In the light of all this Hillary being a woman supporting, I’m wondering why we haven’t blogged about the blatant racism that Obama has faced.
So I found a good one from West Virginia, in case you had any doubts about racism being alive and real and that this has everything to do with having REAL feminism in office.
Plus: How summer camps get Native culture wrong. Also: Kate Bornstein, how to build a bonfire, get inventive.
Save time and money. Get Shameless delivered straight to your door.
Sign up for e-mails about big Shameless news and events. We won’t give out or sell your address to anyone.
Shameless is an independent magazine with a very small budget. In addition to purchasing a subscription or back issues, you can support us through donations.
Digg
Facebook
del.icio.us
10 comments
The one problem I have with this video is that it seems to be implying that anyone who opposes Obama, questions his qualifications for the presidency, or plans to vote for McCain, is doing so because they are racist.
The one paid of women interviewed early in the clip very clearly said that Obama's background and heritage were issues for them, as did "Ashley," who came right out and said she didn't want an African-American president. Racism pure and simple, yes. However, many of the others interviewed simply said they didn't know enough about Obama or his platforms. Those would seem to be valid reasons to avoid voting for a candidate. Obama also refrained from campaigning heavily in West Virginia, which meant many of the voters there did not get a chance to know him and felt slighted.
Of course, this election is rife with both sexism and racism, but it is unfair to generalize that all opposition and questioning of candidates has racial motivation behind it.
(and for the record, yes, I'm voting for Obama)
Posted by Denise
June 17, 2008, 1:28 PM
Hi Denise
Thank you for your response. I simply picked this video because I feel like there has been such an outcry against sexism without identifying how much racism and otherwise oppression and prejudice that has been happening.
I would agree that to not vote for a candidate because you don't know their political stances is definitely a good reason, and those also happened to be points of view in the video. Which were also coming from the white blue-collar population towards Obama, as introduced at the beginning, so you can take that for what you want it to represent.
I think I'm just tired of seeing the same outcry of sexism that does not go anywhere near racism and me appearing "angry" when I point that out, or that they are intersected and very much related. I want to see equal discussion of the other oppressive stuff besides sexism and that we need to really question our spaces when we're continuosly only picking one.
So as the Hillary Clinton outcries continue, so shall I on what I think is equally important of discussion and what is often left out of the picture; racism.
Posted by Jessica
June 17, 2008, 2:06 PM
Hi Jessica,
Thank you for your response. I do want to reiterate that I do acknowledge and agree with you that racism is a major part of this campaign, and it needs to be discussed and recognized.
I just think this particular video is neither the fairest nor the best illustration of that. The video was edited to make it appear that some of the interviewees were racist when they gave absolutely no indication as such and made no remarks to that effect.
At any rate, thank you for posting this and opening the floor to dialogue on it!
Posted by Denise
June 17, 2008, 9:22 PM
Thanks for posting this video Jessica! I am always so interested in watching people "avoid" being racist when they *know* that they're being racist.
I also agree in that I don't think the video is a good illustration of the situation. Only "black" and "white" people were interviewed so the filmographers are framing this explicitly as a "black"/"white" debate. I think too that the questioning wasn't "open" enough to garner fuller responses.
But alas, I'm watching the US with a pair of binoculars and some pepper spray. I'm afraid of what the next 4 months are going to look like.
xo
Posted by diandra
June 17, 2008, 9:53 PM
I also think there is something extremely problematic at interviewing some of the poorest and most vulnerable people in America and try to expose their racism. It's hardly 'racism in the campaign' when a journalist rakes the powerless for explanations for their powerlessness. Racism in the campaign is when someone from the Clinton contingent distributes a photo of Obama in traditional African dress and then claims that there is nothing wrong with it. Racism is a power dynamic--exposing racism in the poor distracts from where it truly resides and does damage.
There is racism in America. Is this up for debate? Exploiting those who are not accustomed to hiding their bigotry because they have nothing to lose is sensationalist and shameful. The VO mentions that those interviewed keep using "euphemisms" for racism, which is doubtless true. I wonder where they got these euphemisms from? The journalist certainly doesn't wonder...he's just happy to point out how stupid, racist and ignorant West Virginans are.
Posted by Catchfire
June 18, 2008, 5:53 AM
First off - Thank you Jessica for posting this video and starting this discussion.
Secondly...it often seems to be 'dangerous' when pointing out when people are oppressed in one way but also oppress others in another. While I recognize that most people are fighting to gain what little power they can...what is wrong with criticizing how they attempt to gain that power? While someone could say that the journalist is in the wrong for exposing people oppressed in one way...is it so wrong to show how these people do not hesitate to undertake oppressive actions themselves?
At my school this fall, there was a huge debate surrounding Elephant Man playing in our town due to his homophobic lyrics. Some of the students of colour argued that this school is an oppressive space to them and implied that anyone speaking out against Elephant Man was attacking their culture. However, many members of the Queer Community were upset to be supporting a homophobic artist.
While many recognize that Elephant Man's homophobic lyrics are the product of colonization and oppression, I personally have problems supporting artists (or anyone) who promote killing people because they are queer. It would me completely inacceptable for me to support a queer artist who promoted any form of oppresion.
For me this is similar. Although I do agree that the journalist could have chosen a different group to ask, it still shows are far racism spreads. I think that we cannot always rely on those in power to realize their racist (or oppressive) thoughts/actions. But if everyone who is oppressed in some way by those in power do not recognize the forms of oppression they also promote, nothing will ever change.
However, I also recognize the complexity of these issues and the history that surrounds them. I myself am still coming to terms with the privileges I have and how they intersect with the oppressions I face. In a perfect world, noone would be oppressed. In a better world than we have now, people would recognize the oppression they promote, stop it, and work in solidarity with others to create a perfect world.
Posted by Charlie
June 18, 2008, 9:36 AM
While many recognize that Elephant Man's homophobic lyrics are the product of colonization and oppression
How on earth does that make sense? There's no shortage of homophobes who have not been colonised or oppressed, so why is his homophobia special? Why let any individual off the hook for their support for homophobia, regardless of personal circumstances? There is never a good reason for it.
Jessica, the video has vanished from Youtube :( New link pls?
Also, have you seen http://michelleobamawatch.com/ ? It's a great site that's recording & challenging all the racist, sexist attacks being committed against Ms O. Some of them are beyond belief.
Posted by Thene
June 18, 2008, 4 PM
Wow, lots of great discussion going on, thanks everyone for posting!
Thene: The link seems to be working for me, just tried it.....
I have seen the Michelle Obama site, that's a good one for sure, thanks for sharing the link!
I think it's a slippery slope to go down when we conditionalize when and where racism or other "isms" for that matter should be recognized....are we to explicitly say that white people just because they are living in poverty can't really be racist because....they are poor? And used to not being called on it? Doesn't the fact that those realities continue without us really dialoguing about it make it worse?
Posted by Jessica Yee
June 18, 2008, 9:16 PM
Hi Jessica Yee,
I certainly did not say that the people interviewed in the piece were not racist because they were poor. I also did not say that the racism Obama and his campaign face on a daily basis should not be exposed. I said it was "problematic" to expose such racism by engineering "gotcha" journalism against the powerless. Particularly by a privileged white journalist who travels to the poorest state in the country to show how ignorant and bigoted they are. It's speaking truth to weakness.
But I don't think that the material shown in the piece is valuable to showing the kind of disgusting racism Obama has had to endure throughout his campaign. The fact that he felt it necessary to declare that he "was not and had never been a Muslim" should indicate the kind of illogical hate he has had to face. The fact that he felt the need to distance himself from his pastor who made "radical" remarks when McCain feels no such need to distance himself from right-wing homophobic and explicitly racist nuts. The fact that Obama was compelled to highlight his white parentage. This is all evidence of the kind of racist pressures America exerts on Obama every single day. The recent activity around Michelle Obama, as the above website shows, is another great example.
My issue was with the choice of video, not with the overall statement. Of course we should expose and combat racism wherever we find it (disclosure: I am white and I don't always do this) but that's very different from actively searching out some of America's poorest and inciting them to say some racist things. In fact, many of them did not outright say racist things, but racism told anyway--only because they are not as educated as their CNN and rich Republican counterparts who are much more skilled at hiding their racism in euphemisms and subtext.
Posted by Catchfire
June 19, 2008, 3:57 AM
Great points Catchfire!
Indeed, as I will now reveal, I actually posted this specific video hoping for this kind of healthy discussion on it.
Which is why my comments were questions, =)
Posted by Jessica Yee
June 19, 2008, 9:31 AM
Leave a comment
This blog post is older than 90 days old. All comments submitted regarding this post will be automatically held for review by the editors before posting. Your comment will not appear on the site until it has been approved.
Our comment policy
Shameless prides itself on the diversity of opinions expressed by our writers, and we encourage and appreciate different points of view. Our intention at Shameless is to foster community and to maintain a safe and positive blogging environment; we do not consider it our duty to give a voice to anybody with an opinion.
Discussion on this site is moderated. We will delete comments that:
(We get to decide what's discriminatory, hateful, attacking, or inflammatory).
In some cases, we will cap off comments on a discussion when we feel they are spiralling out of control and fostering an unwelcoming space for bloggers and readers. Comments will be closed by the Web Editor, unless the post is by the Web Editor, in which case the Editor in Chief will close them.
If your comments repeatedly make the same point, they may be deleted. This also applies to comments made by multiple members of the same organization.
Your comments should be about the topic of the post, not its writer—although we certainly encourage praise for our writers, if you want to say something nice.