Racism Without Racists

An execellent piece by Nicholas Kristoff in today’s Times:

One of the fallacies this election season is that if Barack Obama is paying an electoral price for his skin tone, it must be because of racists.

Snip

Most of the lost votes aren’t those of dyed-in-the-wool racists. Such racists account for perhaps 10 percent of the electorate and, polling suggests, are mostly conservatives who would not vote for any Democratic presidential candidate.

Rather, most of the votes that Mr. Obama actually loses belong to well-meaning whites who believe in racial equality and have no objection to electing a black person as president — yet who discriminate unconsciously.

If you have Sirius radio and ever listen to Lynn Samuels, Samuels must be the first person who comes into your mind when you read this.

Samuels’ show on Sirius Left is barely adequate when there’s not an election going on. She loves to speak endlessly about her personal struggles, like which movie she is going to see next weekend, or which TV show she missed. She becomes very angry when people have the gall to speak Spanish in her presence.

She was a big-time supporter of Hillary Clinton. She loves Hillary. She hates Obama because he’s sexist, unexperienced and he’s no Hillary.

Fine, whatever, but she never said that John Edwards, who has spent less time in political office than Obama, was inexperienced.

More from Kristoff:

For decades, experiments have shown that even many whites who earnestly believe in equal rights will recommend hiring a white job candidate more often than a person with identical credentials who is black. In the experiments, the applicant’s folder sometimes presents the person as white, sometimes as black, but everything else is the same. The white person thinks that he or she is selecting on the basis of nonracial factors like experience.

Research suggests that whites are particularly likely to discriminate against blacks when choices are not clear-cut and competing arguments are flying about — in other words, in ambiguous circumstances rather like an electoral campaign.

I don’t think people like Samuels and Harriet Christian and the folks over at No Quarter think of themselves as racist. Rather, they think they are nice tolerant people who just happen to hate Obama because he’s “not qualified.”

But if there were a white Democratic candidate with exact same experience level as Obama, I can’t imagine they would complain all that much.

More:

“In the U.S., there’s a small percentage of people who in nationwide surveys say they won’t vote for a qualified black presidential candidate,” Professor Dovidio said. “But a bigger factor is the aversive racists, those who don’t think that they’re racist.”

Faced with a complex decision, he said, aversive racists feel doubts about a black person that they don’t feel about an identical white. “These doubts tend to be attributed not to the person’s race — because that would be racism — but deflected to other areas that can be talked about, such as lack of experience,” he added.

Of course, there are perfectly legitimate reasons to be against a particular black candidate, Mr. Obama included. Opposition to Mr. Obama is no more evidence of racism than opposition to Mr. McCain is evidence of discrimination against the elderly or against war veterans. And at times, Mr. Obama’s race helps him: it underscores his message of change, it appeals to some whites as a demonstration of their open-mindedness, and it wins him overwhelming black votes and turnout.

Overt racism still exists, but as Kristof suggests, most overt racists would not likely vote for any Democrat for president. But these covert racists trouble me. I imagine I know many of them.

It will be interesting to see how a Lynn Samuels or a Harriet Christian might react once Obama is elected (which seems increasingly likely). Will they continue to hate him for no clear and rational reason, or will they be excited that the candidate who is most closely aligned with them in term of political views won?

My guess is that for most, the former will be true.

But as Kristof mentions, they’e non-racist racism may not matter:

One lesson from this research is that racial biases are deeply embedded within us, more so than many whites believe. But another lesson, a historical one, is that we can overcome unconscious bias. That’s what happened with the decline in prejudice against Catholics after the candidacy of John F. Kennedy in 1960.

It just might happen again, this time with race.

The Wit and Wisdom of John McCain

No, this joke isn’t the least bit offensive. Not at all sexist or racist:

Did you hear the one about the woman who is attacked on the street by a gorilla, beaten senseless, raped repeatedly and left to die? When she finally regains consciousness and tries to speak, her doctor leans over to hear her sigh contently and to feebly ask, ‘Where is that marvelous ape?’

What a great guy!

West Virginia and Obama. Ugh.

From the Financial Times:

Like most people in Mingo County, West Virginia, Leonard Simpson is a lifelong Democrat. But given a choice between Barack Obama and John McCain in November, the 67-year-old retired coalminer would vote Republican.

“I heard that Obama is a Muslim and his wife’s an atheist,” said Mr Simpson, drawing on a cigarette outside the fire station in Williamson, a coalmining town of 3,400 people surrounded by lush wooded hillsides.

Snip

None of the 22 Democrats interviewed by the Financial Times at the Clinton rally would commit themselves to voting for Mr Obama if he became the nominee, and half said they definitely would not. The depth of opposition is particularly striking considering that Mingo County is one of the most Democratic places in West Virginia, having cast about 85 per cent of its votes for the party in the 2006 midterm elections. If Mr Obama cannot win there in November, he has little chance of carrying the state.

Most people questioned said they mistrusted Mr Obama because of doubts about his patriotism and “values”, stemming from his cosmopolitan background, his exotic name and the controversy surrounding “anti-American” sermons by Jeremiah Wright, his former pastor. Several people said they believed he was a Muslim – an unfounded rumour that has circulated on the internet for months – despite the contradiction with his 20-year membership of Mr Wright’s church in Chicago. Others mentioned his refusal to wear a Stars and Stripes badge and controversial remarks by his wife, Mich­elle, who des­cribed America as “mean” and implied that she had never been proud of the US until her husband ran for president.

Fortunately, Obama’s performance in WV’s primary is irrelevant in deciding who the nominee will be. Even if Clinton were to win all of that states’ 39 delegates, Obama would still have a net gain in delegates since Indiana and North Carolina.

Of course, it makes sense for Clinton and her surrogates to campaign there as hard as they can in hope that a 40 point Clinton win in WV will change perception about Obama’s ability to win in November. After all, they tell us, since 1916, no president has won the White House without winning WV.

Whatever. Obama will lose WV in November, and probably by a wide margin. He can make up that ground in other states like CO that would be hard for Clinton to win.

What gets me about this article is the aggressive ignorance of the WV voters that were interviewed. They seem to be taking anonymous e-mails that bash Obama, based on clear misinformation quite seriously. Do they believe everything they get in their inboxes?

I’m wondering if WV residents communicate with Nigerians who want to put money in their bank accounts at a higher rate than people in the rest of the country do.

If a Democrat votes for Clinton over Barack, he’s not a racist any more than a Democrat who votes for Obama or Clinton is a sexist. Sure there are some who will vote against either candidate over gender or race issues, but I think those kinds of voters are the exception rather than the rule.

But when zero of 22 Democrats unable to state that they will vote for Obama when he is the nominee, I have to think that racism is playing a large role in determining for whom to vote.

Pathetic.

Reverend Wright in Context

Wow. I was shocked to read this piece from AP about Barack Obama, Reverend Wright, and Trinity United Church of Christ that actually gives some context to Wright’s sermons.

A young Barack Obama was searching for answers, and perhaps a place to belong, when he decided to visit a fast-growing church recommended by friends. What he heard left him in tears.

The Rev. Jeremiah Wright preached that day about suffering — about the seemingly endless problems of the world and of individuals. But he also talked about the importance of hope, the audacity of believing things can be made better.

“Hope is what saves us,” Wright said.

Snip

Trinity was an early leader in ministering to people with HIV and AIDS. It offers housing and employment programs to people in need. It has scholarship programs and services for cancer patients, domestic abuse victims, drug addicts and more.

Members are expected to volunteer for one or more of these ministries. They usually announce their choice on the same day they’re baptized, said Jane Fisler Hoffman, a United Church of Christ minister who joined Trinity.

“There’s this kind of constant encouragement to live your faith, learn your faith,” she said.

The church proclaims itself “unashamedly black and unapologetically Christian.” It supports charity work in Africa, gives some of its ministries Swahili names, uses Africa-themed decorations.

People familiar with Trinity compare its emphasis on African culture to the way some Catholic churches play up Irish or Italian roots. And they emphatically reject the accusations in widely circulated e-mails that the church is separatist or turns away white members.

“That’s such a bunch of hooey,” said Hoffman, who is white.

She tells the story of a group of young Germans visiting the church. Wright met with them before the service and prayed with them in German, she said. Later, he delivered part of his sermon in German and the choir sang in German.

“To me, it’s a testimony that this is not a church that rejects people of other cultures and races,” she said.

She and others say Wright is far from the hothead he may appear to be in video excerpts. They describe him as a serious biblical scholar who thinks carefully about issues.

“Wright is one of the most respected pastors in the African-American church in the United States,” said Kellman, who nevertheless says Wright “blew it” in a few sermons.

Pfleger, one of Chicago’s most outspoken members of the clergy, said Wright and Obama are similar in their intellectual approach. “They examine things, they study things. They are not quick to make judgments,” he said.

Wright’s sermons, even when they included strong critiques of racism and inequality in America, were always grounded in the Bible, church members said. Wright sometimes used harsh, painful language, his supporters acknowledge, but mostly he was well within a black tradition of emotional, social commentary.

It’s really worth your time to read the whole piece. 

What has really bothered me about the whole controversy is that people in the MSM, Clinton Democrats, and many Republicans have taken a look at the video and just saw Wright proclaiming “God damn America” without even thinking about the context of the remarks or the context of Wright’s entire career. Those words in a 30 second soundbite might seem a little shocking when shown on Fox News, but if you watch hear more than what the media has been showing us, you’ll see that Wright was basically saying that 9/11 should have been used as an opportunity for self-reflection. It’s basically a sermon about karma (though he doesn’t use that word).

Take ten minutes to view the video  posted below.  I find nothing objectionable about his remarks when they are observed as a piece of the larger sermon.

Seem Familiar?

I don’t think Hillary Clinton is a racist. She has a long history of supporting human rights for all people.

For that reason, it’s really sad that her campaign seems to be using some racist tactics to try to defeat Obama (hat tip to Daily Kos on these graphics):

Hmm.

So Clinton’s campaign makes Obama’s face darker than it really is to frighten Ohio voters about Obama. Fine.

Does that remind you of anything?

Nah, me either.

Race a Factor in Clinton’s Ohio Win?

Maybe.

From the Wall Street Journal:

About one in five Democratic primary voters in Ohio said race was an important factor in their decision — and they voted 60% to 40% for Sen. Clinton.

Snip.

That suggests to some analysts that concern over Sen. Barack Obama’s race is playing a role in the minds of some working-class voters. John Russo, a professor at Youngstown State University in Ohio, recalls walking into class Monday and finding his white, midcareer students arguing heatedly about the election, affirmative action and whether predominantly black cities should share services and costs with white suburbs.