In an interview with the BBC this week, Oprah Winfrey said of President Barack Obama: There is a level of disrespect for the office that occurs. And that occurs, in some cases, and maybe even many cases, because hes African-American.
With that remark, Winfrey touched on an issue that many Americans have wrestled with: To what extent does this presidents race animate those loyal to him and those opposed? Is race a primary motivator or a subordinate, more elusive one, tainting motivations but not driving them?
To some degree, the answers lie with the questioners. There are different perceptions of racial realities. What some see as slights, others see as innocent opposition.
But there are some objective truths here. Racism is a virus that is growing clever at avoiding detection. Race consciousness is real. Racial assumptions and prejudices are real. And racism is real. But these realities can operate without articulation and beneath awareness. For those reasons, some can see racism where it is absent, and others can willfully ignore any possibility that it could ever be present.
To wit, Rush Limbaugh responded to Winfreys comments in his usual acerbic way, lacking all nuance:
If black people in this country are so mistreated and so disrespected, how in the name of Sam Hill did you happen? Would somebody explain that to me? If theres a level of disrespect simply because hes black, then how, Oprah, have you managed to become the at one time most popular and certainly wealthiest television personality? How does that happen?
No one has ever accused Limbaugh of being a complex thinker, but the intellectual deficiency required to achieve that level of arrogance and ignorance is staggering.
Anyone with even a childs grasp of race understands that for many minorities success isnt synonymous with the absence of obstacles, but often requires the overcoming of obstacles.
Furthermore, being willing to be entertained by someone isnt the same as being willing to be led by them.
And finally, affinity and racial animosity can dwell together in the same soul. You can like and even admire a person of another race while simultaneously disparaging the race as a whole. One can even be attracted to persons of different races and still harbor racial animus toward their group. Generations of sexual predation and miscegenation during and after slavery in this country have taught us that.
Alas, simpletons have simple understandings of complex concepts.
But it is reactions like Limbaughs that lead many of the presidents supporters to believe that racial sensitivity is in retreat and racial hostility is on the rise.
To be sure, the Internet is rife with examples of derogatory, overtly racial comments and imagery referring to the president and his family. But the question remains: Are we seeing an increase in racial hostility or simply an elevation or uncovering of it? And are those racist attitudes isolated or do they represent a serious problem?
Much of the discussion about the president, his opposition and his race has centered on the tea party, fairly or not.
In one take on race and the tea party that went horribly wrong this week, Washington Post opinion writer Richard Cohen wrote:
Todays GOP is not racist, as Harry Belafonte alleged about the tea party, but it is deeply troubled about the expansion of government, about immigration, about secularism, about the mainstreaming of what used to be the avant-garde. People with conventional views must repress a gag reflex when considering the mayor-elect of New York a white man married to a black woman and with two biracial children. (Should I mention that Bill de Blasios wife, Chirlane McCray, used to be a lesbian?) This family represents the cultural changes that have enveloped parts but not all of America. To cultural conservatives, this doesnt look like their country at all.
What exactly are conventional views in this context? They appear to refer specifically to opinions about the color of peoples skin.
Cohen seemed to want to recast racial intolerance and sexual identity discomfort in a more humane light: as an extension of traditional values rather than as an artifact of traditional bigotry. In addition, Cohens attempt to absolve the entirety of the tea party without proof fails in the same way that blanket condemnations do. Overreach is always the enemy.
I dont know what role, if any, race plays in the feelings of tea party supporters. It is impossible to know the heart of another person (unless he unambiguously reveals himself), let alone the hearts of millions.
But nerves are raw, antennas are up and race has become a lightning rod in the Obama era. This is not Obamas doing, but the simple result of his being.
The New York Times