Racial hope fades despite Obama

[Rob S]

Racial hope fades despite Obama
Wed 04 Nov 2009 03:24
Clarence Page
In my favorite "Star Trek" episode, Capt. James T. Kirk and the crew of the Starship Enterprise encountered humanoids from a planet embroiled in war over an issue as clear as black and white.

Literally.

The planet Cheron is locked in a race war. This astonishes earthlings. To us, all Cheronians look alike. Their skin is evenly divided, half black and half white, right down the middle of their faces and bodies.

A perplexed Capt. Kirk asks: "What is the difference that Cheronians are fighting about?"

"Isn't it obvious?" says a Cheronian, who is white on his left side. "All of his people are white on the right side."

The episode, like all good fiction, helps us come to grips with painful realities. It first aired in 1969, at a time when our country's racial differences were erupting in riots and assassinations. The black-white planet was doomed by its inhabitants' inability to deal with the slightest diversity.

Flash-forward 40 years. That old "Star Trek" episode came to mind as I read the latest Gallup Poll on the state of the nation's racial optimism. A year after two-thirds of Americans polled expressed high hopes for a post-racial future, Gallup says, "there is scarcely more hope" for a solution on race than there was before.

If so, I am not surprised. In fact, I am somewhat relieved that we Americans are showing ourselves to be optimistic but also realistic. We know one election is not going to solve our racial challenges.

Since 1963, Gallup has been asking us whether we think relations between blacks and whites "will always be a problem for the U.S., or that a solution will eventually be worked out." The optimistic view that a solution will be worked out surged to an all-time high of 67 percent the day after Obama's White House win. But a year later only 56 percent express that belief. That's statistically the same as the 55 percent who felt that way in December 1963, when Gallup first asked the question.

"In short, despite all that has happened in the intervening decades," Gallup says, "there is scarcely more hope now than there was those many years ago that the nation's race-relations situation will be solved."

But Gallup's forecast shouldn't be so gloomy.

Those who took the survey were being realistic. We Americans might want to be post-racial, but I think we know in our hearts that we're not ready yet.

After all, it was not that long ago that Gallup found our racial optimism at an all-time low of 29 percent. That was in October 1995, shortly after O.J. Simpson's acquittal of double murder dramatically revealed the nation's racial divide on national television. Seldom has our state of race looked so bleak. Yet, Tiger Woods was becoming a new cultural hero who crossed racial lines, Oprah Winfrey already was, and Colin Powell was seriously being urged by high-powered fans in both major political parties to run for president. Change was in the air.

It is a sign of our progress that racism has been driven underground, if not eliminated. But racial suspicions rise to fill the gap. For example, it is hard for me to read about church pastors like the Rev. Wiley Drake of Buena Park, Calif., or Pastor Steven Anderson of Tempe, Ariz., who have both proudly prayed for Obama to die soon and not wonder about how race might be a motivating factor in their prayers.

But race is such a touchy topic these days that you can be accused of being a racist just for bringing it up. Obama's thoughts on racial profiling led Fox News star Glenn Beck to call the president "a racist" who "hates white culture." When CBS' Katie Couric later asked Beck, "What is white culture?" he looked surprised. He accused Couric of trying to "trap" him and refused to answer. That's too bad. I, too, would like to know what he means by white culture.

By understanding people who come from other cultures, I hope to gain a better understanding of what I have in common with them -- even with Glenn Beck.

Clarence Page is a member of the Tribune's editorial board and blogs at chicagotribune.com/pagespage. [e-mail]

[NCC Shakinah 704]

People do not want to change and as long as people do not want to change then there is no hope. I am sorry to say this but what is the still the top skin color of choice and anything else is different therefore not acceptable. I am not like that however, living in Hilo HI for 18 years has given me the reality of the diversity of the world, cultures and religions. I therefore respect all skin colors , religions and cultures and teach my children to do the same. People would want to have to change and until that happens , this will always be the case for our planet.

[Capt.Dar Greywolf]

Very brilliant.Sorry have nothing else to very nice job.

[Jen]

Brilliant.

[Ms.Go]

Wow. I've just started here at ning, I have to say I really like this blogpost. I think in many ways, 1969 was a better time for race discussion in this country than now, because racism was the status quo back then, it was a much more visibly obvious thing.

It was easy to pinpoint the obvious evil of hosing down black students or assassinating civil rights workers.

It's much more difficult to move past the obvious black and white parts (no pun intended) and into the shades and nuances that are holdover programming from then.

You no longer have people who are out-and-out proud racists. You have people so afraid offending that they refuse to talk about it. Those who are certain that aren't racist. And the victims of these slights who choose to ignore, attempt to discuss (with it going no where because of that afore-mentioned fear of accusal/denial) or avoid the topic altogether except from within protected circles where people are already up on anti-racist literature and efforts. They basically talk amongst themselves, preach to a choir where it does absolutely no good.

I actually miss the audacity, the guts people had back then to confront these things in the arts and other mediums.