The news that has dominated the covered the news in the past week is the brutal massacre that has been waged by Israel against the people of Gaza and Hamas movement that controls the Gaza strip. Officially Israel says that the military campaign that is launched is intended to stop Hamas from firing rockets into Israel. But it does not take much intelligence and IQ to figure out what the motive behind the attack is. Israel has initiated this military campaign to alter the geopolitical factors on the ground, geopolitical factors which were not in favor of Israel. After the war in Lebanon and the humiliating defeat that Israel witness in the war the geopolitical factors began to change against Israel and in favor of the resistance movements in the region. So Israel did not have any option but to try and change the realities on the ground.
Now a god question that can be asked is “ what is the relation between this war and the election that happened in the US? Does the new administration is the US support the military campaign?
The Israeli authorities saw the transition till the handover of power to the new administration in the US as an opportune time in attacking Hamas. By doing this they would they would in fact put the new administration on the US in front of a done deal. Furthermore even months before and during the presidential campaigns in the US and Obama’s message of change, the Israeli authorities had expressed concern over Obama’s willingness to talk to Iran and had stated that Obama’s change would harm Israel. Therefore by attacking Hamas, which was one of the Resistance links in the region, they want to change the reality on the ground. A few weeks ago, Shemon Perez, the Israeli president had asked Obama to postpone talks with Iran for a year. This also indicates the plan that Israel has had since quite a long time to put the new US administration into a more offensive stance vis-à-vis Iran. If these attacks succeed and Israel manages to defeat Hamas, the new US administration would have an easier task in implementing its middle east policies. A part of those policies are related to Iran. Therefore one can say that the current attacks are also aimed at putting more pressure on Iran.
Uncategorized
January 2, 2009
December 26, 2008
A month before his inauguration, Americans choose Barack Obama as the man they admire most in the world, according to a new USA TODAY/Gallup Poll. It’s the first time a president-elect has topped the annual survey in more than a half-century.
This is a report by the USA Today newspaper and Gallup Poll survey which has put Barack Obama on the top list of the admired men In the United States. Now the question that can be asked is “ what is the significance of this poll and what does it mean? What kind of impact this rating can have on the future president of the US?
Clearly this rating can put too much burden on him. The current financial crisis in the US has been one of the worst of its kind in the past four decades in the US. A report released yesterday said that this year the US has seen one of the sharpest falls in Christmas consumption. With unemployment rates high, the Americans are experiencing one of the most difficult years in at least the last 25 years. The harsh financial situation plus the prolonged and unfinished projects in Afghanistan and Iraq have made the Americans frustrated and angry.
Considering all that, the Americans are looking for a savior , a messiah , somebody who can save them from the current mess.
This can be a double-edged sword for the president-elect Obama. On the one hand he can use this trust and get things done. Given the current situation and the fact that Democrats control both the houses of Congress , there would be less challenge for the president-elect. He would meet less confrontation and more cooperation in the congress. The Republicans would probably not impede his plans in the congress with filibusters. So generally speaking this rating gives him a honeymoon period which is one of real opportunity for him to try to get things done because he’ll have a lot of support and a lot of good will.”
On the other hand this can be dangerous for Obama. These high hopes can both be a source of opportunity for him and a potential source of disappointment. If Americans cannot see any tangible improvement in the economic situation quickly , President Obama would be under heavy criticism. They would see their hopes dashed and this can be a potential source of trouble for him.
To conclude , I can say that we have to wait and see what is going to happen in the coming months. If a quick fix can be found for the current economic situation, Barack Obama can pose himself as one of the most successful presidents in the US. On the other hand if the economic downturn continues and Americans do not see any improvement in their situation , Barack Obama can be in real trouble.
December 19, 2008
The news that has dominated the global issues is the financial crisis. Everyday there is the news that a new company has applied for government protection or another company has had to lay off thousands of workers. The climax of these crises is the predicament of the three giant auto-makers in the US (General Motors, Ford and Chrysler ). As recently as last week it was announced that Chrysler has decided to halt production for one month. This company has also had to reduce its employees substantially. The other companies are not doing much better.
The other impact of the global financial crisis is the great reduction in the purchase power of the average Americans. This reduction in the purchasing power of the Americans means that less and less commodities can be traded and this in turn means less transaction and more recession. Apparently this global financial crisis has had profound impact on the lives of the average Americans.
But despite all this, some have argued that all these crises were a scheme and a set-up, to halt the seemingly unstoppable growth of China and Russia. The surge in the price of oil had dramatically enhanced the international position of Russia. The unilateral behavior of Russia and the inability of the West and the US ushered the return of Russia onto the world stage. On the other hand, the tremendous vulnerability of the west vis-à-vis Russia in regards to energy had substantially weakened the West’s bargaining power.
The higher oil prices had also boosted the economies of countries like Iran and Venezuela, two countries that are on the terrorist list of the US. Iran has been able to make great achievements in the nuclear technology and this been a big source worry for the west. A few months ago , Henry Kissinger wrote an article and in it he warned against the “trillion dollars” that the oil-producing countries have been able to make because of the high oil prices. This huge money could potentially be a great source of power for countries like Russia, Iran and Venezuela, countries that are not liked by the West and the US in particular.
One of the aftermaths of this crisis was the free fall of the oil prices in the market. Oil prices decreased from 147 dollars and currently is hovering around 42 dollars. Some have even predicted that the oil price could even dip below 30 dollars. What all this means is a substantial fall in the revenues of the oil-producing countries and this in turn means less power and bargaining position for them. Some have argued that if the financial crisis had not happened, the oil price could have exceeded 200 dollars. Right now , because of cheap oil, the strategic reserves of industrial countries have increased from 52 days to 56 days. This means that they have used the opportunity to reduce their dependency on oil. All these indicate that the position of oil-producing countries has been greatly reduced.
Therefore one could speculate the current crisis might be e behind- the –scene scheme to restructure the world financial system to insure and guarantee the superiority of the US in the future. With massive interventions in the market by the US government , once the crisis is over, it can be predicted that the global position of the would be greatly enhanced.
December 12, 2008
The question of identity is a crucial question. Identity talks about who we are and what is the relationship between us and others. Blunt (2003:73) has defined identity as “ a sense of self that encompasses who people think they are and how other people regard them”. Then we can argue that there is a self-definition and imposed definition of others. This in turn means that identities are always social constructions rather simply matters for the individual. It also means that contestation over different versions of identity are power struggles. In fact how others perceive an individual or group affects the self-definition of that individual or group.
Huntington has argued that identity is an individual’s or group’s sense of self. Identity refers to the images of individuality and distinctiveness held and projected by actor and formed through relations with others. Identities are , overwhelmingly , constructed. Benedict Arnold has described nations as “ imagined communities”. Identities are imagined selves: they are what we think we are and what we want to be. An important issue that we have to remember is the fact that we have multiple identities. These multiple identities might stem from social, cultural, political, economic or national factors.
Stanley Hoffman has said that America’s identity is the unique product of a “ material feature” , its ethnic diversity produced by immigration, and an “ ideological feature” , its liberal democratic creed. In fact immigration and creed are key elements of American national identity. In order to know what really the American identity is , we have to go back to the roots of the foundation of America. America was found by the British settlers. These English settlers brought with themselves the English language, English religion, English culture and English institutions. In fact for two centuries prior to the American revolution, Americans considered themselves as English subjects. So at the inception of this nation, four elements i.e race (whites), ethnicity (English), religion ( Protestantism) and culture ( English culture) were the important factors defining the American Identity. These factors were crucial in the formation of American identity. But as Stanley Hoffman has argued , the American identity is inextricably tied to immigration . In fact immigration changed one of the components and that is the ethnicity. After the revolution and in the mid 19th century, Irish and German immigrants came to be accepted as Americans. We know that there were waves of Irish and German immigrants to American both prior and after the Revolution. But initially , they were not accepted as “American”. As identity is a fluid concept. The Irish and German immigrants who were not considered Americans , became Americans in the mid 18th century. Here we see that the element of ethnicity has changed and includes more people as Americans. Both before and after the two World Wars, there was a surge in the number of immigrants from eastern and southern Europe. Initially , the issue of ethnicity played a significant role in the exclusion of immigrants from southern and eastern Europe. There was even a bill passed by the Congress( Immigration Act of 1924 or the National Origin Act). This act was intended to keep the ethnicity aspect of the American identity salient. But the massive immigration of eastern and southern Europeans and their assimilation into the American society has made ethnicity less of a component of American identity. After the Vietnam war and the immigration of many eastern Asians , this element( ethnicity) has become less and less important.
The issue of race has for a long time been an important signifier of who and American is. “ Being American” was for a long time considered to be white( and to some extend it still is). The blacks , according to the constitution of the US , are three-fifth of a person and Indians were referred to as “savages” by Jefferson. However, after the fairly significant achievements of the civil rights movements in the 1965, the issue of race has lost much of its significance (it can be argued , however, that still there is discrimination against blacks and other non- white minorities , but this discrimination is not as blatant as was previously in the US). So it can be inferred that the importance of race in defining an American diminishing .
The last two elements regarding the American identity are language and religion. Traditionally America has been a Protestant country with English as the national language of the country. It still is an English-speaking, Protestant country. But there are “disturbing” trends in America that is challenging the significance of these two elements. The factor that is challenging the significance of these two components is the massive immigration of Hispanics into the US. The immigration of the Hispanics and Latinos into the US is unprecedented in the History of the US. Latinos and Hispanics, who are Catholics and speak Spanish, are changing the social texture of the US. There have been some referenda in some states to decide whether to keep English the official language of the state. The result of these referenda has always been in favor of keeping English the official language but the mere fact that such referenda are happening is significant. Besides these, there has been a rapid increase in number of the people who speak Spanish and who cannot speak English properly. Apart from that, Catholicism, which was once a pariah in the US, is also increasing because of the mass Hispanic immigrants. Therefore one can say that the significance of the last two elements of the American identity is becoming less important. This is what is meant by saying that identity is a fluid concept.
Now this question can be raised “what is American identity”. As Stanley Hoffman has argued one of the key factors in defining who an American is, is the American Creed. What is American Creed? American Creed is best defined in the belief in liberal democracy. Probably the best enumeration of these values is the words in the constitution of the US as “ life , liberty and pursuit of happiness”( though for a long time life and liberty of the clacks was not even mentioned). It is argued that it is this creed that is the basis of the American identity. In fact some say that the American identity is Creedal identity based on the belief in some common values.
November 28, 2008
The United States is sending investigators to India to help unravel who was behind the terrorist attacks that targeted largely foreigners in the commercial and tourist center of Mumbai. Three Americans are confirmed among those injured.
The terrorist attacks in Mumbai have dominated the news in the last two days. Apparently a dozen “islamist” terrorists have attacked two different hotels, a popular cafe and a railway station, killing more than 150 people and injuring 300 others. This is not a strange story. India has been the target of terrorist attacks in the past both by Indian and Pakistani groups. But what makes these attacks significant from other previous ones is the complexity and the level of coordination of the attacks. Another important element in these attack is the alleged link that has been established between the terrorists and “some elements within the government of Pakistan”. The Indian foreign minister has already pointed the finger at Pakistan blaming them for the attacks. So already Pakistan , though involuntarily, bears responsibility for these attacks.
Barack Obama in his presidential campaigns said that the war on terror began in Afghanistan and should end there. He also said that the cross-border attacks on tribal regions of Pakistan should continue in order to curb the terrorists. In fact in his campaigns he put a lot of emphasis on the issue of Pakistan and the role that it played in global terrorism. Obama in fact believed that Pakistan was a battleground against terrorism ( as a matter of fact McCain held the same view on the issue of Pakistan, with some tactical differences)
Now this question arises: Why has the US decided to send an investigation team to India and what is it looking for there? The first possible benefit that the US could reap from the current turmoil in the relation between Pakistan and India is to gain more influence in Pakistan. The newly elected government in Pakistan ( unlike the government of General Musharaf, a close ally of the US) is not really inclined towards the US. Asef Ali Zardari, the new president of Pakistan, has officially protested to the unlawful attacks of the US unmanned helicopters on his territorial integrity. Very probably, the US would use these terrorist attacks as an excuse to put more and more pressure on the Pakistani government to “ bring it more into the line”.
The second benefit that the US could take from these attacks would be a renewed pledge from different countries of the world against the global war on terror. Undoubtedly the so-called war on terror has become one of the pillars of the US administration in the last several years. Any incident that would make the call against terrorism urgent again would certainly strengthen the global position of the US in this regard. The recent pirate attacks off the coast of Somali have renewed the calls against terrorism again. Definitely these attacks in India would be an opportunity for the US to reprioritize the issue of terrorism on the global stage.
The last advantage that the US could make out of this issue is the indirect pressure on Iran. Iran , Pakistan and India have been trying for so long to establish the gas pipeline between themselves. These attacks could sour the recently-improved relationships between these two countries once more and deprive Iran of the opportunity of selling its gas to Indian and Pakistan.
November 21, 2008
American intelligence agencies predict that China and India will cut into U.S. clout over the next two decades.
This report, released by US intelligence agencies, predicts that the influence of the United States will decrease substantially in the next two decades. The report says that countries like China and India are going to play more important roles in the coming years, China being the most strategic challenge to the US. It also predicted that a multipolar world will give more manoeuvre room to countries like Iran and Turkey. The report says that US will still be an economic superpower but it won’t be able to assert its will in a multipolar stage.
This report is significant because it is for the first time that America feels threatened because of its diminishing power. Political analysts attribute the decline in the power of the US to several factors. The first and probably the foremost reason was the unilateral (and now unsuccessful) invasion of Iraq. The unilateral invasion created a rift between US and other powerful international players. Furthermore the quagmire that the US plunged itself into, depleted the strategic power and influence of the US dramatically. Apart from that, the 33-day war between Israel and Hezbollah weakened US influence even more. Also the unsuccessful attempts to stop Iran from acquiring nuclear capability was another blow to the hegemonic power of the US in the region.
The global financial meltdown and the dramatic plunge in the value of US stocks curtailed the influence of America substantially. The financial crisis in the US is said to be the worst since the Great Depression in the 1930s. The high unemployment rates and the increasing cost of living are the challenges that the US has to cope with domestically. The financial crisis would be definitely limit the power and influence of the US to play a more robust and unilateral role in the world.
Also the resurgent Russia is also a huge strategic challenge to the US. The oil boom last year was a huge help for Russia to reemerge as a world superpower. Also the energy monopoly that Russia has over the European countries has put Russia on a very strategically advantageous position over them. Furthermore, the nuclear issue of Iran has given Russia a leverage over the US and indeed Russia has played very well with this card with the US.
Other challenges to the US include the new leftism of Latin America. Cuba , Venezuela, Nicaragua and Bolivia have recently emerged as socialist-leaning countries which have dramatically curtailed the influence of the US in Latin America.
Apart from these the growing global hatred towards the policies of the US which reached a climax with the Bush administration has greatly tarnished the reputation of the US. All these factors and reasons have made US officials to admit that the next two decades would see a great decrease of the power of the US.
November 14, 2008
President-elect Barack Obama’s White House chief-of-staff Rahm Emanuel has apologised to the US-Arab community for remarks made by his father.
After the election fanfare subsided , probably the first name that circulated the media after Barack Obama , was Rahm Emanuel. What had his father said that made the Arabs so angry? Who is he and where does he come from? What is his new post in the White House?
Rahm Emanuel is the son of a Jerusalem-born doctor. He is said to have served in the Israeli army during the first Iraq war and to have a very aggressive manner towards solving issues. He was one of the architects of the so-called peace negotiations between the Clinton administration , Yaser Arafat and Isaac Robin in the 1990s. In a recent interview his father said to the Israeli newspaper Ma’ariv: “Obviously he’ll influence the president to be pro-Israel. Why wouldn’t he? What is he, an Arab? He’s not going to be mopping floors at the White House.”
These remarks has clearly infuriated Arabs in the US and the Middle East. They have shown that the new administration in the US is very much Israel-oriented. In fact some have argued that the new administration in the US is not much of a change for the Middle East. The influence of the powerful Jewish lobbies in the US has very much shaped the policies America towards the Middle East. The nomination of Rahm Emanuel to the Chief of Staff of the White House clearly indicates that the influence if Jewish-Israeli lobbies in the US is increasing. It is often said that the last administration in the White House was the most Israel-oriented administration in the US in the past two or three decades. But the appointment of Rahm Emanuel shows that this unilateral support to Israel is not going to be balanced in the administration of Obama.
Rahm Emanuel is a bad choice for the Middle East. He might probably rekindle the talks of an attack on Iran. So to put in a nutshell, with the appointment of Rahm Emanuel to one of the highest posts in the White House , the prospect of change coming to the Middle East is very very unrealistic. In fact on the issue of the Middle East, Obama is no change at all.
November 7, 2008
After almost two years of lengthy and costly campaign, Barack Obama finally became the President of the US. Now the questions that can be asked are “ what are the implications of his selection to be the president of the US inside and outside the US?
There are different factors to be taken into consideration. The first one is the fact that Barack Obama is the first African-American president of the United States of America. This is very important because the US was one of the most notorious countries in the world with a long history of slavery and slave trade. This issue was not even imaginable even 40 years ago when there was widespread protest against the discrimination against African-Americans. These protests led to the initiation of the Civil Rights movement and the famous speech “I have a dream” by Dr Luther King. So it is quite significant that there is now a black president in the “White” House.
Now we have to ask this question: Are the Americans ready for a black president? This is a serious issue for the white majority. During the campaign , Obama was implicitly and explicitly attacked by the supporters of McCain. He was called a terrorist and a socialist, which some argue were new expressions of a racist agenda and motive. Even two weeks before the election there was an attempt to assassinate Obama. A few months before the election , there was a cartoon of Obama on the front page of a famous Chicago magazine , which portrayed Obama as an aide to Osama Bin Laden and his wife as a suicide bomber. All these issues show that the racist trends in America are still very much strong in America. These points indicate that America is still the hotbed of more racist incidents. Clearly, the election of Obama is going to intensify the social and racial tensions in America more. Very probably there are going to be more racial remarks in the US and that in turn would escalate the social tensions even further.
What would be the effects of this escalation of racism for America in the international stage? Clearly any escalation of racism would engage the attention of the Americans to the domestic arena. Americans have a tendency to focus their attention on the domestic issues and then give a second priority to international issues. A clear example of that is the recent financial crisis in the US which made the war in Iraq and Afghanistan and the conflict in Georgia and the Iranian nuclear issue to be off the lists of the priorities for the Americans. Now if there is again a resurgence of racial tensions and conflicts in America again, very probably the Americans would be busy with their own domestic affairs and spend less time thinking about other international issues. This would give countries like Russia and China , and even to some extent Iran, more room and opportunity to pursue their own interests on the international stage.
October 31, 2008
General Information
Ali Behdad’s A Forgetful Nation is probably one of the best books ever written on the issue of immigration. Structured into five chapters , the book offers a critique of immigration and nationalism , taking on the idea central to American national mythology: that the United States is a “nation of immigrants”, welcoming and generous to foreigners. He argues that Americans’ treatment of immigrants and foreigners has long fluctuated between hospitality and hostility and that this ambivalence is fundamental to the construction of national American identity. In discussing these issues Behdad has used extensively the ideas of Nietzsche, Foucault, Freud and Derrida. The book is published by Duke University Press and has 212 pages.
About the Author
Ali Behdad is professor of English and Comparative Literature at the University of California , Los Angeles. He is the author of Belated Travelers: Orientalism in the Age of Colonial Dissolution. Ali Behdad is also a renowned post-colonialism scholar.
The Body of the Book
In chapter 1 Behdad talks about “imagining America”. By “imagining America“ Behdad means that the idea that there is nation called America is a “myth”. The reason is the “forgetfulness” that is inherent in the creation of each nation. By forgetfulness Behdad means “the process of forgetting the original violence and the fact that the creation of nation entails brutality”. Further in the chapter we read about the brutal treatment of the Indians in the hands of the Europeans who in fact invaded the land of the natives. In the first chapter, one also reads of the need for labor in America and the fact that this need is couched as a desire for liberty and the prosperity of the immigrants. Behdad argues that the discourse of freedom, liberty and prosperity has disguised the fact that America has actually welcomed the immigrants because of its immense need of labor. Chapter 1 also argues that the history of nationalism and immigration in the United States is ambiguous. Some argue that , because of being democratic , the United States should open the doors and adopt a more immigrant-friendly policy. Others argue that a stricter immigrant policy is needed. Another factor that should be taken into account in the immigration policies of the US is the economic situation of the US. When the economic situation of the US is good , the doors for the immigrants is open but when the there’s a slump , the doors become harder to open.
Chapter 2 talks about the exceptionalism of the US and the Tocqueville’s ideas about this issue. According to Behdad the exceptionalsim of the US the is the presence of a strong federal government and the relative absence of the same Federal government in subjugating the people to the wishes of the government. He argues that the nation is founded on a governmental rationality that designates a dispersed form of authority , invisibly legislating and thus tactically regulating the lives of those it governs by implicating them in relations of power as voluntary agents. He goes on to say that entrusting power to individuals, while indispensable in the construction of a democratic imaginary, may render invisible the mechanisms that subjugate individuals, and obscure structures that maintain white hegemony over racialized groups and immigrant communities.
Chapter 3 talks about the nature of the American society and argues that historically speaking , America is a society of immigrants. The so-called “Founding Fathers” were themselves immigrants who had come from England and other Western European countries. Behdad goes on to argue that every nation needs a “National Bard” who creates an image of unity and homogeneity, helping the nation to forget the violence of the past. The national bard acts as a symbolic figure who offers a hospitable image of the country and implies that the recipient country is a hospitable one which welcomes the immigrants. The chapter goes on to argue that Walt Whitman performs this function. This poet creates an image of “multiculturalism” in America and hides the fact that this apparent multiculturalism comes at the expense of the elimination of some and the superiority of others. Behdad argues that the task of the national bard is to find consistencies and links between the past, present and the future, perpetuating the nation’s ritual of self-renewal that enables it movement towards future.
In chapter 4 one gets familiar with the Discourses of Exclusion. In this chapter Behdad argues that this new anti-immigrant expression embodied a differential mode of national identification-differential because it relied on a binary form of cultural and political classification in which national identity is articulated through and depended upon an alien other : this other , by threatening to invade , helped to define the citizen as a white , English-speaking person. By this discourse, some were excluded and others were included in the national identity. The presence of the alien is in fact necessary so that a national identity can be created. Behdad goes on to argue that xenophobia plays a significant role in the construction of a national identity. He concludes in this chapter that the discourse of immigration control and seeing the immigration as a threat to the nation’s health has helped to create simulated civil war in which the citizen and the imagined community of the nation willingly participate in the state’s politics of exclusion.
Chapter 5 deals with the practices of exclusion. In this chapter Behdad focuses on the issue of borders and argues that borders are the very place that exclusion and inclusion is demonstrated. The authorities in the US know that it is almost impossible to control all of the porous border between the US and Mexico but the mere presence of patrolmen and checkpoints allows the them to create a discourse of exclusion. Further the borders gives excuse to the authorities to practice power and regulate everything. Behdada argues that the authorities do not intentionally curb the flow of immigrants. One is the insatiable need in the US for cheap labor and two is the need to have an alien to allow the authorities to create a national identity s that some are included and others are excluded in it.
Conclusion
This book is a good academic work who can help the students and scholars of immigration and identity issue. It is highly recommended for student of cultural studies. The book also provides thorough information on issues of identity and nationalism.
October 31, 2008
Two men have been arrested in connection with an effigy of Sen. Barack Obama that was hung outside a building at the University of Kentucky in Lexington, police said Thursday.
This is news item that was featured on CNN news network. On the face of it , the news seems to be a shocking . A racial act in the, modern first world US : you godda be kidding!!! But further contemplation on the news does not make it that shocking. The US has a along history of racism and racial discrimination. In fact one can soundly say that the racism and slavery was one of the pillars of the US society. Blacks have for a long time been excluded from the American society. They have been a second class citizen. The issue of slavery has a long history in the US. Even the constitution of the US tacitly confirms slavery. Furthermore , one of the bloodiest wars in the American history has been fought because of the excuse that slavery provided in the US. Even after the so-called “Emancipation Proclamation” the blacks were still slaves with little improvement in their lives. The culmination of the revolt against the oppression of the Blacks in the US society led to the civil rights movements of the 1960s. Some have argued that the Civil Rights Movements of the 60s did not eliminate the issue of slavery. It only turned the issue into burning fire under the ashes. The issue was very much present in the American society, but not in an obvious way. One can observe the racial attitude in the US by seeing the stereotypes that have been made of the black people. They are portrayed as drug addicts , criminals , burglars and thieves. Further the rate of unemployment among the blacks is much higher than that of whites. In fact it is possible to say that the civil rights movement of the 60s did not totally eliminate the issue. Now with the presidency of Obama (though he is not the president now, it is very likely that he becomes the president) this “can of worms “ has been reopened once again. The racial attitudes among the whites is still very much present. A few days ago , two white supremacists wanted to kill a number of blacks including Senator Obama in a shooting-spree. Now we have the effigy of Obama being made by two whites( this reminds one of the Klu-Klax-Klans). Further , Obama has been called different name likes “ sheep” ,”terrorist” and “ a fundamentalist” These all show that racism is still very mush present in the US and with the likely presidency of Obama one should wait for more of these attitudes.
