An observation about and a recommendation for discussions about race

[Empowerer]

One of the very troubling phenomenon I've seen in just about every discussion about race on DU (and many discussions elsewhere) is the tendency among some whites - even liberals/progressives - to immediately dismiss the perspectives of blacks, as if our point of view is irrelevant, unreasonable or not worthy of consideration unless it comports with that of whites.

For example, in all-too-many discussions about race, racism and bias, whenever blacks express that we believe some liberal whites have demonstrated racial bias, our opinions are dismissed as "race baiting," "playing the race card," etc. Instead of considering our perspective and how we came to it and - God forbid - engaging in any self-reflection to determine whether even MAYBE our point is well taken, many not only reject our perspective out of hand, but accuse US of all manner of racial wrongs (including being responsible for exacerbating the race problem in America because WE keep bringing it up or aren't framing it in a way that makes whites feel comfortable).

I may be beating my head against the wall (not to mention, leaving myself open to the very kinds of attacks I'm referencing herein), but I once again urge everyone, rather than jump to the knee-jerk reaction that generally ensues, to instead step back for a minute and take the time to consider why so many blacks feel the way we do on these issues the next time this comes up. And then take a look at yourselves, your friends, your families, your colleagues, your neighbors and consider whether the issues that we're raising could have some merit.

And also please try to open your minds to the reality that a point of view that differs from that of most whites is not, by definition, wrong or an aberration. It might actually be the correct one - or at least just as valid - even if it is not consistent with yours.

Maybe then we can all discuss these difficult issues in a productive way and, Lord hope, actually learn something.

[Bobbie Jo]

1. Another observation...

I recall a similar OP/discussion with regard to homophobia and bigotry. Those concerns were taken seriously, yet the prospect of racism among liberals seems to be dismissed out of hand. I've even seen the notion referred to as "stupid."

What's up with the double standard?

[Empowerer]

2. You are right

I think part of the problem is the morphing of bias and prejudice into "racism" which is a very loaded term with troubling associations to some of the ugliest aspects of our society and history.

All too often, I see many whites react to even the gentlest observation that they might be biased or prejudiced with a visceral "I'M NOT A RACIST!" - and that's usually the end of any rational discussion.

When we think of racists, we think of Bull Connor, George Wallace, David Duke, etc. Most people - especially liberals - don't want to be associated with such. But many of them also are overly smug and self-satisfied with NOT being like them that they have come to believe that they have NO prejudices, which would only be possible if they weren't human beings. So they take great offense whenever anyone even suggests that they - or even other white liberals - may not be pristinely open-minded on all matters of race.

It's very unfortunate. And it cannot be overcome until people get over themselves and start to think more critically about their thoughts, attitudes and behaviors.

[Mr Deltoid]

15. What is stupid about it is...

...that it harms Obama. It brings zero votes. If anything, it costs Obama votes. It's a fools errand.

[OneGrassRoot]

19. It's there. It's simmering just beneath the surface....

I think ignoring the subject and dismissing it and not wanting to have intelligent dialogue about the state of race relations, as well as all forms of bigotry, in this country does everyone a disservice, including Obama.

I now understand that that is why many here don't want to "go there."

I honestly don't feel we have a choice. It is an issue, and I'm not talking about it only being an issue with regard to Obama, it's an issue IN OUR SOCIETY in so many ways. We must deal with it.

The discord and frustration due to more and more people struggling in myriad ways only heightens such problems. It's best to bring it out in the open. What is that saying? Sunlight is the best disinfectant.

:hi:

[nashville_brook]

3. can you give an example of the passive racism you're accusing progressives of?

it might help to understand where you're coming from.

[Empowerer]

5. I'm not accusing progressives of "passive racism"

I do believe that we all are prejudiced and sometimes hold people to different standards based upon stereotypes and biases.

An example is the double standard that some people, including liberals, apply to President Obama. That has been the source of much anger and argument here on DU and elsewhere, but in my view, it is a reality.

I do not for one moment believe that every (or even most) criticism of, disagreement with or disappointment in the President is based on his race. But some of it is. The fact that it's not ALL based on race does not mean that NONE of it is. Yet, every effort I've seen here and in the real world to identify and discuss it has been met with such anger and pushback - to the point of accusing those of us who bring it up of being racist.

This was apparent in many of the reactions to Melissa Harris-Perry's piece. Instead of stopping to think about why she feels the way she does and wrote what she wrote, she and those of us who agreed with her were attacked.

I agreed with her that many progressives (again, not all or even, in my view, most) tend to have higher expectations of the President because he IS black. He is expected not just to be a president, but to be a civil rights leader. They are disappointed in him because he has not personally taken on certain causes or made an overt effort to usher in a new era of racial harmony, expectations they never had or would ever have of a white president, regardless how liberal he/she is. It's as if they are giving him an extra job to do - solely because he's black. And when he doesn't do this, they get angry and frustrated with him - feeling that they were instrumental in getting him in office and he didn't live up to their expectations - expectations that were unfair in the first place. They treat him as if they did him a favor by letting him into the White House and because he's not behaving the way they want him to, they have every right to speak to and about him as if he is an ignorant, ungrateful child.

This is not a mean-spirited notion or done with any malice, hate or racism. But it is based on racial stereotypes and prejudices that they probably don't even realize they had. And it also includes some elements of entitlement and, yes, even superiority, as if they are the ones entitled to decide how he should approach race and if he doesn't do it the way they think he should, they have the right to criticize and punish him for it.

I am very familiar with this concept since I have personally had to deal with it repeatedly throughout my career. I believe that many, many African Americans have had similar experiences and we understand this very, very shaky tightrope the President is walking because of his "firstness." Yet, when we refrain from criticizing him or, God forbid, actually defend him, WE are accused of playing the race card, pulling our punches because he's black, lowering expectations, etc. In reality, we fully get where he's coming from and are frustrated that, rather than consider our perspective, we are treated as if we couldn't possibly know what we are talking about because our perspective is not the same as that of whites, so it must be wrong.

[nashville_brook]

16. can you provide an example of progressive crtitque of obama motivated by racism?

or that is a good example of the problem you're outling here? b/c leading on civil rights issues is a progressive expectation that we ho,d every progressive to...hence, the progressive label. no leading on civil rights is going to be a problem for most progressives regardless of race. that's the backbone of progressivism, to lead on issues of fairness regardless of your personal stake.

[Empowerer]

21. I haven't accused progressives of being motivated by racism in the critiques of the President

[Enrique]

4. I haven't noticed that

I've actually seen thoughtful discussions in response to what I considered to be flamebaititsh OP's.

I'm betting that you might possibly have in mind the Melissa Harris-Perry article. The thing I loved about that article is the responses. Look at the comment thread in The Nation for example. Overwhelmingly non-kneejerk.

[Empowerer]

6. You must have read different comments than I did

I thought they were breathtakingly kneejerk - many were mean, ignorant and hateful.

And throughout, those comments reflected exactly what I'm talking about. Rather than showing any consideration for her perspective, many simply just told her she was wrong. And they seemed to based that purely on the fact that THEY didn't agree with her, without any consideration of the possibility that, because of her experiences, she may see things differently and that view could be a very valid one.

[Supersedeas]

23. and then there's this

[Name removed]

7. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[The Backlash Cometh]

8. I couldn't have said it better.

[lunasun]

9. Thank you good post

This won't open up many old minds though - just put them on defense most likely IMO too late
and they always think they know it all anyway
and exactly what they would do even if they did not have the personal experience or what ever .
Not looking to 'actually learn' as you suggest just protect their opinions that have been formed now for years .

I try to concentrate on the youth=only hope
again IMO

[lumberjack_jeff]

10. Is this about the Perry article?

If so, dismissing it out of hand is perfectly reasonable for one simple reason: the liberals she is accusing of racism supported, donated and voted for Obama in 2008. Unless aformentioned liberals just recently noticed that he's black, that argument is wholly without merit.

What has changed is the perception of his (lack of) support for progressive causes, not his skin color.

[Empowerer]

11. You're evidencing exactly what i'm talking about - you dismiss her out of hand

because you believe the fact that someone contributed to a black man's campaign or supported his candidacy means that they couldn't possibly harbor any racial biases or prejudices. That may be a logical conclusion based upon your experiences, but I'm sure that most blacks - and many whites - based on OUR experiences have a very different point of view.

In my experience, many (not all, but many) whites, even the nicest, most well-meaning, most liberal, have racial biases to varying degrees. So do many blacks, Hispanics, Asians, etc. - because we're human. I have seen valued friends and colleagues, most of whom abhor racism and would be horrified at the thought of being racists, exhibit some of the most scary biases, biases they're not even aware of.

I've seen open-minded liberals ask my distinguished, highly respected father to bring their car around by "liberals" - because he was standing in front of a hotel in a tuxedo, so he must be the bellman (never mind that every other man standing there was also in a tux but they all were white including the actual bellman).

I have seen numerous black lawyers mistaken for the defendant by "liberal" colleagues.


And I have personally and on countless occasions been subjected to blatant double standard treatment by "liberals" who would deny to their dying breath that they would ever treat anyone differently because of race.

Etc., etc.

This does not make them bad people - it makes them humans with biases and prejudices.

The fact that a white person donated to Obama's campaign is not proof that they are incapable of holding him to a higher standard than they would apply to a white candidate under similar circumstances.

That is a false argument. I urge you to open your mind to that reality and to not dismiss out of hand Prof. Perry's argument based on a false assumption.

[lumberjack_jeff]

12. I'm opening my mind to what you're saying to this extent:

Many liberals projected expectations onto 2008 Obama based on race; "I can tell he's going to be a progressive, just look at his family!". That he doesn't comply with those expectations is a source of feelings of betrayal.

We all operate with stereotypes. It's human nature and to some degree a useful mechanism for coping with the world, but we don't all hold the same stereotype. The beggar on the corner? Every passer-by holds a stereotype about him, some negative, some positive.

Is Obama a victim of biases and stereotyping? I think it's easier to argue that - among liberals - he's a beneficiary of it.

He isn't being held to a higher standard than other presidents. He's being held to the standard of their unjustified expectations of him.

[Empowerer]

14. Interesting - I think we found something on which we can agree

That "he's being held to the standard of their unjustified expectations of him."

I agree with you about that. But on what were those unjustified expectations based?

[lumberjack_jeff]

17. The topic of this thread is racial stereotypes.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x6616476

I think that white liberals projected expectations on him based on their (our) racial stereotypes - in denial of his stated positions and voting record on progressive issues. We expected him to govern in the way we'd expect anyone from the Congressional Black Caucus to govern.

To the extent that white liberals are abandoning him, it's not because he's doing something other than what he said he'd do. His campaign was consciously and deliberately built around nebulous and subjective platitudes, "We are the change we've been waiting for"? That's why I should vote for you? Seriously?

The letdown is pretty predictable.

[Empowerer]

20. I think we're finding some common ground here

I agree with you that some liberals projected expectations on Barack Obama because of his race - expectations they would not have projected onto a white candidate. That is the very essence of a double standard.

This is something that many African Americans are very familiar with. In my own career, I have repeatedly been expected to do more than my white colleagues in order to be seen as just making the grade. For example, it was never enough for me to just do my day-to-day job. I've also been expected to mentor junior-level minorities, to be more visibly involved in recruiting, marketing, etc., to help educate colleagues about various diversity issues, etc. I sometimes refer to this as the extra part-time job that I must perform in order to be seen as performing my regular job satisfactorily. My white colleagues don't have this extra part-time job - they just need to do their regular job and then go home. I often envy those who don't have to shoulder this burden and think about how nice it would be to just have one job and be done with it.

But that's not a luxury that most minorities can afford. We are constantly on guard and constantly in teaching mode and constantly on probation.

That's what's happening to Barack Obama. While there are many reasons unrelated to race for people to be unhappy with how he is performing his "regular" job, much of the disappointment with him has nothing to do with how he's performing is day job. He is being criticized because some folks don't like how he's performing the extra work he's been given - extra work he's expected to do solely because he's black, extra work that no white president would be called upon to do or attacked for not doing.

That may not be racism in its purest form - it's not about whether liberals hate President Obama because he's black, etc. - but it is bias and it is based on race.

If they're feeling let down, that is not the fault of Barack Obama. That is because they allowed their own racial biases color how they approached a political process.

[fishwax]

24. to me, what you're saying actually sounds fairly similar to what MHP was saying

Particularly this part: "President Obama has experienced a swift and steep decline in support among white Americans—from 61 percent in 2009 to 33 percent now. I believe much of that decline can be attributed to their disappointment that choosing a black man for president did not prove to be salvific for them or the nation."

She was talking about white Americans in general, and you're talking about white liberals, but the sentiment seems fairly similar to me.

You also seem to be saying that the disappointment white liberals feel towards Obama is based on his failure to live up to their projected expectations of a black man. They're let down because he isn't governing "in the way we'd expect anyone from the Congressional Black Caucus to govern." That, also, would seem to support MHP's point. I'm not sure I agree with your assessment as a general rule--I'm sure you're right with respect to some, but I'll have to chew on it for a while.

Of course, all successful presidential campaigns (that I remember, anyway, with the likely exception of Bush in '88) are effective at inviting voters to project distorted expectations. Clinton won with a smaller percentage of the popular vote, but I think in '92 there was a similar sense of a possibly transformational president--we were coming out of 12 years of Reagan/Bush, we were on the crest of new era of media, and Clinton was the first Boomer to step up to the plate. Reagan and W had similar (well, not similar, really, but analogous) hopes and allegiance among their voters. I can't remember it happening to the same degree on either side in '88, but I was still pretty young, so maybe it just went over my head.

[frazzled]

13. Your post is very wise and measured

I've always maintained that one should listen very carefully to people when they say they feel that bias or a double standard or offense has occurred. There are reasons they feel that way, and before dismissing the claim, one must inquire deeply as to the reasons. The first reaction (among some liberals and conservatives alike, though not in the same circumstances at all times) is to simply dismiss as invalid what the person has claimed to feel. To deny their perceptions. And that's a very dangerous thing: to treat someone as if their feelings and perceptions simply have no objective measure of reality.

I've seen this so many times over the years on liberal sites: people who deny the sense of women that bias or offense has occurred, for example. And in that very act of denial--"your feeling of offense is not valid"--they are in a sense acting out the very bias/offense that was first perceived. They are saying that the aggrieved party is "less than ...," that their feelings are not valid or real.

This is paternalistic, and we can compare it to what (bad) parents do to children: "Stop crying," they say, "you have nothing to cry about." Rather than acknowledging the child has these feelings ("I know you are sad/mad, but ....). Perhaps this is a bad example, because I might be perceived as saying the aggrieved parties we are talking about are like children. I want to dispel that notion right away. We are talking about human beings, whether they are African Americans, women, Jews, Muslims, etc. To deny their perceptions and fail to understand where they are coming from is to treat them LIKE children.

I for one thought the article by Ms. Perry-Harris contained many indisputable truths, especially that a double-standard has been applied to this president's actions, especially in comparison with our last Democratic president. What part of that double-standard is due to racism is unclear to me, but I believe that a part of it most surely comes from a stereotype liberals have of a black politician or leader, who is supposed to act and believe a certain way, and so has some higher standard to achieve. I don't think most people think of this as racism, but it certainly is in a subtle way. Or perhaps, unbeknownst to themselves and unconsciously, they feel that the rancor from the right is so largely driven by racism that "our side" is losing ground, and that we must therefore find faults with this president so that the hostile reactions from the other side will abate. Who knows what unexamined perceptions we have.

Whatever it is, I believe that when someone expresses feelings of bias it is worth listening to and asking questions about. It's worth acknowledging the perception and then exploring before dismissing it out of hand.

[OneGrassRoot]

18. Very well said. I appreciate your post. K&R n/t

[Cherchez la Femme]

22. What would I be called for voting for someone based on their skin color?

That goes across the board.

Period.

[OneGrassRoot]

25. Off-the-wall question:

Is the discussion of racism and bigotry -- in a larger context or as it pertains to MHP's piece -- relegated to GD:P for some reason? I haven't seen it being discussed in GD.

[Prism]

26. This discussion won't be happening.

And here is a big part why you may not be getting the reaction here you might be hoping for. There are a few things you need to acknowledge that have heretofore been studiously swept under the rug. But without understanding these dynamics, you may be forever puzzled why you're not getting the reactions and discussions you're reaching for.

1. For nearly four years now, too many white liberals on this board who have lodged criticisms of the President have at one point or another been called a racist for having those complaints. So the impact of this MHP-inspired conversation is diluted. The power of a discussion of racial bias in liberalism has been weakened by almost frivolous racism charges employed over even the most mild criticisms of the President's policies. It's a classic crying wolf scenario, and I think, on DU at least, you'll find a lot of people who just aren't interested. They're tired of the "conversation" which largely consists of "You're racist. Why? Because! That's why!" And when pressed for details, it's all distilled down to "You criticized the President in a way I didn't like."

Been there, done that. Been called racist or racially snarked dozens of times for arguing in favor of LGBT equality. I still listen to personal experiences intently. Vaberella had a really excellent post on growing up African American. I loved that post. I want to see more posts like those.

But as far as "Why you're a racist for not treating President Obama in a manner I prefer." Forget it. That ship has sailed, sunk, been salvaged, and sunk again dozens of times here since the man declared his candidacy. I don't understand why rehash #4,692,168 is expected to be any better than rehash #4,692,167.

2. Speaking only for myself (but I know many others who feel this way) this whole discussion is insanely hard to swallow as sincere for me as an LGBT man. I'm sorry, I see far too many names in these discussions that called my rights a pony, defended Warren, defended McClurkin, defended the DOMA defenses of the DoJ, defended the administration's tone-deafness, called LGBTers a bunch of poutragers, etc. etc. etc.

Just yesterday, out of idle curiosity, I looked back and some '08/'09 posts, and there were all these names! Lambasting LGBTers in terms and verbiage that I have yet to see repeated in these recent MHP threads.

It's very, very, very difficult to take seriously lectures on privilege and bias from people who practically fell over one another to shove LGBTers faces in the mud as early and as often as possible.

The hypocrisy is suffocating, unacknowledged, and underlying why I'm not as receptive to the MHP stuff as I ordinarily might be. I suspect it's that way for a lot of people.

Treat others as you yourself wish to be treated.

Yeah, some people are getting a taste of that lesson right now. And yeah, as you say elsewhere, it's bitter, and some people aren't liking it one bit.

Discussions of this sincere and sensitive nature must consist of a give and take. I see a lot of taking here, and almost zero give. So I'm not sure exactly what everyone expected here.

[EffieBlack]

27. Could you please provide some specific examples of the instances you cite in #1?

I've been on this board for quite a while and often hear this accusation made - i.e. that liberals who criticize the President on this board are called racist for no reason other than that they criticized the President. However, I have seen few if any instances of this actually occurring.

Could you please cite a few actual occurrences of what you're describing?