Jesse Jackson, Dr Boyce Watkins Speak on Obama

I'm set to appear on the Jesse Jackson Show tomorrow morning at 8 am, along with one of my esteemed colleagues, Dr. Marc Lamont Hill. I am sure I don't have to tell you the topic of the discussion, since we all know that Rev. Jackson's unfortunate slip on Barack Obama has kept the world churning as of late.

I should make these quick points on the issue, so you can understand my perspective. This point of view came from personal reflections, extensive conversations with individuals in media, politics, and leadership and even a good conversation with my mama. I love my mama. What is most interesting is that she complains about Jesse Jackson more than she compliments him (the same for my father, a high ranking police official). But she made a good point that it's easy for us to attack people for what they are not doing when the truth is that most of us aren't doing anything. Remember that Jesse was #3 on the list of world leaders most likely to be assassinated (behind the President and the Pope). He has sacrificed for our community, and although I have critiqued him myself in the past, I consider him to be an elder worthy of respect. It was his landmark run for the White House that cleared the path for Senator Obama to do what he is doing today. I will never forget that.

Here are my thoughts:

1) I am not sure if we should be so quick to believe that a Black president can replace every Black leader in America. As I've asked before, who is going to show up for the next Hurricane Katrina or Sean Bell shooting? I will give you a hint, it may not be Barack Obama (his response to the Sean Bell shooting was quite weak, to be honest). This doesn't mean that Obama shouldn't get our vote, but you can't throw out your mama just because you have a new daddy. The fight for Black people should be multi-dimensional in nature.

2) Let's not forget that there is a difference between the hatred Rev. Jackson is receiving in the blogosphere and so-called mainstream media (almost none of which is owned by Black people) vs. what is happening in the street. When I put my ear to the street, there is a concern that Senator Obama is not prepared to truly represent the interests of rank and file, working Black folks. Not the hoity-toity of us who went to college and make enough money to (uncomfortably) afford the high price of gas. But rather, those who don't worry about the price of gas because they can't afford to buy a car. This reflects a clear division between the haves and have-nots, implying that we are as diverse as any other group of people. What is most challenging for me is that while I supported many of Senator Obama's positions on the BET shoot we did last weekend, I am concerned that other interest groups may move him toward anti-Black agendas in the White House. Jesse may have wanted to cut his n*tts off, but it appears that others may have his n*tts in a vice grip already (excuse my French, but I have to tell it like it is).

3) Senator Obama (again, whom I support) is, in many ways, like most other politicians. The reason he felt comfortable stereotyping black men (whether you agree that his comments were off base or not) and no other ethnic group is because he knew there would be little negative political consequence for doing so, but tremendous benefit from those who already think Black males are immoral (note that Bill O'Reilly congratulated him on his speech). He would not, however, take the same tone with AIPAC (the pro-Israel lobby) no matter how questionable their policies (they could have a 100% fatherless rate and he wouldn't say a word). Why is that? Because they are mobilized, organized and well-funded. African Americans must become engaged and educated in the political process in order to become equally funded and equally mobilized to ensure that our interests are protected. Asking Barack Obama to help black folks is like borrowing money from a loving relative: charity will get you so far, but ultimately, you have to make it worth their while to keep supporting you. It would be selfish and silly to expect otherwise.

4) If you want to be nit-picky about Senator Obama's position on Black fathers, we cannot presume that he "can relate to the issue" because he was abandoned by an African American man. Obama's father was KENYAN. So, as a black man, it's hard enough to defend the silly stuff that happens here without being forced to account for what someone did across the sea. That is like holding white males accountable for what a man did in the Ukraine.

5) I would not presume that Rev. Jackson's challenge to Obama implies that he doesn't advocate for personal responsibility. Anyone who has heard Rev. Jackson speak knows that he is very conservative in his value systems. Actually, the only things that make him liberal are that he speaks for black people, stands up for the poor, and believes in stronger gun control. I don't defend his remarks against Obama, but my belief is that, again, we should think carefully before trading in 40 years of sacrifice for a few speeches on hope and change. I will vote for Obama, but I want to wait and see if he does the right thing for us, or allows other groups (some of whom dislike African Americans) to control his actions. What you believe is not as important as what you do.

Finally, let's love ourselves. I am not a fan of the idea of denouncing strong blackness just because the words make others uncomfortable (that doesn't include Rev. Jackson's comments this week, but rather, the words of Jeremiah Wright and others who speak out on racial inequality). Getting into the big white house on the hill is a good thing, but we must remember that the ultimate goal is to get off the plantation.