I see that question being asked a lot since last November.
Interestingly, most of the countries suggested as alternatives have immigration policies which are much more restrictive than those of the USA. Most of the alternatives are also significantly whiter than the USA.
Both true points. But what I think you may find is that many “lefties” support strong immigration enforcement, we’re just realistic about where we’re at, the fact that kicking 10 million people out of the country isn’t sound, and we can “fix” immigration without building an idiotic wall.
The “whiter” (less diverse) aspect is also unfortunate, and I should have mentioned that a nation at least welcoming of diversity and not fundamentally racist is a given, even if they are not as multicultural as the United States (almost nowhere is, frankly).
I don’t think you’re an ass, because I’ve been reading your posts for quite some time. But the above is an asinine statement. In American terms, Barrack Obama is black, period. I’m not going to go into a history and culture lesson, and I think you already know that stuff. But taken by itself, really, I think the above statement is quite, well, off-color, for lack of a better turn of phrase. Heh?
But really, you think a lot of people voted for him who wouldn’t have, if his mother had been black? I really just don’t see that as a “mitigating factor” that bought him more votes. Maybe I’m mistaken, but again, Barack Obama is a black man, period, his wife is black, his kids are black, they are a black family. To even slightly imply that he is “less black” is, well, ridiculous.
I’m mostly speaking from experience on the “well she’s a b-word!” thing. Anytime my mom asserted herself even in the mildest of stances she got that kind of push back from men in my own observation. It seems the US social order really has this thing against women piping up or leading or being assertive. Heck, our movies make the “queen b-word” thing a trope.
What I’m saying is that the American electorate is notoriously racist, and it’s no coincidence that the first non-white President had a lifetime of immersion among white people. His appeal to white voters would have been more limited if he didn’t look, speak and act in ways we have been conditioned to think of as belonging to the dominant culture.
That’s not to say Obama hasn’t faced a lifetime of discrimination based on the color of his skin or that he isn’t an authentic black man. But an equally intelligent and qualified candidate wouldn’t have made it nearly as far if he had, say, spoken with a strong Harlem accent or sported an Afro. There’s a limit to how much “blackness” the American voters will accept.
I think that starting out with “acceptably black” would’ve been more on target (instead of emphasizing that he’s a “mixed-race man”).
Acceptably black means being nonthreatening to white people inclined to feeling threatened by black people. It means standard English, clean-cut appearance (or, as Joe Biden fumbled, “clean”) and the most Caucasian features possible. These obviously are not objective measures of character or worth; just as obviously, they are measures of what sells to the vast, white audience. Halle Berry and Denzel Washington are acceptably black. Your local news anchors are acceptably black. Tupac was not.
Again, fair criticism. However I do believe Obama’s “acceptable blackness” is largely due to the fact that he was raised by his white family and thus immersed in traditionally “white culture” from the get-go.
If what you are saying is that differences in cultural worldview can be much more divisive than differences in physical ethnicity, I could not agree with you more. There are people of African descent who I would welcome into my home and my family, and people of my own background (Asian/white) with whom I’d be uncomfortable living within the same square mile.
Could be, but I don’t see why that’s worth pointing out. It’s not like people raised in other circumstances can’t also code switch/perform acceptable blackness.