Wow, Melissa, we were getting along so well until now!
Despite my apparent cynicism, I also possess a politics inspired by hope. This is why I refuse to allow the Left’s political hopes to be scaled down to Barack Obama’s candidacy. This is why I refuse to accept that a presidential candidate cannot speak openly about the evils of No Child Left Behind, NAFTA, and white supremacy and win a general election. This is why I refuse to believe that we must rely upon the media and other corporate entities to generate 21st century Black leadership.
To be clear, my issue isn’t that you’re voting for Obama tomorrow. In fact, I too may be forced to pull his lever now that Dennis Kucinich (whose campaign I have supported from the beginning) and John Edwards are out of the race. The difference, however, is that you supported Barack when there were legitimate alternatives left on the ballot. For me, such a choice is an unnecessary concession that a real Left-wing movement is no longer possible and that we must settle for Obama’s watered down centrism.
Like you, I don’t romanticize the role of the president. Indeed, it is our job as intellectuals, activists, and everyday citizens to force politicians to operate in our interests. This is precisely why it is so critical that we support an individual who at least articulates a politics that is aligned with our struggle. While Obama may be more progressive than Hillary, his politics stand in sharp contrast to those of Kucinich, Edwards, and countless others whose “viability” (a term I detest) is undermined by our failure to support them. By exhausting our hope at the level of the immediate and the pragmatic, we create a self-fulfilling prophecy that says that we can’t do any better than choose between two corporate controlled centrists.
You say that Obama’s candidacy is a testament to our capacity to believe. From where I sit, it is a consequence of our failure to do so.
Marc
Marc Lamont Hill is an Assistant Professor of Urban Education and American Studies at Temple University.
