That Philadelphia speech
Following publicity about his former Pastor, Jeremiah Wright's, controversial remarks, Barack Obama has clearly felt obliged not only to distance himself from Wright, but to go further, and set out in this Philadelphia speech a complete stall on racial division and the politics of identity in America. I think it's a mistake.
In the immediate short term, perhaps this will work: tactically, this is all about drawing a line under the Jeremiah Wright issue, limiting the damage and earning the right to move on. As far as that goes, the tactic may well work. But listening to this admittedly thoughtful, attractive and positive-minded speech, my heart sank as I began to think Obama has blundered strategically. His entire appeal is based on the idea that he's not a "black" candidate at all: he's a man who raises above race and leaves the issue somewhere in the past. To identify himself so much with the black experience and community risks throwing away this advantage and appearing to be the kind of identity politician who's tried and failed in the past. Yes, he's right that there is social, cultural and racial division in America and that this needs healing; but to speak directly about the legacy of slavery and to suggest his mission is to invite America to "work this out" risks looking like the kind of politician who's obsessed with past grievances, and being identified with a traditional civil-rights and social redress politics that voters have heard before.
I'd have advised him to avoid this. Instead of getting down to brass tacks about race, he'd do much better to be the new America he wants to create. If he now makes Americans feel his mind, too, is shackled by the past, he'll hand the White House to Clinton or McCain. "I am race" is, famously an anagram of America. Obama's mission is to prove it false, not true.
Have your say - join the discussion