Oh Jesse.
In 1988 I volunteered briefly for the Jackson campaign in Los Angeles. I have never been a devotee of Rev. Jackson. I can honestly say my support for him was because of his politics. At the time, he was as liberal as I thought I was. And full disclosure: I stopped showing up soon after I started out of a discomfort that was entirely my own problem. Most days I was the only white person in the office ( I was certainly NOT the only Caucasian who volunteered) Everyone was addressed as "brother" or "sister". This was ( and may still be) the customary and very warm salutation in activist Black culture - a culture burnished by so many battles, nearly all good fights on the right side of history. Because of my own issues I felt like a fraud being called "Brother John" I was a white kid trying to prove something - I just did not know what. Still, of all the campaigns I've involved myself with Jackson's felt the most like family.
Many years later Rev. Jackson gave a sermon at my church. It is in the context of a sermon that he has few rivals in modern American life. The connections between the African experience in America and the Moses and Jesus narratives are sublime when infused with the imagery and cadences someone like Jackson can evoke with ease.
So what is one to make of "I'd like to cut Obama's nuts off"? Is there anything to make of it?
I actually find it silly AND reassuring. Silly because it is so blatantly Freudian. He did not say he wanted to slap him or give him a talking to he would remember. Jackson wants to remove his manhood. This is alpha dog preening - and embarrassing. There is no doubt that Obama stands on the shoulders of Jackson - and in 1988, Jackson stood on the shoulders of a thousand other great Black leaders.
If nothing else - let us take a moment to remember the first African-American major party candidate for President. A person who could not have "nuts" removed - but had more huevos than Obama or Jackson combined - Shirley Chislom. Ms. Chislom blazed the trail Jackson and Obama walk.
There has been way too much self congratulation about Obama's mixed race in this campaign. I have gotten furious about the misuse of the word "racist" by the Obama fanatics. Words do matter. Racism is real. Neutering the word to suit a fad - to win an election - is insulting and degrading. It's been bandied about for the sport of it by everyone from Olbermann to know nothing college kids whose life experience consists of history 101 class and drum circles. Being white and male I've not been on the rifle butt end of racism. But for God sake, I have a decent regard for our painful history and the victims of it. So when entire populations of places like West Virgina are branded racist for voting for Clinton it is, in fact, an act of racism. It is the brainless yelping of rich white liberals who think they are good people because they are polite to the help.
Now, I find Jackson's remarks reassuring because, regardless of how AA's vote, it is nice to see what we already knew. African -Americans are not a monolith. Black leaders are engaging this campaign on many levels. Of course, this is true. I never thought it wasn't. But to listen to the MSM one would think that 12% of the population hadn't thought a bit about Obama. He's black, They are black. End of discussion. This narrative is a form of racism. I'm glad Jackson blew a cog. It's refreshing. And, in the end, harmless.
Obama is still not qualified to be President - and that has nothing to do with his race. Though his lack of qualifications does have a bit to do with his metaphorical "nuts".
Many years later Rev. Jackson gave a sermon at my church. It is in the context of a sermon that he has few rivals in modern American life. The connections between the African experience in America and the Moses and Jesus narratives are sublime when infused with the imagery and cadences someone like Jackson can evoke with ease.
So what is one to make of "I'd like to cut Obama's nuts off"? Is there anything to make of it?
I actually find it silly AND reassuring. Silly because it is so blatantly Freudian. He did not say he wanted to slap him or give him a talking to he would remember. Jackson wants to remove his manhood. This is alpha dog preening - and embarrassing. There is no doubt that Obama stands on the shoulders of Jackson - and in 1988, Jackson stood on the shoulders of a thousand other great Black leaders.
If nothing else - let us take a moment to remember the first African-American major party candidate for President. A person who could not have "nuts" removed - but had more huevos than Obama or Jackson combined - Shirley Chislom. Ms. Chislom blazed the trail Jackson and Obama walk.
There has been way too much self congratulation about Obama's mixed race in this campaign. I have gotten furious about the misuse of the word "racist" by the Obama fanatics. Words do matter. Racism is real. Neutering the word to suit a fad - to win an election - is insulting and degrading. It's been bandied about for the sport of it by everyone from Olbermann to know nothing college kids whose life experience consists of history 101 class and drum circles. Being white and male I've not been on the rifle butt end of racism. But for God sake, I have a decent regard for our painful history and the victims of it. So when entire populations of places like West Virgina are branded racist for voting for Clinton it is, in fact, an act of racism. It is the brainless yelping of rich white liberals who think they are good people because they are polite to the help.
Now, I find Jackson's remarks reassuring because, regardless of how AA's vote, it is nice to see what we already knew. African -Americans are not a monolith. Black leaders are engaging this campaign on many levels. Of course, this is true. I never thought it wasn't. But to listen to the MSM one would think that 12% of the population hadn't thought a bit about Obama. He's black, They are black. End of discussion. This narrative is a form of racism. I'm glad Jackson blew a cog. It's refreshing. And, in the end, harmless.
Obama is still not qualified to be President - and that has nothing to do with his race. Though his lack of qualifications does have a bit to do with his metaphorical "nuts".
posted by J -SOM at
Wednesday, July 09, 2008
PERMALINK
<< Home