On Facebook, I’ve seen some Pennsylvania friends calling for the (I think wrongful) boycott of a local businessman on account of his perceived racism with a link to a blog post on Obama’s inauguration as proof. I followed the link and didn’t think it was racist (though one phrase could have been de-contextualized as such) but I’ll get to that after my disclaimer (in case I get a bunch of people calling me racist). I’m a dark-skinned US Born Dominican. If I’m allowed to comment on race now, I’ll proceed.

The blogger starts off by sharing his annoyance with the 2009 Inauguration and making a teaser statement that we’ve voted for the tannest President of US History.   Now this statement has potential for being seen as racist until he unpacks it in the second paragraph: he hates that people are making a big deal out of Obama’s skin color alone and thinks that is, in itself, racist. People are applauding that they voted for a Black Man but, says the blogger, Obama is half-white so to say that he’s Black would be just as correct as saying he’s White.

Now, I think what the blogger is getting at (even with his “tannest” president statement) is that people are deciding that Obama’s black because (1) he looks black or (2) he has a percentage of “black” blood. But he denies (2) on the basis that the percentage is 50% so it is either (1) or a version of (2) where it doesn’t matter how much “black” blood Obama has: he is still black. Historically, this has been colloquially (I need a better word than that) called the one-drop rule (we’ll call this 2*). So, one drop African and the person is African—no matter what. This method is almost never applied to any other racial group (that I can think of) beside maybe Native Americans (like I’ve never heard someone refer to a person with a drop of Spanish referred to as Hispanic).

Is (1) racist? Well, in some cases it might be extremely racist to say because a person looks like a racial group they are part of a racial group. For example if I see a person with certain features and say “They must be Chinese” when they are in fact Korean, might be racist in the sense that I’m defining a racial group by certain stereotypical features. But I can imagine a case where I’m speaking to cops and referring to the person who robbed me with no real sense of their race if I say things like “He was a white guy, with a ring on his hand” etc. Now, if the officer taking the report makes a decision in his head that I’m referring to a racially white person (Caucasian descent) then it still may not be racist, but it is prejudicial. But if people are deciding Obama is black because he looks black, I’m not sure that we can say that is prejudicial since people have the information that Obama is half white. In that case, if people think Obama is black because he looks black, then I think that is racist.

Is (2)and (2*) racist? Without invoking the genetic fallacy (that this rule was used in US Legislation to segregate Whites and Blacks) I think we can say that it is racist on two levels. At the very least, racist against the percentage that isn’t black. I mean, why would any percentage overrule some other percentage of racial (if there is such a thing) information? But also on the grounds that the very presence of black in a person’s makeup supposedly turns the whole person into Black—it is an evil equivocation of race with illness, actually, and strikes me as completely racist.

Is the blogger racist for writing any of this? His “tannest” comment seems to underscore that we’ve voted for the darkest Man in US History, but he isn’t making a pejorative statement against Obama rather flattening the idea of what makes someone Black. Frankly, I couldn’t find anything racist about the man’s statement and think that his adversaries are needlessly raising the charge and will put the guy out of business, and ruin his family, if they succeed in their boycott. Apparently this is more morally justified than any amount of honest examination of the man’s statements.

One thing that I do think is strange is this penchant to ignore people because they’re not-Black or not-Dark-skinned. Because this business owner spoke into a matter of race by ignoring race and highlighting the difference in skin as an unimportant fact, he is labeled racist. I have a problem with that. Like I said above, I’m a dark skinned Dominican—am I therefore justified in saying racist comments against dark skinned Dominicans? I don’t’ think I am. Likewise, I don’t think a person is denied the right to speak on race issues just on account of them not being X-race.

Besides that, I also think the blogger raised a couple of questions in my own head: are people who believe Obama is black, knowing his heritage (half white, half black), acting in such a way to allow for racism?  I’m not sure what you would call the ignorant prejudice of a person who says things like “I know, and am friends, with plenty of black people” but it seems that this might lean more towards that which generates an atmosphere of racism—but I might be overstating that

So, what do you think about all of this? Is the blogger actually being racist? Are his detractors? Is Obama black or white? Most importantly, am I wrong?