Race Didn't Matter, Or Did It?

Whoever said that "Race" didn't matter, should take a good look at themselves in the mirror; because you just might be fooling yourself. And while there are countless individuals in this country (with blinders) that believe we are in a new dawn of human enlightenment and inclusion towards people of other races, ethnicity, and cultures; people still resort to old-school thinking. But, the greater question is: do we lead by our intentions, or by our actions? There is no surprise that America has been through some tumultuous times in terms of "Race" relations, but so much importance has been placed on resentment and exclusion, rather than finding ways to be a truly inclusive society. The flag waving of diversity in America will not be a unifying factor if it continues to "pit" one group against another. Yes, America is a melting pot, and all cultures should be respected and proud, but alienating yourself from society has the opposite affect; it provides just the divisiveness that so many have fought against.

After the 2008 election, Anderson Cooper (CNN News) made the bold statement, declaring that is was refreshing to see that "Race" had no effect on the election. That Americans came together, and voted for man they felt would be the best President, rather than focus on his multi-cultural background. Now, I actually like Anderson Cooper, and enjoy his show (Anderson Cooper 360), but unfortunately he had only been talking about the apparent media speculation; that a portion of "White" voters would refuse to vote for Obama once they actually walked into the voting machine (aka Bradley Effect). No one ever questioned "Black" sentiment or voting bias: you would be a racist, wouldn't you? Did anyone ever stand up and say the "Black" vote would fall under the same racial prejudice as if a "White" voter decided to vote against him for the same reason? Let's get real here, the first president nominee that happened to be "Part-Black"; nahhh, no reason to speculate there would be voter bias here. And I guess that is okay, right?  I mean, we are not voting for a man "based on the color of his skin, but on the content of his character (Or was MLK just yadda, yadda, yadd-a-ling)?  Sure, the "Black" community has been through so much adversity in America, and despite the barriers that still exist, they found a gleaming moment to be proud. No one is going to argue with that, but is that enough? Do you vote for man because of it? This election had nothing to do with supporting a man that is running for a local township position, or community advisor, this is the office of the "President Of The United States". And I am not discounting his Academic achievements, but you would think his lack of experience and controversial background would be an important factor in this decision process. The critics will argue that Blacks have been predominately devoted to the Democratic party for years (roughly 90-10), so any racial bias would be discredited. But, I would have to argue that position. Due to the undeniable love and adoration for the Clinton family beyond just party block-voting. The black community embraced the "Clintons" emphatically over 8 years, so why would a majority of the back votes abandoned Hillary Clinton, and shift to an inexperienced man like Barack. He certainty did not have the proven tenure to be our leader. And based on Hillary's experience in Washington and commitment to the black community over the years, a radical departure can mean only one thing, right? Well, I would never want to make an assumption, but given the countless street interviews that I witnessed, the case against "Race" is hard to dispute. I remember watching a NY1 news broadcast and watching a black woman covered in Obama "garb" state that she was going to vote for Obama. She originally was voting for Hillary, but changed her mind. When asked why, she stated, after further review of his credentials (?), he would be a good president because he represented "Change" and "Hope"; and she believed he would save the country. That was it; no mention of experience, proven ability, nor significant contributions that would qualify him for the job (All in the 150 days of legislative work). And no mention of why the sudden change in candidate support. And, as I walked through various neighborhoods in NYC, the ostentatious and elaborate donning of pro-Obama gear worn by the "Black" community, would be more than just excitement for the American political process, right? I am sure many of these people would have cared less if Barack was not on the ballot. Sure, that is another assumption, but I did not re-call "Black" voters wearing an excessive ensemble of "Bill Clinton And Me Forever" T-shirts and blinking "We Can Do It" hats, when Bill was running for President. Sure there was excitement and support, but not to the level in 2008. But then again, this was a nation's first, was I being insensitive to the historical significance of this election?

Now that Barack is elected, will "Whites" be absolved from some guilt, will the "White" community gain some credibility in acceptance and inclusion because of this election, and will this have a positive affect on "Race" relations? I hope so, because Barrack did not win on the "Black" vote alone, he won with the "White", "Hispanic", "Jewish", "Asian", "Indian" and "Etc.", vote too. And given Barack's ethnic make-up, he is actually the first "Multi-Cultural President": he is "Half-White" you know.   But, it is common that any "percentage" of African American descent automatically make you "Black-Only" in the eyes of the community (And I thought color was insignificant). Just look at Tiger Woods, when was the last time someone said, the first African American-Asian-Caucasian golfer; they don't, they say "Black".  At least credit goes to Mr. Woods for stating he was proud of all his heritage and refused to make "Race" a central theme of him being a legendary professional golfer (And an amazing one at that).  Even Barack's endearment for his "White" heritage was not prominent; I am sure, until after intense campaign pressure to not alienate the voting block.  And his book titled the "Audacity Of Hope" wasn't exactly "White" friendly, yet interesting enough, he was raised quite well by a Caucasian family, while his Kenyan father deserted him at the age of 3.  But hey, let's not drag up the past; shouldn't his multi-cultural background give everyone a reason to celebrate this historical event, not just the "Black" community? Shouldn't the nation be proud that we ALL truly gained ground here? But the fact that the media and minority communities only focused on the issue of "Black", demonstrates that the overwhelming support was not devoted to embracing his entire ethnicity. And does that help in the fight of diversity, or just widen the gap? As a person of "Multi-Cultural" ethnicity, I was never taught to embrace one part of my heritage over another. In fact, I was proud of my 5 separate countries of historical lineage. The difference was that I was an American first, so regardless of background, I always found a common bond in another man by nature of the entire community. My grandmother was a proud Spaniard, but she loved this country. She faced a lot of diversity when she stepped on this soil, but she was a tough woman. But her toughness was not based in exclusion, but in Godly love. She had friends of various backgrounds, and did run amok with her Spanish flags, pins, and ribbons; she was an American now, and she had our countries' flag flying proudly on her lawn (I know that is a potential "Hate Crime" in these days, but not at that time when people appreciated this country). She truly embraced everyone to the point where her openness and acceptance was sincere and not transparent. She never sided with someone due to their ethnicity, or disparaged them because of it. She was an American, first.

Sadly, after the O.J. Simpson "Circus", I will never forget the day I watched the jury declare their verdict; "Not, Guilty". I remember scores of "Blacks" around the country cheering and screaming! Of course, after the media and Johnny Cochran turned the case into a "Race" issue, there was no doubt that OJ was going to be freed, and the "Black" community would overwhelmingly support him. All they knew was an ex-football star and actor, that happened to be "Black", was on trial for murder under the conspiracy of alleged racial targeting. Of course, OJ is paying his dues now on unrelated charges, proving that justice finds a way to prevail. But, all I could think was, "A woman was murdered, and people are cheering". Now, I know there is not exactly the best history of the L.A.P.D. and the "Black" community, but this case was not about that, nor should it have been. When Rodney King was excessively beaten by the L.A.P.D. (regardless of being pumped up on PCP and endangering the lives of civilians with reckless driving), the aftermath of anger was understandable. The rioting that ensued that ridiculous (I do not know how burning your own neighborhood qualifies as revenge), but justice, I agree, was not served. But when Reginald Denny, an innocent trucker, was dragged out his truck and beaten by "Blacks" during the L.A. riot, did anyone in that community condemn those actions? Where "blacks" screaming for Justice? For a lot of Americans it underscored the issue that "Racial Bias" exists in all communities, and the divide in this country only escalated.

So, yes, "Race" and "Ethnicity" will continue to play roles in prejudice and community loyalty, until we stop letting it be the focus. If the "Black" community overwhelming supported Barack due to his "Race"; is there justification? And though many will argue against that notion, or in support of it as an understanding that I will could never truly appreciate it, I can't help but feel indifferent. I have friends of varied backgrounds, and we agree on some issues, and disagree on others; and that is okay. As a society, we will never see "Eye-To-Eye" on everything, but if we continue to segregate ourselves, we will never fully integrate. Face it, "Diversity" in this country went from "Appreciation" of culture to "Isolation" of community. And America will only be a successful "Melting Pot" if we can focus on thinking together as a nation and not as individuals. So, now that we have gotten over the presidential barrier with "Race", I hope the "Black" community will embrace society, rather than still feel alienated. But, with a rise in "Black-Centric" adornment in the "Black" community, I can't help but wonder: why all the fuss if you just want to live in isolation. If "White-Centric" thought was considered racist, then why not this? But the real questions remain unanswered. If Barack makes a misguided decision, will the community question him? If Barack makes a mistake, will the community be quicker to forgive him? And if Barack fails as President, will the community stand by his side without hesitation? If the answers are "Yes", then society may have overlooked the fact that; I guess "Race" does matter. Then again, maybe I am making too big a deal of this. Or, maybe this is just a prideful time in history that should be respected, understood and embraced. Is it wrong to talk openly about this? Doesn't an open forum provide the seeds of progress? Regardless, I hope that this is a true beginning of racial healing and a move towards unity that "ALL" people can be proud of; not just "Black" identity.  But until then, as long as we focus on labels like "Blacks" and "Whites", and not "Americans", the only progress we will make is further expanding the gap that we have come so far to close.