Rev. Jeremiah Wright & Sen. Barack Obama: The Failure of “Colorblindness” and the Ignored Reality of White Social Power in the US

Reverend Dr. Jeremiah Wright has my admiration and respect. Unfortunately, citizens had to witness the media gauntlet formed in the last week of April 2008 and its fallout.

What the media circus showed is that the United States is still mired in race yet does not want anyone to point out that fact or the United States’ failed foreign policy adventures. Moreover, Senator Barack Obama unjustly condemned Rev. Wright’s statements as “not only divisive and destructive, but I believe that they end up giving comfort to those who prey on hate.”

The Black Agenda Report’s Executive Editor Glen Ford has written an excellent column analyzing the collapse of Sen. Obama’s color neutral world view.

The world views of Rev. Jeremiah Wright and Sen. Barack Obama were incompatible from the start, just as the mythical American Manifest Destiny world view is directly at odds with the facts as perceived by Blacks in the United States. Wright finally forced Obama to choose sides in the conflict of racial/historical visions, and in doing so, performed a service on behalf of clarity. Obama lashed out in a startlingly personal manner, calling Wright a “caricature” of himself and linking the minister to forces that give “comfort to those who prey on hate.” Rev. Wright exposed the flimsy tissues of so-called “race neutrality” in a nation founded on racial oppression.

This whole event between Rev. Wright and Sen. Obama leaves unanswered the question of what happens to current issues of concern of the Black community (which Sen. Obama essentially downplays as relics of older Black people in his heralded speech on race). I assert that the issues Rev. Wright speaks about, still are relevant (and essentially unaddressed) today.

Some of these issues I have attempted to address on this blog in tracking Ward Connerly’s ballot initiative in four states (click on the affirmative action tag in the right column for my previous posts on this subject).

One is the facile (and untrue) implication that Blacks and Whites have equal social power in the United States. Sen. Obama alludes to this view in his speech on race.

Just as black anger often proved counterproductive, so have these white resentments distracted attention from the real culprits of the middle class squeeze - a corporate culture rife with inside dealing, questionable accounting practices, and short-term greed; a Washington dominated by lobbyists and special interests; economic policies that favor the few over the many. And yet, to wish away the resentments of white Americans, to label them as misguided or even racist, without recognizing they are grounded in legitimate concerns - this too widens the racial divide, and blocks the path to understanding.

The fact is that the White population has the sole social power in the United States. First, the travails of White Americans were not caused by Black people but rather the economic policy of the United States, which happens to be dominated by White people. In addition, Black people have similar problems on top of institutional anti-Black discrimination.

Second, Sen. Obama fails to acknowledge that Whites have a much bigger population size than Blacks in the United States. The White side alone (75.1 % of the United States population) controls governmental power. The 2000 Census makes this clear.

United States (population: 281,421,906 (2000 Census)

Race	Percentage of population	Number
White	75.1%	211,460,626
Black	12.3	34,658,190
Native American	0.9	2,475,956
Asian	3.6	10,242,998

Thus, it is not fair simply to compare the groups strictly as equals, as Sen. Obama did in his April 2008 speech.

ACRI Ballot Initiative (Oklahoma): Oklahoma Civil Rights Initiative Group Withdraws Initiative Proposal

The Tulsa World reported that the Oklahoma Civil Rights Initiative (OkCRI) decided to withdraw its anti-affirmative action initiative proposal. Voters who oppose OkCRI’s initiative proposal filed a challenge in the Oklahoma Supreme Court. The reason for the withdrawal: OkCRI determined that it had not collected enough signatures to get on the November ballot.

‘Based o[n] the number of signatures delivered to the Secretary of State, the validity rate for the signatures would need to be in excess of 90 percent, which is a statistical impossibility given historical validity rates and the limited time to verify the signatures,” the motion says.

The backers “do not want to waste this Court’s efforts nor taxpayer money on pursuing State Question 737 when (the backers) are reasonably certain that it will fail to garner the requisite number of signatures.’

OkCRI’s parent organization, the American Civil Rights Institute (ACRI) has proposed a similiar initiative proposal in Colorado, Arizona, Nebraska and Missouri (place the state name in the search box in the left column for my other posts on this issue).

ACRI Ballot Initiative (Arizona): Student Columnist Defends Initiative Proposal

A student opinion columnist for the Arizona Daily Wildcat favors the American Civil Rights Institute’s (ACRI) initiative proposal to end affirmative action in Arizona (column titled “Racism by Any Other Name“). [Note: For my previous posts on Arizona's anti-affirmative action initiative proposal, search on Arizona in the search box on the left column.]

The writer writes his column as if social minorities in the United States are in control of social institutions in Arizona. If this were the case, his column would be persuasive.

Reality, though, vehemently contradicts the writer’s assertions. Contrary to the opinion of student writer, power is not measured by wealth alone. The social group that has the most people possesses the most power. As a result, there is no question that Whites have the most power in Arizona and the United States. Whites are, by far, the largest racial group.

Arizona (population: 5,130,632 (2000 Census) [NOTE: high number of “some other race”])

Race	Percentage of population	Number
White	75.5%	3,873,611
Black	3.1	158,873
Native American	5.0	255,879
Asian	1.8	92,236

 

United States (population: 281,421,906 (2000 Census)

Race	Percentage of population	Number
White	75.1%	211,460,626
Black	12.3	34,658,190
Native American	0.9	2,475,956
Asian	3.6	10,242,998

 

Thus, neither situation in Zimbabwe nor in Malaysia is equivalent to the United States’ obligation to correct the damage done by its slavery institution. For more information on Zimbabwe, see an article by Dr. Chika A. Onyeani in The Black Commentator.

For Malaysia, see a Reuters article. The purpose of affirmative action in Malaysia is to help the impoverished majority population, the opposite of the goal of the United States, which is to help those who are not part of the powerful majority.

While Bumiputera [ethnic Malays and indigenous people] wealth went from just over 2 percent in 1970 to about 19 percent in 2004, Malays, who make up more than half of the population of 26 million, are still the poorest racial group — well behind the minority ethnic Chinese, who hold about 40 percent of the nation’s wealth.

ACRI’s anti-affirmative action proposal is not needed in Arizona. The small non-White population needs assurances that their ability to live will be respected.

The Futility of “Colorblindness” (Part 5): Clarence Thomas & His Troublesome Role Model John Marshall Harlan

I have written my critique of John Marshall Harlan’s dissent in Plessy v Ferguson before. Harlan’s view of “colorblindness” is indifference not racial justice. Thus, it is unfortunate, yet predictable, that Clarence Thomas, an Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court, would glorify Harlan in an article in the Wall Street Journal.

I will reiterate my view.

Justice Harlan’s Dissent in Plessy v. Ferguson

Justice John Marshall Harlan, in Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U.S. 537 (1896), stated that Whites believed in White supremacy, but the Constitution prohibited the law from enforcing it and, most significantly, from protecting Blacks from the effects of White supremacy doctrines.

The white race deems itself to be the dominant race in this country. And so it is, in prestige, in achievements, in education, in wealth and in power. So, I doubt not, it will continue to be for all time, if it remains true to its great heritage and holds fast to the principles of constitutional liberty. But in view of the Constitution, in the eye of the law, there is in this country no superior, dominant, ruling class of citizens.

Harlan’s dissent is, at best, racially indifferent to the plight of Blacks, certainly not an opinion to admire in the slightest.

The reason why I had to repeat this argument is that in the Wall Street Journal, Thomas stated that he views the flawed Harlan as a role model. However, Thomas edits out a troublesome sentence in order to try to convince the public to agree with him (emphasis mine).

It is the Plessy dissent of Justice John Marshall Harlan to which Mr. Thomas points for an example of a Justice putting his personal predilections aside to keep faith with the Constitution. Harlan was a Kentucky aristocrat and former slaveowner, although he was also a Unionist who fought for the North during the Civil War. A man of his time, he believed in white superiority, if not supremacy, and wrote in Plessy that the “white race” would continue to be dominant in the United States “in prestige, in achievements, in education, in wealth and in power [. . .] for all time, if it remains true to its great heritage and holds fast to the principles of constitutional liberty.”

 

“But,” Harlan continued, “in view of the Constitution, in the eye of the law, there is in this country no superior, dominant, ruling class of citizens. There is no caste here. Our Constitution is color-blind, and neither knows nor tolerates classes among its citizens.”

 

That, for Mr. Thomas, is the “great ‘But,’” where Harlan’s intellectual honesty trumped his personal prejudice, causing Mr. Thomas to describe Harlan as his favorite justice and even a role model. For both of them, justice is truly blind to everything but the law.

The way Thomas explains Harlan’s statement of white supremacy is that Whites will remain dominant as long as they follow the Constitution and the idealized view of “colorblindness” (that all people would be treated fairly regardless of their skin color). This is the view Thomas expresses in the interview with the Wall Street Journal.

But the part of Harlan’s dissent edited out by ellipses (”So, I doubt not, it will continue to be”) changes the meaning of the sentence and directly contradicts Thomas’s statement. In reality, Harlan did not separate his personal prejudice from the opinion. With the edited statement added, Harlan was actually observing that White supremacy would never go away and the Supreme Court would not challenge it (provided the society did not implicate the exact words of the Constitution).

Moreover, ideal “colorblindness” is impossible in the United States where one race (White) is the clear majority and controls all of the power in society.

The views of Mr. Harlan or Mr. Thomas are definitely not opinions to be admired in the slightest.

ACRI Ballot Initiative: Direct Democracy Fails When Citizens Feel They Are Ignored By Initiative Process

Professor Marci Hamilton wrote on FindLaw, about her observations of the discontent that members of the Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action, Integration & Immigrant Rights And Fight for Equality By Any Means Necessary (BAMN) had for Ward Connerly and his ballot initiatives against affirmative action (click on the ward connerly category in the right column for my previous posts on this subject).

Among Professor Hamilton’s comments, she observed that the fact that affirmative action was forced on the population not in the social majority, the ballot initiative process worsened tensions rather than decreased them.

This was the best example I have witnessed to date of the infirmities of direct democracy. The controversy over affirmative action is obviously a social problem that is hyper-charged with emotion and that plays into deeply-held beliefs and values, and the lawmaking process that ended over one and a half years ago had not succeeded in resolving public tensions. To the contrary, it had only reinforced those disagreements and resentments. The result was a frustrated group of citizens — calling itself By Any Means Necessary in no small part because its members felt disenfranchised by the routine means by which the process operated.

I agree with Professor Hamilton. The ballot initiative process cannot work for social policies like affirmative action where the people outside the social majority do not have the power to prevent the passage of an initiative which is not in the social minority’s interest. I wrote the following in a previous post.

In general, ballot initiatives should be limited to non-controversial items with broad general applicability, for example, approving library bonds, and similar items. Issues that potentially deprive vulnerable citizens of human rights must go to the state legislature.

 

The American Civil Rights Institute (ACRI) initiative campaign in several states is unfair to people who are not members of the dominant social group (see my related posts here). The actions sought in ACRI’s ballot initiative has a profound negative impact on a vulnerable portion of the total population.

ACRI Ballot Initiative: Daily Nebraskan Editorial Opposes ACRI’s Ballot Campaign

In an editorial, the Daily Nebraskan, a student newspaper for the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, voiced opposition to the American Civil Rights Institute’s (ACRI) ballot initiative to ban affirmative action in Nebraska.

The Daily Nebraksan editorial is correct. ACRI’s ballot initiative is not needed in Nebraska because there are few non White persons in the state.

Here is the student population of the University of Nebraska-Lincoln.

University of Nebraska-Lincoln (student population: 17,301 (source: www.princetonreview.com))

Race	Percentage of population	Number
White	85%	14,706
Black	2.0	346
Native American	1.0	519
Asian	3.0	173

Below are the results of the 2000 Census for Nebraska (also covered in a previous post.)

Race	Percentage of population	Number
White	89.6%	1,533,261
African-American/Black	4.0	68,541
Asian	0.9	14,896
Native American	1.3	21,931

ACRI Ballot Initiative (Arizona): Ballot Initiative Proposal Filed with Arizona’s Secretary of State

The Arizona Republic reported that the American Civil Rights Institute (ACRI) has proposed a ballot initiative in Arizona. The language (in The Arizona Republic’s article (right column)) is the same as in the initiative proposals in other states (for more information, click on the affirmative action category in the right column).

The Arizona Secretary of State has the technical information about ACRI’s ballot initiative proposal (the petition serial number is C-17-2008).

In the article, Ward Connerly is optimistic about the initiative’s success.

Without sounding arrogant or pompous, I think it will pass decisively,” said Connerly, who is African-American.

Connerly is optimistic because Arizona has a population that is overwhelmingly White, thus the likelihood of approval is high.

Arizona (population: 5,130,632 (2000 Census) [NOTE: high number of "some other race"])

Race	Percentage of population	Number
White	75.5%	3,873,611
Black	3.1	158,873
Native American	5.0	255,879
Asian	1.8	92,236

Related Post Script

I do not believe it is accurate to consider Ward Connerly as a Black person. In an article, Connerly has described himself as 25% Black.

Connerly has stated he is one-quarter Black, three-eighths Irish, one-quarter French and one-eighth Choctaw.

The inference from his statement is that he is primarily White and Native American.

Update (11/8/2007): In response to a blogger’s post and comment I received, the description of Mr. Connerly is far from a “blood quantum” or “purity test.” It is a summation of how Mr. Connerly described himself in a 1997 New York Times article (click here for the article).

Again, Mr. Connerly describes his background as being minimally Black (1/4) as compared to the rest of the descriptors in his own statement: Irish and French (White) (4/ and Choctaw (1/4).

Here is another interesting quote in the same article (emphasis mine):

Mr. Connerly considers himself black ”because blackness is an experience and others have thrust that experience upon me.” He, on the other hand, claims to be not only blind to pigment but a celebrator of the continuous blending in the melting pot. ”In 10 to 15 years, intermarriage will make this entire debate a moot one, anyhow, and we’ll wonder why we didn’t see it coming,” he said.

Mr. Connerly states that the descriptor Black is forced on him, but he does not view himself like that. This is a point that even the blogger concedes:

[...]Ward’s multi-racial status (and he’ll call himself that before he calls himself black, but that’s not the point [...]

In fact, it is the point. Thus, to be fair to Mr. Connerly, given his self-description, it may not be accurate to call him Black as that description ignores the rest (75%) of his heritage (as he defines it).

ACRI Ballot Initiative: Chronicle of Higher Education Article

The Chronicle of Higher Education has published an article which confirms what I have written in describing the ballot initiative. Namely, that given the demographics (overwhelmingly White) of the states selected for initiative proposals, the initiative proposals are likely to pass. I do not think that the undocumented persons issue is relevant to ACRI’s proposal.

In the article, there is a quote from Senator Ernie Chambers of Nebraska about Ward Connerly:

In Nebraska, State Sen. Ernie Chambers, who is black and represents parts of northern Omaha, last week denounced Mr. Connerly as ‘a tool of Jim Crowism’ and expressed confidence that Nebraskans ‘will see through his shell game.’

Please click the affirmative action tag under category in the right column for my posts on ACRI’s ballot initiative proposal.

ACRI Ballot Initiative (Missouri): Ward Connerly’s Socioeconomic Affirmative Action Will Fail; Institutional Racism Must Be Alleviated First

On October 18, Ward Connerly gave public lectures in Missouri, where a branch of his American Civil Rights Institute (ACRI) is proposing an initiative to ban affirmative action in public education, public contracting, and public employment. [Note: Please check under the affirmative action category in the right column for my posts about ACRI's ballot initiative proposal in Missouri.]

During an interview with the Associated Press, Connerly stated that he was in favor of socioeconomic affirmative action.

In an interview with The Associated Press, Connerly, who is black, called for an end to “race-based affirmative action” in favor of what he called “socio-economic affirmative action.”

‘We’re going through a transition in our country,’ he said. ‘We need to help those who need it rather than presuming that all black people or all minorities are in need of some special treatment.’

This belief in socioeconomic affirmative action is a good idea but it is not a viable substitute for the current affirmative action with a racial component. Why is this the case? First, the U.S. society is overwhelmingly White (see 2000 Census table below) and thus would be a majority of the poor persons which would be the target of socioeconomic affirmative action.

United States (population: 281,421,906 (2000 Census)

Race	Percentage of population	Number
White	75.1%	211,460,626
Black	12.3	34,658,190
Native American	0.9	2,475,956
Asian	3.6	10,242,998

An article from the American Psychological Association confirms my view.

The amorphous nature of affirmative action is in itself a subtle denial of society’s history of various kinds of oppression. So, too, are the recent efforts to substitute other sociodemographic attributes for race and culture in affirmative action policies. Socioeconomic class does not carry the same historical baggage as race and culture. It was racial classification, not socioeconomic status, that prevented Thurgood Marshall’s admission to the University of Maryland’s law school. Substituting socioeconomic class for race or culture, for example, ignores society’s history of differential oppression of people of color outside the cultural majority.

Second, race and gender based affirmative action and socioeconomic affirmative action are not mutually exclusive. Certainly programs to assist poor (and increasingly middle class) people can be created right now, without excluding race and gender based affirmative action. Indeed, such a move would be welcome.

Moreover, socioeconomic affirmative action in other contexts have not worked. For example, in the high school context, socioeconomic plans implemented to develop student bodies composed of all races have generally failed.

The wide ethnic diversity in San Francisco’s schools, which are about one-third Chinese, also introduces calculations among parents that make it easier to get income diversity without racial or ethnic diversity.

At Willie L. Brown Jr. College Preparatory Academy, a fourth- through sixth-grade school in the predominantly black neighborhood of Bayview, 75 percent of the students are black. Most are poor.

Tareyton D. Russ, the principal, said students from other neighborhoods did not seek to go there so the diversity index did not even apply. “Poor Chinese kids don’t want to go to school with poor black kids,” Mr. Russ said flatly.

Conversely, one white parent interviewed as she dropped her child off at summer school said some white parents avoided schools with a heavy Chinese concentration, like Lincoln, believing they would be too high-pressure for their children. She declined to be quoted by name.

It is interesting that ACRI is proposing its initiative in Missouri. In 1992, an ABC television network program, Primetime Live, used a hidden camera to record the treatment of two testers, one White male and one Black male in St. Louis, Missouri [Note: The program was titled, "True Colors."]. Uniformly, the Black tester received the worst treatment. It did not appear so at the time he experienced it. All the people who discriminated against the Black tester were, for the most part, pleasant. Comparison of the videos from each tester, interacting with various social institutions, clearly revealed the discrimination against the Black tester.

Unfortunately, I do not believe that 2007 is significantly better for Blacks in U.S. society. As a result, ACRI’s ballot initiative proposal is extremely premature.

“It takes more than 30 or 40 years to remedy, or overcome, centuries of direct and indirect forms of discrimination,” said Shirley Wilcher, executive director of the American Association for Affirmative Action and a former Labor Department official under President Clinton.

Related Post Script

I do not believe it is accurate to consider Ward Connerly as a Black person. In an article, Connerly has described himself as 25% Black.

Connerly has stated he is one-quarter Black, three-eighths Irish, one-quarter French and one-eighth Choctaw.

The inference from his statement is that he is primarily White and Native American.

On the other hand, Senator Barack Obama, of mixed race heritage, considers himself to be Black.

Obama, who will speak in San Francisco tonight at a fundraiser for Sen. Barbara Boxer, identifies as black. [...]

He was president of the Harvard Law Review. He is the son of a Kenyan immigrant, his father, and a white Kansas native, his mother. [...]

Seattle School District Case: The Plurality’s Unrealistic View of Race in the U.S.

In Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. 1, the plurality opinion (authored and signed by Chief Justice John Roberts, and signed by Justices Alito, Scalia and Thomas) concluded, “The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.”

I am not as confident as the plurality opinion concerning the issue of race (particularly the Black-White paradigm) in the United States. Race has been, is, and will continue to be an issue simply as a result of demographic reality and the unresolved history concerning the Black people placed into slavery and their descendants suffering the persistent legacy of the slavery institution.

United States (population: 281,421,906 (2000 Census)

Race	Percentage of population	Number
White	75.1%	211,460,626
Black	12.3	34,658,190
Native American	0.9	2,475,956
Asian	3.6	10,242,998

Chief Justice Roberts’s words ring hollow once one studies how pervasive the practice of discrimination is in the U.S. society (while progress has been made, there is much work left to be done). For example, in Seattle, the location of the Supreme Court case, was once a segregated city, with the widespread use of racial restrictive covenants in real estate deeds, among other practices.

The University of Washington’s Seattle Civil Rights & Labor History Project has extensive information on the history of segregated Seattle here.