Reader Submission: Transcending Race in Presidential Politics

By now, we all have heard the standard line about Barack Obama: he transcends race and represents a new multicultural identity for America. Such talk is idealistic, to say the least. Obama can indulge his fantasies about creating a new America, but presidential campaigns- and presidential administrations- are not about reconfiguring society. Racial politics, even when it supposedly transcends old racial identities, rarely produces a good outcome for democracy. Whether its inspiration is liberal or conservative, the politics of identity usually leads to the politics of exclusion and stereotyping.

Most of us appreciate why Sen. Obama’s supporters are drawn to him. His eloquence and easy charm create a kind of charisma that has not warmed Democratic hearts since the days of RFK. Bobby Kennedy’s post-JFK liberal idealism was so powerful precisely because it remained untainted by the messy problems of governing. The re-born liberal Kennedy never had to soothe the anxieties of white working-class Democrats fleeing “urban” problems. He did not have to account for the failures of many of Johnson’s Great Society experiments.

In other words, Bobby’s passionate liberalism was never put to the test. He died a martyr, and like all martyrs, he is revered and admired. But politics is a dirty business, like it or not, and a victorious candidate’s liberal idealism cannot survive a presidency intact. Sacrifices will be made, promises will be bent, if not broken, and voters will be left disappointed. Even Roosevelt, Truman, and John F. Kennedy did not have perfect progressive records. If Obama succeeds in winning the nomination, let alone the presidency, his more left-leaning admirers will have their hearts broken.

Of the Senator’s star qualities, one of his most admired is the one over which he had no control in acquiring- his unique racial heritage. For liberals, his family background is a burst of fresh air. In a society dominated by a much-maligned club of “old white men,” Obama’s non-traditional ethnicity is a refreshingly positive change in the political status quo. Of course, many Democrats and progressives are old white men, or are married or related to them. And in some cases white men, old as well as young, achieve good things for the country. After all, Sen. Sherrod Brown is a mature white male, and Gov. Ted Strickland is as white as they come. The original American liberal heroes were such famous old white men as Theodore and Franklin Roosevelt. Conservatives are not the only folks a little too preoccupied with the race and ethnicity of their candidates.

As for the very liberal crowd gravitating around Obama, their fascination may begin to diminish as soon as their candidate has to spend more time and energy placating traditional African-American leaders, activists, and rank-and-file voters who aren’t so happy with his non-traditional background. As it stands in the Democratic Party, liberal whites are fonder of Obama than are blacks, who tend to support Hillary. It’s not exactly news that Barack’s takes on social issues are at odds with black church conservatives. Many black Democrats wonder: Can Obama truly relate to inner-city concerns and the historical problems faced by Afro-Americans? Put a different way, they ask: “is he one of us?”

Other black Democratic figures may not possess the charisma of Obama, but they do have something a lot more important- political street cred. It remains to be seen if Candidate Obama, the half white, half Kenyan-American raised by his white Caucasian family, is “black enough” for skeptical black Democrats while not being “too black” for suburban white liberals. As it turns out, liberal racial politics is just as troublesome as conservative racial politics.

Hopefully, many of us won’t have to wait until Election Day 2008 to figure that out. Especially as Hispanic and immigrant influence grows in national politics, many Democrats need to reconsider their definition of pro-minority liberalism. For too long, Democratic advocacy of minority rights has been limited to adoption of the African-American establishment’s agenda. The candidacy of Barack Obama may represent a change in the racial attitudes of Democrats, or it may be a temporary giddy infatuation after years of rule by the very non-inclusive Republican Party. Either way, it’s not in the best interest of the Democratic Party to keep racial politics alive and thriving.

Economic opportunity, equality before the law, and protection of individual liberty are not the passionate causes that they once were, which is particularly strange in this era of globalization and global human rights abuses. Addicted to their fetishes of diversity and multiculturalism, nominal social liberals are diverting the party’s focus from traditional economic issues in favor of pet causes springing from identity politics. As an honorable public servant, Obama deserves better than to become the poster child for the crowds pushing hollow multiculturalism.

Barack Obama may have transcended race in his own life, but America still has a mighty long way to go. It can be argued that the Senator’s background is a challenge to racists and Old Guard activists who want to pigeonhole people into neat little categories. However, nominating him will generate more negative than positive results. In the end, elevating a candidate because of his race and political inexperience does not serve the interests of equality, unity, and good government. For all its progressive hype, Obama’s campaign is yet another example of America’s political obsession with cultural identity. ___________________________________________________________________
Article submitted by kjohns. The views expressed do not necessarily reflect those of MCDAC or its members.