Peggy Noonan’s perspective on Obama and Wright
I rarely reference or highlight Peggy Noonan’s writings and today is one of those rare occasions. In her Wall Street Journal piece, Noonan focuses on Jeremiah Wright in a rather nuanced way. She is critical of Wright, but doesn’t employ the same bitterness and rage that Wright turned on Americans, nor does she resort to the vengeful, condemning rhetoric of the Rush Limbaughs, Bill Kristols, and Hillary Clintons. More importantly, Noonan demonstrates her intelligence by not declaring Obama guilty by association.
Instead, Noonan posits just the opposite. Her take is, Obama’s values and attitudes are reflected in his actions and history, per se, and are not remotely indicative of Wright. She further emphasizes voters should judge Obama on his merits and not the actions or beliefs of Jeremiah Wright.
Noonan’s writing style does not lend itself to quick sound bites and small excerpts, which is why the quote is rather long. In spite of the amount quoted here, it’s best to read the entire piece.
Mr. Obama reveals many things in his books, speeches and interviews but polarity and a tropism toward the extreme are not among them. What happened with Mr. Wright should not determine the race. Mr. Obama’s stands, his ability to convince us he can make good change, his ability to be "one of us," that great challenge for a national politician in a varied nation, should determine the race….
I have seen Stokely Carmichael, the Black Panthers, the Black National Anthem, Malcolm X, James Baldwin, Louis Farrakhan. I came to see their radicalism as, putting the morality of policy based on rage aside, essentially unhelpful and impractical. It wouldn’t work as an American movement, not long-term. Hatred plays itself out, has power in the short-term but is nonsustaining in the long. America, and this is one of its glories, has a conscience to which an appeal can be made. It may take a long time, it may take centuries, but in the end we try hard to do the right thing, and everyone knows it. Hatred is a form of energy that does not fuel this machine and cannot make it run.
And all the time I was watching the old days of rage, blacks in America were rising, joining the professions, becoming middle class, assuming authority, becoming professors and doctors. No one is surprised anymore to meet a powerful man or woman who devises systems by which others should live – that would be a politician – who is black.
I came to think all the talk of radicalism and extremism amounted to little, and was in the end rejected by the very people it was meant to rouse. They didn’t buy it.
This week I talked to a young man, an Irish-American to whom I said, "Am I wrong not to feel anger about Wright?" He more or less saw it as I do, but for a different reason, or from different experience.
He said he figures Mr. Wright’s followers delight in him the same way he delights in the Wolfe Tones, the Irish folk group named for the 18th-century leader condemned to death by the British occupying forces, as they say on their Web site. They sing songs about the Brits and how they subjugated the Irish and we’ll rise up and trounce the bastards.
My 20-year-old friend has lived a good life in America and is well aware that he is not an abused farmer in the fields holding secret Mass in defiance of the prohibitions of the English ruling class. His life has not been like that. Yet he enjoys the bitterness. He likes going to Wolfe Tones concerts raising his fist, thinking "Up the Rebels." It is good to feel that old ethnic religious solidarity, and that in part is what he is in search of, solidarity. And it’s not so bad to take a little free-floating anger, apply it to politics, and express it in applause.
He knows the dark days are over. He just enjoys remembering them even if he didn’t experience them. His people did.
I know exactly what he feels, for I felt the same when I was his age. And so what? It’s just a way of saying, "I’m still loyal to our bitterness." Which is another way of saying, "I’m still loyal." I have a nice life, I’m American, I live far away, an Englishman has never hurt me, and yet I am still Irish. I can prove it. I can summon the old anger.
Is this terrible? I don’t think so. It’s human and messy and warm-blooded, as a human would be.
The thing is to not let your affiliation with bitterness govern you, so that you leave the Wolfe Tones concert and punch an Englishman in the nose. In this connection it can be noted there is no apparent record of people leaving a Wright sermon and punching anyone in the nose. Maybe they’re in search of solidarity too. Maybe they’re showing loyalty too….
And yet . . . it doesn’t get my blood up. It doesn’t hurt my heart. It doesn’t make me feel I need to defend my country. Because I don’t see it as attacked, only criticized in a way that is not persuasive.
Mr. Wright seems to me to be part of the great "barbaric yawp," as Walt Whitman called the American people fighting, discussing, making things and living. I like the barbaric yawp. I don’t enjoy it when it makes me wince, but at least when I am wincing, I know the yawp is working.
0 Responses to “Peggy Noonan’s perspective on Obama and Wright”