Obama Has Betrayed Wright

Obama used the black church to buttress his political

credentials and then discarded the man who helped most.

Barack Obama is deeply indebted to Rev. Jeremiah Wright for two crucial elements of his presidential campaign: The first is Obama's Christian faith and the second is his work with black Americans on the South Side of Chicago.

In March, Obama claimed that the video clips of Rev. Wright playing nonstop on television news "expressed a distorted view of the nation" and were "divisive".

He was not only seriously chastising his pastor in public (a violation of Black Church Code), but disrespecting the conceptual schema of the prophetic wing of the black Christian church.

Obama knew very well that prophetic black preachers had a particular rhetorical way of organizing the black experience in America for their parishioners.

He also knew that the clips were merely seconds of sermons. That taken out of context the clips would be difficult to understand, especially if one was operating outside the conceptual boundaries of black prophetic Christian thought.

Yet, it is important to remember that without his Christianity and his South Side service to black people - both directly due to guidance, commitment and expertise of Rev. Wright - Obama may never have been elected a senator, and would not be in position to be the next president.

Over and over again, we have heard Obama use these aspects of his life to gain political supporters.

He trumpets his Christianity—which is indebted to prophetic black liberation theology where faith demands fighting for political justice—along the campaign trail and leverages it in order to connect with American voters.

But Sen. Obama was not born into a Christian home. By his own admission he became a Christian because of Rev. Jeremiah Wright.

In fact, he claims it was Rev. Wright's sermon called "the Audacity of Hope" that brought him to Christ.

Obama also borrowed the title of that same sermon for the title of his second book and as a way of framing his campaign.

Becoming a member at Trinity United Church of Christ did not only allow Sen. Obama to have a place to worship, it gave him a place to study the oratorical genius of Rev. Wright—an impact visible in his speaking style.

It also allowed him access to the rhythm and tone of organic black life, something Sen. Obama had always related to only as an outsider.

In essence, Rev. Wright provided Obama with the two aspects that make him most appealing to voters—his work organizing in the South Side of Chicago and his Christian faith.

For him to then call Rev. Wright "divisive" and accuse him of distorting the story of America, was, in a way, calling out the tradition that that informs Rev. Wright's words.

Any conscientious observer of race and politics in the U.S. understands that any black person who wants white support has to strike a delicate balance. Most of us do it daily at work.

Likewise, we all understand that any black person running for national office has to be non-threatening (i.e. not too black) in order to get the support of white voters.

The question is always how far one will go to prove to white people that they have nothing to fear.

Rev. Wright was a test for Obama. Rev. Wright forced Sen. Obama to make a call.

Does he throw a dear friend, mentor and pastor -- and thereby the tradition that informed that man -- under the bus in order to keep white support and stay alive in his presidential bid

Or does he try to explain the unassimilated, free, courageous black man as a sound, bold, articulate prophetic teacher who speaks directly to the needs and desires of a despised people?

Sen. Obama made his answer clear. I hope we all heard it.

Obama and Wright: Conservative & Radical

We did not have to go through any of the violent upheavals that Europe was forced to endure as it shed its feudal past.

Our passage from an agricultural to an industrial society was eased by the sheer size of the continent, vast tracts of land and abundant resources that allowed new immigrants to continually remake themselves. - Barack Obama, The Audacity of Hope, p. 55

Jeremiah Wright summarized the difference between him and Obama in his interviews last weekend as, “I do what pastors do. He does what politicians do. I am not running for office.”

But there is more to it than this.

Rev. Wright is an unapologetic African American preacher who has no hesitation speaking the truth in the best of the religious prophetic tradition. He uses the word “imperialism.”

He talks about “oppressors” and “oppressed” and “God’s desire for a radical change.” He says, accurately, that “you cannot do terrorism on other people and expect it never to come back on you.”

Barack Obama, as is clear from a close reading of “The Audacity of Hope” and a review of his Democratic Party political career, is all about rising up within the world of the Democratic and Republican parties, the corporate duopoly.

And if you are committed to that political world and becoming President through it, it is not surprising that you would do things like whitewash U.S. history, as the quote above does.

Genocidal policies toward Indigenous people, the hideous reality of slavery and Jim Crow, the invasion of Mexico and takeover of much of its territory, even the Civil War and Reconstruction: nowhere in Obama’s book does he address these truths of our history.

Obama said at his April 29th press conference where he broke with his pastor of 20 years that, “What became clear to me was that he was presenting a world view that contradicts who I am and what I stand for.

"And what I think particularly angered me was his suggestion that my previous denunciation of his remarks were somehow political posturing. . .

"So where I start hearing comments about conspiracy theories and AIDS and suggestions that somehow Minister Farrakhan has been a great voice in the 20th century, then that goes directly at who I am and what I believe this country needs.”

It is true that a handful of statements made by Wright in response to questions from the press at the National Press Club gave them an opening to caricature him as too radical, too out of touch with the U.S. political mainstream.

The political mainstream that Obama has been laboring mightily, for years, particularly over the past 16 months, to steer in a somewhat more progressive direction.

It is also true that, faced with near-certain, continued media attention on the Obama/Wright relationship, Obama needed to address the “worldview” differences between them, which are real.

But was it really necessary for him to use words like these in doing so: “divisive and destructive,” “the spectacle that we saw yesterday,” and “a bunch of rants that aren’t grounded in truth”?

Obama said that “when you start focusing on the plight of the historically oppressed, you lose sight of what we have in common. . . it doesn’t describe properly what I believe, in the power of faith to overcome but also to bring people together.”

If he truly believes that he’s different in this way than Wright, then he didn’t read all of Wright’s National Press Club speech, or he deliberately discounted major parts of it, like this conclusion:

The prophetic theology of the black church has always seen and still sees all of God’s children as sisters and brothers, equals who need reconciliation, who need to be reconciled as equals. . .

Reconciliation means we embrace our individual rich histories, all of them. We retain who we are, as persons of different cultures, while acknowledging that those of other cultures are not superior or inferior to us; they are just different from us.

We root out any teaching of superiority, inferiority, hatred or prejudice.

And we recognize for the first time in modern history, in the West, that the other who stands before us with a different color of skin, a different texture of hair, different music, different preaching styles and different dance moves

That other is one of God’s children just as we are, no better, no worse, prone to error and in need of forgiveness just as we are.

Only then will liberation, transformation and reconciliation become realities and cease being ever elusive ideals.”

Barack Obama has made a genuine effort to run a different kind of campaign, one which is more issue-oriented and less about the divisive and dishonest personal attacks that often characterize what passes for “political debate” in this country.

But in this case, the case of Rev. Wright, Obama has failed his own test. The corporate media has made him bend his principles.

If Obama wins the Democratic nomination and if he wins the Presidency, which I continue to hope he does as the best candidate when compared with Clinton and McCain, we can expect to see more examples of Obama rejecting consistently progressive positions.

Hopefully, he will feel that it is incumbent that he follows through on much of his generally progressive campaign rhetoric and fights for generally progressive government policies.

But like Jeremiah Wright, we need to be prepared, no matter who is elected President, “November 5th, I’m [we’re] coming after you, because you’ll be representing a government whose policies grind down people.”

Government of, by and for the people: that must be the objective.

tags: obama  wright  betrayal  president  2008  

links: digg this    del.icio.us    technorati    reddit