Obama: Disturbing “Change”

I've experienced two disturbing conversations and one alarming thought in the

last three days. All three were ignited by Obama's amorphous call for "Change."

I've experienced two disturbing conversations and one alarming thought in the
last three days. All three were ignited by Obama's amorphous call for "Change."

DISTURBING CONVO ONE.

I was riding the Metrobus across 125th street, through the heart of Harlem. Behind me is a professional white man talking on a cell phone. He's explaining to a friend why he thinks Obama is the best candidate: "He's different… He's a liberal who calls people to do for themselves, not sit around and wait for someone else to do anything for them."

A DISTURBING THOUGHT.

The picture of the Super Tuesday map crosses my mind. The vast majority of the states Obama won are the reddest "Red states" in the U.S. – with majority white populations. The thought crosses my mind, will the people who voted for him expect and support the kind of systemic and economic change that will be necessary to produce the kind of "real change" he is promising?

DISTURBING THOUGHT TWO.

I had a disturbing conversation with a woman in the heartland of Ohio. She confirmed: "All the white people I know," she said "believe Obama is different because they believe he calls people to pull themselves up by their own bootstraps – not relying on government help."

IMPLICATIONS.

On the contrary, all the Obama supporters I know personally – people of color and anti-racist white folks – are supporting him because when they hear the campaign slogan "Change We Can Believe In" they hear " systemic change" that could alleviate poverty and systemic injustice. It is possible, however, that Obama's largest base of support may be interpreting Obama's call for "change" from exactly the opposite point of view. They may be interpreting the call for "change" through their own cultural lenses. These lenses emphasize anti-structural, individual accountability, according to sociologists Michael Emerson and Christian Smith (authors of Divided by Faith).

If this is true, my white friend in the heartland feared, Obama's election could lead to an even greater racial divide in the U.S. as our Black president is torn between two disparate factions within his own base of support – Blacks and actively anti-racist others who put their faith in him to create systemic change and the rest who voted for a slogan "Change" and interpreted it with the only cultural tools they had.

OBAMA, WE NEED YOU TO DEFINE YOUR "CHANGE"!

To avoid national racial meltdown in the long run, Obama must be clear about the change he intends to bring now:

1. Will Obama's "change" de-construct and redesign the current public school system and federal funding allocation system, which currently perpetuates de-facto separate and unequal school systems across the U.S.?
2. Will Obama's "change" call for mandatory clean-up and regulation of environmental injustices, which put poor people (especially those in urban centers) at the greatest risk for life-threatening diseases like asthma, cancer and high rates of miscarriages?
3. Will Obama's "change" really change in the health care system enough to ensure health care for every American – especially the poor?

I believe the one thing that separates the Clinton campaign from Obama's is Clinton's clarity about how she intends to bring about change. She clearly intends to change these systems and she has clear do-able plans.

Now, the country needs Obama to be clear. It's time for him to fess up. Exactly how is Obama different? Exactly what change will he bring? Is he really different because he is a liberal who calls people to pull themselves up by their bootstraps? Or does he truly offer a vision for changed systems that can bring real "Change we can believe in."