts to come to grips with Black Liberation Theology. I especially appreciate your taking the time to look at the books themselves. My understanding is that Cone and his followers see Jesus as a revolutionary who would have attacked white privilege today even as he attacked unfair privilege in his time.
I agree that looking at white versus black is not a good way to proceed. Asian Americans such as Frank Wu (in his book “Yellow”) have argued that introducing more groups breaks down that artificial diad and makes more nuanced analyses possible. Another analysis that attempts to contextualize the movements for liberation (Asian American and other) is Glenn Omatsu’s “Four Prisons.” (page 135 at this link: http://tinyurl.com/3vqsdr )
You are right that my introduction of the Dean scream was not a good analogy from the viewpoint of the amount of time that Obama knew Wright, but I was trying to make the point that media harping on that small group of sound bites has a similar effect.
As for Mr. Liu, I am sorry that you have had bad experiences with some African American families, and I am no way condoning any self-inflicted negative beahviors. However, I would ask you to remember the broader context of generations of dehumanizing experiences faced by African Americans in this country. For starters, try googling the Tulsa Race Riot of 1921, or read about the Reparations for Slavery bill introduced by Rep. Conyers: http://www.house.gov/conyers/news_reparations.htm
Scientific, objective analyses cannot ignore a history that has not been kind to our brothers and sisters of African ancestry. Moving ahead will take efforts by that community, along with the support of Asian Americans and others of good will.
Thanks again to both of you for writing.
Phil
fred: my uncle was still banned.
his absence was missed…you’re right
but he did bring something funky to the table
Phil Nash:
If the point of your article was to promote Obama candidacy, your support for Reparations issue, probably doesn’t help your case. If anything, non-blacks, including Asians, who were opening their minds to vote for Obama, are probably frightened into voting for McCain if President Obama would overtly or covertly promote the Reparations cause. Even among Obama supporters, most non-blacks would oppose making cash-payments to descendants of slavery. Look at the 2002 poll below on the reparations issue:
CNN/USA Today/Gallup Poll.
ALL: Jan. 25-27, 2002; N=1,011 adults nationwide; MoE ± 3.
WHITES: Jan. 25-27, 2002; N=820 white adults nationwide; MoE ± 4.
BLACKS: Jan. 25-27, 2002, and Feb. 8-10, 2002; N=146 black adults nationwide; MoE ± 9.
.
“Do you think the government should or should not make cash payments to black Americans who are descendants of slaves?”
Should Should not NO opinion
ALL 14 81 5
Whites 6 90 4
Blacks 55 37 8
You see that 90% of whites oppose paying reparations for slavery. Even among blacks 37% oppose the ideas. There are several reasons for the opposition:
1) inequity: only 1% of Americans (upper-crust whites AND some blacks) owned slaves before Emancipation. The vast majority of people were not wealthy enough to own any slaves. The vast majority of Americans today are not, and never were responsible for slavery. Asians, Latinos, and most whites came to the States after slavery was abolished. So why do we have to bear burden for what we ourselves did not perpetrate? Considering the staggering cost of the potential claim (estimates as high as $100 trillion), even many blacks, who couldn’t prove descendacy from slavery, oppose the idea on equity grounds because they themselves would be paying into multi-trillion dollar compensation scheme.
2) Most slaves had already been slaves in their native Africa before they were brought to the States. During the trans-Atlantic slavery era, 30%-60% of Africans were slaves in their own land, to their black masters such as tribal chiefs. The morality of slavery was never questioned by anyone until some Europeans decided, afew hundred years ago, to abolish the practice on human rights grounds. Slavery existed in all places and all times since time immemorial. During Korea’s history, most of the population lived in heriditary slavery ( for 2000 years). Greek and Roman societies relied heavily on slave labor, and slaves were treated as nothing more than commodities, killed and maimed at their masters’ whims. Even here in 2008, Africa still has thriving slave trade in places like Mauritania and Niger; apparently many Africans don’t see any immorality in slavery. If anything, white Americans were the first and only people who fought a civil war to free slaves. 600,000 white men died to free slaves, at a time when the population of America was much smaller than now. African-Americans would still be slaves today if whites had never freed them.
3) potential for race conflict: If the U.S. Government indeed decide to pay reparations, even moderate whites might join the “white supremacist groups” to fight their “race war”. With so many Americans owning guns, we may have a second civil war leading to the destruction of the republic. I don’t want to see this country go down in blood …
FYI I’m an Obama supporter and volunteering to get more Asians to vote for him, but your article will probably send the readers to the McCain camp in droves.
Dear Mr. Nash:
To Clarify my question:
I am seeking how you feel about the Comments by Educator and Comedian Bill Cosby at the Dinner honoring the 50th anniversery of Brown v Board of Education in 2004. In that speech he was very critical of the way poor blacks had squandered opportunites, so he felt. I am sure you are familiar with those comments. There were entire books written to discredit that speech (Michael Eric Dyson).
The reason I am asking you is that Juan Williams, from NPR, called it the most important speech since “I have a Dream”
How do you feel about that speech?
Thanks
Dear Mr. Sohn,
Thanks for your thoughtful reply. As the title of this piece suggests, I am in favor of a teachable moment on race, including a justice-filled resolution of the race issues that plague our society. I support many aspects of the Obama campaign, but, as a reporter, am registered as an Independent and am not supporting any candidate. When Republicans, Democrats, Libertarians, Greens or others do something that I see as beneficial for Asian Pacific Americans, I will try to highlight it in my column.
Sadly, you are right that certain topics are off the table when it comes to the discussion of race in this society. I hope that an Obama presidency, if he prevails in August and November, will change that.
Thanks again for writing and enlightening us with this information.
Phil
Dear Reader,
I have not heard the speech, but am generally aware of what Mr Cosby is saying. His is one of the threads that has been around since the discussions between Booker T. Washington and W.E.B. DuBois.
There is always a personal component to empowerment. We all have responsibility for ourselves. But, to ignore the societal component is, in my opinion, to be naive. We all are affected by the historical context in which we grow up and the ways in which white privilege has damaged our interpersonal interactions. We must change ourselves and the world that surrounds us so that everyone can enjoy justice, freedom, and equality.
Thanks for your clarification and for continuing the dialogue.
Phil
Dear Readers:
All the commentators’ responses to Mr. Phil Nash’s article are good start with dialogue on the issue of race and racism in society. Racism happens to all people at different levels. If you say you’ve never experienced racism from a particular group then you are either blocking it out of your mind or is living in a cave with a very technological system connecting with the world only through the internet. Not to repeat everyone’s comments but racism occur in every nation not just in the USA, and not just to African-Americans. Everyone makes racist remarks here and there. Since most of the comments here pertain to whites and blacks Americans I would like to throw my thought to everyone. When Blacks, Caucasians and slavery are in the equation, there are people that say African-Americans should “get over it” and move on. But when (American) Jewish cry out about their ordeal with the Nazi and all the things they’ve lost and need to be returned to them, everyone dare not manke comments. Why is it that African-Americans keep get stepped on when they talk about their history of slavery (in America) but Americans kiss and hug Jewish Americans when they talk about something that happened in Europe, Germany, etc. Maybe because the Jewish, not African-Americans, are God’s children? Many Christian churches see their God as the one and only and mighter then other religions’ gods. And this belief is preached in all Christian churches, only very subtly. So let’s not say a black or a white or an Asian preacher sermons racist things. We should see ourseleves as human beings and treat and respect every one as we want to be treated. And “fight” for everyone’s rights and respects. Is that too much to ask for?
Thomas Yang Weber
The real problem, as exemplified by Nash’s writings and posts, is that at the root, Nash does agree with the basic foundations and beliefs of Black Liberation Theology, James Cone and Jeremiah Wright, which is really just race-based Marxism. Marxism in all its forms seeks to split humanity into good guys and bad guys, and blames an inequality and suffering of the good guys on the bad guys. He truly believes that America is flawed because it was founded and run largely by whites, and most of its flaws can be blamed on whites, even though in reality it was built in various degrees by Americans of all races, religions and nationalities, be they Buffalo soldiers, or MIT blackjack players.
After the 1st wave of refugees of communism, the new generation of Asian Americans, especially those educated by elite American colleges since the 1970s have largely been taught to believe in class and race marxism, even as Marxism closed out the 20th century as one of the bloodiest mistakes in the history of civilization.
Yet they have been raised to be tolerant of those who paint “whites” as the enemy, and say we should condemn America and to instead chose people such as George Bush, who had the integrity to drive Al Queda out of Afghanistan instead of fire a couple of ineffectual cruise missles as enemies of America.
It’s not just Obama Asian Americans need to question, the bulk of Asian American so-called leadership comes from the same mold. I can see from the amount of traffic that there is a great amount of disconnect between our self-appointed liberal leadership, and what the actual average Asian American believes and stands for. And if that is indeed the case, the “silent majority” we used to talk about in the 60s about whites needs to stand up in the Asian population, and make yourselves known and represented.
Dear Arthur,
I am sorry to see that you continue to miss the point that the problem is the system of white supremacy, not white people. You can throw labels around all you want, but until you grasp this notion, you will remain out of touch with the majority of people, who know that they face inequality that is system-based as well as individually-determined.
I do believe that Black Liberation Theology, and the Black Power movement, had some salutory effects for Asian America. Of course they, like any movements, had their mistakes and problems, but we in the Asian American Studies and Asian American political movements learned from them that there is no power gained without a demand.
As I said before, whites are not the enemy. The enemy is a system of systemic unfairness, combined with those who refuse to do anything to change it.
Thanks again for continuing the dialogue.
Phil