Feeds: 
symbol identifies content for paid subscribers only.
GOLDILOCKS RACISM.
In one of my first pieces for TAP, I tried to explain the cultural and political forces between the arbitrary and often contradictory standards set for Barack Obama as a black candidate. The New York Times obliges with another example of the double standard set merely because of race.
However forceful and passionate Mr. Obama can be, his speeches and public appearances this week have underscored how he is sometimes out of sync with the visceral anger of Americans who are losing their jobs and homes. He often talks about growing up on food stamps and about having paid off his student loans only recently, yet his tone and volume, body language, facial expressions and words convey a certain distance from the ache that many voters feel.
As Jamison Foser points out at County Fair, this analysis is contradicted by all available polling information. Foser also accuses the Times of "injecting race" into an article where it doesn't belong with this paragraph:
For Mr. Obama, the financial crisis poses different risks. He wants to appear fired up over the economy, but he has written before about wanting to avoid appearing like a stereotypical angry black man. Unlike Jesse Jackson, the Rev. Al Sharpton and other black leaders whose fulminations could scare white voters, Mr. Obama is not from and of New York, Detroit, or the segregated South; he grew up in Hawaii and Indonesia. To some degree Mr. Obama faces the opposite challenge from fiery black leaders who came before him: Is he too cool for a crisis like this one?
This isn't injecting race into the article, because race is the very reason this article was written. This is an example of journalism reinforcing the very trends it purports to examine. It's what can be called "Goldilocks Racism" -- the idea that black people are always too hot or too cold and only white people can be just right. If Obama were showing a great deal of populist anger on the stump, we would be treated to reams of analysis about how he is "too hot," regardless of what the polls said.
We've been down this road before. In the beginning of the campaign, Obama was too professorial. Later, there was too much high-flying rhetoric. Is he too smart? Is he a lightweight? Too black? Not black enough? While one candidate is acting increasingly erratic and reckless, the Times runs an article about the calm and collected temperament of his rival, but as a flaw. This isn't a problem with Obama; this is a problem with us.
--A. Serwer
COMMENTS (10)
I couldnt' agree more. In addition to the inherent problem of always ascribing to Obama the loser position of being "not quite right" the Times and the press generally have also always ascribed to the democratic candidate the need to "make up" for an inherent democratic deficit to an imaginary inherently conservative population. That's why we always see the press saying that Kerry, or Obama, or whoever can't "seal the deal" with "real americans" or "white men" or just "men" if minority is just assumed out of existence. We never see the republicans asked why they can't "seal the deal" or why they aren't "running away with the election" or why they "have to rely on the narrow race based interests of white men." As women have pointed out in similar contexts what is good for the white/male/conservative candidate is assumed to be normative, while what is good or bad for the female/non white/democratic candidate is represented as divisive, particular, special interest, or fragile.
aimai
Posted by: aimai | September 26, 2008 1:56 PM
Great post - one which I hope regular commentators (who consistently complain about Obama's lack of/excess of aggression) read.
Posted by: Harvey Lobster | September 26, 2008 2:42 PM
Great post.
Posted by: captcrisis | September 26, 2008 3:04 PM
Lousy post. Obama comes off as distant because he's a University of Chicago ivory tower egghead and self-righteous do-gooder type. One could conceivably argue that he chose to embrace that persona as a flight from "blackness," but who knows? Whatever the reason, he strikes many as a cold, stiff elitist who cannot convince suffering people that he knows or cares about what they are experiencing. Perhaps a reincarnation of Adelai Stevenson in blackface and toupee?
Posted by: Hyde Park Boulevard of Broken Dreams | September 26, 2008 3:24 PM
Wow, you just did a fantastic impression of someone trying to restrict black people into the very kind racist binaries I was discussing, complete with epithets!. Were you doing that on purpose?
Posted by: Adam | September 26, 2008 3:53 PM
Only white men can be "just right." Only white MEN.
Posted by: Stephen | September 26, 2008 4:07 PM
Adama Serwer correctly states that "This isn't a problem with Obama; this is a problem with us."
However, Obama has to get votes from us (or actually, Red State working class voters), who seem to want the candidate who is as impulsive and aggressive (or drunk and violent) as they are.
It's the same problem that Dukakis, Gore and Kerry had -- they all respond calmly & rationally to situations (the correct approach) but that approach is off-putting to voters who
react emotionally. Bill Clinton's impulsiveness evidenced by his philandering and fast-food hankerings) connected him to those voters. Those voters also seem to equate the amount of emotional display with determination and sincerity. "Quiet Determination" is a non-existent concept to many. In 2004, it appeared that Kerry wouldn't even get pissed off about people dissing his heroic war record, so what ever would get him angry ?
Obama similarly needs to show that he will get angry and display his anger in a manner comprehensible to such folk. He needs to show them his emotional intensity and determination in a manner that they understand. It's a communications issues but involving behavior rather than words.
Of course, the media will carp but calling them out/dissing them is also part of what he needs to do.
Posted by: H-Bob | September 26, 2008 5:16 PM
Adama Serwer correctly states that "This isn't a problem with Obama; this is a problem with us."
However, Obama has to get votes from us (or actually, Red State working class voters), who seem to want the candidate who is as impulsive and aggressive (or drunk and violent) as they are.
It's the same problem that Dukakis, Gore and Kerry had -- they all respond calmly & rationally to situations (the correct approach) but that approach is off-putting to voters who
react emotionally. Bill Clinton's impulsiveness evidenced by his philandering and fast-food hankerings) connected him to those voters. Those voters also seem to equate the amount of emotional display with determination and sincerity. "Quiet Determination" is a non-existent concept to many. In 2004, it appeared that Kerry wouldn't even get pissed off about people dissing his heroic war record, so what ever would get him angry ?
Obama similarly needs to show that he will get angry and display his anger in a manner comprehensible to such folk. He needs to show them his emotional intensity and determination in a manner that they understand. It's a communications issues but involving behavior rather than words.
Of course, the media will carp but calling them out/dissing them is also part of what he needs to do.
Posted by: H-Bob | September 26, 2008 5:17 PM
Don't you people get it?
They look at Obama & say things about his skin color or he's not black enough, he's not this & that....McCain on the other hand is just another baby Bush wannabe. I'm not for another four years of this crap! Just think if McCain happens to..whoops...fall the hell out & never to be seen again, do you relize the chick is going to be our president by default!! Then we're really screwed!!
Posted by: aazo007 | September 28, 2008 5:36 AM
Obama comes off as distant because he's a University of Chicago ivory tower egghead and self righteous do gooder type. One could conceivably argue that he chose to embrace that persona as a flight from "blackness," but who knows? Whatever the reason, he strikes many as a cold, stiff elitist who cannot convince suffering people that he knows or cares about what they are experiencing.
Posted by: tower defence | April 25, 2009 3:02 AM