|

Rev. Jeremiah Wright has been the
target of a racist media campaign.
|
Rev.
Jeremiah Wright is right
Tuesday, March 25, 2008
By: Ben Becker
The corporate lynching of a
Black reverend
You know a political system is bankrupt when
telling the truth becomes a scandal.
In the last week, the corporate media has
effectively sullied the image of Barack Obama to millions of potential voters.
He has not been exposed for an extramarital affair or fiscal corruption. No, the
scandal is that Obama’s former pastor, Rev. Dr. Jeremiah Wright of Trinity
United Church of Christ in Chicago, talks openly about the history and
perseverance of institutional racism in this country.
Wright is a Black liberation theologian,
encouraging his congregation to embrace a perspective that reveals and
highlights the concealed role of Africa and people of African descent, so they
can speak "for themselves, as subjects in history, not objects in
history." He is a widely respected community leader whose sermons focus on
social justice, public health, collective responsibility and Black
self-determination. Trinity welcomes people of all nationalities. He is part of
the United Church of Christ, a Protestant denomination that includes 1.2 million
members from all backgrounds.
Regardless, the corporate media pundits seized
upon the remarks of Obama’s spiritual advisor and smeared him as an
anti-white, anti-American "Black racist." In this demonization
campaign, political and social context were thrown out the window, and all
pretenses of objectivity abandoned. As with the media campaign against Saddam
Hussein or Slobodan Milosevic in the run-up to the imperialist invasions of
their countries, the only thing that emerged out of this slanderous
"journalism" was the image of the "demon."
The campaign has been effective at pushing some
white voters away from supporting Obama. In a national Democratic poll conducted
between March 14 and 18, Sen. Hillary Clinton overtook Obama by seven percentage
points. Just a few days earlier, Obama was ahead by several points. Obama lost
his lead over Sen. John McCain in the same period. This abrupt swing can only be
attributed to the racist demonization campaign conducted against Rev. Wright.
Corporate media shapes racist consciousness
When Obama won the Iowa caucuses in early
January, he started off his speech with the words, "They said this day
would never come." His message was indirect, but clear: his presidency
would unite the nation and heal the historical rifts, between blue states and
red states, Black people and white people. If an African American man could win
a state that was 92 percent white, clearly there was reason to believe or
"hope" that this country could finally bury racism.
Obama himself has gone to great lengths to avoid
being labeled as the "Black candidate," leaving it to others to
emphasize the potential symbolism of an African American president. He has hewed
the Democratic Party line closely, avoiding any subjects that could appear as
"Black issues."
With his message of "change,"
powerfully orated and carefully packaged, Obama went on to win not only the
states in the southeast with large Black populations, but also overwhelmingly
white states like Kansas, Vermont and Wyoming. This in itself was a remarkable
development. It showed that without an active racist campaign stirred up by the
government and the media, there exists the basis for multinational unity—even
if in this case on patriotic and non-working-class terms—organized under Black
leadership.
It was actually Bill Clinton, the self-styled
ally of the Black community, who first tried to stir up racism among white
voters. He suggestively compared Obama’s primary victory in South Carolina to
Jesse Jackson’s victory there 20 years earlier. In doing so, he intended to
elicit fears from white "middle" America that Obama was a civil rights
warrior in disguise.
Later, Hillary Clinton prodded Obama in a
presidential debate about why he had "denounced" but not
"rejected" Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan. The question was
beyond ridiculous. It was merely an attempt to link Farrakhan’s name with
Obama’s in the minds of backward white voters. At present, the Clinton camp is
undoubtedly celebrating the vile demonization of Rev. Wright.
This is the tragic reality of racism in U.S.
society. It is not automatically the overriding factor in every political
context. But it can be turned on, almost with the flip of a switch, by the
country’s ruling class. With the mass media, they have tested and precisely
calibrated this racist machine over generations. Like all ideologies, it can be
challenged, cracked, and in some instances, smashed. But this requires an active
anti-racist struggle, which shows through experience the class character of the
media and the common benefits of multinational organizing.
If these white voters had sat through one of
Wright’s sermons, had heard a fuller clip of his remarks, or had been given
the chance to hear the reverend himself, it is doubtful his comments would have
had a major impact. But instead, in show after show, newsreel after newsreel,
FoxNews and CNN only played sound-bites of Wright saying "Goddamn
America." Long before corporate-owned television had become the primary
instrument for shaping popular consciousness, Marx famously wrote, "the
ideas of the ruling class are in every epoch the ruling ideas." Centuries
later, his words hold true.
Wright is right
Rev. Wright was right when he identified the
centrality of racism in U.S. history and said, "the country and culture is
controlled by rich white people." A brief survey of Wall St. board
rooms—or the Senate floor—makes this an indisputable fact.
Rev. Wright was right when he said, "the
government lied about the Pearl Harbor." Rev. Wright was right when he said
Bush lied about weapons of mass destruction. Rev. Wright was right when he
called the government an "arrogant, racist military superpower."
He was right when he called Black men turning on
Black men "fighting the wrong enemy," because "both are primary
targets in an oppressive society that sees both of you as a dangerous
threat." Look at the disproportionate incarceration rate and lengthier
sentences for young Black men.
Rev. Wright was right when he said Washington
supported "state terrorism against the Palestinians and Black South
Africans" and now, referencing the World Trade Center attacks, "the
stuff we’ve done overseas is now brought right back home into our own front
yards. America’s chickens are coming home to roost."
Why is it so hard to believe that a destructive
and imperial foreign policy creates enemies abroad? U.S. activity in the Middle
East—not to mention the occupation of the Muslim holy lands in Saudi Arabia
during the first Gulf war—caused widespread indignation in the region.
Yet, while Democrats have scored points off of
Bush’s declining popularity due to the Iraq war, it is still considered
heretical to suggest that the plane hijackers had a motive beyond
"extremism." Bush’s ridiculous notion that they "hate our
freedom" still holds sway.
Rev. Wright was right when he said "the
government lied about the Tuskegee experiment," in which the government
left African American men infected with syphilis to die. In every stage of U.S.
history, Black people have had to endure criminal and sadistic medical
experimentation. Puerto Rican women were forcibly sterilized. This history is
rarely mentioned in history textbooks, but is well known in the most oppressed
sectors of society. A grave distrust for the established medical consensus on
the origins of HIV is perfectly justifiable.
And yes, Rev. Wright is right when he says
"Goddamn America" for killing innocent people without batting an eye
and "for treating her citizens as less than human." Should the country
be blessed for defending apartheid South Africa and upholding Jim Crow too?
On March 18, Obama gave a lengthy speech
condemning "in unequivocal terms" Wright’s comments as "not
only wrong, but divisive."
Obama referred to Wright as a sort of radical
uncle, whose views he does not endorse, but who he cannot disown any "more
than he can disown the Black community." He called Wright’s views on the
centrality of racism in U.S. society "profoundly distorted," a
reflection of an embittered civil rights generation for whom "the memories
of humiliation and doubt and fear have not gone away." Distancing himself
from Wright’s defense of the Palestinian people, Obama emphasized that
conflicts in the Middle East stemmed not from "stalwart allies like
Israel," but instead from the "perverse and hateful ideologies of
radical Islam."
The New York Times lauded Obama’s speech as one
of the most important political pronouncements in 50 years, for having
stimulated dialogue on such a sensitive issue. This episode— in which the
media forced Obama to repudiate the politics of the Black community in order to
maintain credibility—reveals what the liberal commentators will not say:
Wright is right.
Although it is certainly historic that millions
of white voters have entered their local polling stations and pulled the lever
for a Black candidate, a more profound anti-racist struggle is needed to halt
the ruling class’s racist campaign. A good place to start is to defend Rev.
Wright from the corporate media lynch mob.