Decoloring the Picture

It is believed that the first forced migration from the African continent to the New World took place around the 1530s with the Spanish hunting for labor to tend to their plantations in the Caribbean and American territories of modern day Texas, Florida and South Carolina. Four and a quarter centuries later, the black color from Africa and its consequences tend to dominate the political events of this nation. African Americans constitute roughly 12% of the US population and yet their impact on the national conscience is much more disproportionate. The fact that race continues to be an uncomfortable issue in the United States has been borne out by two recent incidents.

The first was the arrest of Harvard professor Henry Gates by the local police. Trying to force the jammed front door of his house, Professor Gates appeared to a neighbor as someone trying to break into the house. She did what any normal American would do – call 911. By the time the police arrived, Prof Gates was in his house. This is where the story gets fuzzy. The police claim that the academic started a confrontation and hurled racist invective and abuse against the Police sergeant who came to the house. The professor claimed that despite proving his identity he was harassed and ultimately arrested. Adding color to the situation (pardon the pun) is the fact that Prof Gates is black, Sgt. Cowley of the Cambridge police is white, as was the concerned neighbor who dialed 911. The Massachusetts Governor (also black), criticized the police, saying that such discrimination was a fact of daily routine for blacks. What really gave fan to the fire was President Obama’s reaction to the situation. Speaking at the White House press conference on Health care, Obama was asked to comment on the situation and instead of side stepping the question in a way any normal politician would have done, he took it on and called the conduct of the police as ‘stupid’. Republicans, Police Unions and right wing commentators jumped on him. Accused of commenting without knowing the full facts, he was called irresponsible and asked by the Police Unions for an apology.

I guess there are natural fallouts of speaking your mind openly as a politician. Obama is discovering that slowly. He is a front on talker, someone who likes to engage issues rather than side step them. A few weeks back he spoke at the convocation ceremony of the Notre Dame University in Indiana. A university run by the Catholic Church, Notre Dame is anti-abortion while Obama is pro. Students protested against the invite to the President and he was heckled during his speech by a tiny section of the crowd. Obama trod on, talked of listening to voices of disagreement, talked of how sensitive abortion as an issue was to the Americans and how reconciliation would only be achieved by listening to the other side and finding a middle ground. In the incident of Prof Gates, he was quick to realize that he had overstepped the line of tactful distance that a Chief Executive must often maintain. To his credit, instead of hiding in the White House, he came out in the open, confessed that his comment was inappropriate and has now tried to reach out and attempt reconciliation by inviting both the academic and the policeman in question to the White House for a round of drinks.

The second incident is related to Sonia Sotomayor, Obama’s pick for a Supreme Court seat that goes vacant soon. Since Supreme Court judges in US hold office for life, very rarely does a President get an opportunity to appoint one (The most famous Judge in US history, John Marshall presided as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court for 34 years and swore in more Presidents than any other). The appointment of any Justice has to be confirmed by the Congress and each candidate is summoned by the Judiciary committee to a hard round of grilling. Old verdicts, opinions and stray comments are dug up and questioning is challenging (depending upon which party is in opposition). Sotomayor, a Hispanic, has been questioned for some of her own comments from a few years back (she had remarked once that a wise Latina woman can deliver a better judgment that a White man) but almost in parallel, one of her most influential judgments was reversed by the Supreme Court this summer in a narrow 5-4 verdict. The ruling related to the Fire Department of New Haven city that had cancelled the results of a promotion test after the black candidates were found to have scored too low a score to merit promotion. The city feared a lawsuit by the minority candidates due to its impact on the minority (there have been such lawsuits in the US before where courts have struck down such tests). The city’s concern lay in the principle of ‘disparate impact’ enshrined in the US employment law that prevents employers from adopting practices that are neutral on the face but discriminatory in application or effect on a protected community. It includes within its purview, a substantially different rate of selection for promotion or hiring that works to the disadvantage of any sex, race or other group.

17 White and 1 Hispanic firefighter, who were denied promotion, protested through a suit against the city Mayor alleging reverse discrimination. The district court upheld the cancellation of the test and so did the appeals court where Sotomayor was Chief Justice. The US Supreme Court though struck the ruling down stating that city had no ‘strong basis in evidence’ to show that it would have attracted lawsuits had the results been certified. The Court walked a fine thin line in the judgment and acknowledged that discrimination prevention can also lead to discrimination.

Sotomayor of course would go on to be confirmed. Obama enjoys a comfortable majority of Democrats in the Congress. But the fact that America still faces questions of race and how to overcome its historical and potential future impacts is a sign of how despite the economic advancements, social borders remain fuzzy. While attitudes may have warmed and black and white walls of discrimination may have been tore down, at its edges, along the greys America still finds the question of race standing at the corner, and mostly finds it terribly uncomfortable to reach out and address it.

***************************************************************************

This is a bit late in the day but I wanted to draw attention to the Delhi High Court’s landmark judgment on Sec 377 of IPC. For all the abuse that modern India throws at Jawaharlal Nehru it is worthwhile to ponder that the court invoked Nehru and the Objectives Resolution that he moved in the Constituent Assembly in 1946, as India’s wisest men sat to frame a Constitution for the country. Quoting Nehru, that ‘words are magic things; often enough, even the magic of words sometimes cannot convey magic of human spirit and of a nation's passion’, it turned the wheel back to  clause 5 of the resolution that stated the following as the foundation stone of this country –

“WHEREIN shall be guaranteed and secured to all the people of India justice, social economic and political : equality of status, of opportunity, and before the law; freedom of thought, expression, belief, faith, worship, vocation, association and action, subject to law and public morality;”

These words would go on to transform into the fundamental rights enshrined in the constitution. While in India, we may not remember him enough, it took a Pakistani blogger across the border to put the issue in perspective by claiming that ‘Nehru’s glorious legacy had brought another freedom to India’. In the India of 1950s, Nehru was called as the country’s friend, philosopher and guide. To this day, his words and actions stand as guardian angels of the democratic spirit he wanted his country to so dearly possess and embrace.

|