In light of some of the things I have been writing on identity politics lately, someone on Facebook who disagrees with much of what I have written so far asked me to respond to this New York Times article by Michael Eric Dyson.
First, let me say that I have learned a lot from Dyson over the years. I would love to host him at Messiah College some time.
Last Winter I was driving through Alexandria, Virginia listening to C-SPAN radio and heard Dyson talking about his book The Black Presidency: Barack Obama and the Politics of Race in America. I found the interview so compelling (I have written about this before here at the blog) that the following week I bought a copy of the book at Hearts and Minds Books, Byron Borger’s bookstore in Dallastown, PA. I took it home and read it in two sittings. It helped me to better understand the Obama presidency and the subject of race in America more broadly. (You can see that interview with Dyson here).
Here are some thoughts on Dyson’s current piece:
- I think it was unfair of Kanye West, in the wake of Hurricane Katrina, to say that George W. Bush “doesn’t care about black people.” Dyson apparently disagrees.
- I also think it is unfair to equate Donald Trump’s views on race with the views of liberals and progressives such as Bernie Sanders or (implied) Mark Lilla. (More on Sanders below).
- Dyson does not distinguish between the universal ideals at the heart of the American Revolution (or at least the way these ideals were used by social reform movements through American history) and the failure of white people to apply them in American life. For example, the idea that “all men are created equal” was used in arguments on behalf of women’s rights, abolitionism, the opposition to Jim Crow, and other reforms. See, for example, Pauline Maier’s American Scripture: Making the Declaration of Independence. So here is my question: Do the ideals of equality and human rights transcend race? I would answer yes. In other words, they are universal Enlightenment ideals that all human beings share. And if one wants to argue that they are “white” ideals, then it seems that we should be thanking white people for introducing them into global history.
- But there is more to the story. I largely agree with Dyson’s account of American history. Yes, these universal ideas were not consistently applied in American history. (And we should not be thanking white people for that). This is the history any American with a conscience must confront. This is why I think the deep connections between American Slavery and American Freedom (as Edmund Morgan put it) must play a prominent role in the teaching of American history. It is also why I think history is needed more than ever as a means of teaching people empathy for the stories of all Americans within a national narrative. As a historian my vocation is to tell the story. It is then up to my students and my audience to decide what to do about the story. (The latter work can take place in the history classroom, but it is not this is not the exercise that drives what happens in the history classroom). After telling the story my work as a historian is done. (Of course my work on this front as a human being, a Christian, a citizen or a community member should not end, although one’s involvement in the cause will vary from person to person).
- So let me say a word about moving beyond the classroom. Should we throw out these American ideals just because they were not consistently applied in the past? Some would say yes. They would say that the weight of racism (the failure to apply these principles) in America cannot be lifted. They would say that the idea of “we shall overcome” is a relic of the past. I must part ways with such thinking. I will cast my lot with Martin Luther King and other early leaders of the Civil Rights movement who longed for and prayed for an integrated society. My America, like the America King talked about in Washington and in a Birmingham jail cell, is a nation where we must continue in the long hard struggle to apply the principles that our founders put in place in the eighteenth-century. As a Christian who believes in sin, I doubt we will ever get there on this side of eternity, but that is no excuse to stop working. (And we have a lot of work to do–I have a lot of work to do–when opportunities arise). We are called to advance the Kingdom of God on this earth and, with a spirit of hope, await its ultimate fulfillment,.
- I like what Dyson said about Obama in the C-SPAN interview I cited above: “When black people’s backs are against the wall as American citizens…the president should take the side [of black people]….When they are being gunned down in the streets…and especially vulnerable to racist rebuff, you must use your billy pulpit to amplify their cause and their claims and you must do so not simply as the ‘first black president’–that may be inessential at this point. What is essential, however, is that you as the representative of the state must speak on behalf of all citizens including African American people.” (Italics mine, although Dyson does inflect his voice on these words). Here Dyson is appealing to the ideals that bind us together as a people. He is making what appears to be an appeal to the ideals of the nation and the responsibility of the POTUS (and by implication all of us) to apply them to the cause of racism.
- I agree with Dyson that the administration Trump is assembling is not equipped to handle race in America and will not be up to the task as I have just described it.
- As you might imagine by this point, on the question of “identity politics” I find myself siding with Bernie Sanders. I believe that Bernie is correct when he says that we need to move beyond identity politics and toward a more national vision that seeks to address the things that affect all Americans–economic equality, the power of Wall Street, and climate change. These things affect people of all colors. I see a lot of Eugene Debs in Sanders–or at least the Debs that Nick Salvatore writes about in his book Eugene V. Debs: Citizen and Socialist. What I take away from Salvatore’s treatment of Debs is the way that this prominent turn-of-the century socialist invoked the civic humanism of the American founding. Debs’s civic humanism was certainly limited. Our does not have to be.
- To suggest Sanders is a racist is wrong. (I don’t think Dyson is saying this). To say that he does not care about black people or race in America is wrong. (And I don’t think Dyson is saying this either, but he may come close). I also don’t think a Sanders presidency would have ignored race.
- In the end, I see Sanders reaching beyond racial identity to make an appeal–primarily–to the things that all Americans must address. Isn’t this what the POTUS should be doing? Isn’t this the politics we need to move forward? Citizens of the United States must continue to frame their arguments about race in the context of the national ideals.
OK–there are some quick thoughts.