Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

There's Nothing Wrong with Rev. Wright

By Sean Gonsalves, AlterNet. Posted March 25, 2008.


The manufactured controversy over Rev. Jeremiah Wright ignores the tradition of 'prophetic preaching' in African-American churches.
Gonsalves

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

Also by Sean Gonsalves

Our Great 'Secretocracy'
Government secrecy does not make us safer; it undermines the Constitution.
May 6, 2008

The News Media: Watchdog or Lap Dog?
It is becoming more and more difficult for the news media to undertake serious investigative reporting.
Apr 28, 2008

A Bad Week for Journalism
Why Americans should care that print journalism is going down the drain.
Apr 22, 2008

More stories by Sean Gonsalves

Get AlterNet in
your mailbox!

 
Advertisement

Good thing for Martin Luther King admirers -- blogs, talk radio, and 24/7 cable news "analysis" weren't around in the Sixties.

King might not have the status of patron saint in the temple of American civil religion. Then again, King is safely dead. While America may be the land of "second-chances," its people are definitely not the type to give props to a prophet while he or she is alive.

In criticizing U.S. policy in Vietnam, King said America was "one of the main purveyors of violence" in the world. Imagine King, with his sing-song black preacher cadence, saying that over and over and over again on CNN.

Longtime readers of this column might say this is typical Sean Gonsalves fare. And it's true. So, let me explain just how typical I am.

I'm just a typical American who happens to be black, and no matter what Limbaugh says about Barack's grandma, there's a difference between typical and stereotypical.

Like most typical black people my age, from the time I was a little boy, through high school, right up until early adulthood, I spent a lot of time in the black Baptist Church. Tuesday night prayer meetings. Wednesday night bible study. And Sunday service.

It's "typical" because something like 90 percent of all African-Americans are nominally-affiliated believers. And that's why I can say with certainty that no black person in America was shocked to hear Rev. Jeremiah Wright's "controversial" preaching and are probably more shocked at the hysterical and hypocritical manufactured controversy surrounding Wright.

I know we're in the new PC era of "colorblindness," where the word "racist" has been flipped on its head by the fading neo-right to mean: any public talk about race, without doing the Bill Cosby/Thomas Sowell routine, is "racist."

People are free to think whatever they want but just so we're clear: a racist, by definition, is someone who explicitly or implicitly believes one racial group is morally and intellectually superior to others. Only in a warped world is it considered "racist" to talk publicly about the legacy of white supremacy.

So let me tell you 'bout my typical black mother. She's a church-going woman and she made sure my younger brother and I were church-going kids. No if, and, or she would whoop our butts. And not just church. My mother was a big fan of Sunday school too.

Boredom and longing to watch the 49ers or Raiders on TV aside, my Sunday school teachers sparked in me a deep and abiding interest in studying the bible (King James Version).

As a child of extreme energy and passion, I was drawn to the books of the Prophets (Jeremiah, Amos, Ezekiel, Isaiah etc.) -- at first because it was fun to see my Sunday school teachers squirm when asked a hard question about, say, Elijah murdering hundreds Baalists, after he already proved his point. You'd think the fire would have be enough to settle the Who's-God-is-Real contest but nope -- Elijah just had to put the sword to every non-believer in sight.

It wasn't until I began seriously studying the prophetic tradition that I came across the work of the great Rabbi Abraham Joshua Herschel. First, Heschel taught me what a prophet is not: "A prophet is neither a messenger, an oracle, a seer, nor an ecstatic," but "a witness to the divine pathos, one who bears testimony to God's concern for human beings."

Reading the prophet's words, "one cannot long retain the security of a prudent, impartial observer. The prophets do not offer reflections about ideas in general. Their words are onslaughts, scuttling illusions of false security, challenging evasions, calling faith to account, questioning prudence and impartiality."

As any black church-goer will tell you, prophetic preaching is the communal lifeblood of black religious experience in America. Always has been. Rev. Jeremiah Wright comes out of that experience -- an experience I personally encountered the Sunday I attended Oakland's Allen Temple.


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: hagee, obama, politics, religion, rev. jeremiah wright

Sean Gonsalves is a syndicated columnist and news editor with the Cape Cod Times.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
The color of hate!
Posted by: carbon-based on Mar 25, 2008 6:21 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Would we be able to accept Wrights comments if they were made by a white pastor regarding blacks..I think not..hate is hate, no matter what the color.

If Obama had been up front this wouldn't have even been noticed. When one considers 20 years of supporting an anti white religion, combined with his wifes questionable anti american and anti white comments, a not so great picture emerges!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: The color of hate! Posted by: Wacre
» RE: The color of hate! Posted by: Cesco8
» RE: The color of hate! Posted by: Lector
» RE: The color of hate! Posted by: herronsmith
» well stated Posted by: KaptainSpiffy
» RE: The color of hate! Posted by: rwday@cox.net
» RE: The color of hate! Posted by: QCao009
» RE: The color of hate! Posted by: newtype_alpha
» RE: The color of hate! Posted by: dougo
» RE: The color of hate! Posted by: bluepilgrim
» RE: The color of hate! Posted by: bluepilgrim
Hey Carbon-Based . . .
Posted by: Scientz on Mar 25, 2008 7:45 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
. . . have you seen any of the other sermons?

If Jeremiah Wright is "hateful" than Rush Limbaugh is the Grand Dragon of the KKK.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» how many repugnicans... Posted by: Annapurna1
Wright also in the tradition of Lincoln and Jefferson
Posted by: dhess on Mar 25, 2008 8:20 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am a white American Baptist pastor.

I would point out that it is unfair to judge any preacher by taking a few small quotes out of context. Take for example, Jesus' words: “If anyone comes to Me and does not hate his father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters, yes, and his own life also, he cannot be My disciple." (Luke 14:26).

It is proper not only to pray that God bless America but also recognize that all nations, including America, stand under the judgment and righteous condemnation of God for their sins. It is not just black preachers who have pointed this out.

Read Abraham Lincoln's Second Inaugural Address - http://www.bartleby.com/124/pres32.html

Note also the words of Thomas Jefferson (inscribed on his memorial in Washington, D.C.) - "I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just; that his justice cannot sleep forever." Jefferson's words, as were Lincoln's, were in regard to slavery.

There are many sins for which God should damn America. There are many sins for which God should damn me.

Listen to Rev. Wright's remarks in context. See the article and video here - http://www.alternet.org/blogs/election08/80481/

See this video which contains the "God damn America" remark - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RvMbeVQj6Lw

Lastly, see this video where Wright preaches on Jesus' unending love, not hate - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dqphQcOUI4A&feature=related

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

From a dumbass white boy.
Posted by: WhatNow? on Mar 25, 2008 9:11 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
When I first heard the reverend's remarks. It reminded me of the things Martin Luther King Jr. had to say during his last year. Second, when I heard some of the whining from the MSM, I thought, "the truth hurts huh?"

I think Rev. Wright's eloquence pales compared to MLK jr.'s but I can not and will not argue that he is wrong. He makes me sad, angry, and disappointed but only because he what said if it's not true is a lot closer to the truth than what most of the talking heads in this country say.

I also think he didn't go as far as he could. He didn't mention:

bashing women and children's heads in at Sand Creek.

murdering thousands on Philipinos during and after the Spanish American war.

sending troops out to gas and beat veterans during the Bonus marches.

poisoning thousands of servicemen with radiation during nuclear bomb testing in the 40's, 50's, and 60's and then denying them benefits later.

Did he even mention the millions of women and children the US military murdered in Viet Nam?

If anything Rev. Wright was too kind and limited in his criticism. It's a shame there are so many in this country that are ignorant of history. I can't see how we can make things better if we do not acknowledge the past.

This country seemed to make progress even if it was incredibly slow for it's first 200 years but we've been digressing at least 30 if not 40 years now. If more people are willing to face the truth, we might be able to improve once again, but the outlook doesn't look too good.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: From a dumbass white boy. Posted by: davidbdr
» RE: From a dumbass white boy. Posted by: Cooltruth
» RE: From a dumbass white boy. Posted by: BCcovers
» RE: From a dumbass white boy. Posted by: anonymous black writer
He speaks the truth
Posted by: phindrup on Mar 26, 2008 3:00 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Having seen several clips of Rev. Jeremiah Wright here in Australia, I wonder why the fuss?
That the blacks in the US were both disadvantaged and mistreated is beyond question.
That the US bombed and bombed and bombed, and the population ‘never batted an eye’ is also beyond dispute.
It may surprise and irritate Americans generally, who seem to believe that one American life is worth a million of anybody elses, and that the general American view of the world is the only valid reality, but the rest of the world sees the US pretty much as Rev. Wright describes it, and for us any other life is worth at least as much as any American life is worth.
The assumption that the US is a, nay, the force for good in the world is a serious delusion.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: He speaks the truth Posted by: Cooltruth
Racist, but socially acceptably racist.
Posted by: aouie01 on Mar 26, 2008 3:11 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
When one hears the whole speeches of Jeremiah Wright, it is quite clear that Jeremiah is making valid points of grievance. Mike Huckabee responds to the issue well at 3min 21sec into this linked video on youtube by explaining how it is understandable that people like Jeremiah carry a chip on their shoulders and should be given some slack (apart from other good points Mike makes).

While I like the issues that Jeremiah talks about (in the few videos I have seen), and for the most past it is very well worded, I do recognize that Jeremiah is yet another socially acceptable racist. But no more so than many of the feminist group meetings or the spiritually oriented "goddess" workshops are sexist. It is somewhat socially acceptable to unfairly discriminate on the basis of some characteristic if one belongs to the side of the characteristic that was historically unfairly discriminated against.

Hardly any of us are free from almost sub-conscious unfair discriminations on the basis of race or gender, but I would not consider all of us racists or sexists. To be comfortable with discriminating on the basis of race or gender in manners that is clearly unfair in underlying principles is what makes me refer to people as being (unfairly) racist or sexist. I have no problems with being friendly (and maybe even friends) with racists or sexists, but will likely point out (and sometimes condemn or combat) the racism and sexism if and when it seems relevant and called for by my sensibilities.

Sincerely,
Aouie

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Why is the dictionary relevant? Posted by: BenjamminH
Unfortunately, hardly anyone listened to the full text of Rev. Wright's sermon!
Posted by: TarryFaster on Mar 26, 2008 6:27 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I was blown away when I saw the full, unedited video of Rev. Wright's sermon! He was quoting -- with his "Faith Footnote" -- from something that he saw a white man (Ambassador Pike) present on the Fox News channel. He (Rev. Wright) then goes on to repudiate that kind of destructive attitude and admonishes us to do some serious, "... self examination ... " for peace! Shame on Fox! Watch it here.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

My Perspective...
Posted by: dave16 on Mar 26, 2008 6:53 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Please see...www.discussrace.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Black ministers.
Posted by: Doubtom on Mar 26, 2008 9:01 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
For all the flack that this black minister is catching over his hyperbolic delivery, we seem to have overlooked that whatever style black ministers employ, they are likely just copying the white minister's style.

There was a time when blacks didn't even have a church they could attend and when they were finally allowed to have a church and ministers it isn't surprising that they would copy the white minister's style. This inflammatory rhetoric has its origins in the ranting and raving of white cpn artists who called themselves ministers. Its all a scam but, let's be clear about where it started and with whom.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Black ministers. Posted by: january37
» RE: Black ministers. Posted by: Jeffrey Levy
Where is evidence of the AIDS comments?
Posted by: jiclemens on Mar 26, 2008 9:04 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have looked high and low, listened to most of the clips and can find no evidence so far of him making claims the government deliberately infected Africans with AIDS. Can someone please point me to it? Everything else he has said has had a proper context in the sermons. What was the context for this remark?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

& Who's being Racist???
Posted by: Andie927 on Mar 26, 2008 9:44 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"a racist, by definition, is someone who explicitly or implicitly believes one racial group is morally and intellectually superior to others. Only in a warped world is it considered "racist" to talk publicly about the legacy of white supremacy."

By your own definition: in the same paragraph, you are claiming "all white people are guilty", because of what you call a "legacy or white supremacy"!

Some black people are guilty of 'black criminality', does that mean there's a 'legacy of black criminality'. NO!

Painting any racial, or gender group with a broad brush and making broad statements that YOU apply to ALL within that group, is:
Devisive, Hate-Mongering! and Prejudicial!

Some white people, may have practiced and/or believed in white supremacy, but NOT ALL!
That's what was/is wrong with Rev. Wright's speech, and what makes it Hate-Mongering!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: & Who's being Racist??? Posted by: DaBear
» Uhh...Check your words Andie927 Posted by: BenjamminH
Amen
Posted by: tanith on Mar 26, 2008 9:52 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
And thank you for your honesty, Mr. Gonslaves.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

So, blacks are unpatriotic huh?
Posted by: Kym525 on Mar 26, 2008 10:21 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I guess to the ignorant white posters in here who can't stop salivating over being able to call someone black "racist", they were too busy smoking pot to pay attention in history class or they'd know blacks have fought in EVERY single war this country has known. Remember Crispus Attucks--the first black man to have lost his life before the Revolutionary War? How about the black minutemen at the Battle of Lexington: Pompy of Braintree, Prince of Brookline, Cato Wood of Arlington, and Peter Salem? Blacks also fought in the Battle of Bunker Hill, where former slave Salem Poor received official commendation as "a brave and gallant soldier."

At the end of the WWII, not a single black soldier or sailor had been awarded the Medal of Honor until 1997 when President Clinton presented the Medal of Honor to seven soldiers: Vernon J. Baker, Charles L. Thomas, John R. Fox, Ruben Rivers, Edward A. Carter, Jr., Willy F. James, Jr., and George Watson.

But hey, we're not patriotic.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» They are Posted by: BCcovers
» Activist Patriotism Posted by: newtype_alpha
apples and taste
Posted by: DaBear on Mar 26, 2008 10:52 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
My only disagreement with Sean's piece was the apple-biting moment. Sure it's a funny bit but the reality is, that preacher chompin' on his apple was a fundamentalist sonofabitch. Argue a principled argument but don't pull a cheap PR stunt to win via smackdown. That's bullshit. That's why 'Merkuh is still butt-stoopid and proud of her ignorance.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: apples and taste Posted by: Shredder
We Should Be Praising Wright
Posted by: Jeffrey Levy on Mar 26, 2008 10:52 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
From the little I've read of Wright's sermons, they follow the tradition of the Hebrew prophets, who were concerned to call their rulers to justice.

In the messages I have read, Rev. Wright points out that America should be damned, not because of hate, but because of its actions: The terror bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the killing of millions of Native Americans and Blacks, the killing of millions of Iraqi civilians -- including at least 850,000 children; the continuing support for dictatorships, terror and torture around the world.

As a minister in training, I will look forward not to criticizing such comments, but to emulating them and learning from them.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

One Question...
Posted by: BCcovers on Mar 26, 2008 11:05 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
To all those supporting BHO and Mr. Wright, I have one question:

Do statements like that bring us together as Americans or prompt a divisive you vs. me mentaility?

Well actually I have two...

How can one preach unification and bridging the racial gap when they support such divisive (I'm not even going to call it racist) rhetoric?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: One Question... Posted by: mulberrybank
» An answer... Posted by: abrunvand
» Two answers Posted by: Kym525
» RE: Two answers Posted by: BCcovers
» RE: One Question... Posted by: anonymous black writer
P+P+P=R
Posted by: deakon on Mar 26, 2008 1:01 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
i have been doing racial justice work for 8 yrs now, and one thing we are clear on, is the fact that priviledge + power + predjudice = racism. there is only one group in america that bears that disctinction of all three factors. WHITE AMERICA. i know...i know. white america does not want to hear that. the sense of guilt that many whites carry when conftonted with this definition (as well as white priviledge) causes them to reject it out of hand. however, after a 6 hour workshop, i have never had a group of white participants who were not at least willing to consider this definition. anyone can be prejudice. anyone can be in a powerful station. any group can assume a certain level of privi. it is only when all three of these elements come together, that racism (instituional is the only distinction) manifests.

does this mean that all white americans are racists? of course not. its not about blaming white america for anything. its about understanding that when you have a socio-political system est. by white men, for the sake of white men, racism will probably emerge. for a good historical account of this, check out PBS.org/race (or something like that). PBS offers many resources on the study of racism that back what im stating. im utilizing PBS specifically because, most people consider them a credible source. wouldnt want yall to think this black boy just made it up all on his own.

i disagree with the notion that "anyone can be racist". thats something guilty whites tell themselves to feel better. its something people of color tell themselves to appear as non-threatening to the establishment (which by all accounts, is still white). so to whites, stop quoting me the hispanic, or black guy who the other night said something that made you feel less guilt (if you feel any at all-i personally think guilt is not only a wasted emotion, but it often hinders people from making changes that could be powerful).

the sooner white america can own "white privi" the better this nation will be. as a person of color (POC), im tired of fighting racism. i need white allies who are seriously committed to the struggle. i need more tim wise and jane elliots in my life. you, white reader, could be one of those, if you can just take the time to listen, and stop running from the truth everytime your confronted with it.

women should not have to battle sexism, the handicapped should not have to battle for access to public spaces, homosexuals should not have to battle homophobia, and poc should not have to fight racism. but we do. why? because the US has always had a blame the vic mentality.

and do me a favor...dont even respond to this until you have checked out the PBS website re racism in depth. like i said, ive been studying the issue for almost a decade, and your "opinion" alone just wont cut it anymore. i dont mind when people disagree (it goes with the job). but dont quote your uncle so and so as proof. dont site me fox news as unequivicle evidence that black churches are abound with hate.

when white america decides against a nation or a people, there are usually consequences. you know...bombs (how many countries-including...somalia?), policies (jim crow, plessy v ferguson, fugitive slave act), incarcerations (from san quentin to abu ghraib), mass extinctions (Japan, vietnam), etc...

when people of color in america hate someone...go ahead alternet readers. finish that sentence for me, then talk about racism.

we all have opinions...show me the academia.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» there is no struggle Posted by: KaptainSpiffy
» RE: there is no struggle Posted by: deakon
» that's the biggest problem Posted by: KaptainSpiffy
» i believe you misunderstood my point Posted by: KaptainSpiffy
Thank you, Mr. Gonsalves!
Posted by: Joni50 on Mar 26, 2008 6:56 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Rev. Wright isn't racist, hateful, or anything else. He simply expressed how his people feel about being on the reciving end of racism and hate. People who say "I would have walked out," well, they don't know what they would have done if they'd walked a mile in the congregation's shoes.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Definitions
Posted by: YogiBear on Mar 26, 2008 9:58 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
People are free to think whatever they want but just so we're clear: a racist, by definition, is someone who explicitly or implicitly believes one racial group is morally and intellectually superior to others.

If we're going to quote definitions, at least we ought to be fair. There are two definitions of "racist." The first is above. The second is simply "racial prejudice or discrimination."

I don't think Wright is racist. I do think he's a bit homophobic, but that's hardly unusual for Christian pastors.

He did make a comment about not being able to trust Hillary Clinton recently, because of Bill Clinton's indiscretions, which I found to be quite misogynistic -- blaming the wife for the husband's cheating. But, once again, that's hardly unusual for the preacher class.

But I am a little surprised that the editors of this website are so quick to defend a man who is a member of a religon they are so quick to trash in so many other instances.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Definitions Posted by: asaspades9
» RE: Who said anything about reverse racism? Posted by: anonymous black writer
» RE: Definitions Posted by: rickiey
» RE: Definitions Posted by: asaspades9
» RE: Definitions Posted by: anonymous black writer
» RE: Definitions Posted by: anonymous black writer
A BIG Amen to telling the truth
Posted by: beijaflor on Mar 26, 2008 10:00 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
and a big thank you to Rev. Wright. Telling the truth and shaming the devil in all of us and reminding us that we have miles and miles to go. (and this is from a white gal out here in Santa Cruz, CA, land of the ahem, so-called politically correct)
I found Senator Obama's speech to be coherent and thoughtful and inspiring. NO effing sound bites for the MSM, ha ha! Senator Clinton's remarks in 'response', today were pitiful...and so it goes.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Bullseye
Posted by: newtype_alpha on Mar 27, 2008 9:23 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's "typical" because something like 90 percent of all African-Americans are nominally-affiliated believers. And that's why I can say with certainty that no black person in America was shocked to hear Rev. Jeremiah Wright's "controversial" preaching and are probably more shocked at the hysterical and hypocritical manufactured controversy surrounding Wright.

Seconded. In fact the entire episode really DOES reflect the disparity of power between blacks and whites in this country in that the main stream media--like just about everything else in America--pretty much is dominated by upper class whites, with upper-class white sensibilities and values. If CNN, for example, had a majority of black employees, producers and "journalists" on staff, the reaction would have been more analytical as to what this says for Obama's agenda regarding social justice, maybe speculating that this potential nominee is looking forward to a more balanced and pragmatic foreign policy that doesn't include jingoistic imperialism.

Wright scares white people with his honesty, while to most black people everything he's said is practically common knowledge. But more importantly, Senator Obama was kind enough and eloquent enough to explain this fact to blacks AND whites so both of us could understand, not only what Wright was saying, but how each side interprets those comments. As Obama pointed out, white people (well, working-class whites who aren't among the ranks of the elite) resent having the legacy of white supremacy put in their face all the time since as far as they know they've never been in a position to benefit from it; BUT, Obama reminds them, that legacy DOES exist, even if current generations have distanced themselves from it. It's because of that distance that pointing out the legacy of discrimination and injustice in America is in many ways counter-productive, and so Obama says to black people at the same time "Yes, we've been screwed, but it's time to bury the past and move on to the future!"

It's not THAT unusual for blacks to think "God damn America," considering all the underhanded things America and its institutions has done to us over the years and continues to do to us even now (Rodney King wasn't in the 60s, you know). But we're extremely fortunate to have a man like Obama running for the Presidency right now: it's a very a rare statesman who can actually bridge the gap between two completely different cultures with such a fundamentally different understanding of what it means to be American.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

So what does make you so strong?
Posted by: Glynrd Skynard on Mar 27, 2008 10:47 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The author of the article quotes Rev. Wright saying, "He listed well-known black achievers from Sojourner Truth to, yes, Bill Cosby, periodically punctuating his laundry list with the "what makes you so strong" question." Can you explain why he didn't list Oprah, Colin Powell, Condi Rice, Clarence Thomas or Tiger Woods? Last I heard he didn't much care for them, guess they sidled up to close to the "typical white people." So, "What does make this people so strong?" It seems much too much like it's a concerted mistrust and down right hatred of white American's. When will we (descendants of white American’s (most of whom never owned a slave or persecuted a black American)) finally be free of the debt held over us by black American's? How long is the typical white American supposed to carry some nebulous sense of guilt for past sins? Is there any payment that would really satisfy wrongs that were done? I think BHO's church (and others who espouse the “biblical prophetic tradition”) needs to invite Bill Cosby in to bring a positive, motivating message to that body of believers. Show me one instance where hate speech produced a positive result. No, I haven’t experienced the pain that many black American’s have gone through but holding tight to yesterday’s violations WILL NEVER LIFT THOSE WHO ARE DOWNTRODDEN. So then what is this “prophetic message” designed to do? Tough as it sounds, it's up to black America to put their boots on & put their best foot forward till they have cleared all the debris that has encumbered them and it’s up to us “typical whites” to help our fellow Americans.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: So what does make you so strong? Posted by: anonymous black writer
Race & Class
Posted by: expat8 on Mar 27, 2008 10:48 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Sean, first off thanks for an excellent article.

I am not a Christian but yr comments about the role of prophets were helpful in understanding the tenor of Wright's delivery. I have seen preachers on TV over the years who use similar emotive techniques and assume that is part of the tradition. I also listened to Wright's 'damn America' speech in full, including the HIV comment which is the only one I found over the top (though not implausible), and felt he made excellent points.

As regards Obama's speech something is missing in your article and the comments, namely analyzing the dynamic of so-called racism. There can be such a thing as 'positive racism'. There is no problem with a predominantly black congregation using the 'we' word to reference 'us as blacks in America'. There are Jewish we's, White we's, Asian we's and so forth, and why not?

The problem with all such we's is if they are used as part of an aggressive 'us versus them' dynamic. It's not the 'we' that is a problem but the aggression. More importantly, any sense of 'we' is essentially a class distinction in the root sense of the term as in a class or order – both horizontally and vertically speaking. And this is what Obama touched on. After describing how both blacks and whites have reasonable grounds for anxiety and resentment he went on to state - paraphrasing from memory - that the real problem is people being marginalized by the ruling elites. By framing things thusly he placed racially different 'we's' within the overall context of class distinction. Therein he is correct.

Also the theme running through his speech was that of unifying through proactive empathy, or 'caring'. This caring is the basis of creating a truly enlightened society, or christian society for those in that religion, or truly 'american' society in the way many still believe it should be. This caring is what allows differences to exist, including racial ones, including communities within communities within communities. Such collectives are essentially good, though like all dynamics in the human realm they can be twisted into perversion, aggression, or 'bad'. Such empathy, or caring, is what makes the difference between uplifting communities (we's) and 'racist' or otherwise aggressive ones.

Lastly, one elephant in the room with all this sort of discussion, which Obama has encouraged us to engage in is the simple truth that one of the most glaring examples of prejudice is the one against whites in general and white males in particular. Yes, whites have been collectively guilty of all sorts of terrible things including genocide, racism and so forth. But again, along with popular prejudices which come and go along with the overall culture, many of the most egregious crimes have been perpetrated by the leadership. A good example is how today the US is the single greatest war criminal regime and yet most of its people would not go along with this if they really understood what is going on in their name, funded by their tax dollars. I suspect it has always been this way, more or less. But more importantly, whites are simply not allowed to get together as whites in the same way that womens' groups or ethnic minority groups can get together even though in many areas of the country now whites are minorities too. So there is a double standard there that is politically incorrect to raise and yet is a definite, real dynamic in the culture experienced by many day after day in family and work life.

Well, much more that could be said on this. But my point is that there is another level here that is not quite getting discussed.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Can you say, "INEQUALITY," FOR ALL WHITES?
Posted by: Hearthis2 on Mar 28, 2008 8:06 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Because that is what the Black community preaches.

IF SENATORS CLINTON OR MCCAIN had uttered the words, "TYPICAL BLACKS," they WOULD have been asked to step down and not run. Sharpten and Jackson (And probably Wright and Farrakhan), would have been on NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN, FOX, and any other format they could venture onto screaming at the top of their lungs for thier resignment.

Let's face it-prejudice only exists for Blacks...WHites, HIspanics, Asians...we ALL do not count.

That is the simple truth.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Start a new ethnic group to help Whites...
Posted by: Hearthis2 on Mar 28, 2008 8:09 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Call it RIGHTS for WHITES RFW

Whites need Affirmative Action rights...

Housing rights....

Medical rights....

Being a minority in EVERY major city in America surely makes this true.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» no they don't Posted by: KaptainSpiffy
TO: RACE & CLASS
Posted by: Hearthis2 on Mar 28, 2008 8:21 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hey your right...Obama did us a favor...we are talking about RACE and how UNEQUALITY TO WHITES has been around for years with no-one coming to their defense...so for that...we owe him a, "thanks."

Obama will go down in history as the Black guy that finally had Whites sitting up and saying, "Hey we want equality too!"

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» you are trying too hard Posted by: KaptainSpiffy
» RE: not sure I want equality Posted by: YogiBear
» RE: not sure I want equality Posted by: anonymous black writer
WRONG MESSAGE
Posted by: Sy Ence on Mar 31, 2008 7:10 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think it's time everyone came down from their pulpit (soapbox) and went into the classroom. Rhetoric won't fix this country, but maybe a little education will. Well, it couldn't hurt. Stop preaching biblical nonsense and let's sit down and really discuss the issues that matter-racism, sexism, oil wars, drug wars. It doesn't matter where we begin, but stop using the past (2000 years ago) to address radically different problems of the present. It doesn't work. Never has, Never will.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

HA!
Posted by: rjgwood on Mar 31, 2008 9:13 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Obviously you have no clue about what is preached in white, religious fundamentalist churches throughout this country, although anyone who was paying attention could have gotten a clue about this by listening to Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell after 9/11.

White fundie churches preach that America is the new Saddam and Gomorrah, the city that god destroys in the old testament because of its sinfulness.

Get real.

Besides, tell me one thing that Rev. Wright said that you can absolutely prove wrong?

A government that has stood by and allowed things like the Tuskegee experiment, Japanese internment camps and participation in the killing of democratically elected leaders in Chile and the establishment of the Pinochet dictatorship is more than capable enough of comitting any of the offenses that Rev. Wright accuses it of.

Rhonda

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: HA! Posted by: anonymous black writer
Homophobic??
Posted by: lovetruth on Apr 21, 2008 12:07 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
REv.Wright is far from homophobic. He allows gay marriage and is against the persecution of gays. You obviously like slapping assumptions based on your own hate for christians.

I also wanted to say that Hillary Clinton hasn't been called a "n&%#@r" so why isit so offensive?

Wright was refering to the black people who claim that the Clintons are "black".

The comment about Wright saying that Clinton playing black people was true and I have always thought that!!!

Please people..o read before commenting.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]