Different Takes, Different Problems

The New York Times has an interesting article discussing European reaction to Barack Obama’s election. The article dwells on the different problems the major EU nations face with their ethnic and religious minorities. The reaction of my community to Obama’s election was diverse, but largely positive: the older the person was, the more likely they were to view the whole thing with disbelief. Younger people, my high school students especially, were enthusiastic and not at all surprised. I was kind of surprised by the degree to which they accepted Obama’s election as a matter of course, but these students view African-American culture (especially hip hop and Rhianna) as more their birthright than mine, so they have an interesting take on ethnic identity in the US. I passed by a newsstand today that was selling a magazine with a large cover photo of Obama, whose title translated as “A History of Obama.” This country was never as anti-Bush as the rest of Europe, but everyone here is excited about Obama in one way or another

It’s different, however, when we talk about ethnic problems inside the country. The idea of one of the several ethnic and religious minorities in this country rising to a position of real leadership is outside what people see as possible. In the parliament, there’s a large, ethnically Turkish party that usually makes up about nine percent of the vote. While that party wields a lot of power in its ability to make or break various governments, it is emphatically a junior partner. Ethnic tensions are largely peaceful here although there is still a great deal of institutional and systemic racism at play.

On thing the article does not discuss and I think is worth mentioning is the degree to which European nations define citizenship and being part of a community in ethnic terms. It simply is not enough to speak German to become a German. One advantage that the United States has over Europe is, whether or not the founding fathers intended it this way (they didn’t), the framework they created allows us to embrace a constantly widening conception of “Americanness.” It doesn’t matter where your ancestors happen to be from, but if you are participating in American life you are essentially American. While that originally was based upon the differences of the major (mostly British) groups making up the thirteen colonies, it’s only a small step from that to everyone else. The racial problems that have long plagued the US do not, at their base, presuppose that those of different races are some how not American. The US is certainly not without problems, but the problems we have exist on a wholly different footing than the problems of Europe. Anyone can move to the US and become an American in relatively short order. If I move to Italy, speak Italian, marry an Italian, become a citizen of Italy and live the rest of my life there, no matter what I do, I will never be an Italian. Maybe my kids, but by virtue of the fact that Italian itself is an ethnic as well as a cultural category, I cannot access it, because I am not ethnically Italian. In the United States, we define ourselves culturally (speaking English, a (somewhat) shared vision of what the US means) and not ethnically. Hence, a mixed race child of a Kansan and a Kenyan with a Muslim name can grow up to be as American as the decedents of John Winthrop.

Out of the Woodwork

Well, the racists certainly don’t seem content to go gentle into that good night. I guess that shouldn’t surprise us. I imagine that Matt Yglesias is entirely correct when he assumes that an Obama victory will drive the racist elements of the Republican coalition into the open air for on last, grand Götterdämmerung. Well, that’s just fine with me. As these things go, sunlight is the best cure. This is why the civil rights movement was so very successful. The contrast was simply too stark: you can’t look at a parade full of quiet, peaceful, respectable people having firehoses turned on them by thugs like Bull Connor without having it shape your attitudes. In that sense, nonsense like the kind of theatrics we’re seeing at Palin’s rallies are more likely to continue, not less.

This strategy might wring a few more votes out of the bitter, decaying pulp of the Republican coalition, a brief distraction from the economy’s woes – perhaps even the outside chance of a victory.

So here’s my question for those inclined to answer it: what will replace the Republican Party? Will they just have to spend some time out of power for people to forget the upcoming ugliness, as well as the corruption, malfeasance and stupidity of the Bush Era? Or will they be utterly destroyed, the brand rendered so hollow and meaningless that it has to be replaced with something entirely new? Just because we’ve had over a hundred years of dominance by the Republican and Democratic Parties doesn’t mean it always has to be like that. It’d be pretty exciting to watch, too.

Courting the Racist Vote

Ben Smith at Politico sends along the experience of an Obama volunteer talking to people in a white working class neighborhood of Philadelphia.

"What's crazy is this," he writes. "I was blown away by the outright racism, but these folks are f***ing undecided. They would call him a n----r and mention how they don't know what to do because of the economy."

How fascinating is that? Out and out, unapologetic racists still can’t decide if they can vote for McCain. What does it say when a person who would use that kind of language – to an Obama campaign worker – and still can’t talk themselves into voting for the old white guy? It’s always been true that economic issues cut for the Democratic candidate as well as the party out of power. I think we’re seeing that effect in full force if even the racists are undecided.

On a more sociological note, I think this says something interesting about the United States. The media won’t come out and call anyone racist directly. After almost forty years of Sesame Street, if nothing else we’ve learned it’s not culturally acceptable to be a racist. This has positive and negative effects. It means that people see racism in public statements when they aren’t warranted and ignore them when they are.