Pluribus, Working Toward Unum

There have always been dueling American “myths” about who we are as a nation, and those national self-images clashed mightily during this year’s election. On the one hand, we had the “Christian Nation” folks and their enablers, the pundits and politicians whose appeal for our votes could be summed up by the often-intoned promise to “take back” the country.

From whom? They never said, but the implication was clear: from those Others. The non-white, non-native-born, non-Jesus-loving, non “real” Americans.

On the other hand, there were the growing percentages of the electorate who fell into those categories. As Eugene Robinson described in his column this morning:

Nationwide, roughly three of every 10 voters Tuesday were minorities. African-Americans chose Obama by 93 percent, Latinos by 71 percent, and Asian-Americans, the nation’s fastest-growing minority, by 73 percent.

These are astounding margins, and I think they have less to do with specific policies than with broader issues of identity and privilege. I think that when black Americans saw Republicans treat President Obama with open disrespect and try their best to undermine his legitimacy, they were offended. When Latinos heard Republicans insist there should be no compassion for undocumented immigrants, I believe they were angered. When Asian-Americans heard Republicans speak of China in almost “Yellow Peril” terms, I imagine they were insulted.

On Tuesday, the America of today asserted itself. Four years ago, the presidential election was about Barack Obama and history. This time, it was about us — who we are as a nation — and a multihued, multicultural future.

Power doesn’t pass easily. Very few people yield privilege willingly. Change of any sort is disruptive and unsettling. I suppose we shouldn’t be surprised at the ugliness that has emerged during this period of social and political evolution, but it’s hard not to wish for a more graceful, even enthusiastic, acceptance of change. After all, our diversity–and our professed willingness to forge the “many” into “one”–has been a constant point of American pride.

However reluctantly, the nation is in the process of living up to that motto. We’ve chosen our myth.

There are plenty of Americans who aren’t happy with our multi-cultural reality. ¬†They’ll need to get over it.

4 thoughts on “Pluribus, Working Toward Unum

  1. Great title to your blog post today. I disagree a little with Robinson’s speculation that minority groups voted for Obama mostly out of anger or offense at Republican/Romney campaign’s attack of Obama as “Other.” While this was undoubtedly a part of the analysis for some, or even many people, I really think it had more to do with rejecting Romney’s core view that we are NOT all in this together and, by contrast, Obama’s setting this election up as a choice of “we ARE in this together.” To your point, we need more “unum” and many people just aren’t there yet.

  2. I fear that the Speaker of the House (you know the one) has already begun his thinly disguised “We ain’t passin’ nothin’ he wants” already.

    Parker J. Palmer was interviewed by Dick Gordon on “The Story” (PBS stations) this week and the hour was about this same very complicated issue of divisiveness. Palmer researched it with real ‘live people. See http://www.couragerenewal.org/parker to read more about this amazing man!

    It’s past time that both sides did some “unum-ing”.

  3. Sheila, I keep looking at the word “Pluribus” in your title and post, and chuckling……finally figured out why: Sounds a bit like the last name of the GOP National Chairman: (Rance) Priebus. Maybe for starters the GOP should be “…Working Toward Oustum” him(um).

  4. This article is just awful. When will you people look past race and social issues in this country and open your eyes? It is no longer about social issues and race anymore. For now we need to get this country back on track and Obama has proven himself to be a failure. He has rise the debt 6 trillion more dollars and has no intention of changing his policies. And taxing the “rich” doesn’t even address the national debt. It has to start at the spending level. And the main reason Obama was reelected was simply that the people receiving government benefits wanted more. They felt threatened when Romney and Ryan talked about cutting funding to bankrupt and fraud-littered programs including social security and food stamps.

Comments are closed.