[Reader-list] Frantz Fanon: Black Skin, White Masks

[Paul Miller]

Hi Vivek et al - I didn't mention "racism" per se: I actually think  
it's alot more about ideology, American "exceptionalism" and the whole  
issue of how the South has been the barometer of national politics (to  
me, tragically) for the last couple of decades. I'll re-forward the  
article I sent about the "decline of the South's relevance" on  
national politics. Why do you think "Joe the plumber" would vote for  
MCcain? Not because of a "reality" where they have anything in common  
- except race. Please read below. It's actually an interesting article.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/11/us/politics/11south.html?em

For South, a Waning Hold on National Politics

By ADAM NOSSITER
Published: November 10, 2008

VERNON, Ala. — Fear of the politician with the unusual name and look  
did not end with last Tuesday’s vote in this rural red swatch where  
buck heads and rifles hang on the wall. This corner of the Deep South  
still resonates with negative feelings about the race of President- 
elect Barack Obama.

What may have ended on Election Day, though, is the centrality of the  
South to national politics. By voting so emphatically for Senator John  
McCain over Mr. Obama — supporting him in some areas in even greater  
numbers than they did President Bush — voters from Texas to South  
Carolina and Kentucky may have marginalized their region for some time  
to come, political experts say.

The region’s absence from Mr. Obama’s winning formula means it “is  
becoming distinctly less important,” said Wayne Parent, a political  
scientist at Louisiana State University. “The South has moved from  
being the center of the political universe to being an outside player  
in presidential politics.”

One reason for that is that the South is no longer a solid voting  
bloc. Along the Atlantic Coast, parts of the “suburban South,” notably  
Virginia and North Carolina, made history last week in breaking from  
their Confederate past and supporting Mr. Obama. Those states have  
experienced an influx of better educated and more prosperous voters in  
recent years, pointing them in a different political direction than  
states farther west, like Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana and  
Mississippi, and Appalachian sections of Kentucky and Tennessee.

Southern counties that voted more heavily Republican this year than in  
2004 tended to be poorer, less educated and whiter, a statistical  
analysis by The New York Times shows. Mr. Obama won in only 44  
counties in the Appalachian belt, a stretch of 410 counties that runs  
from New York to Mississippi. Many of those counties, rural and  
isolated, have been less exposed to the diversity, educational  
achievement and economic progress experienced by more prosperous areas.

The increased turnout in the South’s so-called Black Belt, or old  
plantation-country counties, was visible in the results, but it  
generally could not make up for the solid white support for Mr.  
McCain. Alabama, for example, experienced a heavy black turnout and  
voted slightly more Democratic than in 2004, but the state over all  
gave 60 percent of its vote to Mr. McCain. (Arkansas, however, doubled  
the margin of victory it gave to the Republican over 2004.)

Less than a third of Southern whites voted for Mr. Obama, compared  
with 43 percent of whites nationally. By leaving the mainstream so  
decisively, the Deep South and Appalachia will no longer be able to  
dictate that winning Democrats have Southern accents or adhere to  
conservative policies on issues like welfare and tax policy, experts  
say.

That could spell the end of the so-called Southern strategy, the  
doctrine that took shape under President Richard M. Nixon in which  
national elections were won by co-opting Southern whites on racial  
issues. And the Southernization of American politics — which reached  
its apogee in the 1990s when many Congressional leaders and President  
Bill Clinton were from the South — appears to have ended.

“I think that’s absolutely over,” said Thomas Schaller, a political  
scientist who argued prophetically that the Democrats could win  
national elections without the South.

The Republicans, meanwhile, have “become a Southernized party,” said  
Mr. Schaller, who teaches at the University of Maryland, Baltimore  
County. “They have completely marginalized themselves to a mostly  
regional party,” he said, pointing out that nearly half of the current  
Republican House delegation is now Southern.

Merle Black, an expert on the region’s politics at Emory University in  
Atlanta, said the Republican Party went too far in appealing to the  
South, alienating voters elsewhere.

“They’ve maxed out on the South,” he said, which has “limited their  
appeal in the rest of the country.”

Even the Democrats made use of the Southern strategy, as the party’s  
two presidents in the last 40 years, Jimmy Carter and Mr. Clinton,  
were Southerners whose presence on the ticket served to assuage  
regional anxieties. Mr. Obama has now proved it is no longer necessary  
to include a Southerner on the national ticket — to quiet racial  
fears, for example — in order to win, in the view of analysts.

Several Southern states, including Arkansas, Louisiana and Tennessee,  
have voted for the winner in presidential elections for decades. No  
more. And Mr. Obama’s race appears to have been the critical deciding  
factor in pushing ever greater numbers of white Southerners away from  
the Democrats.

Here in Alabama, where Mr. McCain won 60.4 percent of the vote in his  
best Southern showing, he had the support of nearly 9 in 10 whites,  
according to exit polls, a figure comparable to other Southern states.  
Alabama analysts pointed to the persistence of traditional white  
Southern attitudes on race as the deciding factor in Mr. McCain’s  
strong margin. Mr. Obama won in Jefferson County, which includes the  
city of Birmingham, and in the Black Belt, but he made few inroads  
elsewhere.

“Race continues to play a major role in the state,” said Glenn  
Feldman, a historian at the University of Alabama, Birmingham.  
“Alabama, unfortunately, continues to remain shackled to the bonds of  
yesterday.”

David Bositis, senior political analyst at the Joint Center for  
Political and Economic Studies, pointed out that the 18 percent share  
of whites that voted for Senator John Kerry in 2004 was almost cut in  
half for Mr. Obama.

“There’s no other explanation than race,” he said. In Arkansas, which  
had among the nation’s largest concentration of counties increasing  
their support for the Republican candidate over the 2004 vote,  
“there’s a clear indication that racial conservatism was a component  
of that shift away from the Democrat,” said Jay Barth, a political  
scientist in the state.

Race was a strong subtext in post-election conversations across the  
socioeconomic spectrum here in Vernon, the small, struggling seat of  
Lamar County on the Mississippi border.

One white woman said she feared that blacks would now become more  
“aggressive,” while another volunteered that she was bothered by the  
idea of a black man “over me” in the White House.

Mr. McCain won 76 percent of the county’s vote, about five percentage  
points more than Mr. Bush did, because “a lot more people came out,  
hoping to keep Obama out,” Joey Franks, a construction worker, said in  
the parking lot of the Shop and Save.

Mr. Franks, who voted for Mr. McCain, said he believed that “over 50  
percent voted against Obama for racial reasons,” adding that in his  
own case race mattered “a little bit. That’s in my mind.”

Many people made it clear that they were deeply apprehensive about Mr.  
Obama, though some said they were hoping for the best.

“I think any time you have someone elected president of the United  
States with a Muslim name, whether they are white or black, there are  
some very unsettling things,” George W. Newman, a director at a local  
bank and the former owner of a trucking business, said over lunch at  
Yellow Creek Fish and Steak.

Don Dollar, the administrative assistant at City Hall, said bitterly  
that anyone not upset with Mr. Obama’s victory should seek religious  
forgiveness.

“This is a community that’s supposed to be filled with a bunch of  
Christian folks,” he said. “If they’re not disappointed, they need to  
be at the altar.”

Customers of Bill Pennington, a barber whose downtown shop is  
decorated with hunting and fishing trophies, were “scared because they  
heard he had a Muslim background,” Mr. Pennington said over the  
country music on the radio. “Over and over again I heard that.”

Mr. Obama remains an unknown quantity in this corner of the South, and  
there are deep worries about the changes he will bring.

“I am concerned,” Gail McDaniel, who owns a cosmetics business, said  
in the parking lot of the Shop and Save. “The abortion thing bothers  
me. Same-sex marriage.”

“I think there are going to be outbreaks from blacks,” she added.  
“From where I’m from, this is going to give them the right to be more  
aggressive.”

On Nov 12, 2008, at 9:07 AM, Madhumita Lahiri wrote:

> Hi Paul and others,
>
> Thanks for the thoughts on Obama/Nader/etc. I'm confused however as  
> to why this is about Southern whites in particular -- or why it is  
> interesting to see them, in Paul's words, into "a reverse Other." Is  
> it because they are "poor uneducated whites," or "evangelical"? Does  
> believing in Genesis make you a racist? Then how are there so many  
> biblical interpretations of the Obama presidency among the  
> progressive black community in America?
>
> If you look at the electoral map many of the red states were not  
> Southern states (or Confederate states) at all. My state of  
> residence, North Carolina, went blue this year (hooray!), as did  
> Virginia, etc, and some of those who voted for Obama were Southern  
> whites, after all.
>
> I'm not white; I'm not even Christian. And this is certainly not an  
> accusation against Paul, or anyone else in the conversation. I've  
> just found that certain brands of elitism -- poor, uneducated, rural  
> -- or simple geography are frequently offered as "explanations" for  
> racism. Not sure it's true, or helpful.
>
> Hope this is constructive, and thanks for reading,
> Madhumita
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: reader-list-bounces at sarai.net [mailto:reader-list-bounces at sarai.net 
> ] On Behalf Of Paul Miller
> Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2008 12:51 AM
> To: Vivek Narayanan
> Cc: reader-list at sarai.net
> Subject: [Reader-list] Frantz Fanon: Black Skin, White Masks
>
> Hi Vivek, Kshemendra, Nicholas - I have a little quote from one of the
> seminal texts of post colonial discourse that I think still echoes
> over the Obama debate: Black Skin, White Masks:
>
> "The Negro and Language":
>
> "For it is implicit that to speak is to exist absolutely for the
> other. // The black man has two dimensions. One with his fellows, the
> other with the white man. A Negro behaves differently with another
> Negro. The this self-division is a direct result of colonialist
> subjugation is beyond question. . . ."
>
> Let's reverse engineer that phrase and see what pops out of the logic
> of diaspora that Obama represents. Is he white or black? Both or
> neither?
>
> If you apply the context vs content breakdown of the unease that
> Obama's presidency strikes in Southern whites, it's that their role is
> being displaced and reclaimed. They are artifacts of a different era.
> If you read stuff like Camus's The Stranger, and compare it to the
> alienation of U.S. soldiers occupying Iraq, there's still a resonance:
> an occupied territory, whether it's the Confederate States after the
> Civil War, or the Iraq of today, creates insurgency in the struggle to
> reclaim identity. That's the way I see Bush - the last colonial vector
> of the Enlightenment, the last gasp of the Civil War. The red states
> and blue states have been caught in a vortex of remixes.
>
> Liberty, Justice, Equality at Guantanamo!
>
> The right to testify! The right to an attorney and to know the charges
> being leveled at you! Things like that have been thrown into the
> dustbin of history by Bush, but the idea is that these concepts can be
> re-animated. That's precisely what is going on at the moment:
> reclamation of public will to imagine a different world.  I really
> think that the "they" of this transformation - the Bush-Mccain
> demographic: are now "The Other" - poor uneducated whites who now face
> globalization without the tools of the average worker of places like
> China or India (math, physics, etc are not "Evangelical values"). I'm
> curious to see how the reverse "Other"  fares in this globalized
> economy based on information. It's now about "confidence in the
> markets" - it certainly isn't about whether the earth was made in 7
> days, or how to count people are 3/4 of a human for tax purposes a la
> that central document of the Enlightenment: The U.S. Constitution.
>
> Just a late nite rumination.
>
> Paul
>
> On Nov 12, 2008, at 12:14 AM, Vivek Narayanan wrote:
>
>> Kshemendra,
>>
>> I'm sure Gordimer said what she said with all good intentions, I was
>> not
>> implying otherwise.  However, as you must know, most Black Americans
>> can
>> anyway trace an ancestry back not only to Africans, but also to
>> Europeans and Native Americans at the very least.  And this is not
>> just
>> a matter of genetics--it's profoundly true as a matter of cultural
>> heritage as well.  This does not take away from the reductiveness  
>> with
>> which these matters are often presented in public discourse.  So
>> even a
>> "full" Black American (by Gordimer's dubious definition) in the white
>> house would *still* symbolise "the importance and potential of
>> pluralism"-- as does not only Obama's genetic circumstance (in a very
>> simplistic way), but also the composition and conduct of his  
>> campaign.
>> I'm surprised that Gordimer would be so hung up on genetic precision
>> (maybe it's just the reporter who gave an offhand, joking comment
>> undue
>> importance) but I wonder if, in the back of her mind, she was using
>> Obama to fight a shadow rhetorical battle relating to current South
>> African politics...
>>
>> Vivek
>>
>> Kshmendra Kaul wrote:
>>> Nadine Gordimer seems to have been very assertive in her comments
>>> which  carried positivity. She does not appear to be enouraging any
>>> debate over whether Obama is "really black". She said (as reported):
>>>
>>> """""He's been celebrated as a black man. But it's not being
>>> pointed out that he's half black and half white. To me, it
>>> symbolically represents a kind of advancement in recognising the
>>> human tribe as one."""""
>>>
>>> List member V Ramaswamy attended the lecture by Nadine Gordimer in
>>> Kolkatta and had this to say:
>>>
>>> """" Asked about the Obama victory, she clarified that Obama was
>>> not a "black" man, he was actually half black and half white, and
>>> thus symbolises the importance and potential of pluralism."""""
>>>
>>>
>>> Kshmendra
>>>
>>>
>>> --- On Tue, 11/11/08, Vivek Narayanan <vivek at sarai.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> From: Vivek Narayanan <vivek at sarai.net>
>>> Subject: Re: [Reader-list] Ralph Nader, "White" Boy?
>>> To: "Nicholas Ruiz III" <editor at intertheory.org>
>>> Cc: reader-list at sarai.net
>>> Date: Tuesday, November 11, 2008, 10:18 AM
>>>
>>> Nicholas, the left has historically tried to discount (for example)
>>> racial or caste-based discrimination by claiming class as the only
>>> relevant  or "real" category, and this strategy has always  
>>> backfired.
>>>
>>> Nader is trying to reuse this old saw, but ironically in a way that
>>> only
>>> points more directly to his deep, oblivious immersion in racialised
>>> rhetoric, his way of seeing the world through racial lenses.  He
>>> uses a
>>> contemptuous, derogatory epithet that can only be applied against
>>> Black
>>> Americans; that's inexcusable, yes, but what is more fascinating is
>>> how
>>> completely out of touch it shows Nader to be, as a politician and
>>> as an
>>> activist.  Anyone who has spent some amount of time in the US would
>>> understand how and why Black Americans feel infuriated at even being
>>> innocently called "uncle"-- let alone "uncle Tom".  By not
>>> getting this,
>>> Nader has completely alienated a huge section of his potential
>>> support
>>> base for all of time.  I doubt he would have done that if he was
>>> more in
>>> touch.  It may that this is a generational disconnect, as Paul
>>> suggests;
>>> or it may be a disconnect that goes much deeper.
>>>
>>> Perhaps you're right only in the sense that Nader perhaps *thinks*
>>> that
>>> Obama's election signifies a post-racial world, and now he can say
>>> whatever he likes without anyone taking (or having the right to  
>>> take)
>>> offence.  This is why Davey D's example of "the white boy at the
>>> party
>>>
>>> who thinks he's cool enough" feels so appropriate.  In the coming
>>> months, I suspect we will continue to see a lot of comments based on
>>> just such an assumption. The discourse of race may have evolved
>>> significantly, but we are still entangled in it; to pretend that it
>>> has
>>> gone away only entangles us further.
>>>
>>> Or perhaps there are more cynical reasons for Nader's comments.
>>> For all
>>> he says, he is still very much invested in electoral politics*.   
>>> This
>>> has been a campaign full of slurs, vicious, below the belt and  
>>> "let's
>>> try anything" attacks.  Perhaps Nader is just doing his own bit to
>>> come
>>> into view. [*the article I posted earlier to this list  eventually
>>> points to the ultimate limitations of electoral politics itself,
>>> and I
>>> think that would be a  much more interesting and useful base to
>>> critique
>>> and challenge Obama]
>>>
>>> Naeem, I'm surprised that you would make Nader's and Davey D's
>>> comments
>>> equivalent (as you seem to be doing.)  Incidentally, Nader's
>>> ancestry is
>>> Maronite Catholic from Lebanon; this is a community that began
>>> emigrating from Lebanon (to escape persecution) to places like the  
>>> US
>>> and South Africa from the mid-1800s onwards, and was universally
>>> accepted as "white" in all of these places (in Apartheid era South
>>> Africa, Maronites were classified as whites by law; other Maronites
>>> settled and were integrated/intermarried into the white social
>>> world in
>>> places like the American South).  Todd Palin is, of course, Native
>>> American.  And of course there's that debate, revived by Nadine
>>> Gordimer
>>> apparently, over whether Obama is "really black".  Or, as a far less
>>> sophisticated fellow was insisting to his friend outside my local
>>> wine
>>> shop yesterday (in Tamil), "No no no, I tell you, he's not a Negro--
>>> he's a Muslim, African Muslim!"  All of these intricate and  
>>> comically
>>> tedious technical questions are mostly separate from the way that
>>> Nader,
>>> Palin and Obama are commonly figured in public discourse, in the
>>> dramaturgy of racialised politics.
>>>
>>> Vivek
>>>
>>> Nicholas Ruiz III wrote:
>>>
>>>> greetings paul/all...I see your point...it's just that Nader seems
>>>> to
>>>>
>>> be calling up the old phrase to highlight what he sees as the
>>> irrelevant nature
>>> of race in Obama's presidency...it's not his skin color that will
>>> make
>>> the political difference, even as most recent 'political' commentary
>>> surrounding Obama's win, revolves around the historic nature of a
>>> U.S.
>>> president of a different hue...
>>>
>>>> Nader's critique seems effective here: it decharges the race
>>>>
>>> element...by stating the obvious... that 'Uncle Tom' is a vestigial
>>> phrase best left that way... while recalling the words, as an
>>> attempt to
>>> eliminate the conspicuous activist charm of 'race' that has
>>> relegated,
>>> for Nader, the itemized political issues to the backwaters of media
>>> coverage and
>>> commentary...
>>>
>>>> NRIII
>>>>
>>>> Nicholas Ruiz III, Ph.D
>>>> Editor, Kritikos
>>>> http://intertheory.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message ----
>>>> From: Paul Miller <anansi1 at earthlink.net>
>>>> To: Nicholas Ruiz III <editor at intertheory.org>
>>>> Cc: reader-list at sarai.net
>>>> Sent: Monday, November 10, 2008 9:50:53 AM
>>>> Subject: Re: [Reader-list] Ralph Nader, "White" Boy?
>>>>
>>>> Hi Nicholas - yes, that clip got passed around alot. I still  
>>>> totally
>>>> and utterly disagree with Nader's use of what is viewed in a
>>>> political
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> context as ridiculously stupid rhetoric.
>>>>
>>>> To call someone an "Uncle Tom" is a highly charged term in
>>>>
>>> African
>>>
>>>> American culture - I'm not sure what the South Asian equivalent
>>>> would
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> be. Of course there's a reason Fox News (never the most progressive
>>>> place...) would highlight Nader saying that, and of course, he's
>>>> trying to gain media traction by using incendiary terms.
>>>>
>>>> I'd like to elevate the discourse a bit. If you look up Birth of a
>>>> Nation and it's fear of an African American political leadership -
>>>>
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Birth_of_a_Nation
>>>
>>>> you can see a similar aesthetic at work. Will the new leader be the
>>>> saviour of his people or be controlled by whites as a kind of
>>>> stand in
>>>> for their own agenda? That film was in 1915. Nader's comments were
>>>> in
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> 2008. If we look at the philosophical implications of Obama's
>>>> presidency, we need to look at something like Frantz Fanon's
>>>>
>>> "Black
>>>
>>>> Skin, White Masks" as a guide - perhaps. Or maybe, just maybe, the
>>>> Obama presidency will be something totally new. It's too soon to
>>>> say.
>>>>
>>>> To be fair, one needs to have some kind of equilibrium. I don't
>>>> think
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> that Nader's comments were, as Fox News likes to say "fair and
>>>> balanced."
>>>>
>>>> in peace,
>>>> Paul
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Nov 10, 2008, at 9:06 AM, Nicholas Ruiz III wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Let's be fair...and not take Nader's comment out of context:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibsP6XN2dIo
>>>>>
>>>>> There is little that is hurtful about the way in which Nader meant
>>>>> to articulate a critique of the political (not racial) similarity
>>>>> of
>>>>> Obama and McCain...
>>>>>
>>>>> NRIII
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Nicholas Ruiz III, Ph.D
>>>>> Editor, Kritikos
>>>>> http://intertheory.org
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ----- Original Message ----
>>>>> From: Paul Miller <anansi1 at earthlink.net>
>>>>> To: V Ramaswamy <rama.sangye at gmail.com>
>>>>> Cc: reader-list at sarai.net
>>>>> Sent: Monday, November 10, 2008 7:57:45 AM
>>>>> Subject: Re: [Reader-list] Ralph Nader, "White" Boy?
>>>>>
>>>>> Hello Naeem, and hello V - -I'm now writing to you from the far
>>>>> northeast of the U.S. where I'm doing an artist residency at
>>>>>
>>> Dartmouth
>>>
>>>>> University.
>>>>>
>>>>> Sorry about the delay in communication - I had a 9 hour flight  
>>>>> from
>>>>> Vienna to Washington D.C. then plane transfer to New England etc
>>>>> etc
>>>>> This is from my cell phone, so it's brief.
>>>>>
>>>>> OK - response:
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm a big fan of looking at things from the viewpoint of
>>>>>
>>> hybridity:
>>>
>>>>> yes, Nader is Lebanese American. Is it an identity he claims in
>>>>> public
>>>>> discourse? No.
>>>>>
>>>>> If a person who was identified as "white" American said that
>>>>>
>>> Obama was
>>>
>>>>> an Uncle Tom on a major news channel it would be greated with
>>>>> outrage
>>>>> (as Nader's comment was).
>>>>>
>>>>> I've lost a lot of respect for Nader from his comments. Imagine if
>>>>>
>>> in
>>>
>>>>> India a minority from the Muslim population (Muslim's make up
>>>>>
>>> about
>>>
>>>>> 13% of India's population), became Prime Minister, and these kinds
>>>>>
>>> of
>>>
>>>>> comments started up in the media. I'm sure people would be
>>>>>
>>> outraged.
>>>
>>>>> In any case, I definitely think it was simply a poor choice of
>>>>> words,
>>>>> and the intent to critique what Nader views as Obama's agenda got
>>>>>
>>> lost
>>>
>>>>> in the poor choice of rhetoric.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm in the middle of releasing a "remix" of DW
>>>>>
>>> Griffith's film "Birth
>>>
>>>>> of a Nation" as an art piece. The film was made in 1915 and
>>>>>
>>> showed
>>>
>>>>> exactly the same kind of sentiments of Nader. I can only say I'm
>>>>>
>>> not
>>>
>>>>> too surprised. Brown on brown racism can sometimes be alot more
>>>>> virulent than white on brown racism. Many of my friends in the
>>>>> African
>>>>> American community were disgusted with Nader's comments. It's
>>>>>
>>> an
>>>
>>>>> emotional issue, and all I can say is that Nader lost alot of
>>>>> support
>>>>> with his comments.
>>>>>
>>>>> in peace,
>>>>> Paul
>>>>> On Nov 9, 2008, at 10:18 PM, V Ramaswamy wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Nader's "Uncle Tom" comment is not in his "open
>>>>>>
>>> letter". I believe
>>>
>>>>>> that was
>>>>>> made in an interview on Fox tv.
>>>>>> From what I understood (from an earlier age of literacy), the  
>>>>>> term
>>>>>> "Uncle
>>>>>> Tom" was used by radical blacks, to refer to what they
>>>>>>
>>> perceived as a
>>>
>>>>>> servile, non-threatening, accommodating attitude, of accepting  
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> white
>>>>>> man's game and his domination but seeking something better for
>>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>> oneself
>>>>>> within that.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The term itself of course comes from the novel "Uncle
>>>>>>
>>> Tom's Cabin",
>>>
>>>>>> by
>>>>>> Harriet Beecher Stowe, where the protagonist, a slave, Uncle Tom,
>>>>>> silently
>>>>>> suffers indignities, but never turns against his white masters,
>>>>>>
>>> whom
>>>
>>>>>> he
>>>>>> continues to love and whose overlordship he neither questions nor
>>>>>> rejects.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If I am not wrong, Dr Martin Luther King had also been called
>>>>>>
>>> "Uncle
>>>
>>>>>> Tom" a
>>>>>> few times.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ralph Nader has contested the US presidential election a few
>>>>>>
>>> times.
>>>
>>>>>> I don't
>>>>>> think he or anyone else seriously believes he will ever win. He
>>>>>>
>>> has a
>>>
>>>>>> specific political objective in contesting the elections. To say
>>>>>> certain
>>>>>> things, to raise certain issues, to ask certain questions. He is
>>>>>> ultimately
>>>>>> a valuable asset to the US democratic system. In fact this time I
>>>>>>
>>> was
>>>
>>>>>> surprised to learn - 2 days ago - that he had contested. That  
>>>>>> says
>>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>> how
>>>>>> marginalised he was in the mainstream media.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Even if no one else does so, perhaps Nader sees it as his task to
>>>>>>
>>> say
>>>
>>>>>> certain things, to call a spade a spade. For instance, the whole
>>>>>> Israel-Palestine thing, on which he has elaborated in detail in
>>>>>>
>>> his
>>>
>>>>>> "open
>>>>>> letter". I was struck by the fact that notwithstanding
>>>>>>
>>> Obama's
>>>
>>>>>> bending over
>>>>>> backwards to please Israelis and thus American Jews,  most  
>>>>>> Israel-
>>>>>> based
>>>>>> Americans apparently did not vote for Obama.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Electoral politics is, as we know, a dicey matter, a game that  
>>>>>> has
>>>>>> to be
>>>>>> played cunningly. So I suppose non-cunning people should not be  
>>>>>> in
>>>>>> that
>>>>>> game, and only cunning people will play. But I would like to  
>>>>>> think
>>>>>> that
>>>>>> "cunning" need not always be a negative term! But I
>>>>>>
>>> would also like
>>>
>>>>>> to think
>>>>>> that by and by, the ways of electoral politics will change, and
>>>>>> people can
>>>>>> by the force of their convictions, speak the truth, be honest,  
>>>>>> say
>>>>>> what has
>>>>>> to be said, and yet prevail.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I would like to see Nader as a conscience keeper, rather than a
>>>>>>
>>> sore,
>>>
>>>>>> sour-grapes loser, or sniveler. He is holding up the mirror to
>>>>>> Obama. He is
>>>>>> challenging him with what he must do, if he is to be true to the
>>>>>> expectations and hope he has unleashed. I have learnt from life
>>>>>>
>>> that
>>>
>>>>>> one's
>>>>>> harshest critics turn out to be one's best supporters.
>>>>>>
>>> "With enemies
>>>
>>>>>> like
>>>>>> these, who needs friends!"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> For those interested, I am mailing separately Vinay Lal's
>>>>>>
>>> article on
>>>
>>>>>> Obama
>>>>>> (written before his victory) that appears in the current EPW. And
>>>>>>
>>> a
>>>
>>>>>> blog
>>>>>> post that expressed the feelings unleashed by Obama's victory.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best
>>>>>>
>>>>>> V Ramaswamy
>>>>>> Calcutta
>>>>>> cuckooscall.blogspot.com
>>>>>> _________________________________________
>>>>>> reader-list: an open discussion list on media and the city.
>>>>>> Critiques & Collaborations
>>>>>> To subscribe: send an email to reader-list-request at sarai.net with
>>>>>> subscribe in the subject header.
>>>>>> To unsubscribe:
>>>>>>
>>> https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list
>>>
>>>>>> List archive:
>>>>>>
>>> &lt;https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>
>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> _________________________________________
>>>>> reader-list: an open discussion list on media and the city.
>>>>> Critiques & Collaborations
>>>>> To subscribe: send an email to reader-list-request at sarai.net with
>>>>> subscribe in the subject header.
>>>>> To unsubscribe: https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader- 
>>>>> list
>>>>> List archive:
>>>>>
>>> &lt;https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>
>>>
>>>>> _________________________________________
>>>>> reader-list: an open discussion list on media and the city.
>>>>> Critiques & Collaborations
>>>>> To subscribe: send an email to reader-list-request at sarai.net with
>>>>> subscribe in the subject header.
>>>>> To unsubscribe: https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader- 
>>>>> list
>>>>> List archive:
>>>>>
>>> &lt;https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> _________________________________________
>>>> reader-list: an open discussion list on media and the city.
>>>> Critiques & Collaborations
>>>> To subscribe: send an email to reader-list-request at sarai.net with
>>>>
>>> subscribe in the subject header.
>>>
>>>> To unsubscribe: https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list
>>>> List archive: &lt;https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _________________________________________
>>> reader-list: an open discussion list on media and the city.
>>> Critiques & Collaborations
>>> To subscribe: send an email to reader-list-request at sarai.net with
>>> subscribe in
>>> the subject header.
>>> To unsubscribe: https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list
>>> List archive: &lt;https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _________________________________________
>> reader-list: an open discussion list on media and the city.
>> Critiques & Collaborations
>> To subscribe: send an email to reader-list-request at sarai.net with
>> subscribe in the subject header.
>> To unsubscribe: https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list
>> List archive: &lt;https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>
>
> _________________________________________
> reader-list: an open discussion list on media and the city.
> Critiques & Collaborations
> To subscribe: send an email to reader-list-request at sarai.net with  
> subscribe in the subject header.
> To unsubscribe: https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list
> List archive: &lt;https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>
>