“There Is Nothing Funny in This World About Rioting in Harlem”

The “Pound Cake” Speech

The seeming disconnect between Cosby’s expression of “conservative” political views and his image as a genial everyman comic lent particular potency to reactions to his 2004 speech. Cosby’s oratory at Constitution Hall on May 17, 2004, became known as the “pound cake speech” because he referred to the betrayal of the civil rights movement by Black youths who got “shot in the back of the head over a piece of pound cake.” Cosby bemoaned the high school dropout rate of African American students and “women having children by five, six different men.” He lambasted these men for abdicating their role as fathers. He criticized the dress and culture of young Blacks: “People with their hat on backwards, pants down around the crack.” Cosby raged that a lower economic class of African Americans was growing up in ignorance with no desire to get an education. “It can’t speak English. It doesn’t want to speak English. . . . who are these sick Black people and where did they come from and why haven’t they been parented?”

Julian Bond, a leading member of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), who was in the audience when Cosby gave his speech, remembered being “shocked” by the entertainer’s comments. “I thought there was some truth to his remarks but they were too simplistic and too sweeping with no nuance” (J. Bond, e-mail correspondence with the author, January 3, 2013). The media picked up on Cosby’s words and a number of commentators criticized him. The Boston Globe reported that “The long-beloved comedian and actor has been accused of betraying his race, cultural elitism, and adding unnecessary fuel to neo-conservative fires” (Graham, 2004). One writer defended Cosby’s right to take poor Black people to task for destructive behavior but countered, “It is far less amusing that Cosby, a multimillionaire chose to criticize the lower economic people when evidence of the habits he condemned . . . can be found at every level of American society” (Asim, 2004). Some critics argued that Cosby should have aimed his remarks more clearly at those in power whose policies contributed to the problems faced by African Americans. “Why isn’t he [Cosby] ranting about the Bush 2005 budget, which would end a slew of programs for dropout prevention?” one writer pointedly asked (Ehrenreich, 2004). Focus on structural racism was a popular counterpoint to Cosby’s speech. Theodore Shaw, president of the NAACP Legal Defence and Educational Fund, argued, “Many of the problems Cosby addressed are largely a function of concentrated poverty in black communities—the legacy of centuries of governmental and private neglect and discrimination” (Freeman, 2004).

Cosby was not without some supporters who believed he had exposed an important truth that Black America needed to address. Some commentators who recognized the criticism leveled at him for airing such views in public acknowledged that Cosby had “reminded us of a hard lesson. . . . even those who live in the darkness because of circumstances beyond their control can exacerbate those problems with their own choices and behaviour” (Moore, 2004). An article in the historically Black newspaper the Pittsburgh Courier pointed to his part in the civil rights struggle and argued, “Bill Cosby deserves a special place in all of our hearts. . . . He, more than any other person, has the right and the obligation to speak frankly to us in the ways we are headed toward demise” (Fritsch, 2004).

The speech made to commemorate the anniversary of the Brown decision was the catalyst for continued ripples of debate in the African American community. Scholar Michael Eric Dyson was so infuriated by Cosby’s comments that he was moved to write a book length rebuttal. Dyson (2005) sought to show that a young comedian who had made some radical and militant comments in his earlier career had forgotten about the importance of the civil rights struggle and was now helping the White power structure abdicate responsibility for the condition of poor Blacks, while also reinforcing negative media stereotypes of his own people. Supporting Cosby’s ideas in the face of this criticism was Juan Williams (2006) who provided a general counterpoint to the arguments put forward by Dyson and other critics.

The debate continued and indeed continues to rumble on as Black America struggles with the challenges of the 21st century. This debate and the speech that the media saw as Cosby’s main contribution to its genesis has come to dominate perceptions of the comedian’s place in the Black freedom struggle. They help explain the criticism Cosby faced when commenting on the Trayvon Martin case. The color-blind ideals of his comedy have been translated as an attempt to move past racial difference and racial prejudice that still color the American experience. His comments about the Black poor and the importance of good parenting and determination to gain an education have been characterized as conservative. At a time when Barack Obama was talking about the “Audacity of hope,” some commentators were talking and writing about the “Audacity of Bill Cosby’s black conservatism” (Coates, 2008). This was not Heathcliff Huxtable, nor was it the comedian so liked by such a wide spectrum of Americans. It was an angry apologist for White racism and a man providing perfect sound bites for a right wing agenda.

The “Color-Blind” Comic

Divisions of opinion concerning Cosby’s brand of Black activism are not new. Thirty-five years before his now infamous “pound cake speech,” commentators were questioning his position in the movement for racial equality. Faith Berry wrote in the New York Times in December 1969, “Nothing on the racial issue has been touched upon, even slightly,” referring to the weekly The Bill Cosby Show on NBC television (Berry, 1969, p. D23). Berry argued that Cosby’s characters were bland and had no vision of their own, they were a “Kind of half-man who, had he lived during the days of Nat Turner, might have sold Turner down the river” (Berry, 1969, p. D23). Veteran Black journalist A.S. “Doc” Young scolded Berry for criticizing Cosby. He argued that it should be acceptable for a Black comedian to produce a show with the intention of making people laugh and without any particular racial message. Furthermore, he asserted that Cosby was not “a professional civil rights leader, a Black Panther, or the head of a poverty program. But as Bill Cosby, comic, wit, humorist and storyteller, he is making an important contribution to Afro-Americans, to Americans as a whole” (Young, 1969, p. D21).

Here, Young made an important point. Cosby was receiving criticism because his comic characters and persona were not seen to be fully engaging with the racial politics of the time. This is different from his off-stage political thought, however. Largely because of the work of Dick Gregory, the role of the Black comic changed in the early 1960s. Gregory crafted a comedy style that responded to the changing racial situation as the civil rights movement dominated the American landscape. He was able to produce material Black enough for Black audiences but not too far from the mainstream to alienate Whites. Gregory was able to affect the conscience of liberal White audiences and combine his humor with the civil rights struggle. In this way, he opened the door to mainstream comedy for Cosby and other Black comedians like Nipsey Russell and Redd Foxx (Nachman, 2003; Lorts, 2008). Originally, Cosby followed in the footsteps of this new form of biting racial humor and social satire. His debut in New York was reported as the story of a young man “hurling verbal spears at the relations between whites and Negroes . . . occasionally he may threaten an unsmiling patron with the cryptic order: you better laugh. I’ve got a club that is the opposite of the Ku Klux Klan” (Gardner, 1969, p. 23). In this respect, Gregory, Cosby, and others were reflecting the sensibilities of their audience at a time of great racial change. Racial humor was topical and it was relevant to both Black and White audiences (Lorts, 2008).

Taking advice from his management, Cosby gradually moved away from telling jokes that satirized the problems of race relations in the United States and focused instead on universal comedic themes. Cosby asserted that he just wanted to be accepted as a human being rather than wearing the label of a Black comic. He was proud that he did not have to alter his routines based on the racial identity of the audience. “There is no great difference between an American Negro and white Americans” (Calhoun, 1964, p. 4). This statement in 1964 became the definition of Cosby’s approach to comedy. His routines appealed to a racially diverse audience and projected a “color-blind” view of American society. Cosby embraced King’s “dream” through his comedy and preached a universal and integrationist message through humor (Higgins, 2007).

He was not the only comedian to feel that he needed to move away from the style created by Gregory. As the civil rights movement began to fracture after the landmark legislation of the mid-1960s failed to bring widespread social and economic change, many Black comics moved away from racial humor toward more universal themes. Paradoxically, the gains of the civil rights struggle and the breakthrough of Black performers into the comic mainstream offered the opportunity to break out of stereotypical characterizations in show business generally and television in particular (Lorts, 2008). Cosby’s role in the Emmy award winning I Spy that premiered in 1965 was the first time a Black performer had played a leading character in a national television series. Cosby was therefore arguably the most visible African American entertainer of the late 1960s.

He did not include racial humor in his routines nor did he put himself physically at the forefront of the civil rights movement in the way Dick Gregory did, but this does not mean that Cosby did not use his position to question racial inequality in America. Here, we can draw an important distinction between his comedy style designed to appeal to a mainstream audience and his political views. He supported civil rights demonstrations, picketing and boycotts, and performed benefits for racial causes (Calhoun, 1964). Cosby, a man who grew up in the ghetto, regularly went to inner-city areas and invested time and money in education and employment programs. He argued in 1965 that areas such as Watts and Compton needed to name their schools after great African Americans and take pride in their Black identity (Hooper, 1965). Cosby asserted that under-privileged youth needed Black history programs to develop a greater sense of racial consciousness and he donated money to help provide opportunities for people in the ghetto.

Cosby’s opinions on the Black freedom struggle were often frank and in the late 1960s, reflecting the rising importance of the Black Power Movement, militant and nationalist in tone. He argued, “The black man’s struggle for power is for his own kind of power, a minority power, and the thing that goes with it is pride” (Seidenbaum, 1967, p. N9). In a revealing interview with Playboy magazine in 1969, Cosby asserted, “Rap and the other militants all speak the truth when they let America know that the black man is not going to take any more bullshit; we’ve been here for 300 years and we’ve had it with waiting.” He went further and argued, “Police forces and the courts have to be overhauled and improved—really improved . . . we need a self-love to throw off that bullshit that’s been laid on us for the past 300 years” (Linderman, 1969, p. 75). These strong political views were not part of Cosby’s comedy persona and he reflected on the disconnection between the two. He told the Chicago Defender, “There is nothing funny in this world about . . . rioting in Harlem, three guys lost in Mississippi” (Calhoun, 1964, p. 4).

Chief among Cosby’s critics, Michael Eric Dyson draws sharp contrast between the militant words of the late 1960s and the attack on under-privileged Blacks in the 2004 speech that commemorated the 50th anniversary of the Brown decision. Dyson argues that Cosby’s words in the Playboy interview represent a rare departure from the “color-blind” creed that he has preached for most of his career. He also asserts that his criticisms of the Black poor in the 21st century contradict his words in 1969. Dyson (2005) states that Cosby’s insistence that

the poor not blame white folk for their troubles appears to be at once a caricature of how the black poor think of their condition and a flat disavowal of the history he so eloquently covered in the Playboy interview. (p. 195)

His criticisms are justified when dealing with Cosby’s 1969 interview and his speech in 2004 as both are expressions of his political thought. It is more problematic to compare these political expressions with Cosby’s comic characters and television shows, however.

Importantly, reaction to his words reflects contests and concerns over the direction of the Black freedom struggle. For Dyson, Cosby’s 1969 words are frozen in time. They represent the true meaning and aspiration of the civil rights struggle and his speech 35 years later is evidence of the defeat of the civil rights narrative by the conservative movement. Bill Cosby in the 1960s represented a man who had broken down the color barrier and entered the mainstream. His comments concerning and support for the racial struggle were most often left at the stage door as he chose to embrace a form of comedy that changed little over the next 40 years. Criticism of Cosby’s choice both then and now emerge because of what he symbolized. His story reflected a wider narrative of the emerging fractures in Black America as class increasingly determined prospects in a post-civil-rights landscape.

The Continuity of Cosby

Cosby’s political ideals have evolved since the 1960s, whereas his comedy has remained largely constant in its style. There are essential continuities that tie the two together, however. Cosby has always been deeply committed to Black education and self-empowerment and the breaking down of negative stereotypes of Black people propagated by the largely White media. These ideals are not divorced from either his words in 1969 or his 2004 speech, but they are central to both his comic and ideological outlook as he has often chosen to combine the two. In his 1969 interview with Playboy, Cosby not only spoke of racism in America but also of the important role of education in improving the lives of young Black people. Cosby stated, “Poor kids have no image that teaches them the value of education” (Linderman, 1969, p. 81). Two years earlier he told the Boston Globe that what Black youth needed was a chance at a better education and apprenticeships to help them gain a trade (Cosby, 1967a, p. 41). Cosby spoke of his desire to teach when his show business career was over. “I want to go back to Philadelphia and teach junior high school in a lower-class section—as low as you can get . . . I’m interested in contact with kids in motivating them to think about higher education” (Duggan, 1964, p. B7). In 1972, Cosby told the Black Congressional Caucus that education was crucial for the Black community and that children needed to have positive role models that promoted inspirational images of Black people (Cosby, 1972).

Cosby’s 1976 PhD thesis focused on the use of his cartoon creation Fat Albert and the Cosby Kids in the elementary school curriculum. He highlighted the institutional racism that damaged the prospects of Black children and the need for the curriculum to be more engaging and help students develop a more positive self-image. Dyson argues that by pointing to institutional racism and the inequality of the school system in his dissertation Cosby criticized the myth of the same American dream that he preached through his “color-blind” comedy, most notably in The Cosby Show. Additionally, by criticizing the educational system itself rather than poor Black students his ideas contrasted sharply with his worldview almost 30 years later (Dyson, 2005). This criticism again reveals disappointment with Cosby’s comedic creations and reflects a desire for them to be more sensitive to the Black freedom struggle that extended beyond the 1960s.

Nevertheless, we can see continuity of ideals between 1976 and Cosby’s views post 2004. He wrote in his thesis that his Fat Albert cartoons can “help teachers combat the insidious effects of racism. The animated characters provide positive images black children can relate to.” Cosby (1976) added that “The universal themes do not isolate these youngsters. . . . Racial awareness is heightened while racial barriers are transcended because the films do not exploit a ‘black’ world, rather they explore the child’s world” (p. 133). Here is a classic statement of the ideal of a universal and integrationist message that runs through all of Cosby’s work. Yes, he acknowledges racism and the problems of racial inequality, but sees a solution as the promotion of positive role models that can be embraced by all Americans. The jump from these ideas in 1976 to The Cosby Show a decade later is not as great as Dyson asserts. Furthermore, in his 2007 collaboration with Alvin Poussaint, Cosby echoed his opinions of the educational system he had outlined in his dissertation. He described “heavily segregated” school systems that do not offer “equal educational opportunities,” and concluded, “The cumulative effects of poor schools for black people over the decades is one very good reason why black students underperform” (Cosby & Poussaint, 2007, p. 104).

Central to Cosby’s understanding of racial inequality from the 1960s to the present is a desire to challenge negative Black stereotypes disseminated by the media. This explains his frustration with what he perceived to be the self-destructive behavior of poor Blacks that he outlined in his 2004 speech. It also opens him up to criticism—justifiably so—because of the very public expression of his ideas. Cosby argued in 1967, “They [the media] use the black man only for tension, for sensationalism. Will he get beaten up? Will he kiss the white girl? And every time there is a cop-out” (Percy, 1967, p. 15). Cosby passionately believed in presenting young Black people with better and more inspirational role models and crucial to this was the depiction of Black people on TV. “I am interested in bettering the black man’s image. I don’t want to present him as a black man, but as a human being” (Cosby, 1967b, p. N7).

This commitment to projecting pride in Black America was further articulated by Cosby in his foreword to The Black Book published in 1974. The book’s authors intended it to be a celebration of Black triumph in the face of adversity. The message of the book was in-keeping with the Black Arts Movement of the 1960s and 1970s. Cosby wrote that the story of Black America was “beautiful, haunting, curious, informative and human” (M. Harris, 1974, foreword). Cosby’s commitment to presenting a positive image of Black people in the media forced him to acknowledge the difficulties of presenting the “real” life for Black people. He told the Los Angeles Times in 1965 that he wanted to do a “family situation comedy on T.V. and it will be a hit because people want to see what goes on in a Negro home today” (Humphrey, 1965, p. D14). In his Playboy interview 4 years later, Cosby suggested that a show that looked at the real lives of a Black family would be unpalatable to a White audience as it would force them to consider the problems of racism and may have to depict White people in a negative perspective. Critics suggest that these remarks and the all Black and idealistic outlook of The Cosby Show are evidence that Cosby ran away from the cause of racial equality when depicting Black life in that program (Dyson, 2005). These criticisms once again reflect a disappointment with the reality that some of Cosby’s more militant or radical political expressions were not reflected in his television projections of Black life.

Undoubtedly, The Cosby Show projected an ideological view of the Black family that had important implications for race relations. What is important here, however, is to recognize the deep commitment held by Cosby to project a positive view of Black Americans in the media. This provides the context for Cosby’s comments in 2004 and after. He decried the messages directed at and stereotypes constructed of Black people by the media. In 2006, Cosby criticized the programming diet served up by Black Entertainment Television (BET). He argued that the negative stereotypes promoted by BET were not representative of Black culture (Samad, 2006). In Come on People, Cosby and Poussaint (2007) devote an entire chapter to warning against the negative stereotypes in the media that undermine Black America.

Cosby is a man deeply proud of his racial heritage and this helps explain the frustrations that spilled over in his 2004 speech. His calls for self-determination echoed the ideas of Martin Delaney, Marcus Garvey, Malcolm X, and others. They were rooted in a long-term commitment to Black education and the projection of positive images of Black people in the media. These concerns provide the essential continuity of Cosby’s engagement with the Black freedom struggle from the 1960s to the present day. Criticism of this engagement centers on the fact that he chose to emphasize some aspects of his political thought through his comedy, while neglecting other elements. This duality is particularly troubling for Black America because of the attacks on the meaning of the civil rights movement by a New Right agenda that seeks to minimize the radical implications of the movement. Cosby’s most celebrated contribution to television comedy is regarded by many as an accomplice of this agenda.

Meet the Huxtables

The Cosby Show has been credited with showcasing probably the most positive presentation of the Black family on American television. It has also been criticized for helping to reinforce the idea that the nation has moved beyond race. The Huxtables were the first Black family long before the Obamas entered the White House. They projected Black achievement, but they also invited audiences to enter a color-blind world in which hard work and education bring rewards regardless of racial identity. King’s dream was of a nation where his children would not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character. The Cosby Show depicted the dream but critics insisted it did so at the expense of reality and in so doing jeopardized the commitment of White people to racial equality in the decades following King’s iconic oration.

The Cosby Show was a natural extension of Cosby’s desire to show more positive images of Black people on television and his commitment to universal comic themes. Cosby was tired of the continuing negative Black stereotypes in the visual media and the over-reliance on violence and sex. The Cosby Show was about a Black family, but it would reveal common family problems and the difficulties of raising children. Indeed, the show won praise and admiration from many parents who saw on screen some of the difficulties they faced and liked the approach Cosby and his characters took. Dr. Alvin Poussaint, a veteran civil rights activist and qualified behavioral psychologist, was employed by Cosby as a script consultant to ensure that the situations and behaviors were realistic and believable.

Some television commentators saw in the success of The Cosby Show a reflection of changing attitudes toward race relations in the United States. Many began to question what Cosby’s hit show was doing for race relations in a more critical way, however. Questions were raised about how “typical” a Black family the Huxtables were and saw Cliff as an obstetrician and Clair his lawyer wife as an idealized representation of the Black middle class. One critic wrote,

Are there black folks out there watching Cosby thinking that they should try to emulate Cosby’s TV family? Are there white folks out there watching and thinking . . . that Cosby’s family somehow transcends race? I really hope there is nobody thinking any of these things. (Sampson, 1986)

Making reference to the potential for The Cosby Show to damage race relations, the critique concluded by warning, “One ought to be sceptical about a [television show] featuring a black family that is the most popular program among whites in South Africa” (Sampson, 1986).

Cosby was particularly irritated by critics who accused the show of not being Black enough or not dealing with racial issues. Cosby was angry because of the challenge to his belief in the universal connections between races and opposition to his desire to present simply positive representations of Black people. He complained, “Why do they want to deny me the pleasure of being an American and just enjoying life? Why must I make all the Black social statements? . . . so people can say ‘This is a Black Show’” (Norment, 1985, p. 30). Dr. Poussaint (1988) defended the reality represented by the Huxtable family. He wrote, “There are families like the Huxtables in many communities; in the past several decades, the number of Black Professionals in America has more than tripled, and the Black middle class has grown significantly”(p.73). Addressing criticisms that the show needed to engage more with problems facing Black America, he argued, “Critical social disorders, like racism, violence and drug abuse, rarely lend themselves to comic treatment: trying to deal with them on a sitcom could trivialise issues that deserve serious, thoughtful treatment” (Poussaint, 1988, p. 74). Cosby was pursued by a paradox. He defended his show as entertainment rather than political statement. Yet in doing so, he projected color-blind ideals that opened a discussion about social realities and reflected an increasing debate over the state of the Black freedom struggle as America approached the dawn of the 21st century.

Academic, Henry Louis Gates Jr., criticized The Cosby Show for not acknowledging the restricted life opportunities of many Black Americans. He further argued that the Huxtables represented invented symbols of racial transformation as a form of cultural compensation for the incomplete social changes brought by the civil rights movement in the 1960s (Gates, 1989). As The Cosby Show approached its final episode in 1992, commentators and academics probed its impact on race relations and the extent to which it had engaged with the continued Black freedom struggle. Some argued that the show had helped raise Black consciousness and changed the way White people viewed African Americans. Thanks to the Huxtables, White people now had “a bigger palette for forming images of black people. No longer do one-dimensional images proliferate” (Jones, 1992). Some others pointed to the subtle messages of racial pride and reminders of the struggle for racial equality that were provided by the show. Cosby won a battle with NBC producers when he refused to remove an “End Apartheid Now” poster from his on-screen son Theo’s room. The show also included an episode in 1986 that celebrated the life of Martin Luther King in the year America recognized his birthday with a national holiday for the first time (Shales, 1992). Interestingly, Cosby’s comedy showed little evolution from the mid-1960s onward, but this in many ways enabled him to be more overtly racial and address racial themes on mainstream television within the context of the universal audience appeal offered by the show.

Reflections on The Cosby Show somewhat later revealed the extent to which some Black Americans appreciated these indicators of racial pride and commitment to the ongoing struggle for racial equality. A study of Black middle-class viewers of the show in 1995 found that respondents could recognize “A kind of intervention against racism” in a subtle way (Inniss & Feagin, 1995, p. 706). Speaking on a national radio program commemorating the 25th anniversary of the first screening of The Cosby Show, Black author Teresa Wiltz described it as “activist television disguised as a sitcom” (Roberts, 2009). Those who criticized the show for depicting a one-dimensional and largely unreal view of a Black middle-class family often ignored subtle attempts to broaden the range of characters and issues in the later series. There was from 1990 onward a move away from episodes and story lines solely focused around domestic issues and a closer engagement with education, employment, and problems affecting Black urban youth (Gray, 1995). Cosby also then sponsored other shows, one of which, Here Now, took place in an urban community center (A. Poussaint, interview with author, December 7, 2012). Here, we saw some of the more socially concerned aspects of his political thought touching on his entertainment career in a way that many liberal critics suggest he should have embraced far more often.

For many critics, however, the lasting impact of The Cosby Show was the promotion of an “enlightened racism” that helped a conservative agenda minimize the legacy of the civil rights movement, especially during the years of the Reagan administration. The extent to which the show failed to offer a realistic view of the problems facing Black America as the end of the 20th century approached was exposed by the juxtaposition of the final episode with the Los Angeles riots of 1992. As Theo Huxtable finally graduated college with his proud parents watching on, south central Los Angeles burned and riots expressed a release of pent-up Black frustration in the wake of the Rodney King case. Cosby pre-recorded a message to go out on KNBC, the local television station, in case rioting and disorder occurred. At the end of the show, Cosby told the audience, “Let us all pray that everyone from the top of the government down to the people in the streets . . . would all have good sense. And let us pray for a better tomorrow, which starts today” (Du Brow, 1992). News anchor, Jess Marlow, echoed the message of Mayor Tom Bradley when he introduced The Cosby Show encouraging people to stay home, cool off, and remember what Thursday nights used to be like (Du Brow, 1992).

This call for calm and the nostalgic view of the show as a soothing balm applied to angry racial tensions served to reinforce the view that Cosby’s sitcom did not tackle the real problems of Black America. Indeed, a study published in 1992—part funded by Cosby himself—revealed that the show actually promoted an “enlightened racism” among its audience. Sut Jhally and Justin Lewis (1992) argued that The Cosby Show had helped a process in which White people no longer saw racism as a problem in society. Making a point that would later be linked to Cosby’s attack on the Black poor in his 2004 speech; the authors suggested that the show promoted middle-class status as “a mark of normalcy” (Jhally & Lewis, 1992). In so doing, it forced lower class Blacks to accept a value system based on class that fixed them in a position of cultural inferiority. The negative effects of The Cosby Show were deepened by a cultural discourse promoted by a conservative conception of politics and race during the Reagan administration. Poor Blacks were represented on television news as a menace to the health of the nation and “model minorities” who worked hard were lauded. Cliff Huxtable fitted neatly into this latter representation and these African American characters were viewed as “just like whites, loyal to the ethos of capitalism and bourgeois individualism, and that loyalty rewarded them with the same middle-class privileges as whites” (Gray, 1995, p. 19).

Bill Cosby—Black Conservative?

These criticisms of The Cosby Show and Cosby’s speech in 2004 have led many to label him as a “conservative.” In the ongoing contest over the future direction of the Black freedom movement, Cosby has been cast as an accomplice in the advance of the conservative agenda. Structural racial inequality that leaves one in four African Americans languishing below the poverty line is not tackled by this conservatism, which only helps perpetuate a concerted attempt by popular cultural and policymakers to sanitize the radical messages of the civil rights struggle. Is Bill Cosby a “Black conservative?” I have argued for the essential continuity of Cosby’s comedic style and a slow evolution of his political thought rather than sharp breaks with the past. He has consistently committed to the essential importance of education and the need to promote positive images of Black people to act as role models for the next generation, but his place in the movement for Black equality has been given varying interpretations. In an e-mail correspondence with the author, veteran civil rights campaigner Julian Bond asserted that Cosby “Doesn’t jump into my mind when I think about civil rights activists” (J. Bond, e-mail correspondence with author, January 4, 2013). Dr. Poussaint, Cosby’s long-time collaborator and friend, argued in a recent interview,

He is not in my mind a black conservative at all. . . . I have been talking about these things [problems in the black community] all my life too. . . . they have not attacked me about being a black conservative. (A. Poussaint, telephonic interview with author, December 7, 2012)

Certainly, some aspects of what Cosby said in that 2004 speech can be viewed as “conservative” and, without a more nuanced analysis of the connection between his comedy persona and its relationship to his political ideals, regarded as a radical departure from some of his earlier connections to the Black freedom struggle. More important, however, is what the term “Black conservative” has come to represent in the continued struggle over the state of the Black freedom struggle. It is seen as an attack on the very foundations of what that struggle aims to achieve. Although African Americans embody the most distinctly liberal political group in the United States, their support for government intervention has declined since the 1970s as they have become gradually more conservative in outlook (Brown, 2006).

Fear among many liberals and civil rights activists that the New Right has prevailed in the struggle to define the parameters of the Black freedom movement helps explain the criticism that Cosby has faced since 2004 and the often negative interpretation of his connection with the movement for Black equality. It is wrong to label Cosby a “Black conservative” and in so doing we ignore both the different patterns of thought that are encompassed by the term and the greater nuance inherent in Cosby’s long-term connection with the freedom struggle. A closer look at the ideals expressed by Black conservative intellectuals and those elucidated by Cosby reveals subtle differences that testify to the greater complexity of his engagement with the movement for Black equality.

Chief among the Black conservative intellectuals who rose to prominence from the 1980s onward was Shelby Steele. He argued that Blacks needed to let White America “off the hook” for the problems in the Black community in the same way that Bill Cosby had. Citing The Cosby Show as evidence, Steele asserted that the comedian and entertainer did not confront White audiences with racial guilt. Black politicians who supported an end to affirmative action and school bussing programs were in effect “Political Cosbys” (Sheridan, 1996). Here, we see an example of Black conservative thought co-opting the message of The Cosby Show to support its own agenda. There are, however, important differences between Cosby’s ideals and those of conservative intellectuals. Personal responsibility and self-determination are popular elements of conservative thinking. The idea that government cannot solve all the problems facing Black America and that African Americans need to look to themselves is a key part of Cosby’s message. The Black conservative thinkers who rose to prominence in the 1980s believed strongly in the power of the individual to gain social mobility and economic empowerment (Ondaatje, 2004). This ignores the historical reality that collective self-determination has been the most powerful force in advancing the civil rights struggle (Franklin, 2007). Importantly, Cosby’s main message is about collective self-determination and resonates with the far more militant views of Malcolm X, and in the later stages of his career, Martin Luther King. The speaking tour that he embarked on before writing Come on People challenged the Black communities to work together to tackle difficulties impacting those communities. Cosby advocated collective self-determination not simply individual self-determination.

Cosby’s “call-outs” summon the spirit of the generation of the civil rights movement in an attempt to harness collective self-determination to deal with the problems in Black America. In this sense, he venerates the achievements and courage of those who fought for equality in the 1950s and 1960s. Again this message is not wholly consistent with the one disseminated by many conservative thinkers. Thomas Sowell, a leading Black conservative intellectual, played down the achievements of the 1960s. He suggested in 2005 that Blacks were making greater progress before that decade and that liberals had exploited the freedom struggle as a vehicle through which to push for expanded welfare programs and bigger government; consequently promoting a victim complex among African Americans (R. L. Harris, 2006). Cosby gave his 2004 speech as an event celebrating the achievements of the civil rights movement and he acknowledged these. Indeed, he was speaking at an event celebrating the Brown decision that ruled against racially segregated schooling in the United States. Michael Ondaatje (2010) has pointed to the anti-Brown stance held by many Black conservative scholars who argue that integrated education has done more harm than good for African American children. They also consistently criticized public schools and called for self-organization and rejected government funding for education. In Come on People, Cosby encouraged parents to take advantage of government programs in education (Cosby & Poussaint, 2007).

Many modern Black conservative thinkers have been accused of having few links with lower class people. They are disconnected from the social, economic, and political problems of the ghetto and offer solutions for the problems in communities that they are far removed, both physically and culturally from (Ondaatje, 2004). The same cannot be said for Cosby. Having grown up in the projects of Philadelphia before making his fortune in show business, he remained connected with lower class communities throughout his career. Cosby’s speaking tours take him into socioeconomically depressed neighborhoods. The provocative subtitle of Dyson’s 2005 book was Has the Black Middle Class Lost Its Mind? The suggestion that Cosby represents a Black middle-class conservative opinion removed from the problems faced by poor Blacks and that completely rejects government-based initiatives to help the Black poor is misleading. With some exceptions, data suggest that middle-class Blacks are as likely as less affluent ones to believe that the government should provide help to address the problems of poverty and unemployment (Brown, 2006). The middle class are not a monolithic entity that shares a conservative outlook. Furthermore, the Black conservatism that emerged during the 1980s was not a “single, coherent system of ideas” (Ondaatje, 2010, p. 156).

Those who view, rightly in many respects, this Black conservative thinking as a threat to the continued struggle for Black equality and an attack on the legacy of the civil rights movement have been those leading the criticism of Cosby and his place in the freedom movement. This criticism ignores the differences that exist between Cosby’s messages both recently and throughout his career and certain strains of Black conservatism. It is also important to remember that both Martin Luther King and Malcolm X made comments that share sentiments with Cosby’s most recent engagement with the Black freedom struggle. Indeed, one commentator who attended one of Cosby’s “call-outs” in 2008 described watching the comedian and entertainer summon his “Inner Malcolm X” (Coates, 2008). Cosby is not a Black conservative by the standards of the Black conservative intellectuals who emerged in the 1980s. His 2004 speech was crude and blunt. It represented ideas that are reflective of a certain strain of conservative thinking but are also clearly linked to an expression of self-determination that has its roots in militant activism. Cosby’s words grew out of a frustration at the continued poverty and educational underachievement faced by many lower class Blacks. His message of collective self-empowerment articulated since 2004 has often been tied to a broad conservative agenda. This agenda is seen as a direct attack on the legacy of the civil rights movement and criticism of, and praise for, Cosby must be viewed as part of the continuing contest over the future direction of the Black freedom struggle.

Does Color-Blindness Blur Our Vision?

A key element of that contest is the extent to which America has or should move beyond race. In 1978, academic William Julius Wilson published The Declining Significance of Race—Blacks and Changing American Institutions. Wilson was widely criticized for being ignorant of the continued problems of racial inequality. As Wilson explained most recently in 2012, he had argued that class was increasingly important in determining the life prospects of African Americans but had not suggested that race was no longer important in shaping those lives. Wilson points out that the position of poor Blacks is in many respects worse now than when his book was originally published and the concept of a post-racial society is inappropriate when applied to contemporary America (Wilson, 2012).

Cosby’s comedic persona and the work he did on I Spy and The Cosby Show in particular have been criticized as an attempt to move beyond race and ignore its continued importance in American life. His 2004 speech has been cited as a betrayal of the Black poor because its message allowed White America to abdicate responsibility for continued racial inequality. The election of Obama in 2008 reinforced, for many, the concept of moving beyond race. It allowed White voters the opportunity to “practise color-blindness” (Bernard, 2011, p. 14). This same color-blindness and sense of racial universalism has been promoted by Cosby throughout much of his comedy creations.

The reaction stimulated by Cosby’s speech in 2004 is reflective, therefore, of the long reach of the legacy of the civil rights movement; a reach that has also shaped responses to Obama. During his run for the presidency, Obama similarly engaged with the debate surrounding the problems faced by poor Black Americans. Speaking during his 2008 campaign, he urged Black parents to spend more time helping to educate their children. In June of that year, Obama told a mainly Black audience in Chicago that while racism provided the context for problems in the Black community, “We can’t simply write these problems off to past injustices. . . . we can’t keep using that as an excuse” (Wills, 2008). In words not dissimilar to those used by Cosby, the presidential candidate asserted, “any fool can have a child, that doesn’t make you a father” (Chaney, 2008).

Four months earlier Obama had received muted criticism for a “Cosby-like” speech in which he encouraged parents to take more interest in their children’s schooling and provide healthy and nutritious meals on a regular basis. Some were offended and suggested that his message should not only be directed at Black families but at working-class Whites also. The Obama campaign responded that he had made similar speeches to White audiences and did so in the lead-up to the Iowa caucus (Tyrkala & Konkol, 2008). On the whole, Obama did not receive anywhere near the same criticism for his message as had been elicited by Cosby, however. This was partly because of the way Obama expressed his ideas. The presidential candidate was regarded as less “scolding” in his attitude toward poor Black people (Nicholas & Finnegan, 2008). It was also because of the contrast between dominant perceptions of Cosby as shaped by his comedic persona and the more overtly “conservative” political expressions in his speech. Furthermore, Obama continually balanced his criticism of some in the Black community with a recognition that government needed to do more. Many political commentators have suggested that Obama’s remarks about individual responsibility were part of an electoral strategy to move to the center ground and appear more appealing to White voters. Frederick Harris (2012) has argued that the election of Obama and his adoption of rhetoric similar to that used by Cosby are symptomatic of the rise of a “politics of respectability.” He asserts that this makes it easier for policymakers to abandon government support for the Black poor. A color-blind ideal leads many to believe that the struggle for Black equality is over. Reactions to Obama’s election in 2008, more generally, reveal the extent to which the racial and cultural struggles of the 1960s continue to affect American life (Ward, 2011).

Conclusion

In a similar sense, reactions to Cosby’s speech in 2004 and reflections on his career as a comedian and an entertainer have been heavily influenced by the contest over the direction and shape of the Black freedom struggle. This contest began in the decade of huge legislative advance for African Americans when commentators questioned how much Cosby’s characters and comic routine engaged with and advanced the Black freedom struggle. It continued in the 1980s as the conservative movement gained political ascendancy and attempted to redefine the parameters of the civil rights struggle as one of individual responsibilities at the same time as The Cosby Show projected an image of Black achievement. Now, it continues to rage in the early 21st century when conservatives and liberals debate the merits of a color-blind post-racial ideal as Cosby preaches a message of Black self-determination and collective action to tackle the problems in the Black community. Throughout these different phases of his entertainment career, “Cos” has retained an essential commitment to Black advancement and African American culture through the promotion of the importance of education and positive role models in the visual media.

Reaction to his comedy and his political ideals has revealed so much about the contested legacy of the civil rights movement, because while his comedy style has shown remarkable continuity since the mid-1960s, his political thought has evolved in ways that intersect with wider debates about the problems facing the Black community. The militant and radical words of Cosby in Playboy in 1969, his endorsement of civil rights causes, help for the under-privileged and critique of systemic racism contrasted with the color-blind worldview projected by his comic creations. His more recent message of Black self-determination and community action that has links to conservative thought exists alongside repeats of The Cosby Show and the associated projection of a color-blind world symbolically led by Barack Obama. Such duality and visibility have so often made Cosby a reference point for the position of Blacks in America in the years since the civil rights movement.