Of course, there's no dearth of white folks what would like black fathers to be embarrassed, too. The important difference, it seems to me, is akin to the difference between being embarrassed for oneself and being embarrassed by another's perception.

Posted by dj moonbat | July 12, 2008 11:11 AM

absentee father's should be embarrassed for themselves, but the problem is they are not. of course, as the other commenter suggested, there probably are scores of white folks that would like to see black fathers embarrassed, but who cares?

why do we care what white people (or any other people for that matter) thinks?

as Ta-Nehisi suggested, if black fathers (and black people as a whole) subscribed to Malcolm's love-of-self ideology, it would not matter WHAT white people thought or said, because you were comfortable with yourself. and out of that love for yourself, would come love for your children, brethren, women, etc.

Posted by theprisonerswife | July 12, 2008 12:30 PM

What if black absentee fathers are embarrassed and that's why many aren't at home? Gender roles for men haven't had a revolutionary redefining period like women have, especially in the socially conservative black community. So, to be a man is to provide for your children, by earning. That's what a man does. So, if you aren't considering gender role definitions, if you aren't talking about black men and their relationship to masculinity then what you're doing is further embarrassing men who are already embarrassed, who already feel like failures because they can't provide for their kids. What does this "so what, take care of your kids" attitude really get us? How is it paying service to the reality that they are behaving in part due to their socialization. And I only ask because the logic can be applied to many other situations where there is an interaction between social forces, institutions, and individuals. So what your schools were crap, graduate anyway. So what there is racism, succeed anyway. My point is this, people often give lip service to policy changes, give lip service to cultural shifts (although I think in your case you're just wrong about how the culture needs to change, shaming isn't the way to go) yet I don't think people understand how interactions lead people to their choices. We just assume that everyone comes about their choices the same way and to make the wrong choice is to be a coward instead of seeing what factors brought this person to feel not being in their child's life is the better choice.

Posted by th | July 12, 2008 1:01 PM

But the black nationalist in me gets pissed at the implicit message of the hard-core black left--that the only change worth discussing is changes in the law.
________________________________________________________

That's assuming that there is a discussion as opposed to a lecture. That's assuming that Obama as a politician has a role or reason in a campaign to talk about anything other than changes in laws and policies... a script he doesn't break from when he speaks to any other part of his constituency.

That's the issue. Brother can talk about Black fathers forever as long as he talks about other Black issues, them change the laws Black issue, as loudly, as consistently and as specific/exclusively as he has the whole adopt [white] conservative "personal responsibility" rhetoric.

Unlike Obama, Garvey's and X's rhetoric was authentic and balanced even though their ideas were seen as problematic via essentialism critiques. So you can't use X or Garvey (or Ice Cube) to defend anything in light of Obama.

You and I both know Obama's beloved White folk would have the media mic in front of him demanding he denounce and distance himself from Garvey and X no matter how much they talked about self-reliance, "do for self", etc., etc., etc.

>>>>

Black people have every right to expect and insist that their government do for them what it does for others and when Obama can't be or won't be an improvement on the status quo of what the government will do in the way of political efficacy as far as Black people are concern... to hell with Obama.

We don't need him if that's all he's going to do... and referencing the stereotypes and internalized racism in Ice Cube rap won't take the stank smell of that sh*t.

Now what did the brother (Malcolm X) say?

"We declare our right on this earth to be a human being, to be respected as a human being, to be given the rights of a human being in this society, on this earth, in this day, which we intend to bring into existence by any means necessary."

I'll never understand this "don't need gov't" bs when Black folks pay taxes and were paying them and essentially paying for their/our own oppression some 40 years ago. No other intelligent human being gets tricked into thinking that they don't have a right to constantly demand changes in the government when they pay taxes to the government.

The framing is all f-cked up. How the hell does "needing" to see a return on your investment via taxes become something negative? And when did demanding changes in government become something that wasn't an act of "personal responsibility"??

No one makes the argument that you shouldn't vote because, instead of depending on the government or expecting the government to do X, Y, or Z, you should perform so other kind of civic duty that's more honorable or "necessary."

There's a huge disconnect. The "cultural transformation Malcolm X initiated" had to do with Malcolm embodying what King talked about in very specific "Black men taking responsibility" terms. He simply said, "a man can't ride your back unless it's bent."

No one is depending on or saying they "need" the government or politicians to anything other than what they are supposed to do and Barack Obama is supposed to speak to the concerns the Black community has in terms of what the government can do for them (which, ironically, is mostly about the government undoing policies that have negatively impacted us... like there is something wrong with the minimum... the minimum expectation of insisting that the government doesn't do and continue to do you harm).

On a deeper level, the cultural transformation Malcolm X initiated is obviously not complete because some us still act like we're ashamed. And we know Obama (or a whole bunch of people misappropriating Black Nationalist rhetoric) definitely is not talking about or preparing us to Go Back To Africa or fulfilling the underlying aim of Black Nationalism.

It's clear he's not making any real promises that Black people in terms of any structural or permanent means of achieving political efficacy. He doesn't want to be the "Black" president and he's essentially made that promise and pledge (that he won't get out of hand and do much or anything "for" Black people) to his beloved White folk.

Posted by Nquest | July 12, 2008 1:14 PM

Nquest,

I'm not sure what to say here. The point that Obama is not making any promises is just demonstrably false. Taken directly from Obama's platform which is on his very public website:

Reduce Crime Recidivism by Providing Ex-Offender Support

--Obama will provide job training, substance abuse and mental health counseling to ex-offenders, so that they are successfully re-integrated into society. Obama will also create a prison-to-work incentive program to improve ex-offender employment and job retention rates.
Eliminate Sentencing Disparities

--Obama believes the disparity between sentencing crack and powder-based cocaine is wrong and should be completely eliminated.

--Obama will give first-time, non-violent offenders a chance to serve their sentence, where appropriate, in the type of drug rehabilitation programs that have proven to work better than a prison term in changing bad behavior.

The very first item on his platform is CIVIL RIGHTS. That's because the platform is in alphabetical order, but my point is it is incredibly easy to access--not hidden at the bottom somewhere. The policy proposals are just too numerous to list--there's an entire section on poverty.

Moreover, check out the Journal of Black Higher Ed's comparison of Obama's platform and Hillary's in regards to African-Americans...

http://www.jbhe.com/obamaprint.html

Then check out this Youtube of Obama in Beaumont, Texas. Before offering a cultural critique, he addresses teaching kids to the test, increasing pay and professional development for teachers, and more after-school and summer school for young kids. Here's the link:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l0L2GEBhd2w

You don't have to like what he's offering, or you may think it isn't worth much. But the idea that he isn't offering any "real promises" isn't borne out by the actual evidence.

Posted by Ta-Nehisi Coates | July 12, 2008 1:34 PM

You completely missed the point, Ta-Nehisi. I'm well aware of the stuff his has posted on his website as his platform. Jesse is too. I've quoted, cited and referred people to JBHE and argued people up and down about what Obama has in his platform and, subtly as it were, in his campaign message circa 2007.

So I'm trying to figure out why you think you can slide that disingenuous reading of my post by me.

The context was the Black Nationalism you invoked in this thread. My point had to do with the "underlying aim of Black Nationalism" which I went on to describe/define as the "structural or permanent means [call it mechanism] of achieving political efficacy."

Once Obama leaves office? What makes anything he "hides" in his platform, you know that civil rights and urban agenda stuff Jesse and a whole lot of Black folk have expressed as what they want to hear and would like to be a full, equal and just as strongly emphasized part of his campaign message... what gonna make any of that permanent?

In the first Watermelon thread, I was clear to say:

"Jesse speaks from his experience as a Black man in America just like you do and... he is on-point in directing the attention of the prospective president of the issues, the policies that he should be talking about in front of them (Black people) that will deal with their day-to-day issues the same way he (Barack) goes before AIPAC, halls, gyms, auditoriums and stadiums full of people who are not Black and "speaks up" to them."

And the Youtube, seriously... I'm down with it but the least you can do when the issue is Obama specifically talking about Black people when he can "talk down to them" then the least you can do is reference his Promise Neighborhoods idea that's taken from the Harlem's Children Zone. That's on his website, too.

Oh but wait, that might complicate his "if parents don't parent" bs which, considering the litany of things he said to chastise parent, I have no idea why you would reference the JBHE which constantly dispels the stereotype-laden myths about Black parents reading to their kids and don't even get me started on Obama's standard bs re: "Acting White." You know, that stuff that was in his 2004 convention speech that put his star on the map.

But, see... Even in the Youtube when he was apparently on his Cold Popeye's Chicken tour, he felt like he had to end/dwell on the down-note. Dude is taking the Chris Rock stuff too seriously. He was having "too much fun" making fun of stereotypes about Black people...

Really, that was a poor selection.

FYI, JHBE keeps Vital Stats like this:

• Percentage of all black children ages 3 to 5 in 1993 who were read to three or more times per week: 66%
• Percentage of all black children ages 3 to 5 in 2001 who were read to three or more times per week: 77%

And then those stats correlate with the socio-economics and education level of the parents. I mean, it's like Cosby ranting and raving about teen pregnancy in full Chicken Little mode when the "actual evidence" showed a decline in Black teen pregnancy. That's the definition of "talk down" to people.

So, yeah, let's talk about and hold Obama to things "born out by actual evidence." Just make sure you get/keep the context straight.

Posted by Nquest | July 12, 2008 7:34 PM

Hey, while you're looking for YouTubes... Let me know when you find one with Obama addressing a non-Black audience/constituency group prefacing his remarks with "I hope I don't offend anybody" followed by him laughing after he reels off stereotype after stereotype about the group with him saying, in essence, "we (the government) are going through all the trouble of addressing your issues knowing ya'll liable to f-ck it up cause it want make a damn bit of difference if you don't straighten up your act."

Find me one of them videos.

One thing about the one you selected is the not-so-subtle way Obama introduces that "undeserving" (poor) theme like a tag and keeps it hovering over Black folks' head, implicitly suggesting that their/our condition is of our own creation and our government addressing our issues is a conditional thing.

Now that's how I see his rhetoric which doesn't necessarily reflect the way he will government (if his Illinois record, e.g., is any indication). I support the brother and want to see him do the things he has listed in his platform which is, perhaps, the biggest reason why I'm supporting him, especially now.

But I feel like, of all people, Black people should be the one's getting the AIPAC treatment (some have said it was specifically the increase in African-American turn-out that won him the nomination and may hold the key to November) where Obama is clear and unequivocal in strongly stating, front and center, his support for the government policies Black people expect and would like to see from him. "Personal responsibility" isn't policy. It's out of his job description, IMO.

And I'm not even saying Reparations, it's security (obtaining it) is sacrosanct. lol I just want him to be our "stalwart" homie-brother-friend.

: )

Posted by Nquest | July 12, 2008 8:02 PM

Nquest -

Thank you for taking the time and energy to offer a critique and counterpoint to the view that Senator Obama's Fathers Day speech served the needs of the national black community. I am becoming increasingly dismayed as this campaign goes on at the willingness of black people to suspend their critical faculties when it comes to a political candidate.

Posted by PTCruiser | July 12, 2008 8:37 PM

I'd like to thank Nquest also. We clearly don't agree. But I wou;dn't want anyone thinking that there is a singular view among black folks--even if that singular view is my own.

Posted by Ta-Nehisi Coates | July 12, 2008 8:42 PM

Coates said:

"I see nothing wrong with creating in environment in which black fathers are embarrassed when they don't perform thier basic parental duties."
_________

So, should they also be embarrassed when they DO perform their basic duties?

Black fathers =/ Black fathers who don't do their duty. One is all encompassing, the other is specific and distinguishes those who do their duties from those who don't. I see a distinct lack of nuance, qualifying and specifying among politicians and the media regarding this. NOT ALL BLACK MEN ARE LAZY, CRIMINALS, AND/OR ABSENTEE FATHERS. Like the Counterpunch piece said, "I saw no headline lead with the word 'some' black men." This isn't making excuses or extreme left-ism or any of the straw arguments you're mentioning, this is demanding basic respect and rejecting stereotypes.

Posted by Alexander | July 12, 2008 8:48 PM

Ta-Nehisi, I appreciate that and the way you express your view from your point of view. I don't want to take anything away from that. I understand where you are coming from. I just have issues with brother Obama. But, as Farrakhan said, "I (still) love that brother."

I don't typically get into all the stuff about political strategy or posturing, though the brother is challenging that position of mine. I believe Obama believes what he says and, as we can see, what he says is well within the range of different views Black people have (which is why I don't question the brother's "blackness").

To me, this is about respecting Black people as voters and not taking us for granted. I'm like PTCruiser (who has put in a lot more work for Obama than I have): dismayed. Obama makes me question whether he will ever move to push those "civil rights" and urban policy programs he has in his platform.

I don't understand how he will have the mandate, so to speak, unless he preps the country for it. He's doing the exact opposite in some very disappointing ways.

Anyway, Ta-Nehisi, I love your blog. Brothers like you and P6, e.g., always make me think and introduce new information or perspective I always appreciate.

And, PTCruiser, I thank you for being a consistent voice on JJP. It makes it worth my while to keep reading there with your comments and Jack's threads.

Posted by Nquest | July 12, 2008 9:07 PM

Alexander,

I've been pretty vocal in my support of the actual text of Obama's speech. I'm a black father, and you may be one also. The actual speech didn't make me feel ashamed at all. But I've been equally critical of how it was covered. For a refresher, see here:

http://www.ta-nehisi.com/2008/06/obamas-fathers-day-speech.html

Posted by Ta-Nehisi Coates | July 12, 2008 11:27 PM

Ok, I know this conversation has been in effect. But, I've got my late pass.

Nquest, it seems to me that Obama's entire message is also about whites taking "personal responsiblity" for their government as well. If your jobs have been shipped overseas, you've got to do something about it by kicking the negligent policymakers out. If you lost your pension due to corporate malfeasance, do something about it by kicking the negligent policymakers out. You help elect them. Its a government by the people. Dont just talk about it, be about it.

In front of a Black audience that message takes on a different flavor. The laws blacks need to have changed have caused significant socioeconomic, as well as, psychological damage. Once the laws have changed and socioeconomic doors are opened, the psychological damage will close them quickly, if not addressed prior to these laws changing. So a message acknowledging that we need to work on the psychological damage because the government can't completely fix that is a good one in my opinion, even its rhetoric is cloaked in traditionally Republican semantics. Remember, Obama is a politician and politicians have a sly/"artful" way of using language.

As long as Obama follows through on the policy, I'll give him some leeway on what he thinks he needs to do to win because right now, his presidency is still just a "good idea" rather than a reality.

Posted by John Henry | July 18, 2008 8:11 PM