In the midst of Barack Obama’s election, many political pundits and black leaders  posed the question as to whether or not Obama was “black enough?” Yes, in the simplest sense, Obama is biracial because his mother was white and father was black.  But, Obama’s skin is brown, and but for his popularity and the scrutiny of his background due to his political position and power, most Americans—and particularly black Americans—would not even entertain such an intellectually unscrupulous question.  Not only is the question inappropriate, it is an abstraction—intellectual smoke and mirrors or slight of hand—that can never be answered or refuted.

Once upon a time, whites were trying to make sure that people with but a drop of black blood were designated as black, and blacks accepted these multiracial persons into their community.  Now, ironically in Obama’s case, some blacks—if not only in private—continue to question whether or not Obama is black enough because he doesn’t play the race card like they would like.  At the same time, some whites, like Rush Limbaugh, sarcastically and disparagingly ask the same question, and continue weak attempts to insinuate that race is a major factor in Obama’s political platform.  But I have digressed, because this question of “black enough?” is not about Barack Obama, per se, it pertains to the many blacks who do not subscribe to America’s notions of “blackness.”

So what is being black enough?  Is it based upon complexion?  Is it a question of heredity and genealogy, or culture and experience?   I have been mistaken for being Hispanic, Hawaiian, biracial, and even have been told that I looked like certain Arab terrorists, so I suspect that one’s physical characteristics alone do not make someone black enough.  Moreover, in many respects, it makes me realize how ethnic classifications based on colors are misguided anyway.   Black America, in particular, not only consists of people with many variants of complexions, black culture consists of people whose racial heritage is a product and blend of the realities of the sexual impropriety by white men (for the most part) and their rape of black women during slavery.  When analyzing these wanton, sexual misdeeds against black women by Euro-centric whites  (who had  their own mixed cultural make-up), it is not a stretch to realize that many blacks are technically biracial.

So, again, what is “black enough?”  My skin is brown, and this makes me subject to the same racism that any other black person in America has faced.  There are areas where I can’t walk without being stopped by the police.  There are still “sundown towns” that I would be loath to be caught in after dark.  If I were buying property, there are neighborhoods that I would be redlined out of by realtors because of my skin color.  In New York City, there are still the shops that would deny me entrance and cabbies that would refuse to stop for me because I am black.  There are still the banks that give me higher interest rates on loans than my white counterparts (if they would give me a loan at all) notwithstanding equal credit scores and financial status.  I would be turned down for certain positions at certain corporations just like any other qualified black man!  And the list goes on and on.   Indeed, what is being “black?”  Likewise, what is “acting white?”  There is not a manual that says all black people are supposed to have the same tastes when it comes to clothes, food, music, or anything else.  Am I not black because I can appreciate Vivaldi or Mozart as well as James Brown or Public Enemy?  Am I “acting white” because I listen to the local classical radio station?  Does my preference for white zinfandel over a forty ounce malt liquor make me less black?  Does my respect for education, learning and knowledge mean that I am “acting white?”  Do I lose some of my blackness because I enjoy listening to some country music and watching a little NASCAR?  Notwithstanding my personal likes and dislikes, I am still black!  Though I can appreciate things about American culture that appear to be characteristically white,  I also appreciate my black culture, history and heritage, as can be attested by my writings and concerns.  In spite of trying to experience many different things that life has to offer, outside of what some might consider African American cultural constraints, I have been labeled a black radical, militant, and even a racist at different times in my life.  So am I “black enough” for the most part, or “acting white” just a little too much? This whole notion of trying to define blacks by misguided perceptions and stereotypes, fueled by an uneven media, is ignorant and/or disingenuous.

Isn’t it funny how Curtis “50 Cent” Jackson accused Oprah Winfrey of being an Oreo (black on the outside, and white on the inside)?  Now everyone has a right to their opinions, but who is 50 Cent to question Oprah’s blackness?  They both came up under difficult circumstances and overcame their troubled childhoods to gain a measure of success.  Of course Oprah wasn’t a crack dealer dealing out death and destruction upon her own black community.  50 Cent starred in Get Rich Or Die Tryin’, a movie that arguably glorified gang life and moral decadence, and Oprah starred in The Color Purple, a portrayal of the strength of black women in the midst of racial and gender inequality.  Like Oprah, 50 Cent has given charity to his black community, but he still continues to rap about debauchery and “thug” life, which arguably has a profound impact upon impressionable young black minds.   In 50 Cent’s defense, the Oprah Winfrey Show may not depict the struggles of black folk to the degree and amount that many black people would like, but Oprah does have some shows that deal with many social and economic issues that concern the black community.  But, just because she has shows dealing with worldwide issues on a whole does not make her any less black.  Oprah Winfrey will go down as one of the greatest black women in history—revered by blacks, whites, and all other peoples of the earth.  Will the same be said of Curtis Jackson?

All in all, “blackness” is undoubtedly in the mind of the beholder.  The next time that you are questioning whether or not someone is “black enough,” or “acting white”, consider that they may be asking the same about you.  This is purely hypothetical, but perhaps Malcolm X asked whether Martin Luther King was “black enough” when King was preaching nonviolence.  Maybe W.E.B. Dubois questioned the “blackness” of Booker T. Washington when Washington gave his address at the Atlanta Exposition.  Though these men may have had philosophical differences on how to empower blacks, one thing that they all had in common was appreciation for their heritage, the desire to take part in the ongoing struggle for freedom, respect for hard work and education, and a strong desire to unify and edify the black community’s social and economic status in an unequal America. Their lives epitomize the fact that individuals can succeed at using different methods to help blacks in their struggle for equality, and this truth really makes the question of whether or not someone is “black enough” meaningless.

What happened to my grandparents’ neighborhood?  When I was growing up, I used to visit my grandparents in their downtown Raleigh, North Carolina home.  Their neighbors were much like themselves, working class blacks who had lived in their neighborhood and homes for decades.  My father used to reflect about stories of his youth, living in that very same neighborhood filled with what Southerners sometimes refer to as “shotgun homes”, that only set back maybe 10 feet from the street, and less than that from the house next door.  Since my grandfather was skilled at carpentry, their home was a little larger than the rest.  Moreover, due to my grandpa’s additions, you couldn’t actually look through the front door and see through the backdoor.  My grandparents had 10 kids, so their home warranted the additional space.  When my father was coming up back in the 1950s and 60s, the neighborhood was very much still a viable, old southern black area, where many of the women—my grandma included—worked as maids, and most of the men worked as some form of laborer to support their families.

Over the years, things gradually changed.  My grandfather died unexpectedly.   Though he died relatively early around the age of 55, at least he was spared by not having to see the decline and decay of his once proud neighborhood.  With the economic troubles during the late 1970s and the early 80s, along with the proliferation of illegal drugs within American culture, my grandparents’ neighborhood gradually transformed into a place where many of those in the younger generation abandoned many of the values, wisdom, and experience of their predecessors, and succumbed to drugs and became victims of their own philosophy of instant gratification, self entitlement, and/or “Me, first!” attitude without regard to their black community, or even their family.  Of course it can be argued that many within the white establishment had these same values, and that these beliefs in concert with social and economic neglect were the origins of the downfall within black communities like my grandparents’.  But, needless to say, that the dynamics of all these problems were too much for many black communities to bear.  It’s unfortunate, but many of these black communities have still yet to recover from the socio-economic ills that have plagued them since the 1980s.   In 1980 when I was 13, I had a debate with my youngest uncle on my grandparents’ front porch when he said “This is the ghetto.”   Though, I reflected upon what he said with my young mind at the time, I really didn’t believe that my grandparents’ neighborhood was the ghetto, but over the years my uncle’s statement rang all too true, whether it was true at that moment or not.  But, fortunately for this specific black community, at the same time that the neighborhood was stuck within social and economic malaise, a large Mexican migration to America began in earnest.

Well, almost 30 years have passed, and my grandmother has died.  Her home, though technically still in my family, is now basically a squatters house from the last I had heard from my cousins.   I used to visit her from time to time, before she died a few years ago.  On that same front porch, I had a conversation with another uncle about the state of the neighborhood.   We discussed how much better this “black community” seemed to be doing now that the Mexicans had “taken over.”  Yeah, there were still quite a sizable portion of blacks, a few whites and maybe a few other different ethnic groups, but it was the influx of a large population of Mexican immigrants that breathed life into a neighborhood that had long been a victim of social, economic and moral starvation.  The Mexicans have had the greatest positive transformational impact upon this once, drug infested, crime filled five or six blocks of Raleigh.  As you can imagine, there are still many problems.  It is still far from perfect.  But with the Mexican migration has come marked improvement.  At the time, my uncle said that the only “problem” that he had with the Mexicans in the neighborhood was their penchant for drinking beer out in front of their homes, and listening to loud Latin tunes.  But he agreed that this was a far cry from having to deal with the blight that had been there before (and there were really no front or back yards to speak of).

The neighborhood is gradually changing back into a place where working men and women support their young families.  It has changed back into a place where people can start to believe in, at least the concept of, the American dream.  In many ways, I feel as though my grandparents’ neighborhood is getting a second chance.  Hopefully, this time around, the futures of the Mexican and black kids in this neighborhood will be brighter than those of the black kids a few decades earlier.  Perhaps, this time, the children of back street America will grow up with the same opportunities, goals and aspirations as the children of main street America as the result of the attention from a smarter and more concerned nation, who truly cares about the social and economic conditions of every neighborhood across this country.

According to my research, it is estimated that anywhere from 800,000 to 1 million people died during the Rwandan genocide of 1994.  The world, including the United States, basically allowed this inhumanity to take place.  Now, years later, the U.S. must be suffering from deja vu as we stand idly by as thousands of people die in the Darfur region of Sudan.

I often wonder how a nation whose leaders proclaim that American values encompass the freedom, democratic principles, and sense of morality that should be the standard for the rest of the world can allow mass murders, rape, and pillaging to be wrought upon helpless people.  But then, I quickly come to my senses and realize that subtle hypocrisy thrives among us.  The demagogues of democracy are really capitalistic carnivores who are only willing to offer aid that will make a difference when real or perceived financial implications are at stake.  In other words, Rwanda and Darfur are of no geopolitical importance to the U.S. and the rest of the free world. Since there are no vast oil reserves or deep diamond mines in these areas, both places are viewed as having a nominal effect upon the world economy, at best.  Since these regions are of no capitalistic, geographic or strategic military importance, why lift a hand to stop thousands of persons from being helpless victims of barbarians?

Within this same vein of inaction is how hundreds of Haitians can die as a result of political violence, hurricane Jeanne, and outright poverty while our leaders throw pennies at a problem that requires “Benjamins”.  America ruled Haiti for nearly 20 years.  A once lush and beautiful island has in a large part become barren.  Political despots basically put in power by America have been allowed to plunder Haiti’s natural resources while the majority of the Haitian people exist in poverty.  Crime, of which a big part is using Haiti as a transfer point for drugs, has been allowed to thrive with impunity.  And all the while, the U.S. has turned a blind eye to these cyclical problems for decades.

Don’t get me wrong, there are many Americans who believe in doing good because it is the right thing to do.  There are aid organizations that do what they can to help the people.  There are those among us who truly believe in the moral mandates of God.  But still, there are those whose “godliness” is overshadowed by their lustful greed for the dollar.  Is it not ironic that American money has the slogan “In God We Trust” on every dollar and coin notwithstanding America’s propensity toward greed to the detriment of others?  Perhaps a more apt slogan is “In Greed We Lust.”  For a nation that produces around 20 to 25 percent of the world’s economic output, but only accounts for approximately five percent of the world’s population, America is more than able to help the disadvantaged (including those within its own borders).

I once was mystified as to how a nation that has been so blessed can virtually stand by, basically turning its back to the values upon which it espouses, while less fortunate people suffer.  This feeling is made more poignant by the insane amounts of money that America has invested in nation breaking and building, as in the case of Iraq.  But, alas, my cynicism crushes my proclivity toward believing in the goodness of man.  I have come to the realization that exploitation of human resources as well as natural resources, inasmuch as it benefits those in power, has been the modus operandi in America for centuries.  And once the result of exploitation is too much for the moral hypocrites to bear, that is when they start with the half solutions, apathy, denial, and/or turning their blind eyes toward the problems that arise from their action and inaction.

Look at how America has failed to come to the aid of its own communities. After exploiting slavery of blacks and stealing land from American Indians, America “freed” black people and corralled American Indians onto reservations while simultaneously allowing institutional racism to flourish.  As a result of inadequate solutions and/or programs to combat the effects of hundreds of years of racial oppressionand exploitation, black and American Indian communities in many ways are stagnant, if not retrogressing.  Due to a lack of historical concern by millions of people within this country—which is basically fueled by the policies of the super rich and powerful—many forgotten inner city neighborhoods and rural areas (including American Indian reservations) are the economic drains and social cancers of our democracy.  What Americans, and particularly white Americans, need to realize is that if this course of inaction is allowed to continue, it will have serious economic and social consequences that could be ugly in the future.  Similarly, if America fails to see the importance of helping disadvantaged people in Africa today, then it will have adverse consequences for America and the world tomorrow.
We already see African ties to terrorism affecting the world today. Moreover, the seemingly apathetic, if not blatant, disregard for human life that has been displayed by America and other economically powerful European nations towards the oppressed in Africa is reprehensible. This especially rings true in light of their historical role in raping Africa of human and natural resources.  In much the same way that America exploited slavery and the stolen lands within its own borders, along with the English and the French, America exploited the people, lands and resources of Africa and left many nations in ruins.  In my estimation, the dire economic condition of a multitude of black nations in Africa today evolved from the legacy of systemic and institutional racism by Eurocentric whites.

Today, the offspring of these same moral villains will quickly use their economic and military might to topple tyrants in volatile areas of the world that have strategic geopolitical importance and/or have vast economic resources to exploit.  Moreover, it appears that America will do so even at the expense of risking detrimental socioeconomic effects upon its on soil.  It pretty much goes without saying that if great oil reserves and other precious resources had been in Rwanda (and now Darfur and Haiti), then the world—including America, whose rich and powerful leaders espouse rhetoric about freedom, democracy and morality—would not stand idly by while peoples’ livelihood and lives are destroyed.  If whites fail to take purposeful and concerted actions to help overcome the sins of commission and omission committed by their forefathers (which theoretically makes them complicit in these sins), there will be more discontent in the future that will bring murder and violence to the doorsteps of America, and beyond.