Barack Obama, History and Hope

I think it's more pragmatism and realism than anything else. I'm sure that deep down he is totally anti-war; deep down he is extremely liberal in terms of tax policy and social policy. But the reality is that he's coming into office inheriting military conflicts, and however he feels about war in general he has to prosecute them responsibly. However he feels about budgets and taxes, he has to get us out of this crisis first.

As I have been saying, he is quite prone to the multi-faceted pandering.

I personally have no clue whether he will be a peaceful president or a war-monger.

I'm not sure if this has been mentioned in this thread before, but I find it rather curious that people hail Obama's election as breaking racial barriers while simultaneously perpetuating the attention given to his race. Somehow I figured that a "post-race" nation would give little to no attention at all to someone's race. Yet, there is much talk and exuberance for the simultaneous status of "black man" and "president."

This is all somewhat irksome to me. I feel that Obama's race is of no significance to things, but in the apparent triumph over racism race is very important and emphasized fairly often. As far as such matters are concerned I find more inspiration in Haile Selassie's 1968 speech to the UN, wherein he says "that until the color of a man's skin is of no more significance than the color of his eyes... the dream of lasting peace... will remain a fleeting illusion to be pursued, but never attained..."

How might the election have turned out if race truly was no issue and of negligible significance?

Go tell African Americans that it is not a big deal that Obama was elected President of the United States of American. Something tells me that something in their history may suggest otherwise. Go tell civil rights protesters from the 60s that it is no big deal. I am sure they could tell you how unfathomable the though of an African American President was only 40 years ago.

Thank you all for an incredibly informative and civil discussion, I have learned a lot from all sides. This is truly the beauty of this philosophy forum. :a-ok:

Blacks may look at this as a symbol of growing racial equality, but supporting him as a president because he is the first black president is no more reasonable than supporting another candidate because he is not black.

In my opinion, blacks can celebrate when they have a president who doesn't have an obvious desire to pander and cater to the elite.

I will not argue that the black community is not in general on a lower rung than other groups as it concerns socio-economic status, but they can now attribute that position more to a system that is geared against social mobility than to a culture of racial prejudice.

This nation could be the most racially open country in the world, yet oppressed groups would continue to struggle simply because of the barriers and hindrances imposed by politicians like Obama.

Accepting the past as part of one's culture is surely acceptable, but in the situation you just described those that you described would be marking themselves off as different from those who did not fit into their group, seemingly to perpetuate the significance of race. By celebrating Obama as the "first black president" we focus on his race and make race an issue. All I wish to point out is that such emphasis indicates that race is still an important issue in America and perhaps there is still a long way to go towards "equality" if such is possible.

We don't make race an issue. It has already been an issue. There is a long way to go before there is equality. To me race is not an issue, but unfortunately to the masses it is one of things they focus on.