viz.

Many Europeans who have closely observed American society have been perplexed with the prevalence of racial prejudice which pulses through our veins. Although colonial administrators and white colonial residents of oversea empires were infected with overt racism, many Europeans who lived on the Continent had a hard time understanding the depth of racial bigotry which existed among Americans even if they harbored mild forms of prejudice themselves. African Americans who visited European countries noted the relative lack of racial prejudice and contrasted this fact with the existence of Jim Crow in the United States. In the last fifty years with the destruction of European imperialism and the sense of prestige that it produced and the growing immigration of non-white people to Europe, racial animosity among white Europeans has reached new levels. Political flair-ups and violent conflicts along racial lines in places like France and England testify to this new reality.

Many say that an Obama presidency would indicate that Americans actually adhere to their high-minded beliefs and would revive our global standing due to the fact most people in the world are non-white. This logic implies that non-Americans dissatisfied with current US leadership would gravitate to a leader like Obama because he would not symbolize arrogance and oppression but understanding and reconciliation. International observers who witnessed the success of the noted African American diplomat, Ralph Bunche, in mediating the violent dispute between the new nation of Israel and neighboring Arab countries in 1948 tended to believe that Bunche's skin color might have endeared him to Arab leaders who had bitter memories of Western imperial rule in the Middle East. It is likely that Obama's brown skin color and Muslim name will produce potential dividends in regions of the world that have been blighted by Western imperialism. It might, however, produce difficulties in countries that are used to holding the balance of power in interacting with national leaders who are of African descent. This is what this French magazine cover seems to suggest.

In predicting how the Western world might react and relate to an American leader of African descent, it is instructive to point out an incidence of condescension that Condoleeza Rice faced during her career as an influential American diplomat. In the fall of 1989 as a foreign policy advisor to the first President Bush, Rice had the thankless task of informing Boris Yeltsin who at the time was a leading critic of then President Gorbachev that would not be meeting with President Bush but would instead be meeting with then national security advisor, Brent Scowcroft. Yeltsin balked at this perceived slight and certainly didn't expect to receive this rebuff from an African American woman who, in his mind, did not possess the proper level of authority to relay this kind of information. A standoff ensued which Rice eventually won, and Yeltsin begrudgingly agreed to meet with Scowcroft. This event illustrates the kind of subtle prejudices that are at the heart of many Western leaders who are accustomed to dealing with white men in their interaction with super-powers. It could be that gender might have played a part in Yeltsin's condescending reaction to Rice but race almost certainly played a vital part.

If it is conceivable that many around the world will judge Obama based upon the symbolism of his race, it is also conceivable that many will look beyond his race and judge him by his actions. People from the Middle East, for instance, have dismissed Rice's suggestion that the United States is engaged in the the same struggle for freedom and justice in Iraq that it was engaged in during the American Civil War. Her history of oppression as an African American does not lend credibility to her words when her actions support an outcome which one Palestinian critic has compare to the horror wrought by Bull Connor in his dealings with civil rights activists in Rice's hometown of Birmingham, Alabama.

A number of progressive African American and white intellectuals are deeply skeptical of whether an Obama presidency will entail real change both on the domestic and international fronts or whether it will provide window dressing for a nation in deep denial about the role it has played in oppressing its racial minorities and destabilizing other countries. In this regard, I believe it is possible to be critical of Obama without resorting to racial stereotypes while at the same time addressing the relevance of his race. Obama has partially cast himself in the mold of the New Democrats who came of age in the 1980s as the American electorate rejected the perceived liberal excesses of the 1960s and 1970s. He also draws comparisons to liberal icons like FDR, JFK, and MLK. Which side of the political spectrum he chooses to court will play an important role in how he is criticized.

Many who yearn for a "post-racial" society would like to see Obama exhort marginalized African Americans "to lift themselves up by their bootstraps" a la Booker T. Washington. Others would prefer to see him engage in an mission to "trample out the vintage where the grapes of wrath are stored." His campaign in fact has been responsible for promoting both of these scenarios. In the early stages of his campaign, Obama stated that the road to racial equality was 90% complete and that all that was left to be done was to instill in low-income African Americans a sense of responsibility and civic duty. In his recent race speech, on the other hand, he delivered an oration that could have been written by the militant civil rights crusader W.E.B. Du Bois. In order to avoid racist stereotypes when critically examining Obama's leadership qualifications, I think it is essential not to evaluate him as someone who happens to be African American but as someone who is African American and to judge him according to the standards set by African American leaders who came before him. During his early adulthood years as a community organizer in south side Chicago, for instance, Obama's personal hero was the city's first African American mayor Harold Washington. How would one evaluate Obama within the context of Harold Washington's vision of leadership?

Since Obama is running for an office which has exclusively been ruled by white men, it is also feasible to judge him according to to the experience levels attained by these individuals before they took office. If Obama is elected president, he will enter office with more elective experience than Theodore Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, and Franklin Roosevelt had combined when they took office. Obama will have had twelve years experience where these other three only had eight years between them.

I don't know how my comments and insights specifically relate to critical visual representations of Obama, but hopefully I have provided some context to both the international and domestic dimensions of how people will (and how they should) perceive an Obama presidency.