Race Hate; Don't Buy Into It

Just this week President Obama took a small step towards acknowledging an issue he has stayed away from for the most part, thus far in his presidency – that issue being race and racism. He did this by adding a specific painting, which in many ways opened a tiny window into a very big moment from our history, to the walls of White House. The painting is a Norman Rockwell and entitled “The Problem We All Live With” and is still apropos as the very circumstances surrounding the picture's coming to the county's attention this week speaks more to its significance than anything else. Though, as we head into this next national election we find it has still not left us and the shadowy spirit of it stays with us – an unfortunate piece of our historical legacy. At a time like this, perhaps considering it a bit may be appropriate.

We have come a long way from slavery, and when we think of racism in America we believe that's the primary source of the problem – at least between blacks and whites - and it is in that context we most often discuss it in our country. So many of us think of it as a legacy of slavery itself – as though it was slavery that all alone generated enough racial hatred and resentment that it boils so deeply even today.

Surely it's a part of it. As kids we go to school and the first thing we learn from our teachers about racial issues is that black people were slaves and whites were the masters. That no doubt makes an impression as we deal with each other. It's a powerful symbol and though our parents try and buffer us against it – it's always there.

But, what's not talked about is perhaps even more important; that being racism and racial prejudice used as a device to keep groups of people separate and divided for the benefit of a few. At some point in our history race was realized as a way to keep specific groups of people focused on each other through jealousy, suspicion and distraction by breeding animosity then playing on those resentments.

This was done so the groups in question would stay fighting each other instead of looking at the sources of their true problems. Early on in our nation's history wealthy landowners and merchants worried about uprisings both by slaves and white indentured servants. In some instances these two groups banded together, and it was becoming increasingly worrisome for upper class whites viewing all that were not white and upperclass as rabble in need of being controlled. An example of one such uprising was Bacon's Rebellion. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bacon%27s_Rebellion)

There were others. As one historian wrote, “Only one fear was greater than the fear of black rebellion in the new American colonies. That was the fear that discontented whites would join black slaves to overthrow the existing order. In the early years of slavery, especially, before racism as a way of thinking was firmly ingrained, while white indentured servants were often treated as badly as black slaves, there was a possibility of cooperation.

“As Edmund Morgan sees it:

There are hints that the two despised groups initially saw each other as sharing the same predicament. It was common, for example, for servants and slaves to run away together, steal hogs together, get drunk together. It was not uncommon for them to make love together. In Bacon's Rebellion, one of the last groups to surrender was a mixed band of eighty negroes and twenty English servants.

“As Morgan says, masters, 'initially at least, perceived slaves in much the same way they had always perceived servants... shiftless, irresponsible, unfaithful, ungrateful, dishonest...' And 'if freemen with disappointed hopes should make common cause with slaves of desperate hope, the results might be worse than anything Bacon had done.'

“And so, measures were taken. About the same time that slave codes, involving discipline and punishment, were passed by the Virginia Assembly, Virginia's ruling class, having proclaimed that all white men were superior to black, went on to offer their social (but white) inferiors a number of benefits previously denied them. In 1705 a law was passed requiring masters to provide white servants whose indenture time was up with ten bushels of corn, thirty shillings, and a gun, while women servants were to get 15 bushels of corn and forty shillings. Also, the newly freed servants were to get 50 acres of land.

“Morgan concludes: 'Once the small planter felt less exploited by taxation and began to prosper a little, he became less turbulent, less dangerous, more respectable. He could begin to see his big neighbor not as an extortionist but as a powerful protector of their common interests.'” (http://libcom.org/history/1619-1741-slavery-slave-rebellion-us) (Zinn 1980)

And so the seeds of resentment and division were sown, a wedge placed between the two groups and given a first blow given with many more to come. Later, more steps were taken along the same lines to try and give poorer whites just enough to make them feel separate from blacks and develop a kind of allegiance to the upper class whites using currency as the glue.

“A report to the English government in 1721 said that in South Carolina 'black slaves have lately attempted and were very near succeeding in a new revolution ... and therefore, it may be necessary ... to propose some new law for encouraging the entertainment of more white servants in the future. The militia of this province does not consist of above 2000 men.' Apparently, two thousand were not considered sufficient to meet the threat.

“This fear may help explain why Parliament, in 1717, made transportation to the New World a legal punishment for crime. After that, tens of thousands of convicts could be sent to Virginia, Maryland, and other colonies. It also makes understandable why the Virginia Assembly, after Bacon's Rebellion, gave amnesty to white servants who had rebelled, but not to blacks. Negroes were forbidden to carry any arms, while whites finishing their servitude would get muskets, along with corn and cash. The distinctions of status between white and black servants became more and more clear.

”In the 1720s, with fear of slave rebellion growing, white servants were allowed in Virginia to join the militia as substitutes for white freemen. At the same time, slave patrols were established in Virginia to deal with the 'great dangers that may ... happen by the insurrections of negroes....' Poor white men would make up the rank and file of these patrols, and get the monetary reward.

“Racism was becoming more and more practical. Edmund Morgan, on the basis of his careful study of slavery in Virginia, sees racism not as 'natural' to black-white difference, but something coming out of class scorn, a realistic device for control. 'If freemen with disappointed hopes should make common cause with slaves of desperate hope, the results might be worse than anything Bacon had done. The answer to the problem, obvious if unspoken and only gradually recognized, was racism, to separate dangerous free whites from dangerous black slaves by a screen of racial contempt.'" (http://www.historyisaweapon.com/defcon1/zinnvil3.html) (Zinn 1980)

Today we still see these issues with interviews from the 2008 elections showing people saying they would never vote for Obama simply because he was black. We see talk show hosts using race hate to drive wedges between people and stir up these age old divisions like when FOX News' Glenn Beck said President Obama harbored "a deep-seated hatred for white people or the white culture." He went on to say the president was a racist. (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/07/29/politics/main5195604.shtml)

At the time the president was very popular and this gave Beck an opportunity to exploit the issue as a way to drive a wedge between president Obama and Beck's followers that influenced the 2010 elections and helped solidify anger towards the president which manifested in outright racism in certain instances the nation witnessed and his network allowed him to do it remaining contentedly silent on the matter.

Of course, Beck never mentioned the fact the president is just as much white as black, as he is half white half black, and he can be called white as easily as he can be called black biologically speaking. Also Beck never mentioned the fact that he was raised by the white side of his family, not the black side. He lists his white grandparents as being perhaps the greatest influences on his life. Beck never mentioned any of that, though that might not have helped him achieve his goal of using race to drive a wedge between groups of people.

The legacy has not only affected whites but people of all races in our nation and people of all races are vulnerable to the resentments. For instance in Hip Hop it is not uncommon for rappers to go at each other and have beefs for various reasons. When it occurs it can be to generate a little controversy, other times a result of miscommunication or something taken the wrong way and of course at times there are always genuine beefs. One such beef was between rapper 50 Cent, no stranger to beefs to put it mildly, and newcomer Rick Ross.

They were going at each other and each other's crews took verbal shots at each other on songs, YouTube clips and interviews. One particular verbal insult stood out during the fracas and showed the use of racial prejudice as a method to drive a stake between groups for the purposes of personal, business and political gain. It happened when Rick Ross took a verbal shot at rapper Eminem. Though Eminem is associated with 50 Cent, he stayed out of the conflict and said nothing about Ross.

Ross decided to take a shot at him anyway and used race to do it. It happened when he called Eminem a “honky.” (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IAQs3eht22Q) Now for those that aren't aware, Ross is black and Eminem is white. The racial insult came out of nowhere and used race against Eminem who had never used race or racial epithets in any of his myriad beefs. It was simply a case of racism being directed at a person without cause to drive a wedge between groups of people. Race never had anything to do with the conflict, and as was the case with Beck, it was meant to pull people closer to him through displaying his views on race. As with Beck none of Ross' associates ever called him on it, apparently just as content as FOX News to remain silent on the matter.

And it isn't only between black and white Americans. This happens between many different races and other such groups in our country. In our ever diversifying nation as we progress there are people harboring views incongruent with making positive steps on the issues around race, and it is their right as free citizens to feel that way and express their views. But, perhaps this time as we head into the next elections we will try and leave race out of it. We no longer even need to worry about electing the first black president or not. Our nation accomplished that in 2008, and it was one of the greatest moments in our history in terms of displaying the potential our country has and the strength of our ethos.

Though it's probably hoping for too much, perhaps we can weigh the strengths and weaknesses along with comparing the accomplishments of whichever candidates are competing this election season as reasons for who gets elected and forget about race, name calling and the weakness of using race in an attempt to drive wedges between people as has so often been done throughout our history. Perhaps we can take yet another step forward as a people and a nation with a collective consciousness trying to free itself from the chains of race hate. This time, if we can, let's just try not buy into it. Who knows? Maybe we can accomplish it.

To read about my inspiration for this article go to www.lawsuitagainstuconn.com.