Sunday, March 09, 2008

Angryindian on Obama

"Obama and his people have done everything possible to distance themselves from authentic African social identifiers that unlike the Obama campaign, gallantly articulate a reality White Americans have no idea exists right beneath their proverbial noses. It simply is not allowed in the unwritten rules governing American socio-political discourse or policy. “The immoveable veil of Blackness,” Obama so embarrassingly totes as Eugenically articulated by early colonial American Founding Fathers Thomas Jefferson, Dr. Benjamin Rush and the Dred Scott Decision is something to be pitied, not respected, as it falls far short of an authentic humanity. While Europocentric intellectuals were aware of the inherent “humanity” of the African, they only recognized it partially, not unlike how a breeder strives to define a newly recognised species of dog. So to suggest that Barack Obama is subject to right-wing belittlement and the relentless confirmation of his loyalty to White American interests because he is a “Black” candidate is correct and exact. To imply otherwise is simply American revisionism of the highest order."

You can read the rest of Angryindian's excellent article entitled The Emergence of the Contemporary "New Negro": Barack Obama and the Immaculate-Genocide of the African-American Male here.

I strongly recommend the article. It is a voice of sanity amidst the troublesome liberal nonsense that has bloated Obama to spokesman for change.

In short, the Angryindian has delivered a thorough undressing of the SuperObama myth and the purpose of whiteness that underwrites it.

Thanks to fanpop for the Obama image.



Desirée said...

I read most of Angryindian's post and agree with much of it. Although there are certain points I disagree with, I am happy to finally see a critical treatment of Obama.

In your view, is Louis Farrakhan one of those authentic African social identifiers?

Ridwan said...

Hello Desiree:

Thanks for your comment. I know Angrindian reads here and may welcome a discussion.

I agree with him about Farrakhan.

He is part of the African American experience and cannot be ignored whether one agrees with him or not.

Obama is not the first to look past Farrakhan. At the million man march, which Farrakhan called, some civil right leaders attended but distanced themselves from him.

I think Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam must not be treated as one entity, particularly in an historic sense.

Obama's Black 'blindspots' are characteristically subservient.

For example, he can't speak to Malcolm X's critique of America and American racism in national and international terms.

To do so would be very dangerous.

His 'truth' is that he is not running as a Black candidate.

Still, even if he is beige politically, there are those white liberals who think he is representing African Americans and Blackness.

He is even touted as being radically different.

In this sense Obama is an access point for whiteness to rationalize racism and the role of whiteness in perpetuating racism.

I have been thinking that one can guage the level of white denial by the fervent level of support Obama enjoys among individual whites.

If he is elected there will be those who will say that he is the kind of Black that is constructive, progressive.

And Farrakhan will remain the congenital disease he is imagined to be.

I do not agree with some of the sensationalist race rhetoric that Farrakhan has thrown around.

I am also mostly not drawn to his politics or his version of Islam.

But, Obama punked Farrakhan for no reason other than the mainstream (white) pressure.

This is telling.