First The Black Commentator on Al Sharpton:
By sheer dint of will and force of personality, Sharpton imposed a vibrant Black presence on the party’s primary process. (Had Sharpton not run, Carol Moseley-Braun would not have been drawn into the race – ironically, as a counterweight to Sharpton.) “Big Al” was truly large on the stage, a daunting deterrent to the intrusion of the usual coded racial rhetoric into the Democratic debates or on the stump: Don’t even think about it, said Al, without having to move his lips. Sharpton gave voice – at times, brilliantly – to the core progressive principles of the Black political consensus, causing big-footed white men to step lightly and in the right general direction.
Sharpton’s candidacy has had a magical effect on the racial chemistry of the Democratic dialogue, in starkest contrast to the White Citizens Council-type language of the GOP. He caused the white candidates to repeatedly demonstrate, through their words and campaign schedules, that they valued Black voters.
…The debacle
Sharpton may or may not appreciate the effect he has had on the behavior and marketability of his white opponents. However, he has much more to worry about than whether he gets to speak at the Democratic convention, in Boston. The growing storm over his covert alliance with rightwing Republicans probably came too late to have any measurable impact on Tuesday’s elections, but the revelations are a deathblow to his actual goal: to become the recognized leader of African Americans. Although the story has been framed in terms of treachery to the Democratic Party, or as evidence of Sharpton’s visceral disdain for white “liberals,” the tale will resonate somewhat differently among African Americans. Sharpton comes across as a hapless stooge of the worst elements of the GOP.
I've always appreciated the good Reverend's oratory skills. I've generally appreciated his politics. I don't appreciate this unnecessary alliance.
This should not hurt Sharpton. His constituency is not the sort of people who are moved by pundits. They are people who see him as an effective agent. Few not in his constituency took him seriously to begin with. So what changes? For myself, nothing: if I agree with what he says I'll say so, as I will when I disagree.
Posted by P6 at February 5, 2004 01:56 PM
Trackback URL: http://www.niggerati.net/mt/mt-tb.cgi/257
Comments
One mistake that many pundits seem to make is assuming that others support, or plan to vote for, a candidate for the same reason that they would. Certain issues may be very important in their minds that are not important to others because of the reasons they've decided to support that candidate.
Posted by Al-Muhajabah at February 5, 2004 04:25 PMWell, you know, the thing with Sharpton and Stone is unfortunate, but I think there's a bit of a double-standard in people's commentary about it, because it played into the liberal left's paranoia about the hard left's supposed desire to be a 'spoiler'. Sharpton is an adult, and he can get money and advice where he likes -- just like Gore could choose a running mate who was a notorious conservative moral scold and Clinton can work with Dick Morris, and Wesley Clark can vote republican in a number of recent elections. People are so sure Stone played Sharpton because, you know, it's gotta be the white guy fooling the black guy. But another way to look at it is Sharpton took a bunch of Republican money and ran a hard left campaign with it... I mean the fact is Howard Dean's opposition to affirmative action, his support for the death penalty and historic support of the NRA's agenda did amount to an anti-black agenda. Why is it against the rules for Sharpton to point that out? The liberal left wants it all ways. Maybe if the democratic party demonstrated that it values and welcomes alternative voices a little more people like Sharpton wouldn't have to fund their campaigns so underhandedly. As it is now, though, the liberal left just asks, asks, asks from the hard left. They want the hard left's votes, they want the hard left to shut their mouths, they want the hard left's money ... but they don't give anything.
Posted by Joe at February 5, 2004 04:39 PM