bq. Obama’s election does not signal the dawn of a postracial era in U.S. politics. Rather, it reflects the current structure of racial politics in the United States—a division between those who favor color-blind policies and seek to keep racial discussions out of politics, and those who favor race-conscious measures and whose policies are often political liabilities. The Obama campaign sought to win support from both camps. Only if pervasive material racial inequalities are reduced can such a strategy succeed in the long run.
That is Rogers Smith and Desmond King, writing in _The Dubois Review_. The article appears to be ungated. Here is one other passage of note, this on the “multicultural challenge”:
bq. It is a challenge that goes to the heart of Obama’s core promise: to embrace the diversity of Americans and yet to find ways to “bridge our differences and unite in common effort—black, white, Latino, Asian, Native American; Democrat and Republican, young and old, rich and poor, gay and straight, disabled or not,” as he put it in his Ohio “closing statement” near the end of the campaign. All Americans are to come to feel and act politically as “one nation, and one people” who will together “once more choose our better history.”
bq. One reason this promise is so challenging is Americans do not agree on what constitutes their “better history.” Some see the spread of religious diversity and considerable secularity, for example, as advances for freedom. Others see those developments as a retreat from the United States’ true calling to be a shining “Christian nation.” Some believe their country’s “best history” centers on the realization of ideals arising in historically Anglo-American cultural traditions. Others see those cultural traditions as historically responsible for the repression of communities and identities that they regard as most valuable and most their own. Put more broadly, the difficulty is that it may well be impossible to give any specific content to the putative shared, unifying values and purposes of Americans, without appearing to fail to recognize and accommodate adequately the diversity of values and purposes Americans in fact exhibit.
The second perspective comes from Susan Fiske and colleagues:
bq. Images of Black Americans are becoming remarkably diverse, enabling Barack Obama to defy simple-minded stereotypes and succeed.
Fiske’s work emphasizes two dimensions of stereotypes. _Warmth_ encompasses beliefs about a group’s intentions — e.g. is the group threatening, peaceful, violent, etc. _Competence_ encompasses beliefs about a group’s abilities — e.g., is the group lazy, hardworking, intelligent, unintelligent, etc.
bq. Obama’s credentials prevented him from being cast as incompetent, though the experience debate continued. His legendary calm and passionate charisma saved him on the warmth dimension. Social class subtypes for Black Americans differentiate dramatically between low-income Blacks and Black professionals, among both non-Black and Black samples. Obama clearly fit the moderately warm, highly competent Black-professional subtype.
Here’s a map of how people placed different groups on these two dimensions. Note the difference between the placement of poor blacks and black professionals.
See also their discussion of habituation:
bq. Finally, non-Black Americans are habituating to Blacks in politics, and to Obama in particular. This habituation proved critical because of the automatic emotional reactions of many non-Blacks to Black people. Although many non-Black Americans have rapid, unconscious vigilance reactions to Black faces, these immediate reactions can habituate, with familiarity and empathy.
