Black Skin, White Masks

Time and time again, Obama has proven that what he most identifies with is America, specifically White America. Last week, he traveled to Ghana and gave a speech to the Ghanaian people, urging them to accept responsibility for the fate of their nation, castigating the continent (don't forget people, Africa is a continent, not a country) for corruption and blaming their ills on colonialism. I will admit that his argument has a modicum of legitimacy, but it was absolutely repulsive in its blatant disregard for historical analysis.We have heard this same argument before: Africans must stop blaming us and take responsibility for themselves. However, this is not something that a descendant of Africa should be stating. I would expect to hear something like this on Fox News, and his speech has only further confirmed my opinion that he does not identify with African anymore than Bill O'Reilly does. He has used Africa as a publicity stunt to showcase his oratorical skills and feign like he will actually put forth progressive policies for Africa, knowing that the people of Africa view him as their child, and are thus more receptive of him than they have been of any other U.S. president.
One point of contention that I have is Obama's emphasis on corruption. Every society has corruption, the United States not excluded, but because it is a wealthy nation, it's permissible to be corrupt. As a subtopic of corruption, it should be admitted that the United States has a long policy of rewarding corruption. Let's face it: The United States, and the white world in general, do not want a strong and vibrant Africa. A strong and vibrant Africa cannot have its resources expropriated and exploited. A strong and vibrant Africa would have no need to placate its former colonizers. If we wanted a strong and vibrant Africa, we would not have sent in the CIA to assassinate Patrice Lumumba and overthrow Kwame Nkrumah. These men represented a strong and vibrant Africa, and they were shot down. We need to be honest. Whenever a politician has advocated a strong and vibrant Africa, they are isolated and denigrated. We have never given Africa an opportunity to fulfill its potential because if Africa were to be reborn, Europe, like a parasite that can no longer feed off its host, would die. Whenever Africa tried to stand, we brought in our guns and shot the people down.
If we want to discuss the reasons why Africa is in shambles, talk about Christopher Columbus. Talk about Britain. Or France. Or Spain. Or Portugal. Or just about every major industrialized nation in Europe. Talk about the Berlin Conference. Talk about how Africa was divided like it was a pie, with Britain getting a piece, France another, and so forth. Talk about how when the Africans tried to take responsibility and liberate themselves, the Europeans brought with them guns, torture chambers, concentration camps, etc. Talk about how King Leopold of Belgium butchered ten million Congolese.Talk about how the CIA assassinated leaders, and how our wonderful leaders kept funneling money to rebel groups to continue wars so we can loot the resources undetected. But........ Obama neglects to mention this. Could it be that the same people who supported his presidency are the same ones who continue all of this dirty business? Could it be that the new masters look a lot like the old ones, and instead of that old-time religion to keep the slaves in place, we mesmerize people with the carrot of capitalism and all its accompanying riches, dangling in front of their noses? Could it be that we black Americans, many of us house slaves, are so desperate to hold onto our positions, we ignore when the master tells the field slaves to be more responsible, and wait for another handout? Could it be that we were duped because Obama was black, and that automatically means that he's for us? Right?
I find it very odd that Obama bent over backwards to remind the Middle Eastern people how we engineered a coup to overthrown one of their democratically elected leaders, how he wants to establish a new relationship with them, and how he's not afraid of Muslims, etc. Maybe he failed to so the same for Africans because, as someone mentioned, he knew his color provided a buffer for criticism. He takes advantage of the fact that because of his color, he can do all the heinous things Bush did and get away with it, because he has such a nice smile and he's black and articulate. What more could you ask for? And besides, who really cares what the Africans think anyway? We all know that the Western world has little respect for the African people, only for their resources, and what better way to deliver that same disrespect, this time wrapped in a smiling, chocolate package? For those who say I'm being cynical, just imagine the criticism that would be leveled at any white public figure who might say the same thing.
And then of course, so typical of American presidents, is the paternalism. You know, the we-need-to-teach-these-peo

ple-of-color-how-a-real-democracy-works type of paternalism. I think most people know how democracy works, and how much audacity does it take for a person to lecture others about their country? Obama would never go to a white nation and do that. And he of course talked about the exploitation of resources, coincidentally leaving much of the Western World uninvolved considering how Europe's wealth is basically stolen from the backs of the very people he criticizes.
Far from saying that I know everything, I have one piece of advice that I believe is very crucial. It's similar to the lesson learned in kindergarten: Leave people alone. (Well, substitute countries for people). If Columbus had heeded that advice, there would be United States of America to terrorize other countries, and I think many other nations would be grateful for that. This land would still be populated with the indigenous peoples. If people heeded that advice, millions of people with African descent would not be here, with some millions imprisoned. If only. Because the truth is, Europeans have destroyed this world. Not singlehandedly, but they have contributed to the overwhelming majority of suffering this world experiences today. Their desire to control everything, their greed, their desire for dominance, their meddling, has led to Africa's misery. It has given them famine, genocide, poverty, etc., and now the descendants of the colonizers have elected a black man to represent them to the descendants of the people who have been colonized, who technically speaking, he should have far more in common with. Oh, the irony. If he really wanted to someone to lecture, go to Britain, and tell them that there streets were built off the backs of slaves. Go to France, and marvel at their wealth, and ask them where it came from. But, no popular politician will do it, and surely not the president. Because, and this may be painful for many of us of African descent to believe, but we identify more with America and the "civilized world" than we do with Ghana, or the Sudan, or Zimbabwe.
Obama may have alluded to a point which he did not intend to. One of the most common excuses I hear from people of European descent for today's state of affairs is, "How can I be blamed for something that my people, or ancestors did?" Good point, however, the descendants of these European colonizers have reaped the benefits of the exploitation of the African people, and while I'm not saying they have to go out and save the world, the least they can do is be honest. And for a politician of Obama's stature, this is especially important. He's the first black president of the United States, and the only one I know of who has a rabid cult following disguised as progressive politics. Many people who like Obama defend every his every statement, and when one is mesmerized by someone, it is harder to be critical of them. Thus, we have many people who take his statements has undeniable truth and have a group of people who believe that the state of affairs is Africa's fault, and that whatever happens to the people there, is just, well, mismanagement, rather than a concerted effort to exploit the people and resources there. This is the reason politicians remain dangerous. They have every media tool at their disposal, and they have built-in audiences who may not have either the time or the inclination to analyze their statements, so they just accept, and once a person accepts someone's ideology, it becomes difficult to criticize what they do in respect to that ideology. Make no mistake about it, Obama is for empire and imperialism. Otherwise, he would not have become president. The corporations and the media (aren't they one and the same?) have given him their endorsement because he has aligned his interests with theirs, and they believe he will be a faithful representative, and so far, he has not disappointed them.
Know that every U.S. president, Obama's predecessors and successors, has to identify with the white world. There is just no other way to get elected. I think in the euphoria of Obama being elected, we have forgotten history, we have forgotten a lot of important things, and we let style and appearance trump substance. While simultaneously rejoicing at Obama's presidency both because of the fact that he was black (well, overwhelmingly because of the fact that he was black) and because of the fact that he was a Democrat (one of the "good guys"), we rejected those presidential candidates who did not receive the mainstream stamp of approval, regardless of whether their views were conducive to our interests. This means that while we were glad he was black, he needed to have the white stamp of approval to be considered legitimate. This desperation for acceptance has far reaching consequences, the least of which is our lack of vigilance. But, maybe Obama is symbolic of many black people in the Western world. Maybe we have black skin with white masks. Maybe we identify with the white world more than we identify with people who resemble ourselves. Maybe we need a Back to Africa movement, at least metaphorically. What do I know? I know that we cannot forget history, and his speech seemed to be a willful attempt to if not to forget history, then to ignore it.