I’ve been talking back to my television and radio a lot these days. Truth be told, I’ve been yelling at my television and radio a lot these days. My frustration level has risen and my tolerance level is spiraling downward. As the primaries drag on, much of the information provided about the candidates is so inane, I am forced to respond vituperatively to an inanimate object. In examining my visceral reaction, I’ve come to realize that it’s the ridiculous type and quality of information to which I am reacting. I worry that people are coming to a decision about a candidate for president based on the blathering of talk radio and the absurd coverage of the news.
Some of the most recent campaign reports have been on Obama’s bowling and basketball. Why are we doing this? I reviewed several blogs to investigate the whys and wherefores from the points of view of the bloggers. Several critics assert that the reason the bowling has received so much attention is because Obama’s ineptitude in the bowling alley indicates that he is out of touch with everyday people, and, if he is out of touch with everyday people, he cannot be a president “of” the people. This is an interesting argument, but one that made me review past presidents. How many presidents were good bowlers? And is bowling a measure of a candidate in touch with the people? Should we start scouring the bowling lanes for those who score 300 to run for president?
With a background in educational sociology, I believe there’s more to this (I have to believe there’s more to this). Emile Durkheim, father of sociology, in his numerous works (On Morality and Society, Division of Labor in Society, Rules of the Sociological Method, Suicide) provides a scientific explanation of society and its development. He asserts that society is not a particular, discrete entity that comes to being at one moment. Rather, society develops and evolves through sociological phenomena, influenced and affected by historical occurrences and rises to, fits, and is satisfied by the functions and needs of conditions at that time.
Our actions, exploits, and behavior are defined as social facts, which are functional realities that have been inculcated in us through our history. The problem in the U.S. is that our history is so comparatively short and our history has changed so radically in this short time that our social facts are evolving and have not yet gelled. It was not until 1865 that slavery was abolished. In 1870, the 15th Amendment was ratified, which granted male citizens the right to vote, free from discrimination based on race, color, or status based on previous years of slavery. However, from 1870 to 1965, violent and manipulative acts, as well as legal restrictions such as the poll tax, effectively prevented Black citizens from voting. For almost a century, the violence and manipulation occurred systematically, persistently, and relentlessly. In 1965, a mere 43 years ago, Congress passed the Voting Rights Act, after which participation by African Americans in voting increased significantly.
Based on Durkheim’s definition of social fact, a few decades is an insufficient measure of time to establish a historical basis to ensure a functional reality of Americans prepared to embrace equal representation by race or gender. So when people, Democrats or Republicans, Liberals or Conservatives, try to make claims to our “colorblind” society and pat ourselves on the back for such non-discriminatory thought and action, the collision of the sociological phenomena in the U.S. and the current normative beliefs result in a foolish focus on Obama’s dismal bowling score that is contrasted by his prowess in basketball and Clinton’s cackle vs. a feminine melodious symphony of muted mirth.
Why do we not judge John McCain’s decision to divorce his first wife who suffered through his imprisonment in Vietnam to await his return to be thrown aside for a younger (and richer) woman? Because that phenomenon is part of the social fact in our culture. Why do we not read the Obama bowling story as one that celebrates his enjoyment of the moment, cool calm in the face of gutter after gutter, persistence (and eventual improvement) in continuing to bowl frame after frame? Because that phenomenon is not part of the social fact in our culture.
As an advanced society, I believe it behooves us to move beyond this stagnant historical analysis – and quickly. In other countries and other cultures, a variety of men of color and women lead their nations. This torpid insistence on narrowly viewing people based on outdated stereotypes is counter to our ideals and, aside from that, is downright embarrassing. This country is founded on the belief that we are all created equal. We need to make the ideals on which this country was built into a social fact. This is an on-going process. If we need to begin somewhere it should be in the 2008 presidential elections. In as important a decision as it is to elect a president of the United States, let’s move from the trifling nonsense to the established political records, foundations of truth, and belief systems of the candidates.
The views expressed (in this report) have not been approved by ABA’s policy-making House of Delegates or Board of Governors, and, accordingly, should not be construed as representing the policy of the American Bar Association.