Bernie Sanders, #BlackLivesMatter, the Liberty U Speech, and Buddhism

Last updated on: September 20, 2015 at 7:17 am by Justin Whitaker

Bernie Sanders, #BlackLivesMatter, the Liberty U Speech, and Buddhism 2015-09-20T07:17:04-06:00 Justin Whitaker

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Bernie Sanders appeals to white Progressives. That much is obvious.

But not all Progressives are lining up behind him. Notably, those fighting for racial justice under the #BlackLivesMatter banner have targeted him and he finds himself far behind Clinton and even trailing yet-to-be-running Biden in South Carolina, where 55 percent of the voters are black.

In a recent column in the New York Times, Charles M. Blow explores Sanders’ lack of appeal with black voters. There he writes that “An August Gallup Poll found that Hillary Clinton’s favorability among African-Americans was 80 percent, while Sanders’s was 23 percent.” And even more disturbing, “Two-thirds of blacks were unfamiliar with Sanders.”

Disturbing as that might be, it’s both understandable and correctable.

As I drove two weeks ago from my home in Helena, MT to Missoula where I teach, I listened to an NPR story about the potential candidacy of Joe Biden. There, Rachel Martin and Mara Liasson discuss the “antiestablishment fever that’s been sweeping the Democratic Party base” while failing to mention the person at the vanguard of that fever. Liasson even, quite gallingly, says of a potential Biden candidacy that, “There are many Democrats who think it would be good for Hillary Clinton because she’d have a serious opponent, and it would help her become a better candidate.”

Really, no serious opponent? But my jaw didn’t really drop until I heard her next line: “Right now, she’s basically running against herself and her problems.”

If NPR, a supposed bastion of left-leaning thought, can have a nearly 5-minute discussion of the Democratic presidential race without so much as mentioning Sanders, we have a problem.

While NPR here simply ignored Sanders, other media stories have merely noted his name or ridiculed him as an impossible outsider, a socialist, and as appealing only to his own existing fan-base (which is, if we can judge by crowds at his speeches, rather huge).

In order to counter this apparent laziness by the media, Sanders is going to need to go directly to the people he wants to reach and prove to them that he understands their problems and can help as President. I watched his talk this week at Liberty University as an outstanding example of his failure to do just that. From the outset he is perfectly honest about who he is and where he likely differs from the students of Liberty U, but he moves on too quickly to what he believes to be a powerful common interest: the injustice of the extraordinary inequality in our country. I have no doubt that Christian conservatives dislike extreme inequality, but in general they just don’t think it’s the government’s responsibility to remedy that, and nothing in Sanders’s speech is likely to convince them otherwise.

Writers at Religion Dispatches posted two responses to the speech. In one, Sarah Posner lauds Sanders for breaking out of the Democratic “faith outreach” mold. Her analysis is spot on and it shows his ability – or at least willingness to try – to find common ground with people who might be tempted to ignore or oppose him. Daniel Schultz gives Sanders a B- (or Solid C, according to the URL) for religious outreach, wishing that Sanders had done more digging through scripture in making his case for economic equality.

I agree. Bernie made connections with the students, but only ever so briefly, and only to then move on to his central message of economic inequality. His fans there, and perhaps some of the Liberty U students, cheered loudly at times, but he probably didn’t connect with anyone that didn’t already generally agree with his progressive politics.

Returning to the topic of the black vote, “Polls show that black people line up with Bernie on the issues,” writes Jennifer Epps-Addison in her insightful discussion of the tension between white progressives and the #BlackLivesMatter movement. She continues, referring to hostile and dismissive reactions from white people after the interruption of a Sanders speech by activists, “But when progressives react to the #BlackLivesMatter movement with racism and hostility, it weakens our movement and makes it a lot harder for black folks to #FeelTheBern.”

Sanders needs to take the same approach that he brought to Liberty U to a speech given to black Americans, given with the same humility and forethought about the differences he and they might have. But he needs to go deeper, to actually talk about the central concerns of black Americans, to show that he cares about them as something more than numbers and statistics who will benefit from his grand economic ideas.

As we read in Ned Resnikoff’s July story for Al Jazeera America:

Former Ohio state Sen. Nina Turner said progressives need a separate political program for dealing with racial disparity. “Progressives need to come together and address this issue head on, not wrap it in everybody else’s stuff but say separately that black lives matter and we’re going to push policies and do something about it,” said Turner, who is black.

That would entail rejecting the midcentury social democratic vision of a unified people’s platform to build a new, distinctly American social democratic vision that is more firmly rooted in the social and political history of the United States.

Sanders and O’Malley should have gotten off the stage during the Black Lives Matter protest and joined the activists where they stood, Turner said. “They should have come down to where they were and had a real conversation.”

What does Buddhism have to do with any of this?

That is a good question, but one that I think will become ever more irrelevant as the political campaign progresses. Some scholars and practitioners of Buddhism will quickly tell you that Buddhism has no political philosophy of its own, or that Buddhism -like other religions- ought to stay out of politics and political conversations.

The first is perhaps generally true; Buddhism might not have a political philosophy in the sense that we’d like to appeal to today such as that of Plato or Kant, though Buddhists**** throughout history have developed and endorsed certain political ideals. The Buddha himself interacted regularly with kings (or heads of confederacies) and likely designed his community of monks and nuns around the consensus-oriented Shakyan confederacy in which he was raised. The Buddha was notably successful at speaking directly to the needs of particular listeners as individuals and as communities. In this way Buddhism has never not been in politics.

The second concern conflates Buddhism in politics with authoritarian states that happen to be predominantly Buddhist. And just as Muslims should be concerned and active in American politics without people suggesting that they (American Muslim activists) are trying to make us like Iran, Buddhists should be concerned and active in American politics without concern that they’re dragging our society toward 1930s Japan or a Burma-like pariah state.

And Sanders even name-drops Buddhism in his Liberty U speech, saying: “I am far, far from a perfect human being, but I am motivated by a vision which exists in all of the great religions — in Christianity, in Judaism, in Islam, Buddhism and other religions — and which is so beautifully and clearly stated in Matthew 7:12,” referring to the Golden Rule.

Buddhism has been a force in global politics, and even as a tiny minority in America it will certainly play a role in politics here.

In the months to come I hope to write more about aspects of Buddhist philosophy that can and clearly do apply to political thought in the world today. I’m sure much of what I write will be debatable and I hope most of all to learn through the process to be a more informed voter myself. When I began this article it was written purely as a praise of Sanders for what I saw as an inspiring and humble speech at Liberty U and for an economic policy platform that would make the lives of America’s poorest people (who are disproportionately black and Latino) much, much better. But in reading and thinking about the articles I cite, specifically the ones by Daniel Schultz and Ned Resnikoff, I saw a common, previously unconnected thread describing why Sanders is not energizing many people outside his existing base. There was at least one Evangelical won over by Sanders who has been in the news of late, but he seems to be a notable minority.

Buddhism

Politics

Previous Post

September 10, 2015

Thich Nhat Hanh's condition improves, speaks first words since his stroke

Next Post

September 21, 2015 Compassion beyond boundaries: little girl asks why animals must be chopped up

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Academia Activism American Buddhism Art Book review Buddhism Buddhism Today Buddhist Ethics Burma/Myanmar China Christianity Commodification Environment Gender Happiness Health Humor India Interfaith Islam Japanese Buddhism Kant Media / News Meditation mindfulness Photography Poetry Politics quicktakes Running Teaching Technology Thailand Theism/Atheism Theravada Tibet Tibetan Buddhism Travels Uncategorized Unitarian Universalism video Western Philosophy Zen

Select a Month June 2021 January 2021 November 2020 August 2020 July 2020 March 2020 January 2020 October 2019 August 2019 June 2019 May 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 November 2004 September 2004 August 2004

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz