(… maybe he’d be making 30 percent more and have a higher net worth.)
The recent foot-in-mouth comments from Geraldine Ferraro have led to a number of people speculating about how things would be different if Obama were white. And it struck me that these types of questions reveal how many people (especially white people) think about race.
Because you can’t make Obama white without changing who he is as a person.
Journalists and media pundits have been speculating the “what ifs” as if race is nothing more than skin deep. As if Obama is a black man solely because of the color of his skin, and if you replace that brown skin with a pasty white one, he’d be the same person.
But I think the reality is that for people of color, our sense of who we are is strongly tied to our race and ethnicity. There is no way for us to “transcend” our race or “go beyond” our race. We don’t see our race as a negative that needs transcending. We see racism as a negative. That’s completely different. The popular meaning attached to “transcending” race seems to be to never mention race at all. In other words, we must forget our color.
And then what? Do we become white? Despite what Mr. Levitt seems to think, we can’t ever choose to be white.
Do white people ever have to “transcend” their race? No, because it is not seen as a negative. Remember, the bad things about race are tied to our skin color. They aren’t tied to racism itself, because that would seem to be an indictment of our white society.
If Obama were a white man, he wouldn’t have to tiptoe around saying “racist” to Geraldine Ferraro, who apparently enjoys the taste of her own feet. Because even some white people are thinking that what she said was pretty darn racist. Maybe they’re transcending their race. Because for white people, transcending their race would mean that they did mention race and racism. Because then they would go beyond the confines of whiteness.

16 comments
Comments feed for this article
March 14, 2008 at 3:13 pm
Kai
Yup, true: if Barack Obama weren’t a black man…he would not be Barack Obama. There’s really nowhere to go with that vein of thought.
March 14, 2008 at 3:52 pm
panracial
Well, technically Obama IS a white man. He’s as white as he is black. He’s a white man, but because he’s also a black man he doesn’t have white privilege.
Off topic, isn’t it weird how some multiracial people get to be multiracial i.e. Alicia Keys, Tiger Woods while others like Della Reese (half black/half Cherokee) get assigned to one race or the other?
March 14, 2008 at 4:59 pm
sinoangle
Panracial, isn’t that a question of claimed identity? On some mixed race discussion boards I’ve been frequenting, there have been complaints that Obama doesn’t identify as mixed race.
March 14, 2008 at 7:22 pm
snark
Because you can’t make Obama white without changing who he is as a person.
That was my first reaction to what Ferraro said when I heard it. It’s a nonsensical supposition. If he were not black he would not be who he is. Which helps me to understand the comment, as dumb as it is, in the spirit in which I think it was intended. For one thing, Ferraro was talking about a specific thing, which is the Democratic presidential nomination campaign of 2008. She was not talking about Obama’s life in general. I think it’s undeniable that his being a black man has had an impact on the campaign. Can that really be denied? And her comments are a bit more easily understood, if not excused, in the overall context of what she said to the reporter in its entirety. And if one understands her speaking as a former candidate in a similiarly groundbreaking situation in 1984. It comes down to two things for me, 1. she made it a blanket statement of “he would not be here but for his race”, which is wrong and 2. it’s a pointless comment that can serve no constructive purpose because Barack Obama the individual can not be seperated from Barack Obama the black man.
But I do not believe she meant to in any way belittle Obama or present her comments as a reason to vote for Clinton.
And Happy Blogiversary!
March 15, 2008 at 2:35 am
Jasper
hmmm, no coverge of Obama’s racist pastor here…oh, that’s right, blacks can be racists but whites can’t. when am I going to get this straight.
March 15, 2008 at 3:52 pm
panracial
What did he say that was racist? It isn’t racist that we bombed Hiroshima and Nagasaki, for example, that’s just history?
March 15, 2008 at 4:58 pm
Kathy
Jasper, my biggest disappointment is that Senator Obama had to denounce and distance himself from Pastor Wright. I don’t see how talking about Hillary’s lack of experience as a Black man living in America is racist.
If anything, it shows how foolish white feminits like Senator Clinton are. Actually,
listening to her campaign song video is so ridiculous that it’s entertainment.
March 16, 2008 at 2:56 am
Jasper
Sorry..
“the US of KKKA”……and other racial overtones, stirring up hatred for whites…did you listen to the speech?
“God Damn America” …
Infering that we deserved 9/11…
..the US caused aids or whatever he said. That we build prisons just for blacks. Thw white man controls everything.
etc, etc.
this has Obama’s pastor for 20 years, the man who inspired the “Audacity of Hope” book that Obama wrote, Obama self proclaimed spiritual mentor.
Sorry Obama, you can use the “fear” defense anymore.
March 17, 2008 at 12:22 am
Kathy
Most of your examples are not racist, they are race neutral statements that could be made by a variety of people who have different views from you about the war, imperialism, aids and problems in the prison industry. Take another look at them.
It’s a double standard to expect Senator Obama to denounce his pastor when the Clinton team gets by with “it’s regrettable”?
Why can Clinton sit with Rev. Al Sharpton, or attend Black churches without having to denounce or reject?
March 17, 2008 at 2:18 am
Jasper
Kathy,
Al Sharpton wasn’t the Clinton’s pastor for 20 years and he’s not they’re spiritual advisor or on his campaign.
March 17, 2008 at 11:51 am
resistance
Classic defense of racism #326: They are racist too!
March 18, 2008 at 1:40 am
Jasper
Planned parenthood will accept donations to abort Black unborn children. (the liberals and MSM yawn)
http://www.jillstanek.com/archives/2008/03/drudge_covers_p.html#more
March 18, 2008 at 11:34 am
resistance
*yawn*
March 19, 2008 at 12:14 am
Jasper
exactly, for feminists, liberals and democrats, racism is negotiable. As long as it fits within their agenda.
March 19, 2008 at 3:12 am
Sue
Jasper all you need to do is preface feminists liberals and democrats with “white” and we would be in full agreement. Wouldn’t that be ironic?
March 19, 2008 at 12:39 pm
resistance
If you don’t state the race, it automatically defaults to white.