The Cross of Redemption (24 page)

I think the whole Jesse Jackson thing that I’ve watched in the paper is dangerous in that it confirms or tends to confirm deep suspicions within the breasts of both groups, the Jew and the black American. And there are reasons for this suspicion. And it is true that for the most part the American
Jew is simply, in the black person’s life, nothing but another white American, who goes to church on Saturday instead of Sunday. I hate to put it that way, but it would be true if I didn’t say so; and it is something I think one has to try to deal with, to look at. It is an attempt, the attack on Jesse—as I read it, and bear in mind I haven’t read the paper yet—an attempt to set us at another division, obviously an attempt to discredit Jesse, but to prevent the possibility of a certain kind of coalition. Not only between blacks and Jews but between … The importance of Jesse’s campaign, I thought, was perhaps to create a possibility of a coalition between people who stopped voting quite some time ago. People overlook how few, how small a percentage of the American public vote at all. What I myself may think of Mr. Jackson, Reverend Jackson, in the privacy of my own house has nothing to do with this possibility, and he’s the only candidate which offers us this possibility. And it would seem to be a pity if it can be destroyed by this ancient red herring of anti-Semitism which I’ve seen drag through so many discussions with such disastrous results over so many years. But if that should happen, and I think it very well may happen, then all of us have to figure out something else, because it is not the end of the road.

And I’ve brought up the discussion at liberty this morning in a way to clear the air, because once this question is in the public print, once it is on television, it’s going to be in everybody’s mind in one way or another, and nobody wants to talk about it because it’s unpleasant, and it’s dangerous too, and you lose friends too, yet what’s in the record book is in the record book. And the American Jew faces the same moral choice, is in the same moral dilemma, as any other white American, perhaps compounded by the Jewish inheritance, but it’s the same moral dilemma as any other white American, which is: whether he wants your safety or your honor. That may seem a grandiose way to put it, but that is what the choices are. White people have opted for safety in the generality, which means they have no honor in the generality, and consider that they have given me, Sambo, more than I deserve and as much as they are ever going to give me. There is a fatal lack of logic to this line of reasoning, but it is the American line of reasoning. It is what Americans really feel about black people and about themselves. And they really think that they have something to give, which is even more astounding.

But let us turn the tables, I think I talked enough, perhaps even too much. Tell me what is on your minds. Yes, sir?

STUDENT:
Don’t you think a little bit of the whole Jackson thing is a little bit, is “time manipulation” of the press? I mean things like James Watt, where it
is the same sort of thing that comes out of a little article from two weeks past, and all of a sudden right before you make big decisions this whole hour-and-a-half television [program] on it at night and then the Jackson thing comes out three or four days before the primary, the thing is printed two weeks ago, the twenty-third line of a little article, and all of a sudden they bring that out. We don’t even know, because we are unaware of what the press doesn’t want to show us. Maybe Mondale … I’m not saying he did, but maybe he said something four or five weeks ago, a little off-color remark that got printed in Topeka, Kansas, news that if the press decided that they wanted to put that in the front line, that could destroy his whole campaign. They decide what little things are going to … who is going to get the votes and who isn’t based on what they decide to print as the big news.

BALDWIN:
I quite agree with you except that it is not the press alone that makes this decision, you know. The press is part of the society and it has the same options, as I said, safety or honor, which may be a grandiose way to put it, but the press is a part of the system. And if Jesse is now being attacked as anti-Semitic, now at this moment, it is not an act of God, it is a decision on the part of the people who are the press and on the part of the people who own the press, who run the press. It is deliberate. It is not spontaneous. In the, in the … Sometimes it is true, I suppose, that something happens which nobody can suppress or interpret quickly enough, but this is not one of those occasions.

STUDENT:
I have been working on Mr. Jackson’s campaign and I have every intention of voting for him. Part of what bothers me about the whole thing is that he has now said that he let his guard down and made the comment, and I’m not sure what he means by “I let my guard down.”

BALDWIN:
I know it is a very unfortunate phrase and I’m very worried about it too because what it means, what it can mean, obviously, is that he really is anti-Semitic but never lets it be shown. I have no reason to believe that, but I’ve never had any reason to think about it until these last few days, these last few hours. It’s a very unfortunate way to put it. That’s the best that can be said for him, and it’s going to cost him and us a great deal. I’m only trying to get us to be clear about it. I don’t know if he’s anti-Semitic. I doubt it, but he may be. The trouble is that all the candidates suffer from one kind of affliction, racially speaking or socially speaking, or another, because all of them are Americans. Jesse is singled out for particular reasons, and it will have a particular effect. It will have a disastrous effect on the campaign,
because it questions his moral veracity—therefore, your intelligence. Do you see what I’m saying?

STUDENT 1:
Would you say that the allegations of Jesse Jackson being antichoice as far as abortion is concerned is another example of that, of people who have a vested interest in preventing a rainbow coalition from forming, as another example of that?

BALDWIN:
I wasn’t aware, I have not followed his campaign very closely. What is his stand on abortion? Antichoice?

STUDENT 2:
No, he’s not.
[Multiple responses.]
He’s prochoice and on a personal level antiabortion. He’s also against the Hite amendment and for poor people’s and everybody’s choice.
[Several students]
Stand up!

STUDENT 1:
I said that he wasn’t antichoice, and he’s antiabortion on a personal level.

BALDWIN:
Are you still talking?

STUDENT 1:
What he says is right, but I think he’s been accused and allegations have been made that he is antichoice, and I was wondering if you think that is an example of the same sort of thing.

BALDWIN:
Well, if that’s true, yes, it would be. But as she [the other student?] interprets his position it sounds coherent to me to be prochoice and not to want your wife or your sister to have an abortion. That’s a coherent position, I’m saying. But no matter what position Jesse takes, it could be used against us.

STUDENT:
Excuse me, speaking as president of the Students for Jesse Jackson on the UMass campus
[laughter from audience]
, I’d like to say that I hear a lot of misinterpretation from the press and the media, and I don’t think that is the fault of any of us, it is the fault of the media. I would like to say that for those people who are interested in finding out exactly what Mr. Jackson’s stands [are] on such rights as abortion, as nuclear proliferation, as student
[inaudible]
financial aid, we now have a table set up in the Campus Center concourse right this very moment, and we are giving information on exact quotes from Mr. Jackson himself, so that you might better be aware of his stands on the issues. In terms of the media fest on Mr. Jackson, I would just like to say that in terms of last week’s caucus you will notice that Mr. Jackson only had what the media presented him to only have 3 percent of the vote, while John Glenn had 5 percent of the vote. May I interject with this piece of
information: Jesse Jackson was not even on the ballot and he got 3 percent of the vote. The media did not present that fact. Okay, if you notice in today’s New Hampshire primary, okay, they are playing up Gary Hart, they are playing up John Glenn, but they are not mentioning Jesse Jackson’s stand in terms of New Hampshire votes. I will give you this piece of information. A group of us students went to New Hampshire two weekends ago, where we met face to face with people from Keene State College, people from UMass and people from Manchester, most of those people were very pro-Jackson. I will say this to you, if you are interested in finding out more about Jackson’s issues, finding out about his side of the argument, as opposed to the
New York Times
or
Boston Globe
or
[inaudible]
or in the various news commentators, I suggest you come down to the table, find out information, come to one of our meetings, find out the information. And then make your own decision. And I ask you to vote.

BALDWIN
[
laughs
]: Thank you, sir.
[Audience applause.]

STUDENT:
I just wanted to clarify something for myself, talking about the role of Jews as the kind of businessmen of the Garment District and stuff like that. I just wanted to know how, politically, has the role of Jews in that sense, the liberal kind of role, do you see that as a kind of contradiction to the businessman role, or do you see that as something separate?

BALDWIN:
Well, it depends on … How do we repeat your question? Your question essentially being—you are talking about the black relationship to Jews, actually? You are talking about the black relationship to Jews?

STUDENT:
Yeah.

BALDWIN:
And is there a contradiction between the Garment Center boss and the Jewish liberal? In action, no. In terms of the effect it has on the daily life of a black person, no. In some ways, to put it very brutally, the liberal image can be used in the sense to nullify the reality of the Garment Center. In any case, it’s not enough to be a liberal—Christian or Jew. That is something that people have a great deal of difficulty with. But it is not enough to be a liberal, to have the right attitudes and even to give money to the right causes. You have to know more than that. You have to be prepared to risk more than that. I am telling you this because I have watched what happened to many of my liberal friends when the civil rights movement was in Alabama, let us say, in the Deep South, and they were
[inaudible]
very indignant. And then I watched what happened imperceptibly but fatally
when that same movement moved north to Brooklyn, to Pittsburgh, Detroit, and New York. And their attitudes changed. I really hate to put it to you that way, but that is what happened. Their attitudes changed because they began to feel more and more threatened, and a liberal facade or even a liberal attitude was not enough to deal with the speed with which the movement was moving and the complications of American life as revealed in the fact by the interracial tensions in every major city, and being liberal was no defense against that and no interpretation of that. Do you see what I mean?

STUDENT:
Can you see a similar problem happening—

BALDWIN:
Beg your pardon?

STUDENT:
Can you see a similar problem happening when blacks start making their way up into the business world? Themselves?
[Laughter from audience.]

BALDWIN:
When the blacks start making their way up into the business world, where would the similar problem be? You’re talking about the moral choices again.

STUDENT:
Their relation to the workers whether they be blacks themselves.

BALDWIN:
Their relation to whom?

STUDENT:
Workers. Whether they be blacks themselves?

BALDWIN:
Oh! I see what you are saying. Well, for the moment, the question is more or less academic. Blacks are not making their way in great numbers up the corporate ladder. And I will repeat what I have said often: you cannot tell a black man by the color of his skin, either. But the particular danger that we are speaking of when we are talking about American or Jewish liberals is not yet a danger for black Americans; we are not yet anywhere near that situation.

Yes?

STUDENT:
In talking about Israel before, you said that Israel wasn’t set up because anyone else [cared] about the Jews, but you implied it was set up to protect oil interests in that area. And I would argue that point and say that I think after centuries of despoil that there was a bit of that, [but] that this was an area that the Jews did deserve as their homeland, and I just find it hard to accept that it was set up to protect oil interests.

BALDWIN:
I said to protect the vital interests of the Western world, and I don’t mean to be sardonic or cynical, but I would be lying to you and lying
by my own experience if I said to you that the Europeans—the English, the Dutch, the Germans, the French—impressed me as having any very vivid concern for Jews. The French are still anti-Semitic, so are the British, so are the Dutch, so are the Poles, so are the French. They’ll probably be anti-Semitic until the nation disappears.

STUDENT:
That’s not my … I won’t argue with that. I’m saying that, well, if they’re anti-Semitic, why do they think that the Jews are going to protect Western interests and Israel doesn’t even have the oil?

BALDWIN:
Oh! Yeah, I know that. I didn’t say oil, I said the vital interests of the Western world. Part of the hazard of being a Jew, historically and actually, and part of precisely the danger I was talking about when I began about the way a Jew intrudes himself on a black person’s attention because he is the only white man you see. But then part of the hazard, actually, morally, historically, of the Jewish … of being a Jew, is finding yourself doing the Christian’s dirty work. You see what I’m saying? It’s not a condemnation; it’s simply a fact. So it is in that sense to say that Israel is useful to the Western interests.