Trump prevented the crisis of post-racist intellectuals (op-ed)
Last week began with Martin Luther King Jr.’s holiday and ended with the inauguration of President Donald Trump. It was also the end of the first black presidency. This historic first should end with a second look at the “post-racial” debate the election of Barack Obama initiated.
As soon as the first black president entered the White House in 2008 many wondered if America reached the “post-racial” era Martin Luther King Jr. envisioned in his famous “Dream” speech.
Whites were proud of themselves. They voted for a black man for president.
Encourage by this racial progress whites asked if America was finally “post-racial” and black intellectuals immediately rejected the term. They accused whites of implying that race was no longer a problem and retaliated by saying America can’t be “post-racial” until it’s “post-racist”.
The distinction of terms depended on the intellectual.
One popular black intellectual said, “A post-racial society may not be an idea to which we should aspire. Post-racist. Yes! To get beyond the lethal indignities that are associated with ethnic bigotry … But not beyond racial identity, not to cleanse ourselves in the healing pools of whiteness.”
Another intellectual wrote, “The term “post-racial” implies that we are somehow “beyond race”. Of course, that’s not true. That doesn’t mean that America hasn’t changed. Overall, America is a much more humane place … Some people are still “classically racist” in that they actually do sit around and hate others, but this, for the most part, has to be done underground. I suggest the term post-racist because while race still exist, we don’t build racism into our laws and culture. We definitely past a time where a law can simply say “blacks can’t do X” but race is still around and it’s all over the place.”
Now, for non-intellectuals the term “post-racial” was rooted in Martin Luther King Jr.’s famous statement about judging individuals by the content of their character and not skin color. King forecasted a generation so far removed from America’s racial caste system that its hierarchy would have evaporated, making that generation free from the country’s historical obsession with race.
But black intellectuals equated the term “post-racial” with surrendering black identity or racial transcendence. Now that seemed to be over-intellectualizing to the point of paranoia.
But what did they fear?
It’s simple, before the 1964 Civil Rights Act was passed race-based policies discriminated against blacks and afterwards race became a beneficial factor in policies that were favorable. In 1965 President Lyndon Johnson gave a speech at Howard University. President Johnson told the students freedom was not enough and his aim was to achieve equality as a result through the Great Society programs.
So when whites used the term “post racial” black intellectuals assumed it was code language against policies that made race a permanent factor to achieve a desired result.
They should have stopped while they were ahead.
But in an overzealous attempt to label the term “post-racial” as the new racism they invented the phrase “post-racist” and admitted America no longer builds racism into its laws and culture and defined “classically racist” like an individual hate-crime. This is completely divorced from the demonstrators on the street protesting institutional racism, systemic racism, and structural racism.
This should have created a split between the demonstrators and the intellectual community due to a credibility crisis.
But in an interview before his farewell address, President Obama dismissed the expectations of a “post-racial” society as unrealistic. (Before that, he said racism was in the DNA of America.) Combine those comments with the portrayal of Donald Trump as the Republican version of Woodrow Wilson and the belief that America is more racially divided now than in the past has actually robbed the “post-racist” intellectuals of the loss of credibility they earned.
First published in the New Pittsburgh Courier 1/25/17
As soon as the first black president entered the White House in 2008 many wondered if America reached the “post-racial” era Martin Luther King Jr. envisioned in his famous “Dream” speech.
Whites were proud of themselves. They voted for a black man for president.
Encourage by this racial progress whites asked if America was finally “post-racial” and black intellectuals immediately rejected the term. They accused whites of implying that race was no longer a problem and retaliated by saying America can’t be “post-racial” until it’s “post-racist”.
The distinction of terms depended on the intellectual.
One popular black intellectual said, “A post-racial society may not be an idea to which we should aspire. Post-racist. Yes! To get beyond the lethal indignities that are associated with ethnic bigotry … But not beyond racial identity, not to cleanse ourselves in the healing pools of whiteness.”
Another intellectual wrote, “The term “post-racial” implies that we are somehow “beyond race”. Of course, that’s not true. That doesn’t mean that America hasn’t changed. Overall, America is a much more humane place … Some people are still “classically racist” in that they actually do sit around and hate others, but this, for the most part, has to be done underground. I suggest the term post-racist because while race still exist, we don’t build racism into our laws and culture. We definitely past a time where a law can simply say “blacks can’t do X” but race is still around and it’s all over the place.”
Now, for non-intellectuals the term “post-racial” was rooted in Martin Luther King Jr.’s famous statement about judging individuals by the content of their character and not skin color. King forecasted a generation so far removed from America’s racial caste system that its hierarchy would have evaporated, making that generation free from the country’s historical obsession with race.
But black intellectuals equated the term “post-racial” with surrendering black identity or racial transcendence. Now that seemed to be over-intellectualizing to the point of paranoia.
But what did they fear?
It’s simple, before the 1964 Civil Rights Act was passed race-based policies discriminated against blacks and afterwards race became a beneficial factor in policies that were favorable. In 1965 President Lyndon Johnson gave a speech at Howard University. President Johnson told the students freedom was not enough and his aim was to achieve equality as a result through the Great Society programs.
So when whites used the term “post racial” black intellectuals assumed it was code language against policies that made race a permanent factor to achieve a desired result.
They should have stopped while they were ahead.
But in an overzealous attempt to label the term “post-racial” as the new racism they invented the phrase “post-racist” and admitted America no longer builds racism into its laws and culture and defined “classically racist” like an individual hate-crime. This is completely divorced from the demonstrators on the street protesting institutional racism, systemic racism, and structural racism.
This should have created a split between the demonstrators and the intellectual community due to a credibility crisis.
But in an interview before his farewell address, President Obama dismissed the expectations of a “post-racial” society as unrealistic. (Before that, he said racism was in the DNA of America.) Combine those comments with the portrayal of Donald Trump as the Republican version of Woodrow Wilson and the belief that America is more racially divided now than in the past has actually robbed the “post-racist” intellectuals of the loss of credibility they earned.
First published in the New Pittsburgh Courier 1/25/17
Comments
Post a Comment