Ravi wrote: > I will note though that I was > disturbed by the fact that the > first shot across the bow, from > Obama, was at the left, as he > started his speech with this > warning to those demanding > relief from discrimination: > >> If there is anyone out there who still doubts that America is a >> place where all things are possible, who still wonders if the dream >> of our founders is alive in our time, who still questions the power >> of our democracy, tonight is your answer.
Ravi, You may be over-inferring your conclusion. On Doug's list, we debated Obama's rhetorical approach a few moons ago. Obama has said explicitly that, when he uses those figures of speech, he can't mean that the struggle against racism is done with. In this particular case, he is using his victory as an observation of the kind of society the U.S. could be, that is, in order to continue that very struggle. He said last night, his victory was only the opportunity to advance. That implies that it wasn't the advance itself, but only the chance to advance. And he said he's aware it wasn't about him personally, but about us, the people. So he's not denying that racism still exists, is vicious, etc. He's not conducting a historical analysis of racial relations. He's simply rallying people to carry out a vision in which racism is negated. He says it very clearly in his writings. One other thing. IMO, the deeper reason why racism is an effective mechanism of oppression, class division, etc. is the *economic* disparity between races. Remove that and you remove the economic foundations of racism. As a rule, although not necessarily always, what strengthens the working class economically and politically, helps Black, Hispanic, Asian, etc. workers, and weakens racism and division. Emphasis on providing the U.S. working class (or middle class, whatever; maybe working people doesn't like to be called "working," let alone "working poor," because they feel people are calling them "losers" with all the bad stigma that carries in our society, so call them "middle class," who cares?) with economic security, unionization, etc. is actually a heavy blow against racism, almost in and by itself. But, look, I don't assume that Obama is in the business of helping the working/middle class unite to advance their own interest. That is very probably someone else's business. Say, the business of the U.S. left. But if Obama were in that business (a huge "if"), then I think that the right tactical approach would be precisely the one he's taking now, namely appropriating the best elements of the historical legacy of the nation (disputing with the right the copyrights over patriotism and Americana, which do matter in politics) and using them to underpin a progressive vision of the nation, adequate to the political forces in motion. If he were a smart leftist (not saying he is), he'd also have to call people to unite around certain common goals appealing to the progressive elements present in the history of the nation -- the revolutionary war, the Civil War, the abolitionist movement, the New Deal, the struggle for civil rights, etc. Re. strategy, I know there are some serious elements leading us to suspect that, not only Obama is not in the business indicated above, but that -- in fact -- he's ultimately in the opposite business, namely that of uniting the working class to support the capitalist design. But only time will tell for sure. For the time being, the overlapping of his agenda (not only domestically) with that of an intelligent left is such that all strategic issues need not be settled all at once. Radical shouldn't mean tactically stupid. But I am under no illusion regarding Obama as a person. There are some traits of his personality that I find admirable, but I know that's seldom decisive in the big scheme of things. In any case, I can wait before I make a definitive call on him -- and, with the information I now have, I expect that call to be rather mixed. I know some people here already know with due certainty that Obama will turn out to be another reactionary motherf-er. God bless them. I don't have that kind of foresight and extrapolating from the past has limitations. So, since I don't think this is the time to clash with Obama's stated strategy, yet to hitch popular pressure and face political obstacles (rebuilding the economy, improving the economic security of workers, getting out of Iraq, reforming foreign policy to some extent, etc.), but with portions of which I frankly view as progressive, and I don't disagree with his smart tactical appropriation of progressive historical references, then I can't construe that part of his speech as an assault on the struggle against racism. Do we really think that his victory would stop African Americans from fighting harder to advance their national, economic, and political interest? Don't you see that Obama's victory is having the exact opposite effect on them? Who thinks they are about to abandon the political struggle for full equality? That said, I believe we should pay heed to Fidel's advice: continue to fight and raise awareness, regardless of who won. We need a lot of political activity at the grassroots. And we need more clarity. In fact, if there's no activity at the grassroots and the economy hits us heavy on the head, as it's likely to, the political enthusiasm that now exists may evaporate giving rise to despair, cynicism, and mass moods conducive to the re-growth of rightwing ideology and politics. _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
