Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The modern topical debate strikes me as being less about race than about "national identity". Sure, racial animus is present, even rife. But the main political tension now is over trade and immigration, over so-called national sovereignty vs. supra-national organizations such as the EU and UN and so forth. American conservatives seem to most bristle at Obama's "otherness", his Harvard aloofness, than necessarily race. And what's today tarred as liberal excess is again less about minority issues per se, than a perception (justified or not) that these liberal policies undermine traditional yeoman American hardscrabble self-reliance, in favor of quasi-European coddling-State. Obama is therefore vilified less as a black person than as an egghead reincarnation of Herbert Croly or Woodrow Wilson.
What is in some quarters regarded as being "too far too fast" is the federal response to the Great Recession. Populists decry the Wall Street bailouts (a work of both Bush and Obama) as a gift to "the elites" at the cost of ignoring/dispossessing "the people". Obama has become the symbol and the face of what's perceived as an increasingly meddlesome super-state that picks winners and losers... and thus, the face of all that's wrong with modernity. Obama's presidency has also become the catalyst for redefining what it means to be "left" or "right", leaving some traditionally right-wing ideas homeless. For example, whatever ever happened to free-trade, and libertarian economics in general? Today, both parties seek to outdo each other, in seeing who can more rapidly run away from such economics. The big tussle seems to be in the direction of big-spending... be it "free college" on the left, or relief for the middle class (whatever that means) on the right. Most hated of all, are the "coastal elites" - of which, again, Obama is emblematic.
In sum, the reaction to the Obama years is, I think, less about race, than about a questioning of the American identity - on what it means to be a nation, on the extent of federal vs. state powers, on what the modern state is all about.
The modern topical debate strikes me as being less about race than about "national identity". Sure, racial animus is present, even rife. But the main political tension now is over trade and immigration, over so-called national sovereignty vs. supra-national organizations such as the EU and UN and so forth. American conservatives seem to most bristle at Obama's "otherness", his Harvard aloofness, than necessarily race. And what's today tarred as liberal excess is again less about minority issues per se, than a perception (justified or not) that these liberal policies undermine traditional yeoman American hardscrabble self-reliance, in favor of quasi-European coddling-State. Obama is therefore vilified less as a black person than as an egghead reincarnation of Herbert Croly or Woodrow Wilson.
What is in some quarters regarded as being "too far too fast" is the federal response to the Great Recession. Populists decry the Wall Street bailouts (a work of both Bush and Obama) as a gift to "the elites" at the cost of ignoring/dispossessing "the people". Obama has become the symbol and the face of what's perceived as an increasingly meddlesome super-state that picks winners and losers... and thus, the face of all that's wrong with modernity. Obama's presidency has also become the catalyst for redefining what it means to be "left" or "right", leaving some traditionally right-wing ideas homeless. For example, whatever ever happened to free-trade, and libertarian economics in general? Today, both parties seek to outdo each other, in seeing who can more rapidly run away from such economics. The big tussle seems to be in the direction of big-spending... be it "free college" on the left, or relief for the middle class (whatever that means) on the right. Most hated of all, are the "coastal elites" - of which, again, Obama is emblematic.
In sum, the reaction to the Obama years is, I think, less about race, than about a questioning of the American identity - on what it means to be a nation, on the extent of federal vs. state powers, on what the modern state is all about.
You certainly do have a point because I agree that it does seem to be more about urban vs. rural and the haves vs. the have-nots than it is about race relations or "minority rights". However, race relations do enter into urban vs. rural and haves vs. the have-nots differences because I am fairly sure that it is a fact that more so-called minorities live in urban and comprise more of the have-not class than do white who live in rural areas or the suburbs, although the suburbs are getting more and more mixed, and there are many rural blacks, I think. Because the poor take more in the way of government programs, which I think were increased during the Obama years -- please correct me if I am wrong about this! -- that provoked resentment among many of the more affluent taxpayers, and thus increased the divide.
And you are also correct, I think, about leaving MANY former Republicans or moderate Democrats "homeless" because their views no longer are in synch with either major party.
However, as far as "national identify", my opinion on that is that we have really had no national identity for at least a hundred years when we were known as brash, independent, uncivilized (or the most part), and greedy upstarts. A possible exception that that might have in the 50's when the "sitcoms" of the period led many to think that our "culture" was almost exclusively Euro-white, middle-class and Christian.
Believe it or not, and for those like me (millions) the Left chooses to believe "Not," I don't think there's a consciously prejudiced bone in my Right-wing body against minorities. It's easy to tar us as "racists," I know. To be very clear, the Alt-Right and other fascist fringers really cross the line. I disavow those people, they have no voice in a legitimate dialog between Right and Left. I'd like to think the Far Left are similarly toxic to mainstream Democrats, but there is a definite bi-modality in the Democrat party anymore and they have huge support. As do the Pelosi Democrats, to be sure, but one cannot for a second disavow the fringers or they'll be all over you like ferrets on a rat. I pity Democrats anymore, for this reason.
So that aside, did I mind we put a President who identifies as Black into the White House, for that reason alone? Heck no! What if it had been Herman Kane (yes, I know, not qualified but for purposes of illustration) or a Margaret Thatcher type, speaking of Conservative Blacks and women, respectively? I....don't....care what they look like. I care tons about what they say, and far more about what they DO.
What I "minded" for two Presidential terms was the race-baiting, subtle though it was, and attempts to ram this country too far Left. That reflects the will of the fringers, who took it as opportunity to forward wacko agendas as if they were/are mainstream. Bad news, friends: they aren't. Bad-mouthing the country to others, kowtowing to animals and barbarians in suits abroad, thinking that Ivy League egghead crap would cut any mustard on the world stage, refusing to prosecute 'minorities' by his minions, which is the same as excusing bad behavior, encouraging race riots and refusing to support crackdowns, etc. All that? Yeah, that's "too far," all right.
Now that Trump-ians are in charge, and will be once again in 2020 (I predict), we're rolling all that back to the Center or even Right fast as we can, God willing. I have no hate in my heart for minorities, dude. The playing field is leveled as can-be, so time to ante up and kick in.
How is Herman Kane unqualified? He's been a successful CEO of multiple organizations and headed the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City. I'm not sure what in his background would suggest he is unqualified https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herman...ion_and_career
I'm a conservative. No bones about it. Those conservative views have nothing to do with race or sex of the President. I'd be love to see a ticket of Condi Rice and Nikki Haley because of their viewpoint toward government, the US, and the world.
My whole disagreement with the Obama era had nothing to do with race and everything to do with policies. The problem was that you could not disagree with Obama policies without being called "racist." It was impossible to discuss policy without it becoming a race discussion. Just like this one.
For the vast majority of conservatives, other than some fringe groups who don't deserve the name, it isn't about race, but about the role of the Federal government vs the local and state control; individual rights and individual responsibilities; a strong economy; a strong defense; and focus on supporting American interests over foreign ones. Support those things and most conservatives won't care if someone is black or white, gay or straight, Republican or Democrat.
I'm a conservative. No bones about it. Those conservative views have nothing to do with race or sex of the President. I'd be love to see a ticket of Condi Rice and Nikki Haley because of their viewpoint toward government, the US, and the world.
My whole disagreement with the Obama era had nothing to do with race and everything to do with policies. The problem was that you could not disagree with Obama policies without being called "racist." It was impossible to discuss policy without it becoming a race discussion. Just like this one.
For the vast majority of conservatives, other than some fringe groups who don't deserve the name, it isn't about race, but about the role of the Federal government vs the local and state control; individual rights and individual responsibilities; a strong economy; a strong defense; and focus on supporting American interests over foreign ones. Support those things and most conservatives won't care if someone is black or white, gay or straight, Republican or Democrat.
As a fellow conservative I applaud your excellent description of what a genuine conservative is all about.
I could not say it any better.
To respond to the OP's original post, my answer is yes, but...
The way our nation has always worked is by there being a sort of balancing act between more conservative forces and more liberal forces. The balance tilts one way for a while, and then in the other direction for a while, and I think that -- in the long run -- keeps things in balance.
But rather than take the Obama era, I'll go back to 1977. I was teaching in a school system that was under court-ordered desegregation and court-ordered busing. Our white students were bused in 11+ miles to what had been an all-Black school. The morning after the first episode of "Roots", our African-American principal -- a wonderful, though old-fashioned, lady -- called an early morning faculty meeting because she was concerned there could be some real problems at the school because of the depictions of Kunta Kinte being enslaved the night before. It turned out there were no problems. A few days later she came into the faculty lounge, where I was grading papers, and sat down to chat. I asked her what it was like in the school system before busing. She said, "Are you really interested?" I assured her that I was. She said, "You've been in our school library. What's your impression of it?" I told her it didn't look like any other school library I'd ever seen...it just looked like two classrooms slapped together. "You're right, Mr. L. Because even though the county argued that our schools were separate but equal, they weren't at all. All White schools had a library. All Black schools did not. All White schools had a school cafeteria. All Black schools had no cafeteria. Black schools had much bigger classes than white schools. Black schools got the hand-me-down textbooks that were ten years old after the White schools threw them out". She went on with more examples of how schools were not separate but equal.
Now, where am I going with this? I don't think busing was the right answer, although to a large extent it did mostly work. I rarely saw kids having a problem with it. It was the parents who were up in arms. At least where I was. Like the Obama era, I think some aspects of how we dealt with desegregation were ill-advised and an over-reaction. We did the best we could. We took two big steps forward. When the Nixon administration came along, we probably took a step backwards (from my perspective), and moved back in a more conservative direction.
From a conservative perspective, conservative administrations take us two steps forward in the right (pun intended) direction, while liberal administrations take us a step backwards.
But this is how overall balance in maintained.
OH, DEAR. what she describes occurred in ANY poor district. Since most schools are locally funded , that is all dependent on the taxation of the local residents, and in higher income areas, schools have better resources. She may have known what she was talking about or not.... but having visited different areas, i know that whether white, black, or not, the school conditions always depended on the local incomes of residents, never on race. this is an example of PERCEPTIONS and assumptions, not necessarily facts, determining one's belief about the causes of things.
OH, DEAR. what she describes occurred in ANY poor district. Since most schools are locally funded , that is all dependent on the taxation of the local residents, and in higher income areas, schools have better resources. She may have known what she was talking about or not.... but having visited different areas, i know that whether white, black, or not, the school conditions always depended on the local incomes of residents, never on race. this is an example of PERCEPTIONS and assumptions, not necessarily facts, determining one's belief about the causes of things.
No. She was talking about the history of one school district in Maryland. And since it was forced by the feds to undergo court ordered busing for years, she was clearly in the right. Don't try to rewrite history. She was there. She lived through it. You weren't there. I suppose next you're going to tell us that in neighboring Virginia the state and various localities didn't practive "massive resistance", closing some school systems rather than desegregate schools.
Which leads to the title of the thread: "Did the Obama years take us too far too soon?" (regarding the advancement of blacks and other so-called minorities)
From the Obama years I remember:
1) he signed into permanency almost all marginal tax rates from 2001 and 2003 levels, originally meant to be temporary;
2) he signed an increase in the estate tax exemption by as much as ten-fold and indexed to inflation;
3) continuation of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, opening of new fronts in Libya and Syria;
4) prices of so-called defense stocks increased by as much as three-fold;
5) prices of pharmaceutical and health care management stocks also increased significantly;
6) by mandate of courts, people of any gender can enter into civil contracts, regulated by state law, colloquially known as "marriage", by which they take on certain legal obligations to take care of each other financially, including personal tax management, and in terms of personal health management;
7) I got stuck in stopped traffic for about 20 minutes while Mr Obama and his entourage in motorcade were on their way to the most filthy rich neighborhood in southern Florida to raise campaign funds.
I do not recall that Mr Obama filled that lady's gas tank, but please feel free to jog my memory with facts on the ground. I did see with my own eyes the presidential car, on the ground.
You aren't going to get many admitted racists coming on here, only conservatives who claim that because they aren't racist that any attacks on Obama were also not racist. No other president has had so many questions on his nationality or religion, the constant accusations of "he's not like us". The sheer number of racist cartoons about him and his wife being apes or terrorists.
One thing that is still pretty obvious is how the people who gave Obama a hard time over certain policies and actions are completely okay with our current president doing the same thing. It's pretty clear that it isn't just a Republican vs Democrat thing. Racism might be really low in some parts of the country but it still lingers on in too many places.
For the vast majority of conservatives, other than some fringe groups who don't deserve the name, it isn't about race, but about the role of the Federal government vs the local and state control...
Whatever happened to those persons who'd prefer smaller government in aggregate, but who think that to the extent that we do have a government, it ought to be more national (or even international) than state/local?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Transmition
You aren't going to get many admitted racists coming on here, only conservatives who claim that because they aren't racist that any attacks on Obama were also not racist. No other president has had so many questions on his nationality or religion, the constant accusations of "he's not like us". The sheer number of racist cartoons about him and his wife being apes or terrorists.
I think that it was a confluence of factors. If Obama's name were Leroy Jefferson, if he were the direct descendant of slaves, if he were a truck-driver from Alabama who then started his own business and got elected to city-council etc., if he spoke with a thick "black" accent, then he'd actually sustain fewer barbs and insults from the "conservatives". But Obama was bi-racial. His father was an African, rather than an African American. He had a fine Ivy-League education, and was himself a law professor. He fit the traditional East Coast Elite stereotype... and in addition his persona was vaguely foreign/exotic, with a weird name, with years of his life spent abroad... and on top of that, yes, the issue of race. It was an amalgamation of factors that made him a prime target of nativist ire, representing in the nativist imagination all that's purportedly "wrong" with modern America. A "regular black guy", whatever that means, wouldn't have been thus vilified.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
