National Confrontation on Race

National Confrontation on Race

Facebook
Twitter
Email
Flipboard
Pocket

At the end of a long painful week, Shirley Sherrod’s been offered a new job with the USDA’s Office of Civil Rights and Community Outreach. She’s still considering, though, and who can blame her?

In an interview on Good Morning America Sherrod said Thursday that she wasn’t ready to accept Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack’s job offer. She said she wanted to hear more from the Secretary and his boss. She wants to know that the President is "fully behind" her." "I would hope that he is…" she said. "I would love to talk to him."

And that’s where we’re at. Yesterday in our studio, Harry Belafonte noted that we don’t have a national conversation about race, we have a confrontation. People from different races still don’t know one another. As he put it, in an interview with ColorLines: "The person from whom you’re thinking of taking life, or land, have you heard their story, have you sung their song?"

While the race- like the red-baiting by the Right- is the most obvious crime in the Sherrod story, the question of who believes whom and why, comes next. It may even be a bigger problem — after all, it’s only because of misplaced trust — that the baiting works.

Tom Vilsack, in his apology to Sherrod Wednesday, said he didn’t think before calling for resignation. But that’s not quite true. He did think. And he chose to believe the baiters first. That’s the first problem. Why did they, not she, win his first gut-level confidence?

Melissa Harris-Lacewell pointed out on MSNBC Wednesday night, had Vilsack known Sherrod’s history better — he’d have known that her father was shot in the back by a white farmer when she was 17; that she had history with the civil rights movement. That her husband worked with the Student Non-Violent Coordinating Committee and he’d have known of her involvement with a lawsuit, recently settled, representing black farmers, long dispossessed as part of the post-Reconstruction backlash against emancipated blacks. If he’d understood those things, if they’d resonated — he’d have known they made her a perfect target. If he’d known that — and felt it — there’s a chance that even at the gut-level, he’d have heard an echo of past, similar fabrications — not a fact.

Indeed, if the entire USDA heard and felt that history, they’d not have dragged their mostly-white feet so long in getting black farmers justice.

Eric Holder was right. We’re still a nation of cowards on the issue of race. But here’s another opportunity to grapple with it. We don’t need a debate over whether we’re post-racial — clearly that’s settled. As is the matter of whether the Fox News Channel is a journalistic project.

What we need now is what Sherrod’s asking for from the president — time to talk. We need true conversation, that starts with learning one another’s histories. Not the whitewashed sort that Texas and Arizona textbooks want to teach, but our real histories – and why they matter. It’s not just a question for the President. It’s for all of us. Do we as a nation have Sherrod’s back?

Thank you for reading The Nation!

We hope you enjoyed the story you just read. It’s just one of many examples of incisive, deeply-reported journalism we publish—journalism that shifts the needle on important issues, uncovers malfeasance and corruption, and uplifts voices and perspectives that often go unheard in mainstream media. For nearly 160 years, The Nation has spoken truth to power and shone a light on issues that would otherwise be swept under the rug.

In a critical election year as well as a time of media austerity, independent journalism needs your continued support. The best way to do this is with a recurring donation. This month, we are asking readers like you who value truth and democracy to step up and support The Nation with a monthly contribution. We call these monthly donors Sustainers, a small but mighty group of supporters who ensure our team of writers, editors, and fact-checkers have the resources they need to report on breaking news, investigative feature stories that often take weeks or months to report, and much more.

There’s a lot to talk about in the coming months, from the presidential election and Supreme Court battles to the fight for bodily autonomy. We’ll cover all these issues and more, but this is only made possible with support from sustaining donors. Donate today—any amount you can spare each month is appreciated, even just the price of a cup of coffee.

The Nation does not bow to the interests of a corporate owner or advertisers—we answer only to readers like you who make our work possible. Set up a recurring donation today and ensure we can continue to hold the powerful accountable.

Thank you for your generosity.

Ad Policy
x