US Election 2008

[bawan 0]

Fop fuck off, sort yourself out, your talking out your arse.

[Park Life 71]

I'm guessing he was trying to say Obama isn't black enough but then felt a bit embarrassed and backed off.

 

I'm not saying he's not black enough, or too black.

 

 

Others are; which is my point.

 

The main reason it is a defining moment in American history is because he is a black man. You can even see this in Obama's victory speech quotes earlier in this thread. Obama is well aware and arguably imprinted by his awareness and self-reflexivity of the fact that he is black. Not sure how else on the surface of political things the 'identity politics' clearly played out over the last year we are meant to touch first base with him. Understand? I don't want to go all Nietzsche on yer arse.

 

Ok, lets put it a different way. What is a "black man"? Why is he not a "white man"? And can you define or answer one without being unwittingly racist (in some form or other)?

It's a difficult one Fop I concede. But I suspect he feels more black than white in many ways because he would have more in common with other black/mixed race people in terms of common prejudices faced, common historical injustices faced by family members and so on. Obviously that's pure guesswork coming from a white person from the NE of England but if you turn back the clock to the time before the civil rights movement he'd have been considered a 'negro' or whatever then and it's people who are of mixed race like him who are still at the wrong end of society's injustices in the United States. I don't think he should be defined purely by his colour but it's naive to say it shouldn't be an issue when it is bound to be. That's because we all have our little prejudices I suppose, some far more than others. And countries as a whole have them which is why you've never had anyone 'black' as president before. And he is seen as black, rightly or wrongly (given his mixed race background).

 

 

Yes he is aware mainly because the dominant culture overall erases that moment of blackness. Obama will have had to continually re-colonise his blackness. In simple terms he has to continually ask himself who he is....Not something most of us have to worry about.

[Fop 1]

I'm guessing he was trying to say Obama isn't black enough but then felt a bit embarrassed and backed off.

 

I'm not saying he's not black enough, or too black.

 

 

Others are; which is my point.

 

The main reason it is a defining moment in American history is because he is a black man. You can even see this in Obama's victory speech quotes earlier in this thread. Obama is well aware and arguably imprinted by his awareness and self-reflexivity of the fact that he is black. Not sure how else on the surface of political things the 'identity politics' clearly played out over the last year we are meant to touch first base with him. Understand? I don't want to go all Nietzsche on yer arse.

 

Ok, lets put it a different way. What is a "black man"? Why is he not a "white man"? And can you define or answer one without being unwittingly racist (in some form or other)?

 

 

Not being a black man in America it would be impossible for me to define 'that moment'. That moment before my blackness is colonised. Being black is wholly about the moment your 'otherness' is colonised. These are the basics of race identity. qv the Bangladeshi community in North London, qv the Arab community in Sweden.

 

I think behind all this bluster you have a valid point if it is only about erasure, I'm guessing your tallking about that.

 

Racism isn't just about how others define you ("positively" or "negatively" - both are the same in the end), but it's also about how you define yourself to others.

 

If he was the man that could bring sweeping change he had a massive opportunity to do so (even if it cost him the election - which I don't think it necessarily would), but he took a different tack. Not necessarily and evil tack, just the most pragmatic one.

 

Which is why I don't think he will change the world, he'll probably just rule it.

[ChezGiven 0]

Well, anyway, he is meant to announce a transition team later today, he needs to get on with things and take on an issue that is 'winnable' in the first 6 months for him to get on the right foot. The challenges he faces are ridiculously big.

 

Whether some geek on a newcastle united forum considers him black or not is irrelevant, its the perception of the US public that decides that matter.

[Park Life 71]

I'm guessing he was trying to say Obama isn't black enough but then felt a bit embarrassed and backed off.

 

I'm not saying he's not black enough, or too black.

 

 

Others are; which is my point.

 

The main reason it is a defining moment in American history is because he is a black man. You can even see this in Obama's victory speech quotes earlier in this thread. Obama is well aware and arguably imprinted by his awareness and self-reflexivity of the fact that he is black. Not sure how else on the surface of political things the 'identity politics' clearly played out over the last year we are meant to touch first base with him. Understand? I don't want to go all Nietzsche on yer arse.

 

Ok, lets put it a different way. What is a "black man"? Why is he not a "white man"? And can you define or answer one without being unwittingly racist (in some form or other)?

 

 

Not being a black man in America it would be impossible for me to define 'that moment'. That moment before my blackness is colonised. Being black is wholly about the moment your 'otherness' is colonised. These are the basics of race identity. qv the Bangladeshi community in North London, qv the Arab community in Sweden.

 

I think behind all this bluster you have a valid point if it is only about erasure, I'm guessing your tallking about that.

 

Racism isn't just about how others define you ("positively" or "negatively" - both are the same in the end), but it's also about how you define yourself to others.

 

If he was the man that could bring sweeping change he had a massive opportunity to do so (even if it cost him the election - which I don't think it necessarily would), but he took a different tack. Not necessarily and evil tack, just the most pragmatic one.

 

Which is why I don't think he will change the world, he'll probably just rule it.

 

 

Of course that is the process that defines your blackness if you like. Obama is well aware of that. He is also aware that he needed to be inclusive to win. I wouldn't necessarily hold that against him.

[manc-mag 1]

Well, anyway, he is meant to announce a transition team later today, he needs to get on with things and take on an issue that is 'winnable' in the first 6 months for him to get on the right foot. The challenges he faces are ridiculously big.

 

Whether some geek on a newcastle united forum considers him black or not is irrelevant, its the perception of the US public that decides that matter.

 

 

in tears here.

[ChezGiven 0]

I'm guessing he was trying to say Obama isn't black enough but then felt a bit embarrassed and backed off.

 

I'm not saying he's not black enough, or too black.

 

 

Others are; which is my point.

 

The main reason it is a defining moment in American history is because he is a black man. You can even see this in Obama's victory speech quotes earlier in this thread. Obama is well aware and arguably imprinted by his awareness and self-reflexivity of the fact that he is black. Not sure how else on the surface of political things the 'identity politics' clearly played out over the last year we are meant to touch first base with him. Understand? I don't want to go all Nietzsche on yer arse.

 

Ok, lets put it a different way. What is a "black man"? Why is he not a "white man"? And can you define or answer one without being unwittingly racist (in some form or other)?

 

 

Not being a black man in America it would be impossible for me to define 'that moment'. That moment before my blackness is colonised. Being black is wholly about the moment your 'otherness' is colonised. These are the basics of race identity. qv the Bangladeshi community in North London, qv the Arab community in Sweden.

 

I think behind all this bluster you have a valid point if it is only about erasure, I'm guessing your tallking about that.

 

Racism isn't just about how others define you ("positively" or "negatively" - both are the same in the end), but it's also about how you define yourself to others.

 

If he was the man that could bring sweeping change he had a massive opportunity to do so (even if it cost him the election - which I don't think it necessarily would), but he took a different tack. Not necessarily and evil tack, just the most pragmatic one.

 

Which is why I don't think he will change the world, he'll probably just rule it.

 

 

Of course that is the process that defines your blackness if you like. Obama is well aware of that. He is also aware that he needed to be inclusive to win. I wouldn't necessarily hold that against him.

 

This was obvious pages ago.

[Guest alex]

I'm almost scared to ask what inclusively polarised means.

[Fop 1]

Fop fuck off, sort yourself out, your talking out your arse.

And yet I'm still talking more sense than you.

 

 

 

Ok, lets put it a different way. What is a "black man"? Why is he not a "white man"? And can you define or answer one without being unwittingly racist (in some form or other)?

It's a difficult one Fop I concede. But I suspect he feels more black than white in many ways because he would have more in common with other black/mixed race people in terms of common prejudices faced, common historical injustices faced by family members and so on. Obviously that's pure guesswork coming from a white person from the NE of England but if you turn back the clock to the time before the civil rights movement he'd have been considered a 'negro' or whatever then and it's people who are of mixed race like him who are still at the wrong end of society's injustices in the United States. I don't think he should be defined purely by his colour but it's naive to say it shouldn't be an issue when it is bound to be. That's because we all have our little prejudices I suppose, some far more than others. And countries as a whole have them which is why you've never had anyone 'black' as president before. And he is seen as black, rightly or wrongly (given his mixed race background).

 

All true, but propagating the myth isn't combating it (and is the reason you won't see a democratically elected "white" person in a "black" majority country, or a "black" one in an "Asian" majority country etc.).

 

He's actually been in the best position to actually be a genuinely new era that perhaps anyone has ever been in (certainly in the modern world), yet he's failed the first test already, by choosing power over change.

 

 

Yes he is aware mainly because the dominant culture overall erases that moment of blackness. Obama will have had to continually re-colonise his blackness. In simple terms he has to continually ask himself who he is....Not something most of us have to worry about.

 

If he's doing that then he's already failed in most of the hopes being attributed to him.

Edited November 5, 2008 by Fop

[Park Life 71]

I'm guessing he was trying to say Obama isn't black enough but then felt a bit embarrassed and backed off.

 

I'm not saying he's not black enough, or too black.

 

 

Others are; which is my point.

 

The main reason it is a defining moment in American history is because he is a black man. You can even see this in Obama's victory speech quotes earlier in this thread. Obama is well aware and arguably imprinted by his awareness and self-reflexivity of the fact that he is black. Not sure how else on the surface of political things the 'identity politics' clearly played out over the last year we are meant to touch first base with him. Understand? I don't want to go all Nietzsche on yer arse.

 

Ok, lets put it a different way. What is a "black man"? Why is he not a "white man"? And can you define or answer one without being unwittingly racist (in some form or other)?

 

 

Not being a black man in America it would be impossible for me to define 'that moment'. That moment before my blackness is colonised. Being black is wholly about the moment your 'otherness' is colonised. These are the basics of race identity. qv the Bangladeshi community in North London, qv the Arab community in Sweden.

 

I think behind all this bluster you have a valid point if it is only about erasure, I'm guessing your tallking about that.

 

Racism isn't just about how others define you ("positively" or "negatively" - both are the same in the end), but it's also about how you define yourself to others.

 

If he was the man that could bring sweeping change he had a massive opportunity to do so (even if it cost him the election - which I don't think it necessarily would), but he took a different tack. Not necessarily and evil tack, just the most pragmatic one.

 

Which is why I don't think he will change the world, he'll probably just rule it.

 

 

Of course that is the process that defines your blackness if you like. Obama is well aware of that. He is also aware that he needed to be inclusive to win. I wouldn't necessarily hold that against him.

 

This was obvious pages ago.

 

 

I know mate, but you have to drum it into some.

[Park Life 71]

Well, anyway, he is meant to announce a transition team later today, he needs to get on with things and take on an issue that is 'winnable' in the first 6 months for him to get on the right foot. The challenges he faces are ridiculously big.

 

Whether some geek on a newcastle united forum considers him black or not is irrelevant, its the perception of the US public that decides that matter.

[ChezGiven 0]

I'm almost scared to ask what inclusively polarised means.

 

 

Fop swimming in the sheening clarity of codswallop.

[Guest alex]

The thing is though - he appeals to the young, he appeals to the liberals, he appeals to women, he appeals to ethnic minorities, he appeals to those who like to see someone from a poor background achieve status and wealth (what the 'American Dream' is all about), etc., etc. What's wrong with using those assets? I don't see how he can be criticised on that score.

[Park Life 71]

I'm almost scared to ask what inclusively polarised means.

 

 

Fop swimming in the sheening clarity of codswallop.

 

The rogue.

[Guest alex]

Fop fuck off, sort yourself out, your talking out your arse.

And yet I'm still talking more sense than you.

 

 

 

Ok, lets put it a different way. What is a "black man"? Why is he not a "white man"? And can you define or answer one without being unwittingly racist (in some form or other)?

It's a difficult one Fop I concede. But I suspect he feels more black than white in many ways because he would have more in common with other black/mixed race people in terms of common prejudices faced, common historical injustices faced by family members and so on. Obviously that's pure guesswork coming from a white person from the NE of England but if you turn back the clock to the time before the civil rights movement he'd have been considered a 'negro' or whatever then and it's people who are of mixed race like him who are still at the wrong end of society's injustices in the United States. I don't think he should be defined purely by his colour but it's naive to say it shouldn't be an issue when it is bound to be. That's because we all have our little prejudices I suppose, some far more than others. And countries as a whole have them which is why you've never had anyone 'black' as president before. And he is seen as black, rightly or wrongly (given his mixed race background).

 

All true, but propagating the myth isn't combating it (and is the reason you won't see a democratically elected "white" person in a "black" majority country, or a "black" one in an "Asian" majority country etc.).

 

He's actually been in the best position to actually be a genuinely new era that perhaps anyone has ever been in (certainly in the modern world), yet he's failed the first test already, by choosing power over change.

 

 

Yes he is aware mainly because the dominant culture overall erases that moment of blackness. Obama will have had to continually re-colonise his blackness. In simple terms he has to continually ask himself who he is....Not something most of us have to worry about.

 

If he's doing that then he's already failed in most of the hopes being attributed to him.

Propagating what myth?

[Fop 1]

Well, anyway, he is meant to announce a transition team later today, he needs to get on with things and take on an issue that is 'winnable' in the first 6 months for him to get on the right foot. The challenges he faces are ridiculously big.

 

Whether some geek on a newcastle united forum considers him black or not is irrelevant, its the perception of the US public that decides that matter.

 

Well it seems to be rather relevant here.

[Park Life 71]

The thing is though - he appeals to the young, he appeals to the liberals, he appeals to women, he appeals to ethnic minorities, he appeals to those who like to see someone from a poor background achieve status and wealth (what the 'American Dream' is all about), etc., etc. What's wrong with using those assets? I don't see how he can be criticised on that score.

 

Exactly.

 

 

Next Fop will be telling us he's a black man.

[Guest alex]

The thing is though - he appeals to the young, he appeals to the liberals, he appeals to women, he appeals to ethnic minorities, he appeals to those who like to see someone from a poor background achieve status and wealth (what the 'American Dream' is all about), etc., etc. What's wrong with using those assets? I don't see how he can be criticised on that score.

 

Exactly.

 

 

Next Fop will be telling us he's a black man.

I see bringing people together as a good thing. Crazy, I know.

[Fop 1]

The thing is though - he appeals to the young, he appeals to the liberals, he appeals to women, he appeals to ethnic minorities, he appeals to those who like to see someone from a poor background achieve status and wealth (what the 'American Dream' is all about), etc., etc. What's wrong with using those assets? I don't see how he can be criticised on that score.

 

Nothing from the point of pragmatic politician, but quite a lot from the point of a messiah.

 

Propagating what myth?

The myth of race.

[Fop 1]

The thing is though - he appeals to the young, he appeals to the liberals, he appeals to women, he appeals to ethnic minorities, he appeals to those who like to see someone from a poor background achieve status and wealth (what the 'American Dream' is all about), etc., etc. What's wrong with using those assets? I don't see how he can be criticised on that score.

 

Exactly.

 

 

Next Fop will be telling us he's a black man.

 

Would it matter?

[Park Life 71]

The thing is though - he appeals to the young, he appeals to the liberals, he appeals to women, he appeals to ethnic minorities, he appeals to those who like to see someone from a poor background achieve status and wealth (what the 'American Dream' is all about), etc., etc. What's wrong with using those assets? I don't see how he can be criticised on that score.

 

Nothing from the point of pragmatic politician, but quite a lot from the point of a messiah.

 

Propagating what myth?

The myth of race.

 

 

Oh my fucking Christ! The boy is evidently glistening in cats piss.

[Park Life 71]

The thing is though - he appeals to the young, he appeals to the liberals, he appeals to women, he appeals to ethnic minorities, he appeals to those who like to see someone from a poor background achieve status and wealth (what the 'American Dream' is all about), etc., etc. What's wrong with using those assets? I don't see how he can be criticised on that score.

 

Exactly.

 

 

Next Fop will be telling us he's a black man.

 

Would it matter?

 

 

More importantly would it hold you back?

[manc-mag 1]

This thread reminds me of when Baggio once claimed to be black. Then admitted that he wasnt. The denied that he'd ever claimed he was black. Then eventually admitted that he had.

[Guest alex]

The thing is though - he appeals to the young, he appeals to the liberals, he appeals to women, he appeals to ethnic minorities, he appeals to those who like to see someone from a poor background achieve status and wealth (what the 'American Dream' is all about), etc., etc. What's wrong with using those assets? I don't see how he can be criticised on that score.

 

Nothing from the point of pragmatic politician, but quite a lot from the point of a messiah.

 

Propagating what myth?

The myth of race.

The 'myth' that he's black? Is that what you mean? Because he's of mixed race? Forgive me if I'm wrong but aren't you having a pop at him for being 'inclusive' for political gain? Yet you seem to be saying he's playing on his 'blackness' too, aren't you?

[Fop 1]

The thing is though - he appeals to the young, he appeals to the liberals, he appeals to women, he appeals to ethnic minorities, he appeals to those who like to see someone from a poor background achieve status and wealth (what the 'American Dream' is all about), etc., etc. What's wrong with using those assets? I don't see how he can be criticised on that score.

 

Exactly.

 

 

Next Fop will be telling us he's a black man.

 

Would it matter?

 

 

More importantly would it hold you back?

 

Well you can answer your own question by answering mine.