Obama is not African American - Writers Forum

Owen Merton · 05-19-2008, 05:43 AM

How come we call Obama a black man. He is half white. Should we not refer to him as a mixed race...or no reference at all! It seems that as soon as you have some African blood in you...you are then labeled as African-American. Would not African Caucasian American be more accurate? I guess that would be too complicated...especially if he were a non-Christian...say Jewish. Then he would be a Jewish African Caucasian American. What if his mother was Hispanic? Then he could be a Jewish Hispanic African Caucasian American. Is anybody really pure blood that we can give them definitive labels the way our society does? I think we need to start dropping the titles…we live in a big meting pot where the white American will be a minority in the United States in the next fifty years.

Matthatter · 05-19-2008, 07:59 AM

Good point Owen. Unfortunately human disposition rarely meets logic. We label things according to how they stand out. It is not Obama's whiteness that makes him stand out (as a presidential candidate).

Plus, if people saw him as only half white, that would make some white folks feel 50% less liberal. Kidding, of course. But on a more serious note, this kind of motivation (which would be stronger by viewing him as black) could override people's judgement and cause them to vote for an individual for emotionally-driven ego-preserving reasons, rather than well thought-out opnions regarding the words of a candidate (I don't intend to emply anything about Obama here).

Mike C · 05-19-2008, 08:20 AM

We call Obama black because he's black. Nobody issued me with a colour chart to say which shades are more socially acceptable than others.

Modest Me · 05-19-2008, 08:27 AM

I have a question: Does it even matter how we refer to him?
I think it only matters to people who are hung up on race.

Writ-with-Hand · 05-19-2008, 08:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Owen Merton

How come we call Obama a black man. He is half white. Should we not refer to him as a mixed race...or no reference at all! It seems that as soon as you have some African blood in you...you are then labeled as African-American. Would not African Caucasian American be more accurate? I guess that would be too complicated...especially if he were a non-Christian...say Jewish. Then he would be a Jewish African Caucasian American. What if his mother was Hispanic? Then he could be a Jewish Hispanic African Caucasian American. Is anybody really pure blood that we can give them definitive labels the way our society does? I think we need to stop dropping the titles…we live in a big meting pot where the white American will be a minority in the United States in the next fifty years.

That's how he is defined in the United States (and certain other countries).

There are white Latinos or "Hispanics" by the way. In the United States we tend to view "White" as synonymous with "purity" of race and therefore we look at Hispanic-America and Luso-America as being exotic and non-white.

Many Creoles of Spanish America were no more than Spaniards that had adopted the mixed-cultural ways of Hispanic-America. The word Hispanic goes back to the ancient Roman periods. The word "Creole" in French colonies, however, generally referred to mixed-race and mixed-cultured peoples. There are a couple reasons the concept of "Hispanic" picked up usage in former Spanish-American colonies (I don't think most Filipinos consider themselves Hispanic though I think some might), one of the reasons though was a response to U.S. Anglo-Saxon led actions, under the Monroe doctrine, towards certain Latin American countries.

To Latin Americans - and I know this is a hard concept for Americans (USA) to get - "white" is a chromatic descriptive term and has little to do with genetics.

So called "races" amongst Homo sapiens do not exist in a biological sense. There may have been more than one race of Homo sapiens at one time but if that was the case all have become extinct but for the singular race of Homo sapiens today. The issues related to things like Sickle Cell has more to do with geography and related ancestry and consequently only give the appearance intrinsic to "race."

However, the concept of "races" are true from a sociological sense. And because of that it is prudent to use language - labels - that can help governments, organizations, and social scientists track "races" in any given environment.

Obama in my opinion, would be more accurately classified as Mulatto. The United States, however, does not use that term culturally (anymore at least) or officially. President Hugo Chavez is Mestizo in Venezuela even though he looks as much Amerindian as President Evo Morales of Bolivia. Nonetheless, if Chavez was a U.S. citizen he would have to choose between "Native American" or "White." Since Chavez does not look White then it is likely he would choose to be called Indian or Native American.

(I prefer not to get into a debate about the etymology of the word "Mulatto" - in my opinion there is adequate reasons to speculate that the North African Moors of Spain could have donated a particular word to Spanish which Mulatto potentially could have been derived from)

Sam Winchester · 05-19-2008, 08:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike C

We call Obama black because he's black. Nobody issued me with a colour chart to say which shades are more socially acceptable than others.

Now that's some funny shit, Mike!

Sam.

JosephB · 05-19-2008, 09:01 AM

So what is the debate? Should we continue to call him black or should we start referring to him as half-white or whatever?

There are compelling issues surrounding how Obama's race helped make him a viable candidate, but this isn't one of them.

Quote:

I think we need to stop dropping the titles…we live in a big meting pot where the white American will be a minority in the United States in the next fifty years.

And your point is...?

Tiamat10 · 05-19-2008, 09:18 AM

Personally, I'm up for calling him a monkey-American. Because to me, he looks like a monkey. The round face, the big ears. I know that's a cheap shot on the man, but every time I see him, I imagine him holding a banana. I can't help it.

Modest Me · 05-19-2008, 09:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tiamat10

Personally, I'm up for calling him a monkey-American. Because to me, he looks like a monkey. The round face, the big ears. I know that's a cheap shot on the man, but every time I see him, I imagine him holding a banana. I can't help it.

RACIST!! jkjk lol
I know what you're saying- now that you mention it, you're totally right.

lin · 05-19-2008, 09:29 AM

NOBODY is "African American". It's a stupid misegenation of the language that doesn't mean anything because it tries to substitute geography and nationality for the racial designation it pretends to describe.

An Egyptian who took up U.S. citizenship would be "African American" one supposes. The most pure example of black racial stock in Nigeria would not be.

A LOT of people outside the US don't much care for the idea that blackness gets described as "American". And the idea that you can't identify a person's race without knowing his nationality is too idiotic to wash with anybody except the precious little elite American academic liberal fools who promote the "African American" bullshit.

(They will suffer the pangs of guilt when the next charismatic black leader decries the phrase and demands to be called something else...the way they demanded "Black" instead of "colored" in the Sixties.)

What I can't figure out is why ONLY American blacks go through all this adolescent identity re-christening crisis. Everywhere else they seem pretty much comfortable with being black.

JosephB · 05-19-2008, 09:32 AM

I liked Chevy Chase' old line:

I don't judge a man by the color of his skin, but rather, the thickness of his lips.

Tiamat10 · 05-19-2008, 09:33 AM

Maybe because everywhere else didn't have them as slaves before they were integrated into the culture. Not that slavery didn't go on in other parts of the world, but most of the blacks you see in other countries actually emigrated there of their own volition--their family didn't get there via slave ship.

lin · 05-19-2008, 09:34 AM

Quote:

So called "races" amongst Homo sapiens do not exist in a biological sense.

This is total, obvious bullshit. Easily observed as such by just looking around at people.
SCIENTISTS have decided this because they get in trouble using racial terms, especially when they come up with non-correct results.

There are OBVIOUSLY diferent human races. Just as there are different races of dogs.
No matter how much interbreeding occurs, or how much you can trace things back to common roots...a chihuahua is very obviously a different breed than a Rottweiler.

And a seven foot Ibo and a four foot Mayan and a six foot Swedish Bikini Team member are very obviously of different racial stock. And NOT just because of "skin color".

And before anybody tweaks on it: "race" and "breed" are synonyms.

lin · 05-19-2008, 09:36 AM

Quote:

everywhere else

???????????

Meaning "everywhere else except Cuba and Haiti and Brazil and Barbados and Mexico and Belize and....."

MANY countries of the world got a black population courtesy of the Arab-British overseas slaving industry.

Writ-with-Hand · 05-19-2008, 09:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lin

This is total, obvious bullshit. Easily observed as such by just looking around at people.
SCIENTISTS have decided this because they get in trouble using racial terms, especially when they come up with non-correct results.

There are OBVIOUSLY diferent human races. Just as there are different races of dogs.
No matter how much interbreeding occurs, or how much you can trace things back to common roots...a chihuahua is very obviously a different breed than a Rottweiler.

And a seven foot Ibo and a four foot Mayan and a six foot Swedish Bikini Team member are very obviously of different racial stock. And NOT just because of "skin color".

And before anybody tweaks on it: "race" and "breed" are synonyms.

Lin, the concept of race is a specific scientific concept, it has to do with divergence into sub-species. There are not different sub-species amongst Homo sapiens, and in fact two White people are more genetically different than simply a White person from a Black person.

The example of Ibos, Mayans, and Swedes you gave has more to do with expression in genes than it does with divergence into sub-species.

Jeniffer Garner (sp?) has a nive round pronounced ass... yet she not Black nor Puerto Rican.

I've got to go right now though. Pace.