::::::::
Here's my short take on the current debate between the president's black detractors and supporters.
The split black verdict on President Obama's record somewhat follows the splits in black thinking that began to emerge during the 2008 election campaign particularly the president's alienation from his long time pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright (who doubles as a Chicago neighbor and favorite of the super-black nationalist/patriot, Minister Louis Farrakhan). Wright's perspective was quickly denounced by black assimilationist leaders who wanted to see a black man, any black man (not black woman) get the presidential job.
I can see and appreciate positives on both sides of the debate. My problem with both sides is that they place too much emphasis on the power of the office of the presidency as it relates to black options. Somehow they forget that, on top of the race question, stands a myriad of other obstacles to presidential power that come with federalism, constitutionalism, regionalism, party spirit, campaigh funding and the designed splits the founders put in the US experiment with democracy. But I won't belabor the non-racial stuff here.
Both sides of the argument spring from a black neo-liberal ideology that sees itself as successor to the black power and civil rights movements of a generation ago. Rev. Wright's side of the argument forwards ideas that were foundational for Black Christian Liberation Theology (BCLT) movement and the conclusion of its key founders such as Dr. James H. Cone of Union Theological Seminary in NYC. It also incorporates some of the left-wing to neo-Marxist oriented thinking of the black new-left of the 1960's (i.e. Black Panther Party, Black Liberation Army). For the most part though, BCLT posits a kind of cultural, but definitely not black political nationalism that attempts to parlay the need to maintain a strong black identity, with the confusing recommendation of integrating into the white dominated mainstream in order to secure black success.
Confusing? The post-civil rights era black dilemma has been to try and stay black while integrating into white society and its social-cultural control mechanisms powered by white racial superiority myths and hegemony.
That the cultural nationalists never seem to rise to the level of political nationalism irks me for I think a separate or autonomous state of political existence is most likely the way out of our common delimma of having to forever argue about integrating into a set of political and legal arrangements that keeps alienating us most of the time. Logically, a black president should be elected by black people to head up a black state with a black cultural and educational apparatus that compliments black consciousness.
Cornel West views closely parallel the BCLT outlook with the exception that West is a weak type "democratic socialist" (he is not a communist or a doctrinaire Marxist, Maoist or such although the Communist Party USA has endorsed Obama's 2012 campaign and is in full support of it)) who is ultimately dead set against advanced capitalism and US/Western imperialism's constant wars of aggression to maintain capitalist markets abroad. Tavis Smiley is less concerned with the theological part of BCLT and is more interested in black identity politics and making a name for himself while remaining fairly quiet about advancing the banner of socialism.
Of course, the president cannot come off as being a black cultural nationalist, or a socialist or anti-imperialist; he's already being labeled as such by Tea Party racists. His pragmatic standpoint must be as president of the whole body of people, even though the people are still defined as more "white people" (the majority of white middle and working class), "rich people" (white capitalists), powerful people (again those with money and money's influence on presidential politics). Black people en mass do not snugly fit those three categories of what it means to be "the people".
The Rev. Al Sharpton, Steve Harvey, most members of the Congressional Black Caucus, Ryan Mack below and most black voters are all in support of the president. The idea of the president being a pioneer (the suffering pioneer who must undergo the harsh ordeals of vicious racism to clear a path for later victories) and a first in his office is among the paramount themes played by black neo-liberal presidential supporters and regular black voters. So too is the idea of pragmatism regarding which policies and programs that benefit black folks that the president has taken the lead on. Most of those policies and programs with the mark of presidential leadership have not had the adjective "black" or "African American" assigned to them. They can't. Why not should be plain to see by all.
My own view is that of those who see this "first black president" as a pragmatic pioneer with the ability to only do so much (not much really) to advance the concrete needs of black people as black people. I agree with the communists who note that in this period of intense right-wing hate mongering, union busting, and attacks on the overall interests of working and poor people, that President Obama is our best bet to hold back the barking dogs in the Tea Party, the lily-white Ron Paul libertarians and others who are throw-backs to eras of unfettered white dominance over the body politic wherein white people enjoyed unparalleled privileges and benefits at the expense of racial minorities.
I can't get too excited about what he's not doing for black people for I was aware of his limitations coming into office. He had to surround himself with, advisors, sponsors and funding angels (many of the Jewish ethnicity besides the ever present/ubiquitous white Christians and atheist/humanists) who were definitely not of necessity concerned with the advancement of black people as black people. His advisors and handlers keep a sharp eye on all of his doings, sayings and stuff. Sometimes they will approve his doings for black people that is acceptable to the great bulk of white people. Saying reconciling words at the Martin Luther King Memorial dedication is acceptable race related activity the president can and must engage in. celebrating Kwanzaa (as Rev. Wright's church in Chicago did for years) is not approved, but holding Jewish seder ceremonies at the White House is a must and must be televised so the world can see it also. A pardon for Marcus Garvey is no good, but kind words for the Pope and the Catholic Church in its times of hurt by freakish-pedophile priests is okay. Of course, behind the scenes Obama and his few black advisors are to be complimented for their work in which they do manage to do a few black things at least symbolic things.
Ms. Obama also deserves credit for doing as much as she is allowed to do in highlighting black concerns. Doing something about obesity problems among our people is at least as important as the game of identity politics.
So while others debate about President Obama's black record, I take the stance that if you want him to do more then mass organizing can help. The president, having been a community organizer in the old days, knows full well the power of the people when they stand united. He has even called upon us to help him push others by pushing him harder, via organizing. We should take him at his word. We wanted a black president, we got a black president. If President Obama is not what we wanted ... don't mourn organize!
