At Last…Maybe
March 20th, 2008 by Angela Glover Blackwell
A Message from PolicyLink founder and CEO Angela Glover Blackwell
There have been moments in this nation’s racial history when we’ve seemed ready to open the door that hides our collective prejudices, resentments, and pain.
During Reconstruction, we had the opportunity for an honest debate that may have helped heal still-fresh wounds of slavery. In the wake of the Brown vs. Board of Education decision, we headed toward a national conversation about the injustice of America’s unequal schools. With the release of the Kerner Commission report, we came close to talking about the toxic lack of opportunity and hope that were dragging down our cities. In the devastating aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, we inched toward having a true and honest dialog about race in this country.
But it seems like every time we get close to real dialog, the door is slammed in our faces by leaders unwilling to gaze into the American soul or those all too happy to reap the benefits of the crippling status quo.
Could this time be different? The country is in the midst of a long and difficult national election campaign, a race that on its face challenges outmoded notions regarding race and gender while remaining notably devoid of in-depth discussions about those issues. However, the door to discussion may be opening. Pundits and rank-and-file voters are saying that Senator Barack Obama’s speech on race and unity on Tuesday may present a turning point in our national dialog. I, for one, am hopeful the nation is finally ready to engage in a thoughtful, informed conversation that will help us confront the complexities and nuances of the past.
Too often, discussions on race remain on the surface, triggered by a current event or debate - an affirmative action law, say, or a race-charged case in the Supreme Court. But racial history is long and complex. It is rooted in black and white, but today is also Asian, Latino, Native American, and wonderfully multiracial. Through slavery, segregated schools, ongoing discrimination, and the violence and hopelessness they serve to perpetuate, race and racism have left an indelible mark on all of us.
This election season has given me and many others hope that the discussion is ready to change. Despite fleeting unpleasantness, the campaign has largely been waged on the high-road — a debate of issues among a phalanx of talented and bright candidates. We have now seen millions of Americans cast their ballot for a black man or a white woman.
When several colleagues and I wrote about the “uncommon common ground” early this decade, we were critical of politicians who claim to be searching for “the common ground” but are really settling for the lowest common denominator. This presidential race has challenged us to move beyond the well-trod back-and-forth of our national racial stasis.
It’s long past time to acknowledge the legitimate and real concerns underpinning the racial divide, and tackle the big issues and the complex problems that need fixing. It’s time we recognize that we need to build a platform for a true discussion - one where everyone is both welcome and necessary in the conversation.
As someone who has spent my career working for equitable social change, I know how difficult it is to confront people’s deepest fears and needs. But my long experience tells me we are watching an historic opening of that discussion. We cannot afford to let it slam shut again.
NOTE: As a tax-exempt charitable organization, PolicyLink (and its project, EquityBlog) is strictly prohibited from expressing support for or opposition to any candidate for elected office. Though some posts here may mention elections, our sole purpose is to discuss important underlying public policy issues. Comments that express a view about any candidate for elected office, including linking one’s views about issues with the positions of candidates on those issues, are inappropriate in this forum, and are prohibited. Anyone posting a comment on EquityBlog must agree to abide by these rules. Posts that, in the sole discretion of PolicyLink, appear to violate these rules may be removed from the blog, and their authors may be barred from future postings.
March 20th, 2008 at 6:16 pm
What does it look like when a a whole nation has a meaningful conversation? Seriously, I’m trying to envision what this would look like. How does this nation have a meaningful conversation on anything? I’m all for a national discussion on race but I would really like to have a clearer vision of what a heartfelt conversation on a national scale would look like. Maybe if we could get a shared vision of what the sustained dialogue would look like among millions of Americans, we could begin to position socety to actually have that dialogue.
March 20th, 2008 at 6:34 pm
This is a good question, Kevin. It’s not something we are very good at in general. Surely it must involve a conversation that unfolds over time, and one to which the media continues to pay attention over a period of time (there’s the rub). And it has to occur at all levels and in a variety of venues. So it happens in churches, and political groups, and town halls. And in legislative hearings, speeches by a wide array of leaders, and on the Sunday talk shows. And on blogs, websites, and other online venues. And on talk radio. So the trick would be for the community-based groups, the politicians, and the newsmakers to keep the dialog creative enough and moving enough that there were sufficient hooks for the newsmedia to grab onto. The only thing that makes me think it might be possible is the experience after 9/11, when the media continued to report on aspects of the event for several months. So it’s not that we as news consumers don’t have the ability to focus over a period of time. It’s more that the media need to keep feeling it’s important. My two cents. It will be interesting to see what others suggest.
March 20th, 2008 at 10:20 pm
I would agree with Sandra that it may be a national discussion but the ground work must start with each constituency group - churches, schools, community centers, town halls, lecture hall, senior centers etc and let those environments set the tone..it is clear that media and government should not be the driving force behind the momentum or the discussion, but, for a change, the ones who sit in the back of the room and listen to the issues, hurts, challenges, successes etc of the people…for too long we have allowed the rhetoric of government officials and the slanted views of media representatives serve as the representation of the masses….we can be our own spokespeople…there was so much more to Obama’s speech, not to take away from the much needed discussion, but multi-layered concept of the racial divide, but he spoke to other issues that continue to take a back seat in all the political hype and media profiles — the health care crisis, housing debacle and the educational tragedy in this country - those are issues that transcends race (health disparities, redlining and unfair fund distribution aside) in many respects. Living in New York and working down at Ground Zero after 9/11 (and now experiencing all the health effects of that endeavor), I know too well the impact of major tragedy and the resolve of a people rebuilding their community — together. No one asked what color the person was on the 20 floor of a building with no elevator, we asked what do they need. There is so much that is good with this country and the collective voices of the people, the “unsung” voices need to be heard from the streets in which they now live, over the din of their empty stomachs or from the slammed doors at hospitals that turn them away, not because they are Black or White, but uninsured. We need to talk about why one in four Hispanic-American and one in five African-American child are pre-disposed to diabetes and the majority of all children are obese. Explain to the young woman of color who works her way through school and tries to get some financial aid to be told that “if she had a baby and no husband, she could get help.”…so there are many discussions that need to take place, but if there needs to be one about race, then “we the people” need to initiate it from each crack and crevice of this country and stop being in denial ourselves about our own responsibilities or dropping the ball. We can pass the blame all we want, but that brings no solutions, so we need to come to the table ready to do battle, but ready to provide long term solutions to not only begin the healing, but maintain the momentum and build on a legacy of not just hope, but progress and productivity. There is little point having a town hall meeting in an inner city where the real problems lie and we all do the “rah, rah” bit around the rhetoric on camera and then jump in our fancy cars heading right to the to expressway heading for the allegedly safe suburbs with the sound barriers to not only block the sound to the “hoods”, but to keep us from seeing how much those inner cities are crumbling….we cannot overcome that way….and so the story continues….. and we wait for the grand solution or the one person to fix this grand mess, when it really is a simple matter that involves everyone of us…are we really ready? Do we have a choice not to be??
March 21st, 2008 at 10:24 am
It is somewhat naive to believe that real social/cultural equity/suffrage (locally, nationally, or globally) could be realized in an environment in which the majority of power (economic, social, and governmental) continues to be held in the hands of narrowly defined groups. Much like H. Spencer seemed to, long ago, suggest; those few ‘tokens’ who are allowed to be included in the mainstream, must appear to support the idea of ‘American Exceptional-ism’ (as it is defined and prescribed by those holding power) above the reality of oppression/repression of the groups that they, by their private cultures, genders, aesthetics and cosmetology, would appear to normally represent.
March 21st, 2008 at 10:49 am
Racial tension and prejudice has been subdued in the recent years, but it has never gone away. I don’t think we’ll ever be able to have a “real dialogue” on the issue if people are not willing to really look inward and address their own peronal prejudices. You have to be “real” in order to get the problems on the table, before a conversation can take place. There are issues with racial tensions in our public schools, even in the best of counties like Montgomery County. Yes, they are there, and no, they are not being addressed, just swept under the rug - and right now, there is a lot under the rug.
March 21st, 2008 at 11:04 am
I agree with your eloquent words, Angela. I will write more in the next couple of days. Thanks for sharing your thoughts.
March 21st, 2008 at 11:29 am
I believe the reality behind the fear of this topic being slammed shut -is- the problem. How far can this conversation go, how successful can it be, and what legacy can it leave for our children? It can go very far in a short period of time, it can be very successful, and it can leave a legacy that outlasts our lives or the memories of our lives on this planet. But like many great leaps, their fate lays uneasily on the collective response to anecdotes over data. If we’re lucky, the conversation could last 2 years and make headway, it can be fueled by millions of dollars worth of research and millions of hours of labor, but how much of that will be undone in the individual conscious when we focus on just one single inevitable media/viewer sensation around a single, small event? Can a viral image of a black “looter” taking bread from a flooded supermarket after Katrina undo 10 Pew initiatives, 100 Rockefeller grantees, 1000 advocates working 7 days a week for two years? Yes.
When will we acknowledge this? And when we do, will we just accept it or will we use it to work for us, finally?
March 21st, 2008 at 2:25 pm
Yes to everything that has been said. And I believe that each of those former openings described in Angela’s post was not in vain–each one of them moved the conversation forward, and each one of them started the process that changed the way thousands and thousands of individuals thought about themselves and about race. As the campaigns have unfolded, with all the issues of racism and sexism that have been playing just below the surface, I’ve been thinking a lot about how social change happens, about the interplay between movements, the way those movements get played in the media, and the way in which internal personal change happens for each individual when s/he is ready for it, and not before. To truely transform the world all of those elements are necessary–the movement on the ground, the visibility in the media that exposes other individuals to new and transforming ideas, the response of the institutions, and the groundswell of more minds opening that further fuels the movement. We surely won’t reach a fully equitable and open society in one more generation, any more than we have reached it in the last 10 generations. And we CAN make giant leaps forward, greatly expanding the number of people who have done the internal work that allows and motivates them to do the external work. The conversation in all its complexity and imperfection is for many people the impetus that triggers that internal work. And we can make the institutions, policies, and practices of government change with them.
Yes, the conversation gets set back by media sensations around small events (and the distortions and outright lies that are often part of that), but it doesn’t mean that all those changed minds get changed back too. There’s still a greater number of people who have transformed themselves and continue to transform the little piece of the world they touch. Perhaps part our weakness in progessive circles is that we relax and think we’ve “won,” so that we aren’t at the ready when the next setback happens, with the result that the setback is more powerful than it should be, because we don’t get our voices effectively into the media in the aftermath. But society is still, higgly piggly, moving forward.
March 21st, 2008 at 4:18 pm
As this conversation moves forward, we need to make sure that those of us doing the policy and advocacy work to build a more inclusive society tie the conversation about race to the conversation about inclusion.
That means the issue of gentrification and the displacement that’s often associated with it, can’t be dismissed simply as “market forces operating.” It must be put in the context of the historic exclusion of African-Americans and others from the mortgages, the jobs and the educational opportunities that would have enabled the current residents to make positive changes in their lives and become the higher-income residents of the neighborhood.
It means our transportation discussion can’t just be about building new highways to growing suburbs, but there has to be a recognition that there has been discrimination against the public transit investments needed in inner-city communities.
It means our concern about education must move beyond looking at the failure of busing to solve the educational problem and ask why the nation has not been able to muster the political will to make sure all schools in all locations can perform at high levels.
The conversation about race must move beyond what is in our hearts and concentrate on how we can make change through smart, inclusive public policy.
March 21st, 2008 at 6:14 pm
Congratulations, Angela and PolicyLink, for your efforts to move the difficult, but necessary, conversation about race to a higher ground of enlightenment and healing. The nation — and the world — benefit from your vision and leadership.
March 24th, 2008 at 1:29 pm
Asking for dialogue about the problems of race and gender and the deep wounds that exist in the hearts of individuals is a great way beginning, but more than anything, we need action that is sacrificial.
I was reminded in an Easter service yesterday that before the resurrection, there was Good Friday. Sacrificial love is what leads us to truth and justice. Nowhere in America is sacrificial love needed as much as in the gender and racial injustices that have divided us. If those of us who have privileges acknowledge how that gives us opportunties that others do not have, how will we share those opportunities? Is a progressive white man willing to step aside and support a progressive woman of color in an election? Is a chair of an academic department willing to acknowledge that maybe the Latina woman who applied for a position may not have as long of a resume due to having fewer privileges? Privilege is not earned, it is not something we deserve, it something that is thrust upon us for no other reason that fate. That truth alone needs to stop us short and fill us with humility. Then those of us who have “full cookie jars’ need to ask how we will display sacrificial love to those who have less.
We are afraid to have this conversation because “how dare we ask anyone else to give up something for another?” However, it was sacrifice that won World War II and saved us from becoming a world of tyranny. It was the sacrifice of Martin Luther King Jr. that launched the Civil Rights Movement and the sacrifice of President Lincoln that put an end to slavery. Sacrificial love has launched every single movement of social justice in our history of humanity.
Sacrifical love will bring healing to our nation, one person at a time.
August 15th, 2008 at 7:56 pm
Keeping Race/Ethnicity in the National Discussion of Policy Change – By All Means Necessary!
Too often, discussions on race remain on the surface, triggered by a current event or debate - an affirmative action law, say, or a race-charged case in the Supreme Court. But racial history is long and complex. It is rooted in black and white, but today is also Asian, Latino, Native American, and wonderfully multiracial. Through slavery, segregated schools, ongoing discrimination, and the violence and hopelessness they serve to perpetuate, race and racism have left an indelible mark on all of us.
This election season has given me and many others hope that the discussion is ready to change. Despite fleeting unpleasantness, the campaign has largely been waged on the high-road — a debate of issues among a phalanx of talented and bright candidates. We have now seen millions of Americans cast their ballot for a black man or a white woman.
Angela Blackwell, PolicyLink Blog, March 2008
Now that the dust has settled on the Democratic race for president, our U.S. population is for the first time in history, “choosing” between a “Black” and a “White” man (McCain).. Hillary Clinton’s campaign also clearly paved new ground for women of all hues to step up and be counted. AND the issue remains, will we be able as a nation to have a serious conversation about race/ ethnicity that leads to policy and other structural changes of the magnitude that allow our nation to finally begin to change forever our unfinished legacy in this arena. This work would also to be complete, of course, need to address other historic and current inequities. AND we have the opportunity to start with this fundamental unresolved dilemma. As a psychologist focusing on personal, organizational and community change since the mid 1970’s, I have watched our country ebb and flow in its willingness to tackle this complex issue. In general, we cannot engage in such conversations until we start to unravel the horrific truths of what the first 300 plus years of reality are in our country with respect to the treatment of Native Americans and African descent U.S. citizens. When the conversation also includes the treatment of Mexican, Chinese and/or Japanese Americans, the legacy gets really difficult to face and the typical mainstream white dominated organization moves on to the next “program of the month” or the season. “Diversity” is welcomed and encouraged by these organizations and others as long as it does not bring up too much bad news or too many challenges to the economic and social status quo.
Such a strategy will not support sustained, lasting change. We have to get to the painful ugly past. We have to uncover it and see it for what it was: the violent protracted economic, social and psychological exploitation of hundreds of thousands – indeed millions of people for a LONG time. The implications of this history will not be addressed until we fully name them and look honestly at what it will take to undue this damage. Tim Wise noted in early March of this year, that much of the outrage regarding Jeremiah Wright’s critique of the U.S. was connected to the fact that in many regards Wright was speaking truth. For instance, consider this point regarding Jeremiah Wright’s comments about the September 11th attack:
Deploying the imagery of chickens coming home to roost is not to give thanks for the return of the poultry or to endorse such feathered homecoming as a positive good; rather, it is merely to note two things: first, that what goes around, indeed, comes around–a notion with longstanding theological grounding–and secondly, that the U.S. has indeed engaged in more than enough violence against innocent people to make it just a tad bit hypocritical for us to then evince shock and outrage about an attack on ourselves, as if the latter were unprecedented (Wise, March 08).
I accompanied 21 youth and young adults between 15 and 24 (along with one 8 year old) to the African American Meeting House in Boston, MA on July 18th, 2008. This racially diverse group is participating in an 8 week summer program (with 6 months follow up available) that is preparing them to address issues of race/ethnicity and other forms of oppression in workshop and community settings. Most of them have not been taught the truth about slavery in this country, not to speak of all the other variety of injustices inflicted on people of color. They were learning for the first time facts like the following two: an enslaved person in 1806 was worth about the cost of a Mercedes Benz now; middle class blacks built and owned many of the homes in the part of Beacon Hill that we were sitting in AND when the Anti-Slave Fugitive Act of 1850 was passed, these blacks took their lives in their own hands to continue to support the Underground Railroad in its activities to help Southern blacks get free. They also learned stories of whites (abolitionists) who risked their lives to help fight this exploitation of humans AND that the numbers of whites who took such risks has been exaggerated to make the story easier for us as U.S. citizens to hear.
I have watched these and many hundred young people “get” these issues over the years. We can in this country create a new mind and heart set. The question is, will those with political power set up the institutional and cultural conditions for a societal transformation or will hundreds of people like me and other human rights workers continue to “swim upstream” in our efforts to educate and heal ourselves and our communities regarding the truth of our stories? There are so many success models in educational settings, community organizations, corporate and religious settings across this U.S. There are countless individuals who are doing what they can in their spheres of influence to make a difference. We need a national coordinated movement to transform our country for the next 100 years.
In an exploration of the conditions that set up our inability to effectively engage in “truth and reconciliation” (Batts, 2003/08), I call for the institution of a K through 12 peace curriculum that would tell the whole truth about our past in age appropriate ways. It would further teach young people and adults how to recognize, understand, appreciate and utilize differences (as well as similarities). This process would need to be supported by an effective public policy planning agenda that institutes policies and practices for the long run (50 to 150 years) to eliminate disparities based on race/ethnicity in housing, education, health and health care, job access, wealth, safety, and all other institutional indices of success and achievement of the “ (North) American dream.”
This transformation must further include the articulation and practice of multiple perspectives on what is considered “right and beautiful” in a variety of areas, i.e., how families are raised, what languages are spoken in our communities and institutions, what foods and other resources are available in our stores and markets across this country, and how religious differences are understood and allowed to evolve and be uniquely expressed. The singular escalation of the western world view of “rugged individualism” has outlived its usefulness. In order to address issues as seemingly diverse as global warming, world hunger and obesity, terrorism, and alternative energy sources, we will need to think communally, collaboratively. Cooperation will need to be at least as important culturally as competition.
The collaborative world view is understood as primary culture by many historically excluded groups’ and is accessible through an effective emersion in their historic and cultural experiences and practices. Mainstream U.S. citizens must practice learning from these cultures and their world views (Malidoma, 1999). In addition to being world leaders, we as U.S. citizens must acknowledge what we do not know and what we have devalued. We must let go of our singularly competitive approach to playing on the global stage. In addition to owning and celebrating our greatness as a nation, we must also own our errors, apologize and take steps to make right for past and present misdoings.
Will we continue to stay with the conversation on race/ethnicity? I submit, we must, if we are to remain a relevant player in this country and globally. Further, if peace is our goal, such engagement is inevitable. It appears that “immigrants” (largely Latino/as), Muslims, and even the Chinese, are becoming the “new Negroes”. They collectively are much larger in number than mainstream U.S. white folk. Even if the voices of traditionally excluded groups like African Americans and Native Americans are silenced, the dynamics are alive and well. Perhaps this is our moment to decide once and for all, that equity will be our mission for the 21st century so that when we come to the end of the U.S.’s fifth 100 years, we can say with genuine joy and fervor, “We are free at last.”
August 15th, 2008 at 8:00 pm
Symbolism in the U.S. Presidential Elections: Talking about Race and Gender
By Valerie Batts
Obama and the Democratic party, in providing a voice for women at the Denver convention, have the potential of exercising corrective action in the journey to U.S. racial healing. If women can come together in their support for Barack’s historic candidacy as the first African descent U.S. citizen to become president, it can be seen as a symbolic reversal of a painful, often divisive history.
In the 1870’s, the issue of who would have representation (in this case the vote), pitted black men against women. In that process, black women’s unique needs were minimized in the desire to link “women’s” fate to the “black cause.” This underlying competition of oppressions has been a painful subtext of race/gender dynamics since the inception of the United States.
Black women during the period of slavery, ironically, were viewed as a very good investment as they were typically physically strong and therefore good workers AND they could produce off springs. As black woman began to have and exercise options other than the caretaking ones often available in the post civil war years, their status in the mainstream economy changed.
Over the last quarter century, white women have been viewed as –and, have been– the primary beneficiaries of gender based corrective actions. Black men and black women experience this as a discount. If the Democratic convention can continue to engage all of us in dialog about the complexity of experience and how we learn to recognize, understand and appreciate differences it will be bold and exciting. Having women nominate a woman even as a black man is the “presumptive nominee” models how men can be feminist, black and humanist. Recognizing how and when fair is not equal, takes skill and on-going modeling, education, reflection, power sharing and communication regarding the “what” and the “how”. Such could begin a new legacy in U.S. politics.