Putting Black Faces on Imperial Policies
by BAR Executive Editor Glen Ford
As African Americans contemplate the possibility of Barack Obama in
the Oval Office, they should consider the ramifications of a Black face
at the helm of an unreconstructed imperial policy. During the Secretary
of State tenures of Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice, the face of U.S.
aggression and lawlessness in the world, has been Black - a hell of an
image to present to the planet! Barack Obama shows no inclination to
abandon imperialism as state policy - only to avoid "dumb" wars, while
placing U.S.-designated "interests" above international law.
"What a spectacle: American imperialism in black-face."
"Barack Obama is our son and he deserves our support," declared
Illinois Senate President Emil Jones Jr., speaking to a gathering of
Black Democrats at the party's winter meeting, in Washington, earlier
this month. By Jones' logic, Condoleezza Rice deserves automatic
African American support as "our daughter," and Colin Powell, her
predecessor as George Bush's Secretary of State, was due fealty as "our
brother."
Jones' embrace of the entire African American family tree must also,
therefore, extend to U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice Clarence
Thomas, the most reactionary, anti-Black member of the High Court; and
to "our brother" J. Kenneth Blackwell, the former Ohio Secretary of
State whose consuming mission in 2004 was to deny the franchise to as
many fellow Blacks as possible.
Although the winter meetings are traditionally showcases for
candidates to display their positions on the issues of the day, State
Sen. Jones saw no need to present his appeal on Obama's behalf in any
packaging other than race. In effect, Jones attempted to relieve Obama
of any political obligation to Black people. Under Jones' formula, the
relationship between the Black office-seeker and the African American
public is reversed: it is the people that owe allegiance to the
candidate, who is in turn set free to woo groups and promote interests
that may be inimical to those of the Black public.
"Jones would utterly gut Black politics of all substance, rendering
the entire electoral process worthless to the Black masses."
Jones and the larger political current he represents would utterly gut
Black politics of all substance, rendering the entire electoral process
worthless to the Black masses. Perhaps the greatest irony of Jones'
issue-less directive is that it masquerades as a Black empowerment
strategy. In a transparent bid to shame Blacks in the Hillary Clinton
camp - another political desert - Jones said African Americans don't
"owe" anyone. Jones elaborated later, in a conversation with a Chicago
Sun-Times reporter. "How long do we have to owe before we have an
opportunity to support our son?" he said.
In other words, Black people's "debt" to the Clintons - as if such
ever existed - has been paid, and now it's time to herd Black voters
behind Obama, like so many cattle. Jones' brand of politics holds that
Black people don't have interests or political ideals, only obligations
to one politician or the other. In Jones' world, African Americans are
constantly indebted, but nobody owes them anything - certainly not
Obama, "our son."
The Emil Jones brand of Black politics is based on the assumption
that African American aspirations are limited to a simple desire to see
Black faces on display in high places, no matter the public policy
content of that representation. It is as if emancipation of the slaves
could be achieved by moving Ol' Massa out of the Big House, and
installing the Black butler in his place, while the conditions of life
and labor in the fields remain unchanged. After all, the butler is one
of "ours." The slaves should be happy to experience a vicarious
freedom, through their "son." Further, it would be downright unfamily-
like to pester our own kin about the need for forty acres and a mule
per household.
"Barack Obama's stealth corporate presidential candidacy could create
the conditions for a ?perfect storm' that sweeps away what remains of
issues-based coherence in Black electoral and institutional politics."
Jones' remarks exemplify an extraordinary vulgarization of African
American politics, the product of uncritical, Jim Crow-era reflexes
that linger within the Black polity, combined with the growing
influence of corporate money in the Black leadership-creation process.
The advent of Barack Obama's stealth corporate presidential candidacy
could create the conditions for a "perfect storm" that sweeps away what
remains of issues-based coherence in Black electoral and institutional
politics. Should that occur - and there is much evidence that the
unraveling is already well advanced - the collapse of progressive
American politics becomes inevitable, a high price to pay for a Black
face in the Oval Office.
Imperial Obama
African Americans will pay a special, historical price if a corporate-
molded Black politician becomes the titular leader of an
unreconstructed U.S. imperial state - and, make no mistake about it,
Barack Obama is an imperialist. No one but a deep-fried imperialist
could describe U.S. behavior in Iraq as "coddling" the Iraqis, as Obama
said to an establishment foreign policy gathering in Chicago, late last
year. His Iraq War De-escalation Act, carefully calibrated to make him
appear slightly less belligerent than Hillary Clinton, allows the U.S.
to wage war until March 31, 2008, at the very least, and to maintain a
military presence in the country thereafter. It is a sham measure, more
helpful in buying time for Bush than in encouraging effective dissent.
At his core, Obama is not opposed to U.S. violations of other nations'
sovereignty; he simply opposes "dumb wars" - as he told a reporter for
the Chicago Reader - meaning, aggressions executed by less-than-bright
American Commanders-in-Chief. U.S.-designated "interests," not
adherence to international law, are paramount - the fundamental tenet
of imperialism.
"Obama is not opposed to U.S. violations of other nations'
sovereignty; he simply opposes ?dumb wars'"
Of the declared Democratic candidates, only Ohio Rep. Dennis Kucinich
can pass anti-imperialist muster; thus the near-certainty of another
imperialist in the White House in 2009. Which brings us to the special
price that African Americans will pay if the face of U.S. imperialism,
is Black.
The Face of Aggression
There was a time not that long ago, when the historic struggles of
Black Americans for racial equality, decolonization and peace were
admired throughout the African Diaspora and beyond. Especially in what
was called the Third World, African Americans were perceived as
different than the arrogant, racist "ugly Americans" - the whites that
strutted around other people's nations as if they owned them. In the
early years of the Vietnam War, there were many reports of Viet Cong
attempts to spare Black American soldiers' lives, if practical, as an
acknowledgment of shared suffering under white rule. When Iranian
students seized the U.S. embassy in Tehran, in 1979, African Americans
were soon released, along with female staffers.
"Colin Powell emerged from Gulf War One as the personification of
American military might - and threat."
It is difficult to imagine such differentiations being made on foreign
shores, today. General Colin Powell emerged from Gulf War One as the
personification of American military might - and threat. As George
Bush's Secretary of State, Powell sacrificed his reputation - and an
immeasurable portion of remaining African American planetary good will
- in a lie-soaked justification of the impending invasion of Iraq
before the United Nations.
Colin Powell became the Black face of international piracy, to be
succeeded by Condoleezza Rice.
In her first act as the Black American female face of imperial
aggression, in April, 2002, then National Security Advisor Condoleezza
Rice could not contain her disappointment at the failure of a U.S.-
backed coup against Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez. "We do hope that
Ch嫛ez recognizes that the whole world is watching," she sneered, "and
that he takes advantage of this opportunity to right his own ship,
which has been moving, frankly, in the wrong direction for quite a long
time."
As Secretary of State, Rice is the reigning imperial drum major.
Despite a string of Chavez victories in fair elections and his
overwhelming support among the poor and mostly non-white Venezuelan
majority, Rice last week loosed another transparent threat against his
government. "I believe there is an assault on democracy in Venezuela,"
she told a congressional committee. "I do believe that the president of
Venezuela is really, really destroying his own country, economically,
politically." What a spectacle: American imperialism in black-face,
threatening a mixed-race president whose government has arguably
adopted the most racially progressive and inclusive policies on the
South American continent.
"Condoleezza Rice is the Black, snarling symbol of U.S. lawlessness."
When Rice claimed that the U.S. had been meeting with Venezuelan
Catholic leaders who were "under fire" from Chavez's government, the
vice-president of the Venezuelan Bishops' Conference - no friend of
Chavez - called her a "liar." Contrast this with Barack Obama's
exchange of pleasantries with Rice before voting to confirm her as
chief diplomatic operative of the Bush endless war doctrine.
From Beirut to Caracas, Condoleezza Rice is the Black, snarling symbol
of U.S. lawlessness - a perception of our African American "daughter"
that the NAACP must not have anticipated when it bestowed on her its
Image Award, in early 2002. Back then, Rice told the civil rights
group's gala affair: "As I travel with President Bush around the world
and as we meet with leaders from around the world, I see America
through other people's eyes."
After two consecutive Black Secretaries of State fronting for a hyper-
aggressive U.S. regime, the world no doubt sees Black America in a very
different light.
African Americans, who care so much for image - some, to the exclusion
of all else - should contemplate what the ascension of a Black face to
the Oval Office will mean to world perceptions of Black Americans as a
group. Would Barack Obama be a worse international criminal than
Hillary Clinton? My guess is, they'd function identically, as stewards
of empire. But a Barack Obama presidency would leave an unindelible
impression on the planet: The Blacks of the United States have arrived!
They, too, are "ugly Americans."
BAR Executive Editor Glen Ford can be contacted at Glen.Ford (at)
BlackAgendaReport.com.
中中中中中中中中中中中中中中中中中中中中中中中中中中中中中
To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L Web interface
at: http://listserv.icors.org/archives/gambia-l.html
To Search in the Gambia-L archives, go to: http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?S1=gambia-l
To contact the List Management, please send an e-mail to:
[log in to unmask]
中中中中中中中中中中中中中中中中中中中中中中中中中中中中中
|