>> i was foolish enough to run for congress in 1968, young. i am now matured. [laughter] >> but i remembered part of the reason for wanting to do that was to bring a voter registrations up.

i lost royally. he was then the congressperson. and that was the second district. so when i ran my first time, the second congressional district, which had about at the time, about 15 to 18% registration. and actually, they sought leaders throughout the south to try to run. and i was one that agreed to do it. they really wanted a man, women, you want to know that. they wanted my husband. and he said he couldn't afford to leave his law practice, so i ran. but in losing we also raised old registration piece. and people began to see some opportunity in doing that. fast forward now to 1990, they had the redistricting that you are speaking about. because the voter right act had failed in turning to motivate

wide elected officials to have fair representation. and so they found a way to give those opportunities, you were the majority then here they found a way of getting these cluster of minorities, give them opportunity to have. maybe there's a better way. nevertheless, this redistricting gave afro-americans and opportunity to be more engaged in the elective process rather than engage in electing someone else who represents them. and so you saw in 1992, the largest number of african-americans ever coming to the south. and i came with jim and a few others in north carolina. when i was elected, i was the first since 1901. george white was the last afro-americans who was kind of thrown out of the first

reconstruction piece. and i returned in 1992, because i came a little early because of my -- and melvin watt and i constitute the first opportunity that afro-americans had to be in the elective process. not makes it more difficult i think politically or democrats and republicans for democrats to now hold on to seats, in particular, white democrats who had been dependent on that black vote to be safe now. as they used to be. so -- and we, as afro-americans, have a challenge of ensuring those white minority in those districts that we would represent them as fairly as we would do for ourselves. and i know as an elected politician, i made a conscious effort to make sure that i said to everyone that i am here to serve all the people, and made a conscious effort of trying to

bring them come and give them confidence, that i was not there just to serve blacks but i was there to serve everyone. i did it opening. >> michael, let me try to turn his back away from the contemporary debate about voting rights act, because it is pretty controversial now, and go back to your question about did in 1965 voting rights act figure into what we're talking about. did it change things. i think yes, it changed things. it change things drastically. by the introduction of african-american voters. but it also emphasizes the peculiar is -- the interesting nature of stealth politicians. it was possible and it did happen in the 1960s and 1970s that this huge influx of black voters cost segregation, as politicians, to wage racist campaigns and get elected and just completely ignore those huge numbers.

but it also created a setting for politicians, such as butler and me, to come in and decide to do things differently. to try to merge those new african-american voters with white voters. you know, one of the problems in political analysis is that we tend to look at census data and voting records and judicial decrees and so forth. and we tend to see that as a mechanistic calls will factor in what happens is completely -- those things just cause different behaviors by politicians. what we're saying is it's not so mechanistic, that stealth politicians represented a population of paul's visions of consciously decided to do it differently. and they had to figure out how

to beat the segregationist, but also how to not suffer the same fate that liberal politicians who came along and pronounced themselves new biracial leaders and who got stomped. and yes, it did change things tremendously in the early '70s, but it only -- i think that emphasizes the interesting nature of stealth politicians. >> this tightrope that you're talking about, talking about essentially walking a political tidal. there are all kinds of tight ropes, but the one that you are talking about is interesting to me and that there had to be, you know, was there some sort of godfather or godmother of stealth politics in alabama? who was the person, or how did you will decide that for political survival, if you want to boil it down to that level, you have to do something

different? and who is credited with that in your state? >> well, i will tell you there was no woman of, no stealth movement. we never held any conferences and said how we going to bring the two races together, how are we going to cut deals. the newspapers never wrote any stories about it. there was never any movement. it was just individualistic act. but i can tell you in alabama, my role model was. i was a young clinical scientist in 1971 and i watched how and he became my role model. he was well-positioned, philosophically, politically and personally. and i watched the way he did things. he was a progressive senator but he is also popular among the whites of our state but he also nominated to block federal judges for alabama. which simply no other state has.

so i watched him and i watched of other politicians but he was my role model. >> what did you learn from watching him? >> i learned that it is possible to be relatively progressive even in george wallace's home state. and it is possible to bring together black voters and black leaders and black voters in leaders. if they are convinced that you won't do some good things, it is possible to do so again if you're very careful and -- well, if you can be racialized those kinds of situations you have a chance not only of winning elections by doing some good things. >> eva, you had your hand up is because i was just going to suggest and north carolina there were some who we thought in

terms of i don't want used the word stealth, were moderate quiet and progressive. they didn't preach racy called as much of human equality. luther hodges though was about to be as progressive but was more businesslike and broaden business opportunities. james hahn and used education to be the equalizer. so there are models of people who new that there needed to be a change and found either economic reasons or others to bring the races together. i don't think they were openly saying racial equality. sanford brought -- as that's the whole human relationship counsel

to resolve conflict a round race. and you will know the paradox lead in north carolina between barry sanford and jesse helms. on one hand where he is trying to bring people together, and on the other hand the same state, jesse helms can win. eventually, we changed a little bit but not much. there was nothing stuff about jesse. you knew what you heard is what he believed. but i think in the sense of progressive, quiet, moving the races together, we have examples of those personal items. >> you know, i'm not going to tell you that every act that every politician in the south had some sort of all true stick motive. of course, but i will tell you i believe there were men and women in the south in politics. that had recognized that the

race problem had been a millstone around the neck of the south forever. and they thought enough -- i'm talking about blacks and. they thought enough of their area in the south to take a chance, to move out. politicians don't go around doing things that they cost him votes if they can help it. but there were a lot of people who took a lot of chance. some of them loss. there was a congressman from orangeburg, south carolina, same place that jim represents today. came back from the second world war in 1946, came up here and they elected him into congress and he thought it was great the anti-vote for all us do. they unelected in the next time. there were a lot of people that went out front that didn't make

it. but i do believe that good will have a lot to do with it. and an understanding, you know, you, i'm of the opinion that slavery did not end in this country until the end of the second world war when you got air-conditioning and to get away with, what's the farmers when they run? what do they call a? sharecropping. and that's when industries -- >> you never sharecropping. you didn't know what that was. [laughter] >> i tell you what though, i picked cotton. [laughter] >> but anyway, when the south started getting industries, when i was growing up, black people didn't even work in the textile mills because those were the best jobs in town. that's where the cache was, and i think i'm as i say with

air-conditioning, you think that's kind of funny, but it's not funny. that's true. that's when the south started moving and started becoming fairly progressive. and i think that all fits into the same. >> well, let's shift now a little bit to talk about some of the theoretical underpinnings of this. you mentioned there were people in alabama who are interested in trying to do things differently. give us some examples that you came across in doing the research. >> examples of the types of -- >> yes. >> glen mentioned -- there are a couple of i can imagine, but glen mentioned the appointment of african-american judges, two african-american judges. this is good. to african-american judges that senator heflin nominated and

obviously appointed. and when you go back and you look at, you know, judge clement, judge thompson, and you see that they were appointed, you see that there is a controversial senate hearing. and fred gray was appointed as well, but in the book you can see what happened. and that's what you see. deployment and the hearing, and they're confirmed. but you don't see what our colleague, john lagrange referred to as that great know. how did it come about that? we're talking that two black judges being appointed, in 19, what, late 1970s? two, and how did that come about? and the example of, and this is what we'd and some of the others that were talking about, is that they were african-american leaders who went to heflin and said listen we need some black judges on this bench.

and the way they approached these politicians, in a very quiet manner. they laid out the rationale for wanting what they need, and heflin for they were the more progressive politics, and i must say this, i didn't realize, howell heflin became one of my heroes as result of working on this book because i didn't realize all that he had accomplished and his staff, mike house and steve, did a great job, but this was an example that great middle of how that came about, that he would appoint these black judges. and alabama hadn't had you know, a black judge previously before. and i think clemens just got down last january. so that's one example. redistricting, alabama has 25% african-americans.

and i think we're probably one of the few states in the south were african-americans in the house of representatives reflect the number. but i think the highest in the country. >> and as a result of this sort of biracial quiet dealing where you have one african-american going to speaker clarkin saying listen listen, unit, this is the demographics. you know, we think we deserve this amount of african-american legislation. i'm sure, african-american representatives. there is disagreement as to whether or not that was progress. you talk with paul hubbert and joe reed, they will talk about -- paul was a great a more republican district, but joe reed will say we have 25 percent of african-americans reflecting the population of the state. so those are two examples of what went on behind the scenes. and we were told to don't get

into a lot of the details about how it happened. you can read the book but those are two examples that sticks out because those are two examples that were referenced on the panel. >> that one occasion mentioned about howell heflin and the two black federal judges, that was a situation where howell heflin met with the black state leadership in a hotel room behind closed doors. as a matter of fact, howell heflin and a member of this audience, i won't name who, but a member of this audience with the only two white people in that room. and they talked about it and they said, judge devlin, we have supported you and we think that one of the things that the state needs or this country needs is more black federal elected officials. do you agree. and he suggested by the way, he was running. let me assure you, stealth leadership that i'm talking about, stealth politics, it wasn't always noble. it was often raucous.

we had a lot of knockdown drag-out's behind closed doors. when we were talking right, frank, racist like which -- not racist language, but racial language. and howell heflin, when she agreed that it was time to appoint a black federal judges for alabama, he did not go out with the black leaders and hold a press conference. and say we have struck a deal. i'm going to get the black endorsement and i'm going to nominate black federal judges. but that's the way it happened. >> you know, i think looking at it, we need to look at it from another angle, too. and that is the african-american community. it was just the white folks making the moves and being and so forth. i know in my home county when i

was in the state legislature, there were a group of young african-americans who i came very close to, and they pushed me and pushed me and push me, and they finally got me to get the courthouse, and let one side of the be black and one side of it be white. and in the african-americans exercise their griefs about what they will not get. and i did, and i will tell you what, i was scared to death. i will be honest with you. i did know what -- i'd know if that was the end of my political, if i was going to get shot or what. [laughter] >> let you know, we don't give people credit sometimes. there were no bad repercussions from it. as a matter fact, i think there were a lot of good repercussions. >> we talked about successes, on the other side of the going.

i do want to give you all the impression that everything was a success that i'm going to ask you to talk about some failures. i mean, were there things that you try to do that you never got done? >> yes, there were. as a matter fact, you have to look at this as, in politics you always look at is the glass half full or half empty. yes, there were times, and if you look in the book you will see some of the calculations. in my mind, i would have to face the issues, and i'm sure butler had to face the issues and eva had to face the issues. in the south, you were always conscious of race. you're always conscious of the south history and of the current legacy. and you're always conscious of how is this going to play back

home. and frankly, at times but i never voted a racist vote, but i would try to keep my record balanced it and i will tell you, how do we define bounce, bounce is what's required of white southern, southern continuing in office with the deep behind his name. so yes, there were sometimes when you didn't get to do everything that you wanted to, but most of the times i think you are able to compromise and kick the can a little further down the road. >> any other? >> let me just say this. you know, i think we need to approach it from this angle as well. you know, this is what we're talking about politics. but what this really is is bringing people together. blacks and whites. i was on an audience of about two weeks ago jim clyburn, who i guess everybody knows is a

ranking member of the house, an african-american. and i was in the audience that he spotted me out there, and i don't know what he was trying to be funny or what. but he said you know what, other and i have been friends for years -- 40 years, and now we can admit it. [laughter] >> and during that time, if blacks were to, with whites, it was a sellout in terms of those areas. but i do believe that why moderate logic position of controversy issue brings things in more acceptability or rather, it's about race or rather it's about war or rather it's about whatever conflict. at some point, at difference between those who are at the very opposite ends, there has to

be a middle that find ways to accept these as value systems. and the politician gets to accept that as value system because they have political life depends on it. you know, they kind of learn. and part of it also is, and it's interesting, we are discussing this this look back reflected in us of what happened at a time now where we just elected the first black president, right. and it's almost unseemly that we would be making such accommodation both black and made accommodations. the point you made about jim. we grew up in this house. i have been reflecting about my comments today. i thought to myself, how am i, i accepted without much question that i live next door to a white family, played with themcome and get we went to different schools, couldn't ride the bus

together. and the accommodation that was instilled in me by a lot of things, the church i went to, whatever. so there is a lot of institutional pressures to accept inhumanity and disrespect to yourself. so you have to find ways to break that. and i think part of what this middle group did was to give courage to those who, less than the heroic perhaps, in certain weren't as bad as the villain. but to find ways of having society to deal with what they knew, they need to do with. >> you will recall, remember in around 1995, all the church burnings in the south? your office, you and i worked together. we got the white southern have a white southerners together and the black southerners. and we went out and made speeches.

i think i'm what you worked on that for me. but we came together and said this is outrageous. this will not be tolerated. we got the attorney general to come in and tell us what he was doing. i think we were able to keep that, not only to make sure that the justice department was going to stop that and find the people and prosecute them, but also we were able to keep it from becoming such a divisive issue in the south that it was divisive enough as it was, but her office and my office, we worked together on trying to present that front of doing things, responding to crises a little differently. >> we also shared artemesia. artemesia used to work from a. >> she came to work on which he came to washington she worked for me and after i left she went to work with congresswoman clayton.

>> in a minute we're going to go to q&a, so to want to start asking questions, you can begin to make your way toward the microphone. i just want to ask a couple of quick questions before we turn it over. one of which is, so we have this concept of stealth politics. we have a good understanding of what it is and why it was necessary. but going forward, what lessons should we be trying to teach leaders and aspiring leaders about how to work in biracial coalitions? i think it's just sort of understood that we have a black president now, people will just come together because that's just the way things are. it's a new world, right? but it's not always like that. i think there are practical concerns that could perhaps get in the way of that. so i just want to know, anybody who wants to jump in, what do we teach, what do we tell these two

leaders? >> i think -- we have some recommendations at the end of our book. i will cite a couple and the turned over to artemesia. my recommendations is, especially for southern politicians, want to be southern politicians, is to understand the history of race and racism. that it's not simply history that it is a contemporary legacy. we are still dealing with the legacy of slavery and segregation. and to understand, once you understand that, realize that the race game, as we call it in the book, is a continuity. we are trying to achieve progress. but if you are a southern politician, the race card will be played at some time in your career, and you have to be prepared to deal with that card

constructively. and there are ways to deal with it, with the race card, whether you're a black politician or white politician. at some point the race card will be played. you can't control it that you can't control your opponent. you can't control your supporters that he can't control the media. you can't control rabble-rouser stick and you had better be prepared to deal with it. another recommendation is that we had better learn how to make progress but we haven't reached -- we haven't reached the post-racial society. we've got to now move forward and we had better move forward quickly because it's no longer going to be a biracial -- it is not a biracial future. it is a multiracial future. and i will tell people who think it's, if those of us up here, if we could deal with the racial problems of our region, if we could deal with that and improve the situation, then surely

people today can deal with racial problems. because we had a very blatant, flagrant racist system. >> also one of the things i think going forward is to find the value in the inclusiveness to our own survival. that we, as a community, will survive. and the importance of teaching that, having that understood, i think makes it beyond the race of gender. it is our common good is dependent on us all having opportunity. and i'm not suggesting that this is economic secret over freedom, but i am saying part of it is a resource, education opportunity, and we can find that as a goal to improving our communities as a whole. and then each of us says

individual races or cultures, will find some value in sustaining others to be strong as we are. >> any thousand? >> -- any thoughts of? >> well, people tend to do things that are in their best interest. and i think just one line of what we need to teach people is that it is in our best interest to cooperate as races. i don't have a plan, anything like that, but you know, i think in a sense that's what the stealth politics is about the. >> do you want to add anything? >> i just want to share a cinema that there is a common now the within all of us regardless of race and ethnicity and background. and i think it's important, when we talk about the racialized politics or stealth politics, when you think about politics it's about who gets what, when,

why. and have a lower poverty issues, particularly in many african-american communities in alabama where i am from. and in mississippi. and i think sometimes when we're trying to find commonality, within the norms of a system, we forget about the structural -- we forget about the impact, the structural impact that racism has had on these types of conditions. and so instead of talking about the need to provide health care as a means to help people without wealth or without -- who doesn't have a middle-class income, we tend to talk about it as, gender, as the government trying to take over. so what i'm trying to say is, we have to understand that there is some commonality. and when we talk about stealth and the racialized politics. we should do at the expense of

ignoring systemic poverty that in many cases occurred because of past racial problems. so i'd think politicians, both black and white, don't talk about middle-class eyes when are trying to bring people together. for the sake of leaving the other stuff off the table. because it is inconvenient and really messy. >> okay. one quick question. i have to squeeze this in before we go to questions from the audience. i'm passing by the picture on the cover of this book. for those of you haven't seen it, there's a picture of the cover of the book here. can you take 30 seconds and tell us the story behind this? >> some of you in the audience, you may want to ask about our relationship, because as you can imagine, we've had our tensions, because she comes out from a particular perspective and i come at it from a different perspective. this is a controversial thesis that we are pitching.

we've had some discussions about covers. we picked that cover. that is me and one of my constituents, theodore fox from jacksonville, alabama. and we picked it and did it, the book in black and white, kind of muted. because it is the far -- the past. it is in the past but also it's about black and white. it's a depiction i think of the stealth relationship in black -- in black and why, and artemesia, interestingly she told me when she saw the picture, she said look at that. the guy -- the tall white guy is doing the talking and a short black is doing the listening. and we had some discussion over that. but when we decide to focus on white politician, because we didn't feel we had the background or resource to cover

both sides, and my explanation, and she -- after a lot of discussions i think we agreed on, that's the way it was. and black politicians -- white politicians working with black leaders. we came at a time when we were -- we have the power. and we elected to do things differently. now in today's -- from today standpoint, you might question that, but back then, that was -- you notice, we are shaking hands. that was a drastic break from the past. and we thought it was just a good picture. and i know she's grieving her teeth over here. and she may want to add something to it. >> no that's okay spent by the way, we did had a debate because i want to put a confederate

flag, a faded confederate flag in the background just to show that that's the perspective that we came from. she said no. she said no, that's offensive but i don't care what you intend the message to be, that's offensive to. >> i thought after all these years of work on this that's going to have to get off the book. [laughter] >> because i couldn't put my name on that. and that's on is the. in fact, i called a few of my college in the office and i said okay, maybe i'm being too sensitive about this, but no. fortunately, quickly we talked about this and it was agreed and it's a good cover. the cover was changed. >> let's open it up to you will. i want to start on this site and it will go back and forth. >> in many of your states, the football coach or basketball coach is the most distinctive white personality on the planet down there. do you have any stories of bear bryant or frank acquire or dean smith contribute to the average that you undertook year?

>> i will do with bear bryant. if you look in her book in the index, we've got -- we list a book on religion. billy graham. we list a book on thomas gotham, who was from auburn. and we list a book on music. in religion, sports, and music, you have written a book about stealth reconstruction in the south using those venues. 's but i understand, i never knew bear bryant. but supposedly, bear bryant did more to foster desegregation in alabama than anybody else. because he took the alabama football team out of southern california one year. anybody -- sam van cunningham?

ran all over alabama. and bear bryant supposedly came back home and said it's time for us to rethink the way we do things. and supposedly, that was one of the turning points spirit is said cunningham integrated the end zone. >> let me say south carolina press at a football team that was strong enough to be any sort of -- [laughter] >> but in any event, this wasn't your question, but i think i want to say it just the same. i think that one of the main problems with politics in this country is that we treat it like a football game. and it is so, so important, and we make such little stuff of it.

>> you didn't ask that question. [laughter] >> well, dean smith was noted to give many afro-american opportunities. there were many athletes who give him credit, he himself was quoted to run as a senator but he refused to do it. but he certainty had impact. >> so in the last 20 years, there's maybe one form of increased polarization, namely we don't seem to have the number of moderate democrats we used to have because they are literally dying, and we don't have the progressive republicans that existed like a deal carmichael for instance, in mississippi in the 1950s. the eisenhower republicans. so we have a racial polarization that is now also a party polarization. and i wonder, is the stealth

politics still going on? is it going on between black democrats and white republicans in a state like alabama where obama got exactly 10 percent of the white vote? >> i don't think stealth politics as we define is going on because it's impossible now. you can do things stealthily anymore. and happened -- came to birth in the '70s, burst in the '80s, and by the '90s you could do stealth politics anymore. the african-americans were not willing to ride, you, be the junior partner. the republicans would not let you pull out off. and the media were on top of everything. so i think stealth politics was appropriate for the '70s, '80s and '90s, but it's not possible anymore. to speak to your second question about the polarization, the decline of moderate democrats and moderate republicans. i think they redistricting has

so been handled to protect incumbents that we have fewer and fewer districts that will, you know, be a tossup district, that will elect a democrat this time and a republican that time, and will encourage people to be moderate. i think the polarization in a lot of ways is due to redistricting to protect incumbents. >> an answer to question, i just want to say one thing. when i was a kid, i used to -- my grandfather would take me every now and then with them, and there was one house, every time he would pass that house he pointed his thing that he said, is a republican. and i want to say this, that i think if he were a live today, and i were on the call with them, he was a their lives a

democrat. and so what's changed? there's a lot that has changed. but there's a lot that has not changed. >> i want to take us back a little bit before the 1970s, because there some story that set things up for the store that you are telling. 1963, i wrote a term paper at the university of chicago that argued that racial segregation in the schools would end up better in the south than in the north. and i said it for two reasons. first of all, for the demographic reasons in the way americans were distributed in a lot of towns and split of. in the north there were big it is and it was so difficult. the other reason i quoted was a certain aspect of southern culture that i think a lot of people don't give enough credit to. there was a culture of civility in the south, including civility between black and leaders. and the way i have some sense of

that is, and my father in 1945, moved to north carolina and joined a citizens committee that had both white and black people on it. and they accomplished and review and passed a package of reform legislation on welfare, which was, of course, very racially distributed at that time, and make progress in it so that it was at least in the context of the south, north carolina was in the lead for a while. well, that cancer has been told in the mind of the south and by keith miller and some of his other writings. but a lot of what was going on was very, very local. it was people who knew people, and they weren't necessarily thinking about changing the big picture, but they wanted to deal with getting the roads paved working a school that had a

cafeteria. and things that could be done. and that was going on at the retail, small level where you could accomplish that. and i think what happened was that the civil rights movement gave some of that -- some of those people had already established relationships a lot more sense to work with so that what black folk were getting out of it wasn't just the leftovers, not just the crumbs off the table but they could start asking for something more but more poorly they had something to talk to that in the north there was nobody to talk to. >> that's my opinion any a. i would be interested in what you have to say. >> eva has referred to that. despite the waters of our history, of racial history and the south and the legacy, you grew up probably a couple doors, did you say, from a white? >> right next-door. >> i grew up two doors down from

blacks. as bad as the relationship was, i think most southerners, black and white, know somebody and people of the other race on a personal basis. and there's a certain bond of trust. now, that's sometimes a warped bond of trust as one of the black leaders said in alabama, you know, better the devil let you know that the devil that you don't know. or the angel that you don't know. >> i will take i think that is romanticizing the whole situation. i think that's a whole lot of bs. [laughter] >> i will tell you, sure, that existed, as long as the black person was the subs urban and as long as the wipers was the dominant. of course it was.

>> that's not arguing my argument. i said the same thing. but at least you know people and people of good faith can come together. >> i stick by what i said. [laughter] >> i won't disagree with you. >> the thing we said in the south is it's not how close you live, right? but you knew your place. and it meant that blacks knew that they could move so far and the whites knew they had a domination. where in the north they said they didn't want to get close to you because they didn't want the proximity of that. i think in both blacks and whites had to move out of the acceptability that i should have been more irritated as a young person that i live next door when i couldn't sit on the same bus with a person and go -- the

story, and my committee of a block there were about three white families. the two who were merchants actually lived, unit, author produce of buying things of what the blacks did. and in the family that lived next to me, my mother reminded, we became friends. but i remember indistinctly, my mother allowing me to play in their yard. i'm not sure why. but they came and played in my yard. and also, they buy sugar, borrowed money. my mother would never will borrow from them. it's just a pair low that she didn't want to be obligated to them. and she didn't want any misunderstanding with us going there. so you know, those accommodations. and we had to grow out of those

accommodations. and so it took both black and whites. the citians for us gave us the strength to say we should resist that kind of thing. and i think the motivation that king gave others, we knew indistinctly we shouldn't do that. but that motivators. the sit ins in north kaleida motivated us to get in that turmoil, the realization both am black and white, that blacks ought to stand up for the rights. but as you stood up for your rights, caused people like you to now know that you should do something. so it's both of us i think needed to go further as we did as human beings. i can get you to do the right thing unless i respect myself that when i respect myself i demand that you respect me. so i think that's part of the evolution. >> we are running very short on time. and i'm sorry that we will only be able to take three additional

questions. i apologize in advance right now to those of you who would not be able to ask a question. >> i just want to express my appreciation for the wisdom of your mother that she understood the power relationship and refuse to give up that power which she could control. there's a concept in science and what it means is you change one parameter of the system in such a slow fashion that the others, values of the other parameters don't change. there's another concept in politics called incremental change. i think that your concept of stealth politics is much more than it is an criminal change. it really is leaving the power relationships in place. one of the reasons why it's so absurd -- is more historical, i haven't read the book but my expectation is it's more a historical document. if you're talking that race relations, then anything that

feeds thinking for current interactions. because in my mind, the power relationships are the key relationship and african-americans have gotten or they haven't, need to get the notion that nobody can have power over us that we don't give them. and we have as much of the responsibility for the outcomes in our society has to white people, and we need to step up to the plate and begin to exercise the kind of moral, spiritual and intellectual leadership that we have bested in our community that will let us add value to the conversation in the society. but as a theoretical or methodological observation, i want to ask if you could abstract from this notion of stealth politics to the context of the nature, timing and dynamics of change and identify other situations where so-called stealth politics is applicable. afghanistan for example, changes in the middle east. how does the united states get out in front of the conversation

of terrorism? those kinds of issues i think that it's important that we think in terms of the nature, the dynamics of change to enable us to make progress in those areas. there are lots of areas where the dynamics and nature of change matter. i don't think that stealth politics is useful, pardon me, in the context of discussing race relations because we spar so far beyond that at this point. but i think that there is possible values to its applications in other areas. comment on that, please. >> i want to say that this is a historical document about changes from the '70s, '80s and '90s. we know a lot about the heroic drama in the clash of good versus evil. but we don't know how those changes unfolded over those

years. and that's what we have tried to depict so that we can fill the gap in. about some of those changes. >> good evening. i'm an undergraduate student at saint augustine's college in raleigh north kaleida. good as you, congresswoman clayton. my question was inspired by something that congressman derrick said early. do you still feel that currently a lot of white politicians are still afraid or still are frightened that something will be said or done to their political career if they step outside of their comfort zone? and work with african-american leaders are just minority leaders in the community? >> yes, i do. but not near as much as they did 20, 30, 40 years ago. and i think that has been the bottom line of the great contribution of stealth politics has made. and of course, they have created

situations themselves because it takes a great talent to balance these things. but the basic answer to your question is, yes, i think so. but not near what it was. >> thank you. >> i think that's what keeps -- anyway. >> good hitting. i'm also an undergraduate at memphis university. and i have a question and a comment as well. ms. eva, you talk about inclusiveness. i guess we all know what affects one in directly so having these type of discussions openly and freely about race and politics in our society today is time, is very important. into the ladies question earlier, i appreciate her question. i told her that that is because we are past stealth politics are doing them quietly. because young people of today,

we are more open to talking about race and how it affects our daily lives. so the question really is, where does our, and when i say our, i mean america, capitalist ideology fit into the mix of cohorts working together? >> thanks, fred. well, i do think, you know, when you do again to look at our current economic status and finding how we are surviving, the question is, isn't the question of race or question of resources, poverty? and i think how we discussed that still has to be based on your larger principle, is that what affects us all you know, what affects one affects us all. example is that to the extent

that capitalism, and in particular in our current economy, has been influenced so much by the banking system, how fair is that? i mean, how do we make accommodation for such an error in finance that affects all of us economically. how do we make accommodation, health care, use that as a way of equalizing over education as a way of equalizer. if education is the basis of us being productive in a capitalist is society, then it is essentially a vision that if health is essential for us to live, there's some basic rights in there. so part of this is finding value system that respects the individual regardless of the race or their culture. >> artemesia, do you want to jump on that?

>> yes. she ended that perfectly and i shouldn't step on it. but i just think that capitalism, it goes back to my did that what i just said. politics is about who gets what, when and how. i think our economy, and it difficult economic situation you have people returning back to nativism pic you have people, tea party movement. you have people -- the tea party movement appears to be predominately white movement. you don't see a lot of black faces in that movement. and i will say negatively because i support some of the ideas but they articulate, but my point is when you're saying that we need to equalize education, someone's going to say it where's that coming from. i'm already paying a fourth of my income -- a third of my income in taxes. when you talk about the need to bring about equality, people say, where does that come from, where does this money, where do

the resources come from? the same concept when we're talking about black and white neighbors living next to one another, the african-american neighbors is fighting for something basic has dream and equality as were the white hearse and maybe fighting for a decent wage. i think economics exploit that. and just one building i was a is two things we recently with senator harry reid is that, it goes back to what attorney general holder says that we're a nation of power when it comes to talking about race. now what harry reid said with regard to president obama is how many people in america view african-americans, but you can't say that as a white politician and expect not to take its. but at the same time, harry reid was able to go back to his african-americans in his district and have this big for

them and say me a call to. and another reason why this is difficult to practice is going back to what -- women when obama was in san francisco, he made a comment that off the record americans clean the guns and one else did he say? and the religion. and that was played all over the place that people are saying what is the real obama? so you couldn't go to one setting and say, you know, one thing to one group that you can't do that now. and in another setting and another group and it not be played 24 hours a day. i think that makes it difficult. i think capitalism exploits the, now the because capitalism is about profits and individualized and i think the fact that we have a poor economy -- well, i do what is a poor economy. president obama is working on this, but -- i love obama. i love the president. the fact that we are in an economic difficulties and to

wars, it's sort of put people in different corners again. >> okay. we have come to the end. we are going to ask -- were going to thank you all for coming and ask you to thank them. [applause] >> we hope that you will take the time to meet the authors and purchase a copy of the book and ask them that they saw. they are about to duck out now to prepare to do that. and thank you all very much for coming. [applause]

>> joe scarborough, what are you currently reading? >> let's see, i'm actually reading harold evans, "my paper chase, which is remarkable -- you talk about when newspapers were in their heyday. harold practice by cases. he discovered, he had a remarkable career with the times of london and it is a great book. and i am rereading a couple of the books. "absolom absolom," william faulkner, which i go through line by line every few years it can also another book by a historic british historian alistair horne called "seven ages of paris" which is just a great history of paris. it is about his enjoyable history book as i've ever read. >> your book came out earlier this year. when is your next one? >> i don't know. we got in the top 10 for two or three weeks, and that was great.

but it's kind of tough riding political books in this environment. unless you want to write a polemic, and that's not really my style. so i don't know. you know, actually, the best part of writing the book was the book tour. because we would go out and would actually have these great crowds and action would be republican and democratic and independent. we had a great -- it was like having townhall meeting all over the country. and what we were hearing back in june and july is what is showing up in the polls now. so that really was -- that was the fun part of it. and i love writing, too. but just the whole process of people on the right calling you a socialist, like my mom. and people on the left, you know, calling a nazi. it gets tiring after a while. but i think next time ever write something i will write about my dog. >> is going broke on your reading