Comments on: Bashing Black Men in the Age of Obama

By: No1KState

No1KState — Sun, 26 Jul 2009 02:35:14 +0000

Barb? Have you read or heard the entire speech?

Like or Dislike: 0 0

By: BARB

BARB — Sat, 25 Jul 2009 23:27:45 +0000

Obama Insults the Black Family at the NAACP

“No Excuses”? Come Again, President Obama
Tolu Olorunda | Posted July 17, 2009 12:55 PM

First he declared that Blacks had advanced “90% of the way” to equality; then he scolded single, poor Black mothers for feeding their kids Popeyes chicken for breakfast; then he ridiculed Black men as boys; and now he tells Black children that they have “no excuses,” no legitimate concerns about the centuries-old system of injustice which has strived to sabotage their success?

Can’t say I didn’t see this coming, though.

In his 35 minute-long Thursday evening speech to the NAACP, on occasion of its centennial celebration, President Obama stopped by to inject more tough-love serum into the Black community. Of the many questionable things he said, more striking were his charges that, for Black children, the odds are not as stacked against them as they might like to believe. Insult bribed injury shortly after.

Although he acknowledged that the “pain of discrimination is still felt in America,” Obama castigated Black children who might use these “excuses” to act irresponsibly in school: “Yes, if you’re African American, the odds of growing up amid crime and gangs are higher. Yes, if you live in a poor neighborhood, you will face challenges that someone in a wealthy suburb does not have to face. That’s not a reason to get bad grades, that’s not a reason to cut class, that’s not a reason to give up on your education and drop out of school. No one has written your destiny for you. Your destiny is in your hands – and don’t you forget that.”

Even though for every 10 cents a Black family makes, white families make a dollar; even though a Black family’s median income is 61% that of Whites; even though Blacks are, despite only 14% of the U.S. population, incarcerated 6 times the rate of Whites, Obama is pretty confident that their destiny isn’t somewhat pre-written before arrival into this world.

His speech before the NAACP–televised internationally–was but a mere reprisal of his June 15, 2008 Father’s Day speech, in which he thundered: “Yes, we need more cops on the street. Yes, we need fewer guns in the hands of people who shouldn’t have them. Yes, we need more money for our schools, and more outstanding teachers in the classroom, and more afterschool programs for our children. Yes, we need more jobs and more job training and more opportunity in our communities. But we also need families to raise our children.”

(snip)

He doesn’t get it, does he? He doesn’t understand that certain occasions serve different functions, and cannot merely be used as bully pulpits to beat upon the most fragile members of society. He doesn’t understand that it’s not just okay to name-drop Du Bois and Dr. King, Jim Crow and Emmett Till, thinking such names guarantee ghetto passes to chastise Black people for everything under the sun. He doesn’t understand that merely pointing out the obvious, highlighting the structural disparities between Black and Whites, does no good when you dismiss the implications of those structural inequities by blaming the disenfranchised for their disempowerment.

(snip)

But if you’re Barack Obama, the equation gets a little complicated. For you, the load gets a little heavier. It becomes questionable for you to ask that Black kids weather the storms of an inhumane society, and simply “get that education,” when you appointed as your Secretary of Education a guy with no teaching record whatsoever, a guy whose academic credibility does not exceed a Bachelor’s in Sociology. Questionable, indeed. Critical thinkers begin questioning your dedication to educational transformation when you appoint as Secretary of Education a guy who, while “CEO” of Chicago’s Public schools, closed down public schools abruptly, building privatized ones in their stead; permitted the army to invade the sacred spaces of the classroom; and notoriously butted heads with the Teacher’s Union–a guy you, President Obama, didn’t trust enough to hand your kids over to. Again, the plot thickens quite a bit.

Like or Dislike: 0 0

By: Nquest

Nquest — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 00:57:06 +0000

Bambi, a part of Ms.Booker’s argument was formed/expressed by completely mischaracterizing other people’s arguments — i.e. a knee-jerk reaction to a word or two or just because there wasn’t a non-critical, 100% “pull your pants up” party up in here. Her full sprint-while-blindfolded argument missed how things the very people she called herself differing/debating with actually stated things similar to what she contributed to this discussion well after they (No1 and I) did.
.
Re: The master’s tools… I’ve long since tired of such rhetoric. It is, dare I say, romantic. Depending on your perspective, of course — and I mean that in a “what’s your ultimate objective” kind of way which probably reflects a difference in perspective I may have given my rather ‘romantic’ Black Nationalist views.

Like or Dislike: 0 0

By: Bambi

Bambi — Sun, 05 Jul 2009 19:51:41 +0000

I completely understand the point of view of ms booker. After all, I was raised by Black women who were more concerned with my survival in a White world than breaking barriers. And to a certain extent, I can see the logic behind ms booker’s argument. It is easy to discuss the white racial frame in America and its affects on Black Americans. However, when your everyday job is survival debating social topics doesn’t make it into the day. So the attitude becomes, “Look, if they want you to pull your pants up just pull em up! You don’t have to like it, but its what you have to do.” Talking about the attitude behind sagging pants is not critical when you need a job. However, I still am in favor of questioning the systemic racism that picks at issues as petty as pants! If my people cannot not look at the system critically, then they will continue to conform. The only way I could be in favor of pulling up sagging pants is if it was done in the attitude of: using the master’s tools to dismantle the masters house.

Like or Dislike: 0 0

By: No1KState

No1KState — Sun, 05 Jul 2009 19:18:43 +0000

@Kristen – Personally, I have great respect of those persons of privilege who, instead of complaining about false liberal guilt, use their position to challenge the status quo. When it comes to my peers, I’m the most radical. I have a girl friend who teases that as a consequence of all my “Black Panther” rhetoric, God will have me marry a white man. (I have a point. Keep reading.) While I wouldn’t deny anyone the right to love who the choose, I’m also not a very big proponent of interracial relations. This is more or less because of the intraracial and mainstream politics attached to it – ie, the CW’s “Hitched or Ditched” most recent episode titled “Blue-eyed Devil.” The gist I got from the 5 min I watched was that the black groom’s mother didn’t like his bride just because she was white. I’m not sure it really got into socio-politics of the situation; that Torrino’s mother was concerned about his and the bride’s anti-racist status. It kinda portrayed her and some other black women of being racist against the bride, maintaining the false notion that racism is all about individual attitudes and everyone’s racist. It’s for that reason I’m not a cheerleader of interracial relationships in general. ~ With this exception: that the white person involved be like you and Joe and Tim Wise. For all my “huff and bluff,” I’d marry a white man who was anti-racist.
~
So, my whole point is, I really respect someone who uses their privilege, whether it’s racial, economic, or business network, to challenge the status quo and “help build a better world.”

Like or Dislike: 0 0

By: Kristen

Kristen — Sun, 05 Jul 2009 16:48:37 +0000

This is a great discussion. Thanks to everyone for the thought-provoking comments.I wanted to jump back in, because I think ms. booker introduced an important point for clarification when she said:

As long as this country and it’s money is run by white folks . . . it’s my job to teach the younger generation to think critically and find ways to work around the system so they can prosper and provide for the next — in addition to fighting racism.

She’s advocating a dual approach: for day-to-day survival people of color have little choice but to deal with reality and conform to (white) society standards; and, for the long haul, the black community and allies must also fight racism.
JDF, I think you put it well with: “Are young blacks in this society equally able to express themselves?” The answer is no of course, which is beyond fair, but to quote ms. booker: “black folks have known it for 400 years” – one ignores this knowledge at one’s peril.But, as No1 indicated, most of the posters on this thread differ in perspective from ms. booker in being more concerned with investigating the root of the problem, which is white racism, which has spawned all this pressure on people of color to conform to white-normed standards (or else suffer the consequences and expect zero second chances), and which justifies African Americans’ outcomes as a result of faulty personal choices. Bambi’s earlier statement exemplifies this perspective: “If we are going to attack sagging pants, can we please add attacking the criminal justice system and prisons that first created the “sagging trend” to the to-do list?”As a young sociologist who wants to see my children and grandchildren live in a more humane society, I will err on the side of “challenge racism” over “work with racism,” and I won’t accept ms. booker labeling this approach “hand-wringing,” because from my standpoint, which is that of an upwardlly-mobile white female academic, I see it as MY job in the antiracism movement to teach students about the realities of racism – especially white students who don’t have a 400-year-old base of community knowledge – and encourage them to think critically and find ways to challenge the system so they can help build a better world. I understand that my racial privilege gives me this luxury, but I believe it is a worthwhile endeavor. And, I didn’t intend to make this all about me; I wanted to point out that ultimately all of us here are on the same team, and we are stronger if we recognize and respect our differences in perspective and approach.

Like or Dislike: 0 0

By: Nquest

Nquest — Sat, 04 Jul 2009 08:33:21 +0000

… and to think, before Ms. Booker ever commented, I meant to clarify the argument I was making in my original, lengthy post. I was going to respond to JDF and say the point I was trying to make was that there is a diversity of views in the Black community with some people who extol what I consider genuine, authentic and positive values and cultural messages about “dignity” and standards and others who attempt to extol the same values but can’t help but expose their own self-loathing and internalized racism. That should have been clear to anyone that actually cared to try to understand what I was saying (as poorly as I may have done it).
.
That aside, JDF… I also would also argue that both self-loathers and legitimate or otherwise ‘positive’ forces/people in the Black community happen to use the same kind of rhetoric. That was the reason why I talked about the “echo chamber.” The words and phrases resonate with a lot, perhaps most, people in the Black community who aren’t sagging… which is why self-loathers feel so comfortable be so loud and obnoxious (read: Bill Cosby). There’s quite a bit of common ground reached there.
.
As for Ms. Booker confusion over the term “romantic”… JDF’s point about “every generation of youth… doing something their parents cannot stand” is why asinine comments about your 76 year old mother are romantic. We’re not in Kansas or the 50’s and 60’s (you know, back in the day when your moms was a teen/young adult) anymore, Dorothy.
.
And, really, since we’re talking about “young Black males” and not making any excuses… what’s up with excusing the poor job people of your mother’s generation (or the one immediately following it) did with teaching today’s youth respect and dignity? Children/youth pick that stuff up from somewhere/somebody.

Like or Dislike: 0 0

By: Nquest

Nquest — Sat, 04 Jul 2009 07:15:58 +0000

I challenge Ms. Booker to point out the excuses she claims others have made here. And I double-challenge here to do it with respect to what I’ve said, since she obviously had a problem with the term I used (”romantic”) while willfully and painfully missing the point.
.
Simply put: what excuse did I make, Ms. Booker?
.
Seeing none…
Please treat us to more rambling “dominance strategy”, comprised/sell-out, “steely resolve” rhetoric that does not but prove the points you’re taking issue with even as you skipped over all kind of points I know were made in the process. (Please go back and read the last thing I said in my initial post and No1’s post #9.)

Like or Dislike: 0 0

By: No1KState

No1KState — Sat, 04 Jul 2009 00:34:50 +0000

Thanks, JDF. You’re quite correct.

Like or Dislike: 0 0

By: JDF

JDF — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 19:57:45 +0000

Well said, No1KState. Virtually every generation of youth have some kind of style, be it dress, walk, slang, etc, to give their cohort ownership to something while simultaneously (often) rebelling from the status quo fo the day; i.e., doing something their parents cannot stand. For my own generation, I don’t recall people blaming unemployment on young whites for body piercings, ripped blue jeans, tattoos, etc, yet this is done to young black men. Are young blacks in this society equally able to express themselves? Another good question to ask is so what about the plethora of research findings showing black men who do NOT sag at interviews or in the autos when driving, yet don’t get the job or pulled over for no reason anyway.

Like or Dislike: 0 0