April 02, 2008 News+Opinion » Jack Hunter

Using Obama's example to destroy political correctness, not reinforce it 

Barack's Invitation

by Jack Hunter
jackhunter.jpg

Latest in Jack Hunter

In 2003, Democratic presidential candidate Howard Dean found himself in hot water by suggesting that he wanted to be "the candidate for guys with Confederate flags in their pickup trucks." Not amused, John Kerry accused Dean of pandering to racists, Dick Gephardt insinuated that such Southerners were anti-American, and Al Sharpton scolded Dean for paying lip service to "America's swastika." Dean soon fell in line and muted his rhetoric.

Last month, I had the privilege of addressing some of these allegedly "racist," anti-American, crypto-Nazis — the Sons of Confederate Veterans. The purpose of my speech was to point out that in 2008, anyone who embraces the Confederate flag is automatically considered beyond the pale. Even Republicans like Mitt Romney and John McCain are as quick to condemn the South's most famous symbol as Dean was to shut up about it.

Arguing the Confederate case (states' rights, constitutionalism, limited government, Lincoln's legacy) in such a restrictive political environment is nearly pointless since such issues were no longer a matter of objective truth, but subjective respectability — as defined by everyone except the subjects. For those who still believe yesterday's questions are still worth asking because they offer solutions to today's problems, the much larger question must first be "how did we get here?" And then "how do we get out of it?"

Enter Barack Obama. Pressured by character attacks concerning his relationship with controversial pastor Jeremiah Wright, Obama gave what many are considering a landmark speech on U.S. race relations. Wrote The New York Times' Jodi Kantor: "Presidential politics usually requires candidates to either wholly adopt or reject positions and people. Mr. Obama did neither with his pastor, rejecting his most divisive statements but also filling in the picture of Mr. Wright and his church."

Kantor then quotes from Obama's speech: "The church contains in full the kindness and cruelty, the fierce intelligence and the shocking ignorance, the struggles and successes, the love and, yes, the bitterness and biases that make up the black experience in America."

When it came time to discuss his own background, Kantor points out that Obama added, "These people are a part of me. And they are a part of America, this country that I love."

This is unabashed conservatism. Loyalty to family, friends, faith, and heritage are indispensable to a man's identity, which in Obama's case is rather complex. Genuine patriotism is a love of one's own, and by refusing to throw his pastor, his church, and his community under the bus, Obama defined on his own terms what kind of American he is. His speech was not just a defense, but an affirmation of the America he loves, both white and black, warts and all.

My America is admittedly different from Obama's. I know religious folks who don't think much of homosexuals. I know white folks who don't think too kindly of black people. I know young people (usually white and privileged) who don't think much of their own country. Wright's most controversial expression "God damn America!" might even make a nifty bumper sticker for their Volvos.

These people are family, friends, and acquaintances. And like Obama's America, they too are a part of this country that I love.

No one should be disqualified by virtue of their particular American heritage, all of which is inherently a mixed bag in this invariably "mixed" country. That a figure as high profile as Obama has suggested as much might be the best opportunity to broaden the limits of permissible dissent in the United States.

My advice to my Confederate friends? Support Obama. Not by necessarily voting for him (I doubt I will) but by giving him moral support. That the white, middle-class, patriotic folks I spoke to, gathered in a small Masonic lodge in Summerville that evening — mostly charity- and civic-minded older men — should be excluded from the political process or even polite society by virtue of their (and my) unique heritage remains unsettling to me. It is an insane proposition that any group of Americans should be defined by the people who understand them the least and hate them the most. Should Obama and his community be defined exclusively by Sean Hannity? Should the Sons of Confederate Veterans and their South be defined exclusively by Al Sharpton?

The door that Howard Dean once attempted to open has hopefully now been blown off its hinges by Barack Obama. And maybe I'm overly optimistic, but the best chance to give voice to the most controversial of Southern perspectives (and indeed all American perspectives) might be by accepting Obama's invitation to join in on the America that belongs to them — too.

Catch Southern Avenger commentaries every Tuesday and Friday at 7:50 a.m. on the "Morning Buzz with Richard Todd" on 1250 AM WTMA.

Comments (3) RSS

Showing 1-3 of 3

Add a comment

It is so easy for a person to make excuses for people of his own ethnicity. A good example of this is Barack Obama, who excused the behavior of Reverend Wright as being a product of his environment . Obama excused Wright’s actions as being the product of the environment in which he was raised, rather than pointing out the universal wrongness of the reverend's behavior. Martin Luther King Jr. did no such thing with his own people in the same situation. Instead, in the Letter from Birmingham Jail, he pointed out the wrongness of violence and hatred and explained why it is inexcusable and solves none of the world’s problems but rather exacerbates them. To stand on my own little soapbox for a moment, I’d like to add that I find it disturbing that people would laud Obama’s recent speech regarding Reverend Wright as groundbreaking when in fact it does nothing more than prolong the misunderstandings and animosity between peoples of different ethnicities and social backgrounds. Mr. Obama would have done better to use as an example the Letter from Birmingham Jail of how to truly offer a resolution to the issue of prejudice. Rather than embody the spirit of change he so proudly states he represents, Obama has set a standard of complacency and, indeed, apathy of which Mr. King would probably have been vastly disappointed.

Posted by HeyJudi on April 12, 2008 at 11:59 AM | Report this comment

Despite his fiery language, Rev. Wright's speech suggested two things... One - that America has waged "total war" in the past, in which civilian deaths were considered OK to accomplish an objective. Wright's examples were Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Even Pat Buchanan agrees that the intentional bombing of Japanese civilians by the U.S. government was "terrorism" by definition. And two - that God passed judgment on America for such actions. Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson believe(d) that 9/11 was God's punishment for the toleration of homosexuality and anti-Christian court decisions. White folks need to get over "if a white clergyman had said such 'hateful' things" because the most prominent white evangelicals do say such things - and Republican presidential candidates like John McCain actively seek their endorsement. And as much as I disagree with Falwell and Robertson - I don't believe that perspective should disqualify them from political involvement, precisely because so many Americans (especially Southern, white folks) share them. The same goes for the black community. I am more offended by the restrictiveness of political correctness, than politically incorrect speech, however foolish or incorrect it may be. Jack

Posted by Jack Hunter on April 2, 2008 at 8:32 AM | Report this comment

I am going to be politically INcorrect and respectfully submit that if Rev. Wright's comments were in the tradition of the black church, then the black clergy should reconsider their approach to ministering to their flock. Wright's words were shocking, hateful, racial, divisive, and I believe, calculated to help him to maintain control over his parishioners. It is not only hearing (or reading) his words. It is the emotion and excitement with which they are delivered. Rev. Wright is screaming the words while he is dancing and punctuating the words with his fist in the air. He pauses for dramatic effect and uses a phony southern drawl that does not wear well on a Chicago Preacher and sounds like a mockery. It is specious for the black community to at once represent that they are working to bridge the racial divide and also support Rev. Wright and his ilk in delivering their poisonous message every Sunday Morning. As shocking as Rev. Wright's hateful words are, the support that is being expressed in the black community is equally shocking. When the video was first exposed I thought that in short order other black ministers would come out and condemn the racist speech. I was shocked that when they did come out it was to support him. If the circumstances had been reversed and that kind of hate speech was spewed by a white minister toward the black community there would be moral outrage. Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson would very quickly organize a march on the city; the minister would have to grovel on Sharpton's radio program, kiss the ring of Jesse Jackson, and then be fired for his blaspheme. If we are ever to truly achieve racial harmony black leaders have to accept their responsibility to censor their own. They are sending and promoting the message that there is nothing a black person can say or do that requires rebuke. As well, the white community must insist that we all be held to the same standards.

Posted by JanetP on April 2, 2008 at 5:53 AM | Report this comment

Add a comment

Classified Listings
Most Viewed


Powered by Foundation   © Copyright 2010, Charleston City Paper   RSS