I guess I should be happy that finally, America is talking openly about race. We’ve got new laws and resolutions to ban the “N” word. We’ve got re-enactments of bloody Sunday down in Selma, recalling the events that culminated in the passage of the 1965 Voting Rights Act.
We’ve got blogs and news programs and major magazines debating whether or not Obama is black enough and accepted by “real black” Americans. Others want to know if Hillary and her card carrying black man of a husband will steal the White House away from the “blood born” black man that is Barack.
We’ve even got the Cherokee Nation kicking out the descendants of their slaves because they are not Native American by blood. Yes, Native Americans owned black slaves, in case that lesson was omitted from your history book. And up until yesterday, the slave descendants were considered part of the Cherokee Nation. The vote to rescind tribal membership was 76 percent in favor. Some are calling the vote racist. Others say it is self determination.
This Obama thing is funny. For most of this country’s history, what defined people as black was “one drop” of black blood, never mind what the skin color was. Obama is fully 50 percent black, so what is the problem? He looks black. He married black. His kids are black. He goes to a black church. Black man!
If white supremacists ever kick off their racial holy war, Obama will be right there next to Tiger Woods getting his head blown off with the rest of us obviously real blacks. So why question his ethnicity now when he’s running for president? Unlike young Eldrick, he doesn’t appear conflicted about who he is, so why should we be?
Anyone remember the Rainbow coalition. Jesse Jackson used to tell us that there were 64 shades of blackness. Black people, Jackson used to say, come in all colors and shades.
African Americans are a living, breathing rainbow. Obama is one shade of that rainbow.
Again I ask, what is the problem? Maybe it’s because he doesn’t feel black. Bill Clinton feels like a black man even though he isn’t and that is hard to explain. There is a rhythm to blackness... a musical....lyrical way of reacting to and within the universe. I’ll be honest, I don’t feel that rhythm with Obama. But I do feel that rhythm with Bill Clinton. I don’t feel that rhythm with Hillary Clinton. Hillary is a white girl, brilliant, but rhythm-less. Clarence Thomas is very obviously a black man. But he is rhythm-less and clueless and I’m not feeling him at all.
But my feelings don’t make Obama any less black. I can still relate to the brother and I suspect that most of my fellow blacks can too.
Now can we get on with the real issues of this campaign?
It is not surprising that Obama has slave owners in his family tree. Virtually all Americans, regardless of their race or ethnicity, have ancestors who owned slaves. Many African Americans who researched their family trees would be shocked to discover that have black as well as white ancestors who were slave owners. In the United States, free blacks as well as whites owned slaves (one of the South’s biggest slave owner was a freed black man notorious for his harsh treatment of his slaves). The percentage of free blacks who owned slaves was small, as was the percentages of whites who owned slaves, but the intricacies of the genetic pool guarantee that virtually everyone is related to them. African Americans who traced their heritage back to Africa would discover that virtually all their African ancestors were involved in the slave traded. The African tribes ran the “supply side” of the Atlantic slave trade. The ancestors of Hispanic Americans owned both black and Indian slaves. American Indian tribes practiced slavery both before and after the European discovery of America. (The Cherokee Nation, for example, voted overwhelmingly yesterday (3 March 07) to revoke the tribal citizenship of about 2,800 blacks who are descendants of Cherokee slaves.
ReplyDeleteOur hostess asked:
ReplyDeleteSo why question his ethnicity now when he’s running for president?
In the City of Brotherly Love, we have Milton Street, who is black and the brother of the current mayor (and a man with a crime problem), attacking Gerald Nutter, a black City Councilman, for not being black enough -- because both of them are running for mayor!
The reason for such things is purely political: who can gain (or lose) some sort of political advantage by such attacks. Senator Obama has not been black enough because there are other candidates (all of whom happen to be white) who know that they need at least some of the black vote to win the nomination.
I'm sure that you aren't surprised by this at all.
Blair wrote:
ReplyDeleteVirtually all Americans, regardless of their race or ethnicity, have ancestors who owned slaves.
I don't think that's a reasonable statement. Certainly many do, but much of our population comes from people who immigrated to the United States after the Civil War was over.
I happen to know my own ancestry; on my father's side, immigration to these shores occurred long after 1865, while on my mother's side they are New Englanders who simply didn't own slaves. I don't think that I'm some sort of unusual exception.
Clearly a lot of Americans have slave owners (or slaves, or both) in their ancestries, but "virtually all" is simply too broad a brush.
I'm so with you on this one. I too am awaiting the real issues of the campaign. Interesting thing though: Obama seems more transparent right now. We know a lot about him personally and we know he's going to tackle issues with seniors and education...wonder what's on Hilary's plate? Why haven't we heard from her?
ReplyDeleteTo Dana: Descendants of immigrants who arrive in the United States after the Civil War married into families who were in the United Sates prior to the Civil War. This of course makes the related to Americans who were slave owners or involved in the slave traded. Not that it matters. Since slavery was once universal, all immigrants to the United States come from countries and cultures that once practiced slavery. This is also true of future immigrants.
ReplyDeleteSlavery was legal in New England prior to the Civil War. New England merchants owned the fleet of slave ships that transported African slaves to the United States. This was the most profitable aspect of the slave trade. Planters tended to be land rich and case poor, and few owned more than two or three slaves. The New England slave traders, by contrast, made immense fortunes. This was the source of the "surplus wealth" that financed the industrial revolution.
For a fee, genealogists offer to trace anyone's ancestory back to a royal family. This works because virtually everyone is related. Everyone is related to members of the royal family, slave owners and slaves.