First black president of the USA... not really

[sobo]

Please clear something up for me here... The media outlets to which I turn to for news (AP, UPI, NPR, Reuters, etc.) all state that Barack Obama is the first black president ever elected in the United States. But that cannot be true, by definition of what is required in order to be considered "black." To be black (or white, or Asian, or Hispanic, or Native Whatever, etc.), one must be able to trace at least 75% of their ancestors to the same geographic region associated with a major racial group.

Source: Wikipedia - Multiracial

 

Since Obama is the offspring of a black father and a white mother, he can, at best, claim the title of being the first biracial president of the United States, and not the first black president. I think the media is making more out of this election result than it really is. So my question is, "Why does the media ascribe a label to him that is patently not correct?"

 

Two things got me thinking about this in the first place. The first was an interview broadcast on NPR that I heard on my commute home one day this past week in which a young man and a young woman were interviewed about their views and feelings about the outcome of the election. NPR was quite clear, as was the woman, Trish Callahan, that she be identified as being biracial (black father, white mother). I thought this similarity curious, knowing that Barack Obama, too, has a black father and white mother.

 

The second thing was that in the run-up to the election, the first paragraph of Barack Obama's Wikipedia entry identified him as being both biracial and African American. Now that the election is over, his Wikipedia page indicates only that he is African American. Did he somehow manage to change his race as a result of the election? And don't give me with the "It's not his fault - Wikipedia entries can be uploaded by anyone" argument. As I understand the wiki process, there is some vetting that must go on before changes are uploaded to the site.

 

Now, before this post results in accusations of me being a racist, an anti-miscenegist, or a white supremist, just cool your jets and respond to the question posed, "Why does the media ascribe a label to him that is patently not correct?"

 

Thank you.

[Bogen]

To make it more news-worthy, grab them headlines. D'uh!

[ivan]

uh, perhaps b/c there's no definitively defining any of the racial terms human beings have long bestowed on each other?

 

put it this way, obama would be plenty black for hitler, jefferson davis, nathan bedford forrest, thomas jefferson (and for the matter probably george jefferson), plus the whole white cast'n'crew of "roots"

 

at any rate, everyone know obama's not the first black president 'cuz every black person in the world said it was bill clinton like 10 years ago

[billcoe]

Most of us probably never thought of it. Now that the subject has been broached though, what's Tiger Woods?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

?????????????????????

 

 

 

 

you still lookin?

 

OK-

Correct answer: Golf Champion.

[sobo]

ivan-

That last line was pretty funny.

 

billcoe-

Pretty funny, too.

PS: Tiger is biracial, too.

Source: Wikipedia - Tiger Woods

[Bug]

Does Wikpedia trump the BIA?

A native American can claim tribal status if they are 25% native.

[denalidave]

Can't we all just get along?

[Bug]

So your question is mute IMO.

[ivan]

i'm spartacus!

[billcoe]

PS: Tiger is biracial, too.

Source: Wikipedia - Tiger Woods

 

Actually, I shouldn't have clicked that link Sobo. They say he's "Multiracial", and then it gets to this: dad "a retired United States Army lieutenant colonel and Vietnam War veteran, was of mixed African American (50 percent), Chinese (25 percent) and Native American (25 percent) ancestry. Kultida (nee Punsawad), originally from Thailand, is of mixed Thai (50 percent), Chinese (25 percent), and Dutch (25 percent) ancestry. This makes Woods himself one-quarter Chinese, one-quarter Thai, one-quarter African American, one-eighth Native American, and one-eighth Dutch.[9] He refers to his ethnic make-up as “Cablinasian” "

 

Shit, I can't even pronounce that. “Cablinasian”. WTF is that? Huh? Dudes as mixed up as the rest of us. At least he knows where he came from, the rest of us are just confused generally and ignorant of our true roots as well. F*uk, can't we just say Golf Champion? I can at least spell it.

[denalidave]

I always wonder how these nutjob racists would feel if they were to get their own DNA tested, only to find out the have the same genes/race history as the people/races they hate so much. After all, we are all mutts in big picture.

[sobo]

Quite true, DD. It would be fun to see the test results.

[Doug]

If you ever see a skinhead wearing a pair of Levi Jeans, it may be appropriate to point out that Levi Strauss was a Jewish Immigrant to the U.S.

 

It may be appropriate to also note that appears that the Jew has the Nazi by the balls.

[sobo]

Does Wikpedia trump the BIA?

A native American can claim tribal status if they are 25% native.

I don't know, Keith. What the American Indians accept for tribal status is their business, I guess.

I'm just going on an accepted standard for the definition of biracial/multiracial.

If we extend the logic in your post regarding the percentage qualification, then one could also state that the election was "business as usual", and we just elected another white guy, no?

So my question is not moot, and it still stands.

[sobo]

So your question is mute IMO.

No, I don't think so, Keith. The question has merit, and still stands.

[denalidave]

Quite true, DD. It would be fun to see the test results.

If I were king, I'd mandate all convicted racists take a DNA test and make them confront the reality that we are all mutts, at one level or another.

[Doug]

The real issue is what is Obama's description of himself.\? If some Government agency or other organization says you must be X percent of Y to claim yourself as being Y does that invalidate the individuals claim?

 

I can tell you from personal experience that as someone who is 1/8th of an ethnic group I have been able to take advantage of a couple of things exclusive to that group. No one can tell me that I can not claim myself as part of that group even if I don't look it.

 

Further, I am the adoptive parent of a bi-racial child. It has been an enlightening expreience raising her. Her birth mother is caucasian, her birth father is black. So far she hasn't had any social adjustment issues; she seems to get along well with all. If the time ever comes for her to make a declaration as to what she is, she will be free to claim whatever it is she wants. Her being half of anything won't mean anything.

[sobo]

If I were king, I'd mandate all convicted racists take a DNA test and make them confront the reality that we are all mutts, at one level or another.

You have to know these things when you're a king, you know.

[mattp]

When you are king, maybe your historians will tell you that by tradition we in American have defined multiracial persons, with one black parent, as "black," "African American," or "negro." Seriously. I'm surprised by your post.

[ivan]

"black" is just a word and doesn't mean much - shit, there are "white" Africans - words mean whatever we want them to mean, which of course changes over time - 200 years ago obama would have been considered "black," especially if he was working in the fields - today, who cares what "black" means? it's whatever a person wants it to mean, and one's assignment to race, a curious and quaint custom and one stilla actively evolving, in the modern world seems to be very much a matter of one's own choosing - that is, if you want to be "black" you are, no matter how much melanin you have in your skin - dude, eminem! if you want to be "white," then that's what you are, however you define it. doesn't mean the "race" will accept you as one as your own though.

[ivan]

in the end, it's best not even to dither much over racial descriptions or distinctions - for example, it's not that hitler's "mein kampf" was bad b/c it was a bigoted, hateful, loathsome diatribe on the subject of race, it's that it was really, really, really boring and rather harder to read than stero-instructions - seriously, have you TRIED to actually make it through a chapter of that fucking thing w/o wanting to take a nap? i was expecting excitement, controversy, a roaring manifesto! instead it was a whole lot of blah, blah, blah, blah, blah about shit that isn't even vaguely interesting

[mattp]

Are you posting about how Obama seemed to posit himself as a "post-racial" candidate? I agree that there are some confusing ideas related to whether this is the first "postracial" President-elect or whether he is the first "African-American" President-elect or both. We'll see how all of this plays out.

[wfinley]

[video:youtube]

Edited November 10, 2008 by wfinley

[JosephH]

Does Wikpedia trump the BIA?

A native American can claim tribal status if they are 25% native.

 

Aside from the fact this thread basically has a real bad odor about it, and the original 'question' significantly blows, the above isn't true - tribes set their own enrollment standards. And 'Race' is as much a matter of societies' and individuals' perceptions, stereotypes, and reactions to a person's appearance as any genetic measure. On that basis alone it's more than a little appropriate for Barack and Tiger to represent themselves as African-American. Try a little experiment and ask yourself if they'd have been a freemen or slaves in Charleston, SC on November 10,1808 - enough said on this rancid topic...

[tvashtarkatena]

Anyone who wants to know their genetic story, from the emergence from Africa to the present, can discover it here:

 

National Geographic Genomic Project

 

I did it, (got a free kit from my wife's place of work). The results are pretty broad brush; I "discovered" I'm primarily of Northern European stock. Still, the track and timing of my ancestors' migrations, tied very closely to climate change, is interesting.

 

Anecdotally, I have noticed a striking similarity between the behavior and personalities of my Irish relations and my own family, who've had almost not contact with their American counterparts save for a few brief visits. I've also noticed a 'Celtic' disposition, although it's certainly not absolute in any way. Like it or not, genetics is very cental to who we are.

 

It seems to me that a person's racial identity is internal and external; what race/cultures you identify with versus what others view you as. The two are not always coincident, of course. To most observers, Obama and Tiger are black in a connotative simply because they look black. Whether that's good, bad, or neither depends on the observer.

 

At a genetic level, your outward appearance and the standard definition of race often doesn't coincide at all with a persons' ancestral haplotype, which in itself says little about culture.

 

I don't agree with the idea of treating any discussion of race as taboo. I think there's far more danger and stigma in avoiding a subject than just getting it out on the table. Like it or not, race, like gender, sexuality, and a bunch of other things we're granted at birth, is an important aspect of human interaction.

Edited November 10, 2008 by tvashtarkatena