Positive vs Negative Identity Politics

[George_Bonanza]

I'm sick of people trying to equate whites voting for McCain/Hillary and blacks voting for Obama as the same kind of racism. It's not.

If blacks vote overwhelmingly for Obama, it's still identity politics, and while there might be an element of racial thinking in it, it's something I call "positive identity politics". These blacks are not voting against someone or a group, but rather, trying to elevate their own unequal standing in society. Their allegiance to a black candidate is an expression of their desire to pull themselves up to a somewhat equal stance (43 white presidents vs. 1 black president is not exactly equality). In other words, they're voting for someone, not against someone.

On the other hand, if whites vote overwhelmingly for McCain/Hillary, it's "negative identity politics" because it's not an effort to elevate their standing because whites already occupy the highest racial strata in the hierarchy. Instead, it's an attempt to maintain their current position and/or keep down another group in order to maintain an unequal social structure. Negative identity politics has a far more maliciously racist intent to it than positive identity politics, though neither are free of racialized ideas.

Another critical point is that the vast majority of black voters have shown no qualms in voting for a qualified white candidate, even at the expense of a black candidate. However, most whites have not shown the same race-blindness, mostly because they haven't got the opportunity to. The 2008 presidential election will show if the white electorate can be as racially enlightened and magnanimous as the black electorate.