Friday, August 28, 2009
News Is the Turpeau memo racist?
Posted by Scott Henry @ScottTheHenry on Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 8:03 PM
Judging from many Fresh Loaf commenters, the answer to that is, "Duh!"
But that wasn't my first reaction when I read the instantly notorious memo by longtime political operative Aaron Turpeau, which calls for black leaders in Atlanta to rally behind a single black mayoral candidate in order to avoid seeing the election of Mary Norwood.
To me, the memo wasn't racist so much as it was a plea for naked self-interest — although arguably wrong-headed, outdated and certainly politically incorrect.
Let me explain. I've always defined racism as the belief that there are inherent differences — character, intellect, ability, etc. — between people that directly result from race. Racism can be in the form of conscious prejudice — Jews are greedy, blacks are lazy, white men can't jump, etc. — or the vague sense that one person is in some way inferior to another simply because of the color of his skin.
But I don't think Turpeau was motivated by the kind of racism defined above. In fact, he was quite clear in explaining his goal:
There is an unstated assumption that having a black mayor in Atlanta is equal to having a black social, economic and political agenda or at least someone in office who would be sensitive to that agenda if not a full promoter of that agenda
In other words, having an African American mayor is a benefit to black Atlantans and their "agenda"; therefore, blacks should take steps to ensure that City Hall stays black.
Frankly, this mode of thinking dates back to the early career of Maynard Jackson, a time when achieving political clout meant, in the words of the day, "having a seat at the table." Black Atlantans felt shut out of the corridors of power and winning the mayor's office was seen as key to getting a foot in the door.
That mindset may seem dated, obsolete and even a little sad to you and me — and, based on her reaction, Shirley Franklin — because it suggests an inescapable social divide that most people would prefer to move beyond. But I can assure you that Turpeau isn't the only prominent black Atlantan who believes electing a black mayor is the only way to protect the interests of the black community.
But is it racism? I was discussing the issue with another journalist who has me halfway convinced that my initial thought was wrong. Turpeau's arguing for the election of a candidate simply based on her race — notice he made no claim that Lisa Borders would make a great mayor — is no different, my friend argues, than a white community leader calling for whites need to reclaim City Hall.
On the other hand, few of us would blink an eye to hear that a Latino chamber of commerce somewhere has endorsed a local Hispanic candidate. We'd naturally assume the group figured a Latino would best serve Latino interests. Is that racist?
Help me out here; I'm confused.
Comments (21)
Showing 1-21 of 21
But I can assure you that Turpeau isn’t the only prominent black Atlantan who believes electing a black mayor is the only way to protect the interests of the black community. It's the only way to protect the status quo for those who may have benefited disproportionately from Maynard's legacy for all these years. That's what this is really all about. But you can't just come out and say Norwood isn't part of our decaying machine. It's actually preferable to emphasize her skin color.
like
dislike
Yes Scott, rich white folks never economically benefited from institutionalized racism in the South and elsewhere. THE WHOLE BASIS FOR SLAVERY WAS FREE LABOR FOR GOD'S SAKE!!!!!
"Hispanic" is an ethnicity, not a race. So in your example the Chamber of Commerce might be ethnicicist, but not racist.
Simple answer to your question. If the words black and white were changed in the memo, you wouldn't even have to ask the question. As for Maynard's legacy, Turpeau or Dash Riptide can't change it no matter how much they hate on it.
Scott - your understanding of racism is actually bigotry. Racism is the belief that one race is inherently superior to another, not that any particular race is somehow deficient. Atlpaddy - you are a font of non sequiturs, aren't you? Either that or your comments from one thread are randomly transposed to threads where they are not responsive to the posts.
As for Maynard’s legacy, Turpeau or Dash Riptide can’t change it no matter how much they hate on it. What did I say against Maynard? I'm talking about maintaining the political status quo in 2010 and beyond for the sake of the connected (and not blacks generally). Naked racism is just a means toward that end.
Dale, I have to say I don't grasp the logic of your contention that, "Racism is the belief that one race is inherently superior to another, not that any particular race is somehow deficient." They're the same thing. For one group to be superior necessarily requires another to be inferior. Frankly, I perceive racism to be a form of bigotry.
For what it's worth, WABE reported about an hour ago that Turpeau didn't actually write this report, just that he circulated it. It was apparently written by two professors at CAU. Any confirmation on that?
I hadn't seen that, but it wouldn't surprise me if it had been written by someone else and would even make the memo more noteworthy because it couldn't be dismissed as the rantings of one old-timer. Fact is, the views expressed in the memo, which went out with Turpeau's name on it, are representative of an older generation of black leadership in Atlanta. Not everyone, certainly, but a large percentage still think like that and you don't have to cover politics very long before you bump up against it. So, whether Turpeau or someone else wrote it, the memo is being interpreted in political circles as a sign of desperation on the part of old-guard black power-brokers who are worried they're going to lose what influence they still wield. For political observers, this is a fascinating glimpse behind the curtains of a mysterious network of movers and shakers who usually act behind the scenes.
Scott, I don't disagree with your last post in general. However, those involved with this memo are not the same group of people that were part of the so-called "machine". The current group are a bunch of wannabes who are trying to hang on to Maynard's cuttails. Truth be told, a lot of people in this group envyed Maynard and his comrades because they weren't part of the group. Don't be fooled. Turpeau was involved, but he is not the person you characterize him to be in terms of the "machine". The "machine" that we all know and love is long gone.
Oh, and by the way, the memo was written by William Boone and his colleague from Clark Atlanta Univ. They didn't sign it and aren't willing to take credit now for obvious reasons.
DaleC, my point wasn't a non-sequitor, but granted, it may have not been too clear. My point is/was that racism was promoted as a tool by the ruling white elite (planters and Northern industrialists) as a means to justify slavery, which was just about the cheapest form of labor there is. Cheap slave labor made the elite in the South exceedingly rich and also stunted entrepreneurship and the growth of a large middle class among whites (definitely among blacks) in the region. From Reconstruction through the 1960s, the disinfranchisment of blacks of the right to vote, racial terrorism (see Klan), and the creation of economic handicaps (racial zoning/redlining, the inablity of blacks to secure bank loans to purchase land and start businesses, etc) maintained the cheap labor pool through this time period. Most poor and middle class whites during this era went along with established racist institutions and social codes to maintain their tenuous financial positions (which oftentimes was as bad or worse than some blacks) in an agrarian-based economy. Sure, racism seems to be irrational on the face of it, but if these aren't positions taken on the part of 'racist' whites to maintain their economic and social self-interest, than I don't know what is. Maybe that helps.
I'm not defending Turpeau at all. I'm just letting Scott know that about 99% of racist sentiment (of which no racial group is entirely exempt) is based on a desire to preserve economic and social self interest.
ATLpaddy - I called it a non-sequitur because it had no relevance to anything Scott wrote. Scott - I realize I was not very clear. Probably because I started drinking early today :-) Racism - white folks are the chosen race, we need a black mayor becasue that will be better than a white mayor Bigotry - Niggers are stupid, Kikes are greedy or Southern Crackers are inbred boneheads.
ATLPaddy - to your 9:47 post I can only reply "No Shit, Sherlock" and then ask what it has to do with Scott's article?
It maybe no shit to you Dale, but you might be surprised how many ppl would fight tooth & nail to try & prove paddy wrong. Quiet honestly I find the definitions being used here to be rather outdated b/c they fail to address how racism operates today.
So DaleC, you believe that white folks are the chosen race? Hmmm, that's very interesting. Now, what the fuck is your point, again?
Latest in Fresh Loaf
-
First Slice: 2/13/12 Beach Boys reunited, Whitney Houston remembered, Christopher Cain busted
Some Monday morning headlines to get your week started
-
5 things today: Goth Valentines, Vouched Books
Goth valentines, poets, Jewish films, and more
-
Pittsburgh rallies for Brandon White; hate crime legislation to be introduced 2
More than 150 people braved cold temperatures to show support for 20-year-old attack victim
- More »
Author Archives
-
Restaurant attire: Step it up, people, and dress to the occasion 45
-
Reed: Atlanta is about winning 7
Mayor Reed's State of the City address is nearly upstaged by Coke-produced pro-Kasim video
- More »
