There’s no doubt that the election of a biracial man to the US presidency is a historic event. Insofar as it symbolises the success of the civil rights movement against racial injustice, it should be celebrated (and I join with my American friends on that count).
Still, I have to confess that I’m left somewhat confused by the countless expressions of pride I’ve witnessed over the last two days. “Today, I’m proud of America!” “Americans can take pride in this historic election result!” And so on.
But what exactly is there to be proud about, I ask?
Should Americans be proud that a biracial man has been elected US president? Surely that’s no reason to be proud. A man’s ethnicity or skin colour ought to be strictly irrelevant to whether he’s the right man to serve as president. Wasn’t that the point all along? So to take pride in his election on that basis is just another form of racism.
Should Americans be proud that a biracial man could be elected US president? Well, we all knew that months ago. How did the events of Tuesday add anything to that?
In any case, how would that give grounds for pride? Race should never have been an issue in the first place — not now, not in the 60s, not at any time. At best, the election result illustrates that a past injustice is no longer present. Suggesting that the election (or electability) of a non-white president is praiseworthy or prideworthy is to confuse the obligatory with the supererogatory. There should never have been any barrier in the first place. There’s no basis for pride in finally doing (or allowing) one what always ought to have done (or allowed).
Imagine if for 40 years my church had forced women to sit on the floor during its worship services. Should I feel pride on the day that the first woman is allowed to sit in a pew? Gladness, yes. Relief, yes. But pride?
America is a truly great country and Americans have much to feel justly proud about. Yet in all honesty, I fail to see that the election of a biracial president should be one of them. Gladness, yes. Relief, yes. But pride?
Perhaps I’m still bitter about the historic event of July 4th, 1776. :)
I don't understand how you can "celebrate" the election of an aracial president yet condemn the pride of pride of others in the result.
ReplyDeleteIt doesn't symbolize the success of the civil rights "movement" since that "battle" was long ago won.
It symbolizes the success of identity politics which this blog has been quick to disclaim in the past if practiced by Whites.
Lastly, since you seem so swift to celebrate the will of the majority in this particular instance. What if the majority decided that we could only properly be represented by a phenotype that was in the majority? Could we celebrate that vote?
Please forgive my atrocious grammar.
ReplyDeleteBest,
D
danielj,
ReplyDeleteI don't understand how you can "celebrate" the election of an aracial president yet condemn the pride of pride of others in the result.
My church analogy was designed to illustrate that very distinction.
It doesn't symbolize the success of the civil rights "movement" since that "battle" was long ago won.
By that logic, the Lord's Supper couldn't symbolise the atonement.
It symbolizes the success of identity politics which this blog has been quick to disclaim in the past if practiced by Whites.
Note the crucial phrase, "Insofar as..."
And wasn't my fourth paragraph an implicit condemnation of identity politics?
Lastly, since you seem so swift to celebrate the will of the majority in this particular instance. What if the majority decided that we could only properly be represented by a phenotype that was in the majority? Could we celebrate that vote?
Nothing I wrote implies that I celebrate the will of the majority as such. I celebrate the will of the majority only insofar as (there's that crucial phrase again) it reflects the law of God.