Thanks to the wayward nation of Australia for doing what no U.S. media, in their white, self-congratulatory, post-election euphoria, have yet done, save C-SPAN and Bill Moyers Journal: In this clip from the Aussie news show, Lateline, Dr. Ron Walters, director of the University of Maryland’s African American Leadership Center, and a key strategist with both of Jesse Jackson’s presidential campaigns, talks at length about the role of race in the Obama campaign, and specifically on the president-elect’s “race-neutral” modus operandi.
Plus, they provided a transcript, where we can read earnest Lateline reporter Leigh Sales discuss the interview’s core concept:
LEIGH SALES: What do you mean exactly by a race neutral campaign?
RONALD WALTERS: The kind of campaign where one does not draw attention to race, one does not privilege issues coming from the black community. One does not, for example, invite to the stage in the images of the campaign prominent black officials. Throughout this campaign, one rarely ever saw a member, for example, of the congressional black caucus or any of the prominent civil rights leaders. So, what they tried to do was to tailor this campaign to an electorate that’s 70 per cent white and that extended even to some of the cultural aspects of his running for president of the United States. The Reverend Wright incident was an incident involving his former pastor. He had to part company with his pastor, part company with his church and line up actually with that electorate that he’s trying to represent.
LEIGH SALES: They may have tailored the campaign to a white electorate, but he still won the black vote as well. How was he able to do that?
RONALD WALTERS: Well the black vote votes not just on race. If you look at the 2004 election cycle, you had two blacks running for president, Reverend Al Sharpton; former senator, ambassador Carol Moseley-Braun. Neither one of them attracted many black votes. Blacks didn’t really support Barack Obama until he won in Iowa. And, what I say is that blacks in South Carolina received permission from whites in Iowa to support him and that’s precisely what happened.
A prophet…his own country…sigh….
Friday, March 27th 2009 at 4:52 am |
Thanks for your kind words, Monica.
Tom, you asked a number of questions. They appear, with my answers, below:
“What’s your assessment of how much or how little the President has done with his appointments, in terms of having a racially diverse cabinet?”
“Racially diverse” is not a term I use. I don’t because, in my opinion, *race* is *white supremacy*. It equals it. It has no other expression. (There’s no such thing as “Black racism,” or “Chinese racism.”
When we say “race,” what we’re really talking about, I hold, is the agglomeration of products and side effects produced and or countenanced, directly and/or indirectly, by white supremacy. Because of this, to me, terms like “racially diverse,” or, for example, “biracial.” are meaningless.
In response to your question, in short, I would say I think that President Obama has selected the cabinet that will a) most ably accomplish the needed tasks the country faces, and b) most directly convey that intent to the electorate.
Clearly, in both cases, what does this is dominated by race.
“Do you think he should strongly consider race with his appointments and nominees, or be totally color blind, or something in between?”
Based on what I think he’s trying to do, I think he should continue to consider race in all that he does, as he *has* done, just like Black people tend to do, even when they don’t think that they are doing so.
“Do you think you would or should do the same, if you found yourself in that position?”
I don’t think a person who believes, as I do, that racism has a sole functional form, namely white supremacy, and who voices such an opinion, could be elected to the office of President of the United States.
Should by some miracle, however, I be found in the Oval Office as commander-in-chief, I would probably seek to do what has been done in his case: Try out smart, untried, non-white people, though not exclusively.
I would do this not only to accomplish needed work, but to develop the body of expertise in non-white people that is needed if racism is ever to be abated and killed.
HA
Tuesday, March 24th 2009 at 11:26 pm |
This was an extraordinary and generous interview. I think anyone who watched it would learn a great deal as I did. Thanks for sharing it with us Mr. Allen.
Tuesday, March 24th 2009 at 2:03 pm |
What’s your assessment of how much or how little the President has done with his appointments, in terms of having a racially diverse cabinet? Do you think he should strongly consider race with his appointments and nominees, or be totally color blind, or something in between?
My question is spurred by a graphic in the Rolling Stone magazine with Taylor Swift on the cover. Inside those pages was a depiction of who sits where in his White House, with the faces of each person. The only black person in the whole group of 8-10 people was his assistant/training partner. That caught my attention, but then I read further and found that he had several black people among his close advisers and other appointees that didn’t have their pictures there. It appears that he has chosen to remain color blind in his selection process. Do you think you would or should do the same, if you found yourself in that position?