I hope that this is true- the evolution of racial politics

[PhiGam]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

The larger point is that black people are not monolithic and don't need "spokespersons" for the sake of the white dominated media. The black activists, intellectuals, leaders, and other key figures in our communities have never needed to be categorized as such until whites were searching for a black leader. "Who will lead black people and speak for them?" Annoying sentiment.

The blacks who want Jackson and Sharpton to be their spokespersons have a right to want that, although I am not one of them and question how many blacks actually feel this way. The blacks who don't, have plenty of more viable alternatives. Blacks are a large enough community that we can multitask--don't let whites tell us that we have to choose.

As a lighthearted aside about how people tend to choose "their leaders/key figures":
There is also a distinction between how researchers and intellectuals like West and Dyson, and others who are huge in academia but don't want to achieve mainstream notoriety, speak to fellow academicians versus how they approach nonacademicians and "laypersons." They have been pretty good at reaching outside of academia and speaking to the sensibilities of people who won't read journal articles or certain books. This requires a level of watering down, positivity, and nonconfrontation because it is appealing to educated persons outside the discipline but also to lesser educated and sometimes more sensitive people who can get offended and turn away, whether people want to admit it or not, which loses the larger message. The more cut-throat approaches are often reserved for fellow academicians because of a common understanding of the nature of the beast.

Great post. Playing devil's advocate here I will say that I have met a lot of black people who do feel that they are being "held down" by institutional racism- how would you argue that they have a legitimate complaint here now that the most powerful man in the world- elected by a majority white population- is black?

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by PhiGam

Great post. Playing devil's advocate here I will say that I have met a lot of black people who do feel that they are being "held down" by institutional racism- how would you argue that they have a legitimate complaint here now that the most powerful man in the world- elected by a majority white population- is black?

The fact that whites are asking this question highlights the salience of institutional racism. It's like these whites were waiting for something to relieve them of guilt or allow them to dismiss generations of inequality in an instant.

We have a legitimate complaint because there are still huge disparities in this society that aren't just about "lazy minorities who don't have a go get 'em attitude." The existence of blacks who reach a certain level simply means that there are instances where some blacks are seen as exceptions**, where a greater interest is served by allowing color barriers to weaken momentarily, or to create an image of progressiveness. Similar to what happens with gender, social class, and sexual orientation even when sexism and patriarchy, classism, and heterosexism are pervasive.

** White folks were the ones going on and on about Obama being biracial, educated, articulate, and elitist. Many whites needed these things so they could see Obama as "not just any black person/not your typical black man/he doesn't make me nervous/I voted for the white half."

[preciousjeni]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

** White folks were the ones going on and on about Obama being biracial, educated, articulate, and elitist. Many whites needed these things so they could see Obama as "not just any black person/not your typical black man/he doesn't make me nervous/I voted for the white half."

Thank you for posting this. I've been wanting to say it but couldn't figure out how where to put it legitimately without being flamed. As I saw white America embrace Obama and spoke to unlikely Obama supporters, I realized that they were making him white in their own minds. That's how many of them related. I can't imagine the backlash if Obama did something that his supporters perceived as a "black action" (whatever that means to them) or supported what they believed to be a "black cause." And, look how he quickly he distanced himself from Rev. Wright and his black liberation theology (which, for the record, I believe white America needs to hear and understand). He made it easy for people to see him as a friend, but many people don't see him as he is.

To the question,

How does anyone waste time on racial fantasies like reparations for slavery when there is a black man who earned his way into the White House?

I have my own question. Now that there is going to be a black man in office, will the decision-makers in the criminal justice/law enforcement system now all of the sudden decide that it is a little odd that black people are disproportionately represented in the system? I have other questions too.

[Tinia2]

For the Southern states, a waning grip on U.S. politics
VERNON, Alabama: Fear of the politician with the unusual name and look did not end with last Tuesday's vote in this rural red swatch where mounted buck heads and rifles hang on the wall. This corner of the Deep South still resonates with negative feelings about the race of President-elect Barack Obama.
What may have ended on Election Day, though, is the centrality of the South to national politics. By voting so emphatically for Senator John McCain over Obama — supporting him in some areas in even greater numbers than they did President George W. Bush — voters from Texas to South Carolina and Kentucky may have marginalized their region for some time to come, political experts say.
http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/11/...ca/11south.php

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by preciousjeni

To the question,



I have my own question. Now that there is going to be a black man in office, will the decision-makers in the criminal justice/law enforcement system now all of the sudden decide that it is a little odd that black people are disproportionately represented in the system? I have other questions too.

Your question is better because it speaks to reality. Most blacks aren't engaged in racial fantasies or concerned with things like reparations for slavery. But white people, in general, keep talking about that as if they have some imaginary inside scoop. It's an attempt to minimize structural and cultural factors, to the point where they become laughable and easily dismissed by those in decision making positions.

[fantASTic]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

Your question is better because it speaks to reality. Most blacks aren't engaged in racial fantasies or concerned with things like reparations for slavery. But white people, in general, keep talking about that as if they have some imaginary inside scoop. It's an attempt to minimize structural and cultural factors, to the point where they become laughable and easily dismissed by those in decision making positions.

How, then, would you explain the huge support for affirmative action from blacks if they aren't trying to get reparations in that way?

[DrPhil]

fantASTic, go ahead and rethink that, edit, or whatever you need to do.

There's basic knowledge that people need if they wish to engage in these types of discussions.

[preciousjeni]

What timing! An e-mail just came out over one of my sorority listservs about the efforts of our Alpha Chapter regarding the justice system. Here's a portion of that e-mail:

Background: The Alpha Chapter has dedicated the Fall 2008 semester to raising awareness about the various cracks in the United States' Justice System. Their awareness activities began with a protest against the potential execution of Troy Davis and will continue over the next two weeks with various publicity exercises and an educational/social justice-based forum (to be held on November 20, 2008 at 7:00pm in Dey 204). Please find the chapter's event blurb/overview below.

Troy Davis: http://www.troyanthonydavis.org/

Alpha Chapter Protest: http://www.dailytarheel.com/news/uni...y/wake_up_call

Additional Information: http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/10/24/...ref=newssearch

[OneTimeSBX]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

Your question is better because it speaks to reality. Most blacks aren't engaged in racial fantasies or concerned with things like reparations for slavery. But white people, in general, keep talking about that as if they have some imaginary inside scoop. It's an attempt to minimize structural and cultural factors, to the point where they become laughable and easily dismissed by those in decision making positions.

while the idea of reparations was a good idea at the time, it is unnecessary in this day and age. there are no slaves left that are owed anything. i have had white people mention them to me, however, and i was very amused...i think that some white people feel that blacks still need some sort of payment for our mistreatment back in the day, or else we will retaliate when we get to a position of power. lo and behold, Nov. 4th brought that level of thinking back into their minds, and its that fear that has brought out a very ugly side of racism that a lot of us only heard about from our parents...

[preciousjeni]

Originally Posted by fantASTic

How, then, would you explain the huge support for affirmative action from blacks if they aren't trying to get reparations in that way?

Originally Posted by DrPhil

fantASTic, go ahead and rethink that, edit, or whatever you need to do.

There's basic knowledge that people need if they wish to engage in these types of discussions.

I'm interested in understanding how affirmative action is even in the same category as reparations. fantASTic?

[fantASTic]

Originally Posted by preciousjeni

I'm interested in understanding how affirmative action is even in the same category as reparations. fantASTic?

In this day and age, it's non-monetary reparations (except, of course, in the form of scholarships, in which case it IS monetary reparations). White students and black students go to the same schools, take the same tests and have the same opportunities. My black neighbor in high school had no disadvantages in society - his parents were both dentists, for Christ's sake. Yet, he got preferential admission over me. How is that NOT a form of reparation?

Even if you can possibly find a way to claim that he somehow deserved that, how is it that now POST-graduate schools are allowing this? Medical schools are giving preferential admission - sorry, but when a kid went to my same college, had the same classes, same professors, same EVERYTHING as me, she has no right to get preferential admittance, especially to such competitive areas as medical schools and graduate schools.

When all other factors are essentially equal, affirmative action is more of a reparation than an equalizer - what are you equalizing?

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by OneTimeSBX

i have had white people mention them to me, however, and i was very amused...i think that some white people feel that blacks still need some sort of payment for our mistreatment back in the day, or else we will retaliate when we get to a position of power. lo and behold, Nov. 4th brought that level of thinking back into their minds, and its that fear that has brought out a very ugly side of racism that a lot of us only heard about from our parents...

It's really interesting because these whites would deny that a white administration symbolized race-specific nationalism and white dominance to them. That's obvious since an administration with a black man at the head suddenly creates "fear of a black planet" and the threat that whites will lose their power position.

[OneTimeSBX]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

It's really interesting because these whites would deny that a white administration symbolized race-specific nationalism and white dominance to them. That's obvious since an administration with a black man at the head suddenly creates "fear of a black planet" and the threat that whites will lose their power position.

it amuses me that those whites dont realize that if a black leader (in this case, Obama) even THOUGHT in the wrong context, someone would be on him like white on rice. i really dont think there is anything to worry about with him in office as far as retaliation...

@ preciousjeni, you are correct. they arent even in the same category. reparations was a means of repayment. affirmative action forced a level of equality among hiring minorities.

[KSig RC]

Originally Posted by preciousjeni

I have my own question. Now that there is going to be a black man in office, will the decision-makers in the criminal justice/law enforcement system now all of the sudden decide that it is a little odd that black people are disproportionately represented in the system? I have other questions too.

I would argue that the reasons behind this disparity have very little to do with "decision makers" in the criminal justice/law enforcement system (who I assume to be judges, lawmakers and police) - these decision makers have little control over educational or job opportunity, for example, two of the strongest correlating factors for finding oneself on the wrong side (rightly, wrongly or 'gray-area'-ly) of the legal system. The reasons behind the massive disparity on Death Row in Texas, for example, are much more complex than simply finding that black males get screwed by juries or judges - which is kind of ironic, as that's the classic mistake DSTC has been pointing out in this thread.

EDIT: I'm sure you realize all of this, and are more asking whether this is the opportunity for the "wake-up call" . . . my point is that whether or not it is, I'm not convinced it matters for that subset of the population. I'll go into more detail if you'd like, but I think that's a good start for feedback purposes.

[DrPhil]

This is all generally speaking, of course.

Originally Posted by KSig RC

The reasons behind the massive disparity on Death Row in Texas, for example, are much more complex than simply finding that black males get screwed by juries or judges - which is kind of ironic, as that's the classic mistake DSTC has been pointing out in this thread.

It is a classic mistake, which is why I wasn't talking about getting "screwed by juries and judges." Structural and systemic processes are much more complex than that. We're looking at outcomes without assuming the intent of the actors or arguing that it only happens at one level. They generally occur at every step, before and after arrest.

For instance, crack cocaine and powder cocaine sentencing disparities are not just about judges (or juries) intentionally handing out tougher sentences for lower class and minority offenders. Social class is correlated with race just as the types of drugs that people deal and use are correlated with race. That affects arrest, as well, with an understanding that minorities and poorer people are arrested for crack cocaine than powder cocaine. Correlates of race such as education, employment, and social class are no secret to these decision makers and disparities in outcome are factors of these. Decision makers simply respond by saying that crack cocaine was/is linked to a violent crack cocaine epidemic and that the psychotic effects of crack cocaine are different than powder cocaine---prior offense and other legal factors are also considered. Still, there are race, social class, education, etc...correlates of this that result in a certain outcome despite intent and justification.

Suffice it to say that when controlling for prior convictions and other legal factors, a lot of research consistently finds extralegal factors such as race and social class are not salient while other research still finds them to be salient. That debate aside, the substantive significance of extralegal factors is not contingent upon statistical significance if we're arguing that there are more embedded and less visible processes that lead to very clear outcomes.