Multiple Answers to the ‘Race Question’ from the Same Person

Geraldine Ferraro’s comment that Barack Obama wouldn’t be where he is if not for his race understandably sparked a rhubarb between the Obama and Clintoncamps and around the commentosphere. 

My angle on this is a bit different.  Why is everyone so sure they know what Obama’s race is?  Why not declare — more accurately, in my view — that Obama’s current status is due to his races, not just one race.  His ability to appeal to different racial groups, and indeed, his mission to reconcile often warring camps — all have developed from his life as a multiracial person, which is what he is.

Obama presents a multifaceted challenge, and often a confusing one.  Witness how some say he “transcends race” or that they don’t see him as a black man, while others emphatically see him as black.  The consensus is that Obama is the first black presidential candidate and could be the first black president.   Virtually everybody knows Obama is the product of an interracial marriage, and the words “bi-racial,” “multiracial” or “mixed race” often accompany discussions of him, but still, when it comes to definitions, he’s black.

This is the case with other prominent people of mixed parentage.  When Halle Berry won her academy award, she tearfully declared it a great day for black women, then called out to her white mother. Despite Barack Obama’s success, despite a frizzy-haired, beige-toned kid in almost every children’s show and ad for children’s clothes and products, black plus white still = black.  In this supposedly progressive age, we have yet to exorcise the demon of the One Drop Rule, which declares that any black ancestry, no matter how remote, makes someone black. 

The purpose of this role has always been to maintain white supremacy.  The myth of white superiority, with its power and privilege, would collapse if it was no longer clear who was white and who was “other.” Although it has largely lost its legal backing, The One Drop Rule, well, still rules.

As the 2000 Census developed, a political battle raged over whether to include a “multiracial” box on the new form.  Black opponents of the proposal argued the category would diminish black numbers, power, federal funding and complicate continuing programs that fought discrimination.  Somehow, to fight white supremacy, it’s vital to preserve the very categories created to maintain white supremacy.  The Census Bureau found a compromise that maintained the basic five categories of black, white, red, yellow and brown, but allowed anyone to voluntarily check boxes for racial background.  About 7 percent of respondents checked one or more of those boxes.  We shall see what happens in 2010.

Why is it so hard to accept that people’s identity can be plural?  If “African American” is possible, then why not other combinations?   Call it Postmodern or whatever you call it, but aren’t we in the Age of Multiplicity?  But the logic of identity politics can’t accept multiple identity.  The integrity of the group and its social-political-cultural-economic demands require adherence to a dichotomous identity: either you’re in or you’re out.

“Many people have a hard time believing that someone can belong in several categories simultaneously,” wrote Dr. Maria P.P. Root, a psychologist, scholar and multiracial activist.  Children can see a ball as red and blue at the same time, and artists understand that red and blue make purple, but many people can’t apply this simple logic to race.  Not only do we have a hard time doing this, but we have a hard time believing it can be done. At more of an extreme, some people refuse to try,” Root wrote.

I dunno.  I’m married to a black woman.  Our extended family mixes black, white, Lithuanian, German, Irish, Cherokee, English and East Indian (via Botswana) blood.  My son wears his hair in dreadlocks and likes the song “Play that Funky Music.”  He doesn’t have any problem being black, white or other.

If Halle Berry or anyone else wants to self-identify as black, fine.  People have the right to self-identify, but that means other people have other choices.  To paraphrase the Army’s recruiting phrase.  Multiracial people want to be all they can be, or wish to be.

Here is Dr. Root’s “Bill of Rights for People of Mixed Heritage,” reproduced in its entirety, as per her request:


Not to justify my existence in this world.

Not to keep the races separate within me.

Not to justify my ethnic legitimacy.

Not to be responsible for people’s discomfort with my physical or ethnic ambiguity.


To identify myself differently than strangers expect me to identify.

To identify myself differently than how my parents identify me.

To identify myself differently than my brothers and sisters.

To identify myself differently in different situations.


To create a vocabulary to communicate about being multiracial or multiethnic.

To change my identity over my lifetime–and more than once.

To have loyalties and identification with more than one group of people.

To freely choose whom I befriend and love.

© Maria P. P. Root, PhD, 1993, 1994




Filed under National Politics, Presidential Campaign

7 responses to “Multiple Answers to the ‘Race Question’ from the Same Person

  1. I see your point and agree with most of what you’re arguing. It is interesting how most times to oppose an opressor we play by their rules and not our own. I believe (though you never clearly say your opinion) that Barack Obama represents what is bnest about America , particularly his message of hope. In our history Americans fight for Hope and that is what other candidates don’t have. They can’t bring hope because they’re the ones that have left us hopeless…At any rate, thanks for your post. If you want to see some videos on Barrack Obama checkout my blog or go to my Youtube Channel.

  2. kip

    Again, for the seventeen millionth time, it’s not Barack who keeps bringing race to the forefront – it’s everybody else!

  3. I really appreciate Dr. Root’s Bill of Rights and have saved a copy of it. I always try to check off the box that says [Other] on any form that asks for my race. Many forms don’t offer that option and force me to choose [White]. I’m not white. People merely assume that I am. The term “white” only serves to create barriers that I pray will one day disappear. My heritage is Eastern European Jewish third-generation American. My ancestors came from Poland, Russia, and presumably very long ago from somewhere in the Middle East. Thus I have little idea of what my race might be and care even less because ideally it should not matter to anyone anywhere at any time.

  4. 2xvoice

    Kip, you are undeniably right. Obama is not running a campaign based on race. But neither can Americans stop thinking about and talking about race after centuries of making a foundational issue. See the other posts on this blog. But Obama is really only the jumping off point for my discussion of how the majority of Americans refuse to grant multiracial people the right to fully express their identities on their own terms, or for that matter, to broaden our own terms.

    Thanks for your comment, and please feel free to continue the dialogue.

  5. 2xvoice


    Jewish identity, or rather the way everyone else identifies Jews, is one example of how the discursive formation surrounding “race” and “ethnicity” collapses if we interrogate the terms. Are Jews a race, an ethnicity, a religion? Well, at some point in time, any and all of the above. I know many Jews who don’t have a religious bone in their bodies, but who still identify as Jews and support Israel. But if Jews ARE a race, then how do you classify, say, Ethiopian Jews and the fairest Ashkenazim as the same race?

    You can’t. The best, most magnanimous answer is that Jewish identity is multifaceted, and can shift at any given moment. That’s true of anybody’s identity, if we really look at it.

  6. I agree with Kip. And I also agree with Dick Morris ( who argues that Hillary Clinton has persuaded her supporters, (Bill, Ferraro, etc. ), to use the race card against Barrack Obama as much as possible, while she stands there “innocently” pretending that she had nothing to do with it. Her morality is especially transparent when you look at issues such as the Michigan Florida delegate issue. She honestly expects us to believe that she is a moral person when she conveniently insists that the vote in Michigan should now be counted even though Barrack was not on the ballot! I think Bill Clinton, in his old age, might be giving Hillary bad advice. And sadly, I truly believe that is the extent of her morals. I don’t think her morals extend any farther than, “What is the best advice I can follow to give myself the best chance of winning this election.” I don’t even think she is capable of thinking for herself. I’m imagining that she shows up for work every day and says, “Okay, here I am consultants and pollsters and Bill Clinton. What should I do and say and think today so that I can have the best chance of winning this election?” So, with this in mind, I don’t think that Hillary Clinton is a racist, but I think that her morals are so shallow that she would gladly encourage any of her supporters to say any racist thing which will help her to win the election.

  7. Pingback: On Baha’is on Obama: Beyond politics | Baha'i Views

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s