tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6155133175831479740.post6340159954396940271..comments2024-02-16T04:05:23.512-05:00Comments on Rev-elution: Obama versus WrightREV-elutionhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08726120253716456109noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6155133175831479740.post-4665346828312882852008-05-02T15:33:00.000-04:002008-05-02T15:33:00.000-04:00I both agree and disagree with Carl's points.A N&O...I both agree and disagree with Carl's points.<BR/><BR/>A N&O staff writer perhaps phrased it best as noting the break between Obama and Wright represents a conflict between a "new vision of race in America contrasted with a civil-rights disaffection toward the government" and past racism. The former recognizes many areas of progress in the last 60 years, while the latter dwells on pain in the past and the realization that we still struggle with racism in our midst.<BR/><BR/>I don't think Obama is ignorant of his ethnic past, especially with Wright in the pulpit every Sunday for 20 years. Obama seems to be saying, however, that if we can't recognize that considerable progress has been made, we remain mired in the victim status that clouds our current outlook and forward vision. He says, "Yes, much of that is true, BUT ... where do we go from here? How do we take the next step, which, necessarily, will include all of us and affect all of us?"<BR/><BR/>Wright is intelligent and articulate in stating, as Carl noted, the majority opinion espoused in black churches for many years. He is correct in most of what he says and can effectively argue his opinions in many other areas. And, he wasn't the first or last person to use hyperbole to make his points, then have these extreme comments taken out of context and pseudoanalyzed. But - and this is a big BUT - some of his views are not supported by fact and when he repeats them for the press, he risks sounding like a buffoon (which he isn't) and people use those verbal gaffes to attack Wright's credibility. As well as anyone associated with him. He ends up handing his enemies ammunition to shoot with, diluting his message.<BR/><BR/>** Black brains hardwired to "learn differently"? Why does he provide fodder for every racist by inferring that black brains are different from others?<BR/>** The government supplies drugs to blacks to either destroy or weaken them? This sounds like the old conspiracy theory that the CIA was distributing cocaine and heroin in black communities. And every government employee, black and white, kept their mouths shut about it.<BR/>** The U.S. government made up the AIDS virus to kill blacks? I fully understand his (and Krista Summit's) recollection of the infamous Tuskegee experiments, and I understand it's that past reality that makes Wright's statements seem possible, but they are not plausible today. It is based on the concept that the thousands working on AIDS today are all in cahoots with each other in this massive conspiracy. And that none of them are black. To repeat Wright's beliefs in this area is to say that predatory human experimentation on African-Americans is ongoing at the Tuskegee level. And, as Krista has noted, it keeps some blacks from receiving proper care.<BR/><BR/>Of course, many white preachers of national note have made their own fact free statements on various matters in the past, including racial and homophobic slurs. These statements also pander to fear and conspiracy in order to make some point (usually to make money or gain power).<BR/><BR/>I don't think for an instant that Obama has all the same views as Wright, nor should we automatically make this type of connection. But, we are in a political campaign where every little nano-particle of negativity is used by Obama's opponent to pander to the fear of some in the white community in order to win votes that could be decisive. And, unfortunately, the sound-bite impaired press plays right into these hands.<BR/><BR/>Carl is right in stating that the controversy over Wright is a glimpse into the black church and a reminder of the African-American anger, perhaps rage, toward injustice. It no doubt makes whites uncomfortable, but not all are uncomfortable for the same reasons. And not all were ignorant of this anger. It will require confronting the past to coordinate the future.<BR/><BR/>Kameron Carter at Duke notes that "younger blacks are not rejecting the preacher-prophet tradition, they're trying to live it more deeply by calling to its ethos of reconciliation." Obama has downplayed race to aspire to what he has called "black, but more than black." I don't agree with Carl when he writes that this is a black man trying to prove he isn't too black to serve in leadership. I think it's a man who thinks we all have a future as well as a past.<BR/><BR/>Yes, Wright is and has been correct in may of his statements. But he has to acknowledge the current politic and choose which is more important to him and black America. Does he want Obama president or is it more important to immediately shout that he is right on everything? If the latter, Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson welcome him to the spoilers club.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6155133175831479740.post-84670031772996513712008-05-02T11:56:00.000-04:002008-05-02T11:56:00.000-04:00Rev: You are the first person in print or verbally...Rev: You are the first person in print or verbally mention the Tuskeegee syphillis experiment. I can tell you the fear surrounding that is very real. When I worked in AIDS ministry, I heard firsthand how many HIV positive black men and women refused free treatment at AIDS research clinics (such as the wonderful DART clinic at Duke) solely because they fear its another Tuskeegee. We can cluck our tounges and say "well I wouldn't..." but the precedent for predatory human experimentation on African-Americans is real and documented - not an Internet urban myth.Kristaspherehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12667713491189951618noreply@blogger.com