Why do people accept Barack Obama as African-American?

Forums: Politics
Email this Topic • Print this Page

Tell me if I'm wrong, but Barack Obama is bi-racial; that's all. He is only Black if one subscribes to the racial "one-drop" concept. So, if America is not to be considered racist against Barack Obama, shouldn't he be bi-racial, not African-American (aka Black)?

Plus, having been raised by the Caucasian part of his parentage, why is he seen as a Black American? I mean children of divorce many times identify with the parent that had custody and raised the child.

And, since Black America is very aware of the racial inequities of American history, why does Black America now get to seemingly subscribe to the "one-drop" racial paradigm and claim that Barack Obama is Black? I'm not talking about all Black Americans, but I would believe a large enough percentage for the mass media to jump on the bandwagon that Barack Obama is Black.

Barack Obama is bi-racial. Bi-racial is not Black; it is bi-racial. Being a child of a mixed race marriage, is not like being a child of a mixed religious marriage where it can be claimed by the child that he/she chose one religion over the other, or parents can say they are raising the child in one faith or the other.

By the way, if Barack Obama was running in the early 20th century, he would not have been identified as just Black or African-American. There was a specific term used for children of bi-racial marriages; used by both Whites and Blacks, and no one was insulted. But today, he is bi-racial; that's all, unless, I believe, one still (probably innocently) accepts the Ante-Bellum Southern racial paradigms.

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 3,731 • Replies: 63

No top replies

Colbert Questions Obama's Blackness

0 Replies

Near as I can figure it if you can locate any Black genes in your blood line and and wish to identify as black, your in. There might be some bottom limit, such as your skin being noticeably tan, but I don't know. I have seen some claim to be black who genetically can be more than 20% black, so it is not a majority thing.

I am genetically 5% American Indian....Maybe I should be Indian next week. After that Irish sounds fun.

0 Replies

Quote:

if Barack Obama was running in the early 20th century, he would not have been identified as just Black or African-American. There was a specific term used for children of bi-racial marriages; used by both Whites and Blacks, and no one was insulted.

This is the most ignorant thing I have read on the internet all week.

In the early 20th century not only were there deeply offensive slurs against bi-racial marriages-- these marriages were ILLEGAL in most states.

This post is a sick joke.

0 Replies

The post is also ironic given the fact that ANY black blood in a person has historically made them african american.

0 Replies

ebrown_p wrote:

In the early 20th century not only were there deeply offensive slurs against bi-racial marriages-- these marriages were ILLEGAL in most states.

This post is a sick joke.

I have a hard time believing that very many people would know that or care, but we can always pick a new name. The point of the OP is black/something else, near as I can figure. Is Multi Ethnic OK? Multi racial? I did my census yesterday, I put myself down as "mutt". I assume that you have a problem with that term as well.

0 Replies

littlek wrote:

The post is also ironic given the fact that ANY black blood in a person has historically made them african american.

The Jews did that as well right? I'd like to think that progress is possible.

0 Replies

I believe this was the term that Foofie was referring to (the one that no one was insulted by).

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fd/ColoredDrinking.jpg

0 Replies

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/27/opinion/27dilday.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

Quote:

Op-Ed Contributor
Go Back to Black

By K. A. DILDAY
Published: February 27, 2008
London

I'M black again. I was black in Mississippi in the 1970s but sometime in the 1980s I became African-American, with a brief pause at Afro-American. Someone, I think it was Jesse Jackson, in the days when he had that kind of clout, managed to convince America that I preferred being African-American. I don't.

Slightly aside the point, but interesting none the less

0 Replies

ebrown_p wrote:

Quote:

if Barack Obama was running in the early 20th century, he would not have been identified as just Black or African-American. There was a specific term used for children of bi-racial marriages; used by both Whites and Blacks, and no one was insulted.

This is the most ignorant thing I have read on the internet all week.

In the early 20th century not only were there deeply offensive slurs against bi-racial marriages-- these marriages were ILLEGAL in most states.

This post is a sick joke.

You should read my statement above carefully, since when I referred to Barack Obama, it was in the context of having mixed parentage. In the early 20th century that was referred to as mulatto. It was not a pejorative term at that time. And, he would not have been referred to as "Colored," (referring to your photograph posted) as were children of marriages where both parents were Black. I don't believe one should be offended by historical facts, especially on a forum that is supposed to value intellectual honesty.

Also, your point above about bi-racial marriages having slurs made against them, and being illegal in many states, is a non-sequitor to my post, and in my opinion, seems like an ad hominem comment.

If you can't answer my original question, as to whether Barack Obama, being a child of an inter-racial marriage should be considered Black or African-American, since it would be giving credence to the racist "one-drop" paradigm of race, you need not make false accusations about the post being a "sick joke."

To be precise, Barack Obama, obviously has every right to identify with Black America, and Black America has every right to identify with Barack Obama, but he is still bi-racial, and not Black, if one wants to be precise.

In my opinion, the Democratic Party might like everyone with any Black ancestry to identify themselves as Black or African-American, since that might help sway that individual to then believing he or she should be a loyal Democrat, as Blacks have shown themselves to be. In other words, there is very little "block" voting if people had independent identities.

0 Replies

I think it has more to do with how a person relates. Obviously, Obama relates well to African-Americans. They recognize something familiar to themselves in him. But by the same token, he relates well to and appeals to white voters apparently.

But I think any person with black or brown skin skin can tell you - no matter what the other circumstances of their lives have been...no matter if they're from a moneyed family, or if their heritage is mixed with caucasian- if they look black- they're treated as if they're black at the outset, until people get to know the details of their lives. And unfortunately, still today, in this particular country...that means they're treated differently than whites- black people know he knows something of what they go through every day. Maybe that's why they can accept him- despite how different the rest of the circumstances of his life have been from theirs.

This question reminds me of an incident I had with my son at the doctor's office. He's interracial - I'm white and his father is black. The woman told me to check his race. At the time there wasn't an option that accurately described his race. There was black or caucasian. I checked both. She said, "You can't do that- I can't put that in the computer- check one or the other." I told her I didn't know which one to choose. She said, "Well, is he more black or white?" I said, "I don't know- are you more of your mother or your father?" She got all mad and said, "Well, he looks more black to me" and she put black in her computer.

How ridiculously stupid...why should it even be an issue?

0 Replies

hawkeye10 wrote:

littlek wrote:
The post is also ironic given the fact that ANY black blood in a person has historically made them african american.

The Jews did that as well right? I'd like to think that progress is possible.

Orthodox Jews believe that one's mother has to be Jewish for her child to be Jewish. The father does not have to be Jewish, as legend goes, because, with the number of rapes by Russian Cossacks in prior centuries, the child born of that union was made to feel accepted by the Jewish community (village) by being told he or she was Jewish because his/her mother was Jewish.

Reform Jews, I believe, allow a child with a Gentile mother to be considered Jewish (by the Reform community) if the child is raised as a Jew religiously.

Secular Jews each have their own criteria as to who might be Jewish. If someone has a good sense of humor, did well in school, has a liberal bent towards the world in general, I think they are probably Jewish and don't know it. This means, in my opinion, a good portion of the world has become Jewish.

0 Replies

aidan wrote:

Quote:

How ridiculously stupid...why should it even be an issue?

It shouldn't be an issue at all. I am always amazed that questions about race
are so important in just about every form that needs to be filled out.

Most other countries will ask you for your nationality but never for the
color of your skin, this is a typical American trait, and a bad one,
I might add.

0 Replies

Quote:

Secular Jews each have their own criteria as to who might be Jewish. If someone has a good sense of humor, did well in school, has a liberal bent towards the world in general, I think they are probably Jewish and don't know it. This means, in my opinion, a good portion of the world has become Jewish.

Yeah - wouldn't it be nice if we could judge everyone on that type of criteria? The other day in class- I'm usually the only caucasian-and someone was making some generalization about whites and mentioned that there were no caucasians in the room. I said, "Hey, what about me?" They said, "Miss - you know you got some hood in you- you're at least part black."

I took that as just about the biggest compliment they could have given me. It means they know I get them...I think people feel that Barack Obama might get them - no matter how dark or light his skin is.

0 Replies

CalamityJane wrote:

aidan wrote:

Quote:
How ridiculously stupid...why should it even be an issue?

It shouldn't be an issue at all. I am always amazed that questions about race
are so important in just about every form that needs to be filled out.

Most other countries will ask you for your nationality but never for the
color of your skin, this is a typical American trait, and a bad one,
I might add.

Ironically the questions are required by laws designed to "protect minorities". As a first step in "protecting" them government must determine who they are and classify them accordingly. The list of legally "protected" minorities is a long one, and the blunt instrument of government is unable to detect the fact that there aren't very many "pure" members of any group left.

0 Replies

aidan wrote:

I think it has more to do with how a person relates. Obviously, Obama relates well to African-Americans. They recognize something familiar to themselves in him. But by the same token, he relates well to and appeals to white voters apparently.

But I think any person with black or brown skin skin can tell you - no matter what the other circumstances of their lives have been...no matter if they're from a moneyed family, or if their heritage is mixed with caucasian- if they look black- they're treated as if they're black at the outset, until people get to know the details of their lives. And unfortunately, still today, in this particular country...that means they're treated differently than whites- black people know he knows something of what they go through every day. Maybe that's why they can accept him- despite how different the rest of the circumstances of his life have been from theirs.

This question reminds me of an incident I had with my son at the doctor's office. He's interracial - I'm white and his father is black. The woman told me to check his race. At the time there wasn't an option that accurately described his race. There was black or caucasian. I checked both. She said, "You can't do that- I can't put that in the computer- check one or the other." I told her I didn't know which one to choose. She said, "Well, is he more black or white?" I said, "I don't know- are you more of your mother or your father?" She got all mad and said, "Well, he looks more black to me" and she put black in her computer.

How ridiculously stupid...why should it even be an issue?

My opinion: Bingo. You're correct. The term today is bi-racial. The need to specify either Caucasian or Black harkens back to a very racist country of prior times.

Why should a person of mixed parentage perhaps pander to those who think the world is black and white. In the way of analogy, gray is a beautiful color too.

Your point above regarding how someone with a darker complexion will be treated a certain way is no different than the Caucasian wearing a big Jewish Star on a neck chain. People will think you can't mention the word "ham" in front of that person, not knowing that the person may not even be Kosher, just feeling proud as a Jew. But, that doesn't make any Jews wearing a Jewish Star (Star of David) feel that other Jews should have an instant rapport (with him). My point is people do treat other people, based on what they think they see.

In Israel there are now over 100,000 Ethiopian Jews. They feel Jewish, since in Ethiopia they were persecuted as Jews, and were as Black as all other Ethiopians. And, Sammy Davis Jr's Blackness was a non-sequitor to many American Jews. He was Jewish. I think I'm turning this thread into a discussion of Jewishness?

0 Replies

georgeob1 wrote:

The list of legally "protected" minorities is a long one, and the blunt instrument of government is unable to detect the fact that there aren't very many "pure" members of any group left.

Well, there is always "other" to check on the forms, isn't it?
Perhaps the government could update its policies for minorities from time to time.

0 Replies

I don't know if this is true, but prior to the early 1970's Jews were on Affirmative Action quotas. Then they were taken off because the definition of a minority for Affirmative Action was "disadvantaged" minority. If this is true, somehow it was decided that Jews, as a minority, are not disadvantaged. That could be thought of as prejudiced? Or, at least pandering to the old canard that Jews have this or that.

So much silliness in the world.

0 Replies

CalamityJane wrote:

georgeob1 wrote:
The list of legally "protected" minorities is a long one, and the blunt instrument of government is unable to detect the fact that there aren't very many "pure" members of any group left.

Well, there is always "other" to check on the forms, isn't it?
Perhaps the government could update its policies for minorities from time to time.

Once special government priviledge is established for any group (subsidies for farmers, for example) an organized political action group is instantly created that will fight hard to preserve its privileges, and the often meaningless procedures used to enforce them, long after the reason for it all has faded from view.

0 Replies

Who cares what color he is! He says he is black. I figure he ought to know. :wink:

0 Replies

Why do people accept Barack Obama as African-American?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know