Your email address is safe with us. View our Privacy policy.
Author Bio:
Richard Cohen's columns have appeared on the op-ed page of The Washington Post since 1984. He joined The Post in 1968 after attending the Columbia ...
Read more about Richard Cohen.
Richard Cohen's columns have appeared on the op-ed page of The Washington Post since 1984. He joined The Post in 1968 after attending the Columbia ...
Read more about Richard Cohen.
How Race Came to the Campaign
Richard Cohen
George Bernard Shaw said England and America were two countries
separated by a common language. White and black Americans are in a
similar fix. Statements that one considers innocuous, the other can
consider offensive. Things have gotten to the point where Bill
Clinton, a president once adored by African-Americans, is now being
accused of racially insensitive statements. Shaw would understand.
It's not necessarily what was said, it's the way it was heard.
To my (racially) tin ear, little that either Bill or Hillary Clinton have said this election season sounded ugly. These included the remarks that seemed to have started it all -- Hillary Clinton's crushingly banal observation that for all that Martin Luther King Jr. did, it took Lyndon Johnson's presidency to enact a monumental civil rights act. The context was clearly her contention that despite Barack Obama's soaring rhetoric, it took good old experience (like hers) to get the job done. Who could possibly object to that?
Lots of people, it turned out, many of them African-American. Obama himself called the remark "unfortunate." My own ears heard nothing untoward and when I mentioned that to an African-American colleague, he said -- to my utter surprise -- that he initially took the remark as a swipe at King. I was flabbergasted. Who would take a swipe at King? A Democratic presidential candidate would have to be criminally insane to do such a thing.
It hardly seemed possible, but things went downhill from there. Bill Clinton suggested that Obama's victory in South Carolina was akin to Jesse Jackson's, lo these many years ago. Kapow!, as they used to say in the comic books. Again, allegations of insensitivity and/or racial provocation. I confess I heard something different, but this time I appreciated the complaint -- an alleged attempt to racially pigeonhole Obama. The former president may have meant no such thing but in Obamaland, Bill Clinton is widely believed to always know precisely what he is saying -- too cunning a politician not to always know the impact of his words. Maybe so, but his recent record or bloopers, errors and rhetorical pratfalls suggests otherwise.
The grievance concerning Bill Clinton was enunciated last week by Rep. James Clyburn, D-S.C., a senior African-American legislator not known for extremist statements. He called Clinton's remarks "bizarre" and said that even back in January, he "thought the president was saying things that would anger black voters and he should chill out." What Clyburn might be suggesting is not that Clinton himself had picked up some racist bug but, like some sort of political Typhoid Mary, he was spreading a disease to which he himself is immune.
This is what is believed by adherents of the Clintons-will-do-anything-to-win school of thought. I myself have some doubts. The Clintons will do almost anything, but not something that will stain their immortal political soul. They have to know that running a racially tinged campaign would give both of them a historical asterisk that will dog them into posterity.
Years ago, Georgetown University linguist Deborah Tannen wrote a best-seller, "You Just Don't Understand: Women and Men in Conversation." Its thesis was that men and women employ the same language but, somehow, hear it differently. George and Ira Gershwin put it somewhat differently: "You like tomayto and I like tomahto" in their "Let's Call the Whole Thing Off." Tannen made her point with acute observations. The Gershwins did it with Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers dancing on roller skates.
What is true for men and woman is just as true for blacks and whites and, probably, minorities of all kinds (recall the Woody Allen character in Annie Hall who mishears the word "Jew" when a passerby is saying, "Did you?"). The Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Obama's former pastor, seemed to make precisely that point in his speech to the NAACP in Detroit. "The black religious tradition is different," he said. "We do it a different way." That "way," as he now knows, made for an awful sound bite.
Barring some unforeseen event, Barack Obama will be the nominee of the Democratic Party. That being the case -- and also as long as the nomination fight continues -- race will be an issue, stated or not, in the presidential campaign. For that reason, it's incumbent on Clinton, Obama and, of course, John McCain to not only watch their language but -- maybe more important -- to watch their reaction to the language of others. We could be on the verge of a great moment of racial acceptance. It sometimes seems that only our common language stands in the way.
========
Richard Cohen's e-mail address is cohenr@washpost.com
(c) 2008, Washington Post Writers Group
This news arrived on: 04/29/2008
Printer Friendly Version | Send this page to a friend | Post Comment
Rate This Story:
Great - 5 - 4 - 3 - 2 - 1 - Bad
Posted Comments:
05-15-2008 12:30
Syl wrote:
Language
Mr. Cohen makes an important comparison when he references Deborah Tannen's work(s). Just as men and women understand the same words and concepts differently, the same is also true, in even greater measure, between blacks and whites. Perhaps, if nothing else, Sen. Obama, whether or not he is elected, his campaign has openned a way for some long-needed dialogue between whites and blacks where each listens, really listens (active listening, as counselors call it) to the other, without defensiveness and with the intent to understand and be understood, to ask the difficult questions and take responsibility for the difficult answers. Black America is all too aware that their perception of reality is not the only one. It is time for White America to recognize this too.
04-30-2008 23:13
neutral wrote:
race/gender
aren't we all supposed to be equal? Obama should'nt be judged on color and Hillary should'nt be judged on gender. yet I hear them making fun of Hillary and saying stuff if she shows any emotion, then bashing her for no emotion. she can't please anyone it seems. no matter what she does or says they bash her for it. Obama gets free advertisments on shows such as Hardball and Countdown but Hillary gets negative commentary on her activitys. now women can't even get justice for unequal pay!!
04-30-2008 19:20
satch wrote:
race issues:
I was once talking to a [negro/colored] friend and he said not to ever call him colored as he wasn't several different colors, nor was he to be called a negro. He told me he was a 'black' man and wanted to be called just That!. But his skin was as brown as the boots I was wearing, but I said nothing. Are we all really different from the eyes that look upon us and see ourselves in a different light. What switch do we flip to change what is thought to be seen? I only speak of race but so many more aspects of humanity are encompassed about us that books could be written to cover them all. Truth and morals speak out as conscience allows revealing whats inside these flesh and bones. We become what we feed upon--be it filth, corruption and lies or honesty and goodness and it shows up sooner or later in words and actions--usually Sooner. This is how we pick candidates and leaders, not age, association, sex or nationality, or have times changed?
04-30-2008 09:33
crone wrote:
race issues
It seems that some quite readily put a spin on comments made, and eagerly play the maligned martyr and whipping boy. This is unhealthy, and I think whites are flabbergasted when they see their benign comments twisted out of context. Can we stop trying to play the race card here? This gets to be so old and so prosaic.
04-30-2008 09:07
mc wrote:
Language
I don't understand why they call themselves African Americans. The name itself is separatist. Whitw Americans are just Americans. Why isn't everybody else? Is we start with the continent or country of origin, Can you even imagine the name calling? And for the color of the skin we are all somo different shade of tan. Remember that we are allHUMANS.
Comment archive | Comment FAQ's
 |
 |
|
View Richard Cohen ezine stories by date or visit the complete archive |
The ArcaMax Politics channel is one of 70 content categories offered by ArcaMax Publishing on this ... |
ArcaMax Dating
