Wednesday, March 19, 2008
Let's keep talking about race
Obama has opened a conversation about race that we all need to continue. If you haven't heard his speech, or read it, please do. Right here.
Depending on whether we all, or most of us -- or at least enough of us -- keep on talking, it could be a real historic text.
Let's have testimony time, brothers and sisters. Let's confess our sins, and profess our hopes.
Here's a big ball of contradictions to start:
I am a Southerner. I am a liberal (by present standards). I love studying Southern history -- all of it.
I venerate the Rev. Dr. MLK Jr., Robert E. Lee, and Confederate Brig Gen. Stand Waite, Cherokee, among other Southerners.
I do not venerate Abraham Lincoln, because while he "saved the country," whether the country should have been saved, or the states set loose to follow their own destinies (and it would NOT have been pretty), was one of the twin sparks for the war, the other one, of course, being what to do about slavery. Lincoln did the legal equivalent of burning the village in order to save it.
I fell in love with the first little black girl I ever saw, in Head Start the summer of '70.
Someone close to me, an adult, told me when I was very little something like: "If you call a nigger a nigger, he'll come in the night and slit your throat in bed."
As a teen, I looked at the Klan, flirted witht he romance surrounding it, and was revulsed -- because of the message of the Cross of Christ. I try to see Jesus in every face now, red or yellow, black or white. I tend to dislike people now for what's inside them, not what they look like on the outside.
The first minorities I knew were little brown boys and girls: Cherokees.
At Lousiana Downs once years ago, I accidentally bumped into an old black man so hard it knocked him to the floor. He got up apologizing, brushing me off. I'll never forget it. It was a God moment.
Years later, in Mobile, Ala., I stopped for gas in a ... I pause, but it's true ... in a black part of town (language habits) ... and for the first time in my life found myself among black people in a situation where I didn't feel like I was an intruder, or that they were. I realized later that that's the effect of the middle class.
But then another time, I found myself just outside the French Quarter in New Orleans and was scared to death. And I realize now that that's the effect of the angry, self-destructive spiral of poverty, just outside the lights of wasted wealth.
And another time, on the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation, I, a white guy, was very self-conscious to be driving a pickup with an Oklahoma tag -- they say "Native America" on them -- in Lakota country. And when Dr. ER ran into a Total in Pine Ridge, S.D., proper, she came out and said she felt like she was in a foreign country, because the signage was in Lakota and there was Lakota flute music playing and she was the only white person in the place.
Daddy ER used the word "nigra." He was born in 1914. Most white Southern men of his generation did.
I have used the n-word in reference to Obama, but in what I meant to be a kind of sophisticated-humor-enlightened-white-person sort of way. Talking to Dr. ER. We laughed -- and she is no more racist than I am. We both, though, are products of our upbringing and our region.
The word "Injun" has crossed my lips. Our family word for Chinese cuisine is "slope food."
There are at least a dozen Confederate flags here in my home office, including two full-sized one tacked to the ceiling: a navy jack (what's known generally as "the Confederate flag," which even knowledgeable people miscall the "battle flag" [here's the battle flag]); and the First National, which is the actual "Star and Bars."
I used to have a Confederate flag license plate on the front of my vehicle. I used to have a bumper sticker that says "Southern by the Grace of God," complete with battle flag. I might again some day. I do now carry a keychain with a plastic battle flag for a fob.
--ER
Depending on whether we all, or most of us -- or at least enough of us -- keep on talking, it could be a real historic text.
Let's have testimony time, brothers and sisters. Let's confess our sins, and profess our hopes.
Here's a big ball of contradictions to start:
I am a Southerner. I am a liberal (by present standards). I love studying Southern history -- all of it.
I venerate the Rev. Dr. MLK Jr., Robert E. Lee, and Confederate Brig Gen. Stand Waite, Cherokee, among other Southerners.
I do not venerate Abraham Lincoln, because while he "saved the country," whether the country should have been saved, or the states set loose to follow their own destinies (and it would NOT have been pretty), was one of the twin sparks for the war, the other one, of course, being what to do about slavery. Lincoln did the legal equivalent of burning the village in order to save it.
I fell in love with the first little black girl I ever saw, in Head Start the summer of '70.
Someone close to me, an adult, told me when I was very little something like: "If you call a nigger a nigger, he'll come in the night and slit your throat in bed."
As a teen, I looked at the Klan, flirted witht he romance surrounding it, and was revulsed -- because of the message of the Cross of Christ. I try to see Jesus in every face now, red or yellow, black or white. I tend to dislike people now for what's inside them, not what they look like on the outside.
The first minorities I knew were little brown boys and girls: Cherokees.
At Lousiana Downs once years ago, I accidentally bumped into an old black man so hard it knocked him to the floor. He got up apologizing, brushing me off. I'll never forget it. It was a God moment.
Years later, in Mobile, Ala., I stopped for gas in a ... I pause, but it's true ... in a black part of town (language habits) ... and for the first time in my life found myself among black people in a situation where I didn't feel like I was an intruder, or that they were. I realized later that that's the effect of the middle class.
But then another time, I found myself just outside the French Quarter in New Orleans and was scared to death. And I realize now that that's the effect of the angry, self-destructive spiral of poverty, just outside the lights of wasted wealth.
And another time, on the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation, I, a white guy, was very self-conscious to be driving a pickup with an Oklahoma tag -- they say "Native America" on them -- in Lakota country. And when Dr. ER ran into a Total in Pine Ridge, S.D., proper, she came out and said she felt like she was in a foreign country, because the signage was in Lakota and there was Lakota flute music playing and she was the only white person in the place.
Daddy ER used the word "nigra." He was born in 1914. Most white Southern men of his generation did.
I have used the n-word in reference to Obama, but in what I meant to be a kind of sophisticated-humor-enlightened-white-person sort of way. Talking to Dr. ER. We laughed -- and she is no more racist than I am. We both, though, are products of our upbringing and our region.
The word "Injun" has crossed my lips. Our family word for Chinese cuisine is "slope food."
There are at least a dozen Confederate flags here in my home office, including two full-sized one tacked to the ceiling: a navy jack (what's known generally as "the Confederate flag," which even knowledgeable people miscall the "battle flag" [here's the battle flag]); and the First National, which is the actual "Star and Bars."
I used to have a Confederate flag license plate on the front of my vehicle. I used to have a bumper sticker that says "Southern by the Grace of God," complete with battle flag. I might again some day. I do now carry a keychain with a plastic battle flag for a fob.
--ER
Comments:
<< Home
I want to add a comment about "slope."
I regret introducing the word to Dr. ER. It's a bad habit. like a habit, no thought goes into it.
In high school, my best friend's dad was a hard-core Vietnam vet, a sergeant or something at least. Bad ass. I think he used the word. But we kids, I think, had learned the word when the Vietnamese refugees came through Fort Chaffee/Fort Smith.
And I hope that a certain good friend and bloggy buddy hears this as confession.
I regret introducing the word to Dr. ER. It's a bad habit. like a habit, no thought goes into it.
In high school, my best friend's dad was a hard-core Vietnam vet, a sergeant or something at least. Bad ass. I think he used the word. But we kids, I think, had learned the word when the Vietnamese refugees came through Fort Chaffee/Fort Smith.
And I hope that a certain good friend and bloggy buddy hears this as confession.
I can not express the sadness that this speech brings too me. I had hoped that Obama would not play "his" black race card and would truely, truely move forward to a new day and a new way. But he did play this old card. This worn old card of make whitey feel guilty, and don't reject our own black racial legends.
I said here once that Obama as a Chicago politician was just old wine in a new skin. Now I know for certainty that such is true.
You guys go ahead and talk about race if you want to. I'm tired of the subject, and I have nothing left to work out about it.
I said here once that Obama as a Chicago politician was just old wine in a new skin. Now I know for certainty that such is true.
You guys go ahead and talk about race if you want to. I'm tired of the subject, and I have nothing left to work out about it.
Your sins and confession have been noted my son. we will discuss in detail your penance at another time after have had time to review and assess the impact.
DrLobo,
You are an old, battle-scarred soldier in this thing. I filter your sadness and your words through that. If you're spent, you spent well. Be glad.
Let others continue.
You are an old, battle-scarred soldier in this thing. I filter your sadness and your words through that. If you're spent, you spent well. Be glad.
Let others continue.
Yer kind of a Jeremiah Wright, in yer own way. You've earned the right to yer cynicism.
But I saw and heard and utterly different speech than you did.
But I saw and heard and utterly different speech than you did.
The thought of hurting my friend and bloggy buddy actually helps me crystalize my thinking on use of language.
People? Eh. But a person! Someone I don't want to hurt!
People? Eh. But a person! Someone I don't want to hurt!
I have to admit, I winced when I saw it, but took it in the spirit of the confession. S'Ok. And it ultimately ends up being a do unto others thing, don't it?
I'm trying to think of how to enter into the discussion. I'm always thinking about race, that's part of the reason for my blog. And I am, at this moment, writing a paper in which I talk about my lived experience with race. I don't know. I certainly don't think that we need more liberal guilt, but man, I think we could inject some good liberal shame. Maybe we'd be more inclined to change things if we saw how inside of us race problems are, and how we're all hurting ourselves and each other.
I do think everyone should spend time as a cops reporter in a town with race issues. That was the best training ground I ever had. You don't get very far on that beat unless you wise up about race pretty damn fast.
I'm trying to think of how to enter into the discussion. I'm always thinking about race, that's part of the reason for my blog. And I am, at this moment, writing a paper in which I talk about my lived experience with race. I don't know. I certainly don't think that we need more liberal guilt, but man, I think we could inject some good liberal shame. Maybe we'd be more inclined to change things if we saw how inside of us race problems are, and how we're all hurting ourselves and each other.
I do think everyone should spend time as a cops reporter in a town with race issues. That was the best training ground I ever had. You don't get very far on that beat unless you wise up about race pretty damn fast.
Respectfully, drlobojo, you're wrong. Obama did not play the race card. I'm white, and I thought it was an amazing speech. (I read the transcript of the full speech because I only caught a portion of it on tv.) Obama provided a context for the Rev. Wright, and he made it clear he also understands why so many people do not want to talk about race. No one likes being reminded about some of the truly terrible things that happened in this country, but for people who lived through those times those experiences shaped their worldview. Medgar Evers, for example, was murdered in 1963. That's pretty recent history.
I'm also one of those people he mentioned who's the descendant of white immigrants who came to this country long after slavery was abolished. I've never felt like I've benefited from any sort of white privilege and I hate like hell being made to feel guilty for sins committed by other people 200 years ago. But I'm also enough of a realist to recognize that race is still an issue in this country, and, yes, even though I don't like to admit it, some of the stuff I've enoyed over the years resulted (and still results) from other people being oppressed, exploited, or excluded. To pretend otherwise is to be willfully ignorant. The way to solve problems is to acknowledge they still exist rather than to pretend that just because everyone is talking around something it no longer exists.
IMHO, I don't think Obama should have had to say anything about the Rev. Wright to begin with. I see absolutely mind-boggling bigotry and hatred paraded on a regular basis by white evangelists on television (remember [IIRC] Falwell's pronouncement that the U.S. deserved to be attacked on 9/11 because of tolerance toward gays? If wishing terrorism on the U.S. isn't anti-American, what is?) so it's not like one black pastor has an exclusive on inflammatory rhetoric.
My Significant Other, a thoroughly blue collar sort of white guy, was impressed by the speech. His take was Obama was stating simple fact when it comes to race relations in this country and the schizophrenic way people behave, but he was also quite sure the right wing punditry was going to go ballistic (and by the references I've seen on other blogs, they have) and that the MSM in general will try to downplay both the content and the effect of the speech. That also seems to be happening.
He also thought it was great that Obama refused to disassociate himself from Rev. Wright. The easy way out would have been a vehement denouncement of both the man and the message; instead he chose to stand by his friend while disagreeing with the friend's rhetoric. The S.O.'s reaction was, "Finally, a Democrat with a spine!"
I'm also one of those people he mentioned who's the descendant of white immigrants who came to this country long after slavery was abolished. I've never felt like I've benefited from any sort of white privilege and I hate like hell being made to feel guilty for sins committed by other people 200 years ago. But I'm also enough of a realist to recognize that race is still an issue in this country, and, yes, even though I don't like to admit it, some of the stuff I've enoyed over the years resulted (and still results) from other people being oppressed, exploited, or excluded. To pretend otherwise is to be willfully ignorant. The way to solve problems is to acknowledge they still exist rather than to pretend that just because everyone is talking around something it no longer exists.
IMHO, I don't think Obama should have had to say anything about the Rev. Wright to begin with. I see absolutely mind-boggling bigotry and hatred paraded on a regular basis by white evangelists on television (remember [IIRC] Falwell's pronouncement that the U.S. deserved to be attacked on 9/11 because of tolerance toward gays? If wishing terrorism on the U.S. isn't anti-American, what is?) so it's not like one black pastor has an exclusive on inflammatory rhetoric.
My Significant Other, a thoroughly blue collar sort of white guy, was impressed by the speech. His take was Obama was stating simple fact when it comes to race relations in this country and the schizophrenic way people behave, but he was also quite sure the right wing punditry was going to go ballistic (and by the references I've seen on other blogs, they have) and that the MSM in general will try to downplay both the content and the effect of the speech. That also seems to be happening.
He also thought it was great that Obama refused to disassociate himself from Rev. Wright. The easy way out would have been a vehement denouncement of both the man and the message; instead he chose to stand by his friend while disagreeing with the friend's rhetoric. The S.O.'s reaction was, "Finally, a Democrat with a spine!"
I'm not going to comment on Obama's piece, because I think he's doing what others' think is necessary to win the election. And before I comment on race, I must admit to my own biases: I have said things -- in anger and in jest -- that would offend some, whether its their color of skin or their sexual orientation. But I am offended by my own comments.
I spent much of my adolescents in northeast Texas, and while my grade school and junior high school were predominantly white, a small black community was in the district. My classmates from there were generally poor. They were also my friends, and my mother instilled in me by the fourth grade that nothing about them was cause for me to look down upon them.
I didn't know racism, really, until my mother arrived at school driving a neighbor's car and toting said neighbor's 4-year-old daughter, whom my mother was babysitting. Tony was going home with us so that my mother could later fetch us to baseball practice. When we plopped our pre-teen butts into the backseat, the toddler spun her head around and said, "What's that nigger doing in our car?"
My mother was beside herself. She apologized profusely to Tony, who responded with, “It’s Alright Mrs. (Teditor’s last name). Some kids just grow up that way.”
Several weeks later en route to a baseball tournament in Shreveport, La., Tony was again with us – we commuted many of my black friends home after ball practices, especially when we got into junior high and the buses didn’t run that late. As we drove into this small, southwest Arkansas community, Tony ducked down onto the floorboard and covered himself with a blanket. Mom queried, “What are you doing?” He said, “This is one of them all-white little towns, and if they see a black boy in your car, they’ll kill us all.” A few miles more, we came upon another little town, and Tony flung himself back onto the floorboard. Mom asked, “Is this another white town?” Tony said, “No, this is an all-black town, but they’ll kill us all the same.”
I’ve watched in horror as our junior high school was targeted by the Ku Klux Klan, and I witnessed fights between football teammates just over the color of skin – I also watched a biracial football coach take both gentlemen off to the side and have them hold hands as they skipped around the football field two dozen times or more.
I cringe at the jokes that come when we celebrate MLK. After I told some people my admiration for Obama and that he had my vote, I stood in amazement as a dear friend of mine claimed the reason she couldn’t, wouldn’t vote for him is because during the Iowa caucus, he held up his fist, “basically saying ‘Black Power.’ I will not vote for someone of his kind.”
Because I care for that person and have had respect, I was really upset by the statement. This person will not vote for Obama, and it’s not because of his beliefs or his politics or his foreign policy or his thoughts on war. He will not get the vote because he is black.
And that, I find, makes me sad.
I spent much of my adolescents in northeast Texas, and while my grade school and junior high school were predominantly white, a small black community was in the district. My classmates from there were generally poor. They were also my friends, and my mother instilled in me by the fourth grade that nothing about them was cause for me to look down upon them.
I didn't know racism, really, until my mother arrived at school driving a neighbor's car and toting said neighbor's 4-year-old daughter, whom my mother was babysitting. Tony was going home with us so that my mother could later fetch us to baseball practice. When we plopped our pre-teen butts into the backseat, the toddler spun her head around and said, "What's that nigger doing in our car?"
My mother was beside herself. She apologized profusely to Tony, who responded with, “It’s Alright Mrs. (Teditor’s last name). Some kids just grow up that way.”
Several weeks later en route to a baseball tournament in Shreveport, La., Tony was again with us – we commuted many of my black friends home after ball practices, especially when we got into junior high and the buses didn’t run that late. As we drove into this small, southwest Arkansas community, Tony ducked down onto the floorboard and covered himself with a blanket. Mom queried, “What are you doing?” He said, “This is one of them all-white little towns, and if they see a black boy in your car, they’ll kill us all.” A few miles more, we came upon another little town, and Tony flung himself back onto the floorboard. Mom asked, “Is this another white town?” Tony said, “No, this is an all-black town, but they’ll kill us all the same.”
I’ve watched in horror as our junior high school was targeted by the Ku Klux Klan, and I witnessed fights between football teammates just over the color of skin – I also watched a biracial football coach take both gentlemen off to the side and have them hold hands as they skipped around the football field two dozen times or more.
I cringe at the jokes that come when we celebrate MLK. After I told some people my admiration for Obama and that he had my vote, I stood in amazement as a dear friend of mine claimed the reason she couldn’t, wouldn’t vote for him is because during the Iowa caucus, he held up his fist, “basically saying ‘Black Power.’ I will not vote for someone of his kind.”
Because I care for that person and have had respect, I was really upset by the statement. This person will not vote for Obama, and it’s not because of his beliefs or his politics or his foreign policy or his thoughts on war. He will not get the vote because he is black.
And that, I find, makes me sad.
I grew up in Canada and in Europe and as a child truly believed that God had made a mistake in making me white (AA was way more attractive to me, with it's fighting against and victory over injustice. I was also in love with Sidney Poitier) .
Other than this great disappointment, I have generally been ignorant to blatant racism, probably because I just don't look for it and because I'm white in a predominantly white society. In my neighbourhoods growing up,however, there had always been every kind of interracial marriages, transracial families - of African , East-Indian or Asian descent and nobody has really cared or even talked about it.
I was completely ignorantof the reality of it until I went to Chicago in November to pick up my new daughter who's heritage is AA. The separation that exists between black and white in this mixed society was so in my face that I couldn't ignore it. You don't see very much "mixing" in Chicago, it's either black with black or white with white.
At Navy Pier an AA woman looked at me in disgust when she noticed I was a white woman holding an AA infant. Other than that most people were very friendly, but didn't want to ask too many questions, and some just were conspicuously silent, staring...My favorite had to be the AA woman who, after telling me how beautiful my daughter was, looked at me again and asked:
"Did you steal that child?".(I laughed becuase of course that's what it looked like!)
I realize that the historical memories don't go away that easily, and i thought that BO was right on the mark in his speech, when he was calling for patience with the older generations, but also emphasizing that things have to be dealt with. I don't think he played an old card, but spoke lucidly about the reality of race in the US ( you can't make things go away just by ignoring them), with such grace and kindness toward all.
Other than this great disappointment, I have generally been ignorant to blatant racism, probably because I just don't look for it and because I'm white in a predominantly white society. In my neighbourhoods growing up,however, there had always been every kind of interracial marriages, transracial families - of African , East-Indian or Asian descent and nobody has really cared or even talked about it.
I was completely ignorantof the reality of it until I went to Chicago in November to pick up my new daughter who's heritage is AA. The separation that exists between black and white in this mixed society was so in my face that I couldn't ignore it. You don't see very much "mixing" in Chicago, it's either black with black or white with white.
At Navy Pier an AA woman looked at me in disgust when she noticed I was a white woman holding an AA infant. Other than that most people were very friendly, but didn't want to ask too many questions, and some just were conspicuously silent, staring...My favorite had to be the AA woman who, after telling me how beautiful my daughter was, looked at me again and asked:
"Did you steal that child?".(I laughed becuase of course that's what it looked like!)
I realize that the historical memories don't go away that easily, and i thought that BO was right on the mark in his speech, when he was calling for patience with the older generations, but also emphasizing that things have to be dealt with. I don't think he played an old card, but spoke lucidly about the reality of race in the US ( you can't make things go away just by ignoring them), with such grace and kindness toward all.
# posted by 
: 2:29 PM
: 2:29 PM
With all due respect to drlobojo, I did not hear anything about white guilt (a term invented by conservatives to distance themselves from their own role in perpetuating racism). I heard a serious, thoughtful opportunity to talk about race in an adult fashion, with as many cards on the table as we can have. He may be tired of talking about race, but we haven't had a good talk about it, as a polity, in many a long year.
While I admire ER for his forthrightness and honesty in confessing, I think the issue is not about our own personal journeys through the maze of our own feelings about those of other races. This is about race as a social reality, and how we deal (or don't deal) with it. This is not about our own individual culpability in discriminatory practices, or what benefits we might or might not feel we gain or lose based on the color of our skin. This is about our national character, how much responsibility we are willing to shoulder not only for past wrongs, but for on-going social dislocation and dysfunction rooted in these systemic, historic evils. It isn't enough to say, "My ancestors came to this country after slavery was abolished. Why should I feel guilty." Um, your ancestors came to this country because it was an economic powerhouse and social and cultural refuge built partly on the backs and stained with the blood of slaves and those who died to eradicate it. Slavery and its myriad legacies are part and parcel of your heritage as an American citizen regardless of when your Granmda stepped off the boat at Ellis Island.
Before we can have a serious discussion, I think it is important to be clear what the parameters are, and what the topic is all about. Obama didn't tell us white folk to get all guilty. He told all Americans that we need to remember that there is both greatness and baseness in our history, and we have to accept and deal with all of it in order to envision a better future. Hope is not rooted in rosy visions of the past redivivus, but in the dirty realities that might overcome our past lapses.
While I admire ER for his forthrightness and honesty in confessing, I think the issue is not about our own personal journeys through the maze of our own feelings about those of other races. This is about race as a social reality, and how we deal (or don't deal) with it. This is not about our own individual culpability in discriminatory practices, or what benefits we might or might not feel we gain or lose based on the color of our skin. This is about our national character, how much responsibility we are willing to shoulder not only for past wrongs, but for on-going social dislocation and dysfunction rooted in these systemic, historic evils. It isn't enough to say, "My ancestors came to this country after slavery was abolished. Why should I feel guilty." Um, your ancestors came to this country because it was an economic powerhouse and social and cultural refuge built partly on the backs and stained with the blood of slaves and those who died to eradicate it. Slavery and its myriad legacies are part and parcel of your heritage as an American citizen regardless of when your Granmda stepped off the boat at Ellis Island.
Before we can have a serious discussion, I think it is important to be clear what the parameters are, and what the topic is all about. Obama didn't tell us white folk to get all guilty. He told all Americans that we need to remember that there is both greatness and baseness in our history, and we have to accept and deal with all of it in order to envision a better future. Hope is not rooted in rosy visions of the past redivivus, but in the dirty realities that might overcome our past lapses.
I think it was a marvelous speech, demonstrating, once again, Obama's mastery of delivery and insight. I think he quite successfully what may have been a negative and turned it into a powerful positive.
Obama wasn't my first choice for president. He's not as "right" on every plank as I'd like him to be. Nonetheless, I think he's a decent fella and this speech helps confirm it for me.
I also think he'll make a good leader, something I think we'll need because I suspect hard times are a-coming, thanks largely in part to the lack of useful leadership of the last few decades (Clinton included).
I suspect that this Wright stuff will be an issue ONLY for the ugly Right that wouldn't vote for Obama, anyway. I expect that it will be old news by the next primary.
Obama wasn't my first choice for president. He's not as "right" on every plank as I'd like him to be. Nonetheless, I think he's a decent fella and this speech helps confirm it for me.
I also think he'll make a good leader, something I think we'll need because I suspect hard times are a-coming, thanks largely in part to the lack of useful leadership of the last few decades (Clinton included).
I suspect that this Wright stuff will be an issue ONLY for the ugly Right that wouldn't vote for Obama, anyway. I expect that it will be old news by the next primary.
(h)apa, re: "I have to admit, I winced when I saw it, but took it in the spirit of the confession. S'Ok."
Sister, I winced when I typed it.
GKS, I totally disagree wih this: "I think the issue is not about our own personal journeys through the maze of our own feelings about those of other races."
I think that is exactly what this is about. That's exactly why Obama's speech was inspiriing.
Re, "This is about race as a social reality, and how we deal (or don't deal) with it. This is not about our own individual culpability in discriminatory practices, or what benefits we might or might not feel we gain or lose based on the color of our skin."
There IS no social reality apart from our collective individual experiences and thoughts.
Re, "This is about our national character ..."
There is no national character apart from our collective individual experiences and thoughts.
It's that whole "people" versus "person" thing. "People" can go to hell. The person who is my friend (h)apa, I care about and shudder to think I would ever hurt.
It's all theory at the top. It's all flesh and blood at life level.
To me.
Sister, I winced when I typed it.
GKS, I totally disagree wih this: "I think the issue is not about our own personal journeys through the maze of our own feelings about those of other races."
I think that is exactly what this is about. That's exactly why Obama's speech was inspiriing.
Re, "This is about race as a social reality, and how we deal (or don't deal) with it. This is not about our own individual culpability in discriminatory practices, or what benefits we might or might not feel we gain or lose based on the color of our skin."
There IS no social reality apart from our collective individual experiences and thoughts.
Re, "This is about our national character ..."
There is no national character apart from our collective individual experiences and thoughts.
It's that whole "people" versus "person" thing. "People" can go to hell. The person who is my friend (h)apa, I care about and shudder to think I would ever hurt.
It's all theory at the top. It's all flesh and blood at life level.
To me.
I grew up in a town that was predominantly peopled with White Scandinavians and Native Americans.
There were a handful of black kids, and they tended to be popular and well-liked. Everyone insisted that they were not racist, but they blamed the high crime rate on the Native American reservations nearby.
Most of the white kids I hung out with were completely larcenous...but would complain about the low quality of life around the town on the NA population too.
My dad beat my butt once because he overheard me doing and Eddie Murphy impression (sans vulgarity). He thought I was mocking African American dialects.
My mom was very active in refugee resettlement, and worked very hard to help refugees from communist countries resettle sucessfully in the US. Due to the efforts of the group she was with, we had a lot of Vietnamese kids in our little northwoods town. Some of the "white" girls apparently complained that some Vietnamese boys had said something insulting about them in Veitnamese. How they would know, I'm not sure.
Anyway, several "white" boys got up in arms about it and attacked the Veitnamese boys at the "smoking corner" across the street from the school. One of my Vietnamese friends was hit inthe head with a tire iron and had to be airlifted to Rochester, fighting for his life. Several of my othr firneds, and my foster brother were beaten so badly they couldn't get out of bed for two days.
Swarms of reporters from the Twin Cities came to our town and interviewed lots and lots of people They interviewed my brother, who is a well-spoken articulate person...but when they wrote up his answers they wrote them in a flamboyantly phonetic representation of the northwoods dialect and made my brother sound like a complete dimwit.
They dubbed the altercation a "race riot" and couldn't believe that such a thing could happen in the north.
Later, two of the boys were informed that their mother had been killed during an escape attempt from Vietnam. Their younger brother had rescued her body from the ocean, and had been taken back to Vietnam to prison.
Our church held a memorial service. One of the brothers had converted to Christianity out of loyalty to their foster parents. The other remained Buddhist. The momorial service combined Buddhist and Christian prayers and scripture. There was a hue and cry from the community.
I remeber noticing that even though northerners talked about how racist the south was, and how racest the north wasn't, that Native American workers tended to be given low-visibility jobs, for instance, in the kitchen or the stockroom.
Many years later when my husband and I were unceremoniously relocated by his employer to Alabama, I looked forward to getting to know the south "for real" and dispell all of those self-congradulatory sterotypes that us northerners put on southerners...
...and I leanred that sterotypes, like individuals within homogenous groups, are complex. They are wrong, yes...but not so easily and simply dispelled by knowledge and experience as one might hope. :-)
There were a handful of black kids, and they tended to be popular and well-liked. Everyone insisted that they were not racist, but they blamed the high crime rate on the Native American reservations nearby.
Most of the white kids I hung out with were completely larcenous...but would complain about the low quality of life around the town on the NA population too.
My dad beat my butt once because he overheard me doing and Eddie Murphy impression (sans vulgarity). He thought I was mocking African American dialects.
My mom was very active in refugee resettlement, and worked very hard to help refugees from communist countries resettle sucessfully in the US. Due to the efforts of the group she was with, we had a lot of Vietnamese kids in our little northwoods town. Some of the "white" girls apparently complained that some Vietnamese boys had said something insulting about them in Veitnamese. How they would know, I'm not sure.
Anyway, several "white" boys got up in arms about it and attacked the Veitnamese boys at the "smoking corner" across the street from the school. One of my Vietnamese friends was hit inthe head with a tire iron and had to be airlifted to Rochester, fighting for his life. Several of my othr firneds, and my foster brother were beaten so badly they couldn't get out of bed for two days.
Swarms of reporters from the Twin Cities came to our town and interviewed lots and lots of people They interviewed my brother, who is a well-spoken articulate person...but when they wrote up his answers they wrote them in a flamboyantly phonetic representation of the northwoods dialect and made my brother sound like a complete dimwit.
They dubbed the altercation a "race riot" and couldn't believe that such a thing could happen in the north.
Later, two of the boys were informed that their mother had been killed during an escape attempt from Vietnam. Their younger brother had rescued her body from the ocean, and had been taken back to Vietnam to prison.
Our church held a memorial service. One of the brothers had converted to Christianity out of loyalty to their foster parents. The other remained Buddhist. The momorial service combined Buddhist and Christian prayers and scripture. There was a hue and cry from the community.
I remeber noticing that even though northerners talked about how racist the south was, and how racest the north wasn't, that Native American workers tended to be given low-visibility jobs, for instance, in the kitchen or the stockroom.
Many years later when my husband and I were unceremoniously relocated by his employer to Alabama, I looked forward to getting to know the south "for real" and dispell all of those self-congradulatory sterotypes that us northerners put on southerners...
...and I leanred that sterotypes, like individuals within homogenous groups, are complex. They are wrong, yes...but not so easily and simply dispelled by knowledge and experience as one might hope. :-)
# posted by : 8:20 PM
: 8:20 PM
Holy cow!
I've also learned that my keyboard is apparently not functioning properly! Look at all those typos! Sorry!
I've also learned that my keyboard is apparently not functioning properly! Look at all those typos! Sorry!
# posted by : 8:27 PM
: 8:27 PM
Keep talin' y'all. This post might sit here for a spell.
I want some unabashed conservatives to talk!
I want some unabashed conservatives to talk!
ER,
I'd also like to point out that I only saw white kids beating on the Veitnamese kids, others only saw Native American kids doing it, others reported a "mix" of whtie and Native American.
I usually bow to the "mix" of White and Native American assessment, but figured since I was reporting MY experiance, I'd use just what I saw.
I'd also like to point out that I only saw white kids beating on the Veitnamese kids, others only saw Native American kids doing it, others reported a "mix" of whtie and Native American.
I usually bow to the "mix" of White and Native American assessment, but figured since I was reporting MY experiance, I'd use just what I saw.
# posted by : 9:52 PM
: 9:52 PM
[Tearing a page from EL's private journal...]
May 1998 12:37am
Dear Mary Angel,
When we younger and learning to love and care for one another, our minds were yet filled with the views and dogmas handed down to us by our parents. Regardless of what we may believe to the contrary we were nonetheless guided by the ideals of those who raised us. For good or ill we were what our parents made us. For most people these belief systems will be with them their entire lives; very few can honestly say that they have broken away and learned to think for themselves.
When I was young and growing up as a military brat, I was not, for the most part, exposed to people of different skin colors, nor was I taught to call black people 'Niggers.' Regardless of my parents personal opinions, color was a non-issue-- The military demanded it. That's just the way it was. I would have been beaten if that word had slipped past my lips, and rightly so.
Upon entering Jr. High, I was suddenly surrounded by black children. If I was frightened at all by this it was because of its strangeness. Suddenly I was among people who hated me; not because I stuttered, but because of the color of my skin! By the time I graduated from High School I had picked up a measure of prejudice, and the measure acquired was of equal parts peer pressure, and retaliatory.
It's easy to hate someone who hates you. It goes back to what is taught in the bible; you reap what you sow. Well, I don't want to be burdened by another person's perceptions of what the color of my skin means to them... It isn't fair to me. It isn't fair to them.
I can somewhat understand the black man's point of view and, to that point, reluctantly share it, for our nation has not been kind to him, and how black perceives white is understandable, if not wholly justified. I tell myself I can't look at persons of African descent and say 'Nigger,' and yet I have, to my own shame. Neither he nor I deserve to be judged by the color of our skin.
I have never owned a slave, but I'm blamed for it every day. I've never deliberately tried to hold a black person back from achieving his dreams, but I am blamed for it nonetheless; and made to feel guilty for what I am innocent of.
He and I are both helpless to change it. I will try my damnedest not to teach my children prejudice but they will learn it anyway. No matter how hard he tries to do the same, his children too will learn. It is in our nature to demonstrate prejudice, for each of us carries within us that seed of propensity, 'Evil' if you will...
Today, I can thankfully say that I don't dislike blacks anymore than I do whites, or anyone else for that matter. I am an equal-opportunity despiser; trash is trash regardless of it's origin, or its coat of paint, and in my own defense, I am only human.
I have a seed of goodness within me as well. But it all boils down to this: "Which seed do I nurture?" The yin or the yang?
The world isn't getting any smaller and with racial tensions as they are, what chance do any of us have at living full, productive, and genuinely loving lives when we, by our very natures, pass our fears on to our children... for which they pay the price.
With all my love, sweet Mary Angel,
Eric
May 1998 12:37am
Dear Mary Angel,
When we younger and learning to love and care for one another, our minds were yet filled with the views and dogmas handed down to us by our parents. Regardless of what we may believe to the contrary we were nonetheless guided by the ideals of those who raised us. For good or ill we were what our parents made us. For most people these belief systems will be with them their entire lives; very few can honestly say that they have broken away and learned to think for themselves.
When I was young and growing up as a military brat, I was not, for the most part, exposed to people of different skin colors, nor was I taught to call black people 'Niggers.' Regardless of my parents personal opinions, color was a non-issue-- The military demanded it. That's just the way it was. I would have been beaten if that word had slipped past my lips, and rightly so.
Upon entering Jr. High, I was suddenly surrounded by black children. If I was frightened at all by this it was because of its strangeness. Suddenly I was among people who hated me; not because I stuttered, but because of the color of my skin! By the time I graduated from High School I had picked up a measure of prejudice, and the measure acquired was of equal parts peer pressure, and retaliatory.
It's easy to hate someone who hates you. It goes back to what is taught in the bible; you reap what you sow. Well, I don't want to be burdened by another person's perceptions of what the color of my skin means to them... It isn't fair to me. It isn't fair to them.
I can somewhat understand the black man's point of view and, to that point, reluctantly share it, for our nation has not been kind to him, and how black perceives white is understandable, if not wholly justified. I tell myself I can't look at persons of African descent and say 'Nigger,' and yet I have, to my own shame. Neither he nor I deserve to be judged by the color of our skin.
I have never owned a slave, but I'm blamed for it every day. I've never deliberately tried to hold a black person back from achieving his dreams, but I am blamed for it nonetheless; and made to feel guilty for what I am innocent of.
He and I are both helpless to change it. I will try my damnedest not to teach my children prejudice but they will learn it anyway. No matter how hard he tries to do the same, his children too will learn. It is in our nature to demonstrate prejudice, for each of us carries within us that seed of propensity, 'Evil' if you will...
Today, I can thankfully say that I don't dislike blacks anymore than I do whites, or anyone else for that matter. I am an equal-opportunity despiser; trash is trash regardless of it's origin, or its coat of paint, and in my own defense, I am only human.
I have a seed of goodness within me as well. But it all boils down to this: "Which seed do I nurture?" The yin or the yang?
The world isn't getting any smaller and with racial tensions as they are, what chance do any of us have at living full, productive, and genuinely loving lives when we, by our very natures, pass our fears on to our children... for which they pay the price.
With all my love, sweet Mary Angel,
Eric
Ten years ago, yes. But I can honestly say this is still who I am.
Obama's speech was certainly well crafted, well delivered, inspiring even. But it cannot be denied why he made that speech. The same reason Mitt Romney had to make the same speech... though for different political expediencies. Nonetheless, from this honest and unabashed conservative, Obama, despite his inspiring delivery, failed to address the question of his judgment in sitting twenty years in a church that propagated the kind of speech Reverend Wright is now famous for.
Obama wants ME to try to understand where Blacks are coming from before jumping to any conclusions, but Reverend Wright is given a pass on 'trying to understand' that 'whitey' is not out to get him. Relations between black and white youth is as near to ideal as one could expect since the early days of the Civil Rights movement. Just look at MTV and other such outlets. White girls with Black guys, Black girls with White guys, and the only people who seem to be angry are those who can set aside the hatreds that have been passed down to them by the previous generation.
Obama has twenty years' worth of lapse in judgment to account for. And until he does... without trying to gloss it over, or make excuses for it... he has a problem with a very large segment of the American population. A portion of that is undeniably folks who are only looking for a reason to not like him. But a larger segment wants to understand how he can lead this nation toward racial unity when he himself spent twenty years under the spiritual tutelage of a man who unabashedly used racially charged language to rail against a system that WAS once unjust.... but rarely is anymore.
If there is one injustice that can be said to still be laid squarely at government's feet [not whitey... government], it's the welfare system that, from its inception [not so much anymore], systematically broke up the black family. This alone was a major contributor to today's high percentage of blacks living in prison.
Truly... the day men like Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Malik Shabazz, and Louis Farrakhan-- just to name a few --cease to openly defend and propagate BLACK bigotry, this nation just may be able to get past all this... as past all this that our sinful natures will allow.
Obama's not out of the woods on this yet. He may yet win. But what happens if he doesn't? Most likely men like Jesse, Al, Malik and Louis will make living in the country more difficult, making the prospect for genuine racial unity a far more slippery eel to grasp.
That's as honest and unabashed as I know how to be.
Peace.
Obama's speech was certainly well crafted, well delivered, inspiring even. But it cannot be denied why he made that speech. The same reason Mitt Romney had to make the same speech... though for different political expediencies. Nonetheless, from this honest and unabashed conservative, Obama, despite his inspiring delivery, failed to address the question of his judgment in sitting twenty years in a church that propagated the kind of speech Reverend Wright is now famous for.
Obama wants ME to try to understand where Blacks are coming from before jumping to any conclusions, but Reverend Wright is given a pass on 'trying to understand' that 'whitey' is not out to get him. Relations between black and white youth is as near to ideal as one could expect since the early days of the Civil Rights movement. Just look at MTV and other such outlets. White girls with Black guys, Black girls with White guys, and the only people who seem to be angry are those who can set aside the hatreds that have been passed down to them by the previous generation.
Obama has twenty years' worth of lapse in judgment to account for. And until he does... without trying to gloss it over, or make excuses for it... he has a problem with a very large segment of the American population. A portion of that is undeniably folks who are only looking for a reason to not like him. But a larger segment wants to understand how he can lead this nation toward racial unity when he himself spent twenty years under the spiritual tutelage of a man who unabashedly used racially charged language to rail against a system that WAS once unjust.... but rarely is anymore.
If there is one injustice that can be said to still be laid squarely at government's feet [not whitey... government], it's the welfare system that, from its inception [not so much anymore], systematically broke up the black family. This alone was a major contributor to today's high percentage of blacks living in prison.
Truly... the day men like Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Malik Shabazz, and Louis Farrakhan-- just to name a few --cease to openly defend and propagate BLACK bigotry, this nation just may be able to get past all this... as past all this that our sinful natures will allow.
Obama's not out of the woods on this yet. He may yet win. But what happens if he doesn't? Most likely men like Jesse, Al, Malik and Louis will make living in the country more difficult, making the prospect for genuine racial unity a far more slippery eel to grasp.
That's as honest and unabashed as I know how to be.
Peace.
Two things, then I'll shut up. First, ER, with all due respect (and I mean that phrase with all the sincerity I can muster) - social realities are realities greater than the sum total of all the individual realities that go to make them up. There's an entire branch of study of these kinds of things, called sociology. While not perfect, and not quite scientific in the same way chemistry of physics is, it still deals pretty well with these social realities. That's all I'll say about that.
EL - just a question in regards to the last little bit of your most recent post - "Most likely men like Jesse, Al, Malik and Louis will make living in the country more difficult, making the prospect for genuine racial unity a far more slippery eel to grasp.". Why is it that it is up to blacks, who are the historic victims of systemic violence and near-genocide in this country, who are also blamed for the sorry state of race relations? Why do so many conservatives point the finger of blame at one or two provocative African-Americans, rather than an entire population of white folks who, historically speaking, wished most folks of color nothing but ill? As soon as I find any reference to a group of blacks lynching a white man for glancing at a black woman, or how an entire party was undermined for its support of white civil rights, or how another political party rode to success on a "northern strategy" in support of African-American equality, I'll get back to you. Otherwise, you might be honest, but I don't accept it.
Not a word.
EL - just a question in regards to the last little bit of your most recent post - "Most likely men like Jesse, Al, Malik and Louis will make living in the country more difficult, making the prospect for genuine racial unity a far more slippery eel to grasp.". Why is it that it is up to blacks, who are the historic victims of systemic violence and near-genocide in this country, who are also blamed for the sorry state of race relations? Why do so many conservatives point the finger of blame at one or two provocative African-Americans, rather than an entire population of white folks who, historically speaking, wished most folks of color nothing but ill? As soon as I find any reference to a group of blacks lynching a white man for glancing at a black woman, or how an entire party was undermined for its support of white civil rights, or how another political party rode to success on a "northern strategy" in support of African-American equality, I'll get back to you. Otherwise, you might be honest, but I don't accept it.
Not a word.
I've got the answer to racism in this country:
We need to clone Mr. Bell:
http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2007702190352
I have the privilage on knowing one of his students. He didn't just teach them about race, he taught them about compassion and listening, and thinking charitably.
We need to clone Mr. Bell:
http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2007702190352
I have the privilage on knowing one of his students. He didn't just teach them about race, he taught them about compassion and listening, and thinking charitably.
# posted by : 6:16 AM
: 6:16 AM
I'm with Geoffrey on this. While I know that confession is good for the soul and all, I don't think that Obama was asking for a discussion about our personal views of race. And while the personal and the political are intertwined, it doesn't do much good for us to beat our breasts in remorse without next effecting some significant social change. Kind of like my thoughts on sin both big-S- and little-s, my personal salvation is all well and good, but without any social justice that's enacted in the real world, the gospel is bupkiss.
I know that it takes a significant mass of personal change across the board in order to create social change, but I actually think a significant number of us HAVE changed and now we're ready to take that next step. What Obama is talking about is not race but racial equity, which is tough because getting equity means that if you have any privileges at all, you have to give some up so that others can be lifted to where you are. I know that we think that most of us don't have privilege, but think on this: We sit here on our COMPUTERS that we bought from spare income talking about shit we WATCHED ON THE NEWS or on our high-speed Internets in our leisure time and we're blogging about WHAT WE THINK and we have people WHO LISTEN TO US. And while the money and leisure aspects of this make up privilege, the biggest portion of our privilege is that when we talk, other people take us seriously and listen. We're won't be automatically written off for our unpopular stands like, say, Al, Martin, Malcolm, Jesse, Jeremiah. Or any number of "Ists" who challenge the world and make us all uncomfortable. No one will dismiss our comments without listening to us by saying, "They're so angry, I don't have to listen to this." We are dismissed not for our tone, or our names, or our body parts, or our colors, but by what we say and do.
I think a big portion of where we start is a true reflection about who is Other to us -- blacks, whites, browns, gays, straights, conservatives, liberals -- and listen to what they're saying with an open mind and heart, and then seriously, reflectfully, prayerfully ask ourselves if they're right. We in privileged positions don't begin dialogue just by talking first. Like Paul said, those of us who are strong bear the infirmaties of the weak. We're all strong to someone. So I think we all need to begin this one by listening. To more people than just Barack Obama.
Rant over. Back to listening.
I know that it takes a significant mass of personal change across the board in order to create social change, but I actually think a significant number of us HAVE changed and now we're ready to take that next step. What Obama is talking about is not race but racial equity, which is tough because getting equity means that if you have any privileges at all, you have to give some up so that others can be lifted to where you are. I know that we think that most of us don't have privilege, but think on this: We sit here on our COMPUTERS that we bought from spare income talking about shit we WATCHED ON THE NEWS or on our high-speed Internets in our leisure time and we're blogging about WHAT WE THINK and we have people WHO LISTEN TO US. And while the money and leisure aspects of this make up privilege, the biggest portion of our privilege is that when we talk, other people take us seriously and listen. We're won't be automatically written off for our unpopular stands like, say, Al, Martin, Malcolm, Jesse, Jeremiah. Or any number of "Ists" who challenge the world and make us all uncomfortable. No one will dismiss our comments without listening to us by saying, "They're so angry, I don't have to listen to this." We are dismissed not for our tone, or our names, or our body parts, or our colors, but by what we say and do.
I think a big portion of where we start is a true reflection about who is Other to us -- blacks, whites, browns, gays, straights, conservatives, liberals -- and listen to what they're saying with an open mind and heart, and then seriously, reflectfully, prayerfully ask ourselves if they're right. We in privileged positions don't begin dialogue just by talking first. Like Paul said, those of us who are strong bear the infirmaties of the weak. We're all strong to someone. So I think we all need to begin this one by listening. To more people than just Barack Obama.
Rant over. Back to listening.
It's been said elsewhere, but I don't remember where. What we're *really* seeing here is that the far right couldn't adequately play the race card against Obama. He's not scary enough. So, they found a way to link him to what they've decided is a much more effective "scary black man" so they can more effectively make race an issue.
They probably were looking for links between Obama and some gangsta-rapper, but figured this was good enough. Plus, now they get to play the "He's not Christian enough" card too.
Race is indeed a real issue, but I'm not about to listen to a bunch of old, straight, white guys tell me how I should think about it, which black people I'm allowed to talk with about it, and how those people are allowed to feel about it. Since when did a bunch of old, straight, white guys become the experts on the black experience in America and what is and is not acceptable dialogue about it?
Funny that they think they still get to set the rules, eh?
They probably were looking for links between Obama and some gangsta-rapper, but figured this was good enough. Plus, now they get to play the "He's not Christian enough" card too.
Race is indeed a real issue, but I'm not about to listen to a bunch of old, straight, white guys tell me how I should think about it, which black people I'm allowed to talk with about it, and how those people are allowed to feel about it. Since when did a bunch of old, straight, white guys become the experts on the black experience in America and what is and is not acceptable dialogue about it?
Funny that they think they still get to set the rules, eh?
EL: Thank you. I do accept your testimony -- because it's yours, and since it's your own experience, I can neither agree nor disagree with it. Your opinions on Wright, and what Obama "should do" about his pastor, I disagree with. But of course I do. :-) And I don't think Obama is in the woods on this with anyone who really can affect his electability.
(h)apa and GKS: I sense the assumption of a dichotomy in what Obama said, and in what I'm saying. I'm not saying confession and personal change, etc., is the answer to the exclusion of other solutions. (In fact, individual and group confession, in this sense, is good in and of itself, even without "repentance," since by definition it is providing all who hear it with more information. I mean, I confess to using the s-word, which only fairly recently has started to seem to be to be offensive, and I'll strive to rid it from my vocabulary; but I cop to the Confederate stuff as an act of honesty and forthrightness; I ain't getting rid of any of it.)
Neither is the top-down sociological approach the solution, to the exlusion of all others. I'll try to give a damn about "people." I think y'all, with all due respect -- :-) -- might could think considerably more about individual persons.
Obama talked about both: the grand expanse of American history, and his grandma.
(h)apa and GKS: I sense the assumption of a dichotomy in what Obama said, and in what I'm saying. I'm not saying confession and personal change, etc., is the answer to the exclusion of other solutions. (In fact, individual and group confession, in this sense, is good in and of itself, even without "repentance," since by definition it is providing all who hear it with more information. I mean, I confess to using the s-word, which only fairly recently has started to seem to be to be offensive, and I'll strive to rid it from my vocabulary; but I cop to the Confederate stuff as an act of honesty and forthrightness; I ain't getting rid of any of it.)
Neither is the top-down sociological approach the solution, to the exlusion of all others. I'll try to give a damn about "people." I think y'all, with all due respect -- :-) -- might could think considerably more about individual persons.
Obama talked about both: the grand expanse of American history, and his grandma.
I don't know what you mean about a dichotomy. Yes, he talked about both, and yes we need to start somewhere, and the only thing we have at hand are our experiences. Yet, our personal experiences are very often confused, contradictory, and the vocabulary necessary to talk about "race" is very often a social one, while we try to relate that social fact to our very personal experiences. I think it isn't so much a dichotomy as it is a confusion of terms based on the way a word is used in completely different vocabularies.
Thank you (H)apa.
I have no problem with personal confession. I also see it as not necessarily related to a larger discussion of race as a social and historical fact because too often, when it comes down to personal testimony, we encounter the whole "personal responsibility" straw argument, which leads to all sorts of non sequiturs such as "Did you own slaves?" or "Did you ever lynch anyone?" which are beside the point.
Which leads me to want to ask ELAshley one last question, to which I am quite sure I will not get an answer. Along with all those white men lynched for glancing at black women, I'm quite sure I read somewhere about the Scranton boys, a bunch of Scots Irish coal miners who were railroaded for "raping" a couple black prostitutes back in the 1930's. Denied counsel, facing an all-black jury and a black judge, these illiterate transient workers became a cause celebre, didn't they?
Oh, wait. No, that was the Scotsboro Boys, a group of itinerant blacks who were railroaded for raping some white prostitutes on a train.
And Martin Luther King was a communist sympathizer who couldn't keep it in his pants, so he can be discounted, too.
Thank you (H)apa.
I have no problem with personal confession. I also see it as not necessarily related to a larger discussion of race as a social and historical fact because too often, when it comes down to personal testimony, we encounter the whole "personal responsibility" straw argument, which leads to all sorts of non sequiturs such as "Did you own slaves?" or "Did you ever lynch anyone?" which are beside the point.
Which leads me to want to ask ELAshley one last question, to which I am quite sure I will not get an answer. Along with all those white men lynched for glancing at black women, I'm quite sure I read somewhere about the Scranton boys, a bunch of Scots Irish coal miners who were railroaded for "raping" a couple black prostitutes back in the 1930's. Denied counsel, facing an all-black jury and a black judge, these illiterate transient workers became a cause celebre, didn't they?
Oh, wait. No, that was the Scotsboro Boys, a group of itinerant blacks who were railroaded for raping some white prostitutes on a train.
And Martin Luther King was a communist sympathizer who couldn't keep it in his pants, so he can be discounted, too.
Here I am, trying to be productive. This kind of thing throws water on it:
"to which I am quite sure I will not get an answer"; the MLK dig; the whole attitude toward EL, especially afrer he ansered my invitation to shoot straight.
EL, as host, I apologize.
No wonder we can't talk about effing race in this country. If it's not a smart-ass right-winger, it's a smart-ass left-winger.
Let's all go back into our own GD personal caves and keep interpreting out own damn shadows.
"to which I am quite sure I will not get an answer"; the MLK dig; the whole attitude toward EL, especially afrer he ansered my invitation to shoot straight.
EL, as host, I apologize.
No wonder we can't talk about effing race in this country. If it's not a smart-ass right-winger, it's a smart-ass left-winger.
Let's all go back into our own GD personal caves and keep interpreting out own damn shadows.
I just wanted to chime in on this thread.
My experience is that as soon as we start seeing individual people, with who we can enter into a one on one relationship our discussions of race will be unproductive. We need to start looking past groups, and start seeing people.
Any thoughts about how the "white" suburban church can enter into a meaningful partnership with the "black" urban church. One that hoes beyond simply writing a check.
Love to hear.
Craig
My experience is that as soon as we start seeing individual people, with who we can enter into a one on one relationship our discussions of race will be unproductive. We need to start looking past groups, and start seeing people.
Any thoughts about how the "white" suburban church can enter into a meaningful partnership with the "black" urban church. One that hoes beyond simply writing a check.
Love to hear.
Craig
# posted by : 1:01 PM
: 1:01 PM
Hi Craig.
Did you mean this is didja leave out some words, or what?
"My experience is that as soon as we start seeing individual people, with who we can enter into a one on one relationship our discussions of race will be unproductive. We need to start looking past groups, and start seeing people."
The first sentence seems to contradict the first.
And, as King of the Typos, assume that "hoes" should be "hopes". ?
Did you mean this is didja leave out some words, or what?
"My experience is that as soon as we start seeing individual people, with who we can enter into a one on one relationship our discussions of race will be unproductive. We need to start looking past groups, and start seeing people."
The first sentence seems to contradict the first.
And, as King of the Typos, assume that "hoes" should be "hopes". ?
So, ER, as host, we can't challenge others who seem to not get it? We can't be snarky, or even downright hostile, if someone expresses what another feels is a position that does not recognize certain realities?
I understand. We all have to get along here. A dialogue on race can't include criticism of what some (like us real radicals) might see or hear or understand as racism.
I understand. We all have to get along here. A dialogue on race can't include criticism of what some (like us real radicals) might see or hear or understand as racism.
Criticise what you see as racism, by all means. What I scolded you for was being critical of a person who, at my invitation, opened himself, and his thoughts, up a little.
Ya just did an arm fart durin' a rare attempt on my part of "Kum Ba Yah."
OK, so EL has shared, GKS has scoffed, and ER has played the part of the pinch-nosed schoolmarm.
In my best faux-Calvinist way, may I say, "I'm glad we got *that* behind us.
Carry on.
Now, without an ad hominem, what's racist in what EL wrote? And don't jump omn me, either. Help me see.
(I disagree mainly with EL's and others' assertion that Obama should denounce Wright; I have never had a pastor I agreed with on everything.)
OK, so EL has shared, GKS has scoffed, and ER has played the part of the pinch-nosed schoolmarm.
In my best faux-Calvinist way, may I say, "I'm glad we got *that* behind us.
Carry on.
Now, without an ad hominem, what's racist in what EL wrote? And don't jump omn me, either. Help me see.
(I disagree mainly with EL's and others' assertion that Obama should denounce Wright; I have never had a pastor I agreed with on everything.)
"Which leads me to want to ask ELAshley one last question..."
But there wasn't a question anywhere in that, just an accusation. Based on what, I wonder? I never called MLK a Communist sympathizer... ever! I actually respect the man and what he managed to do in the time he was given.
I'm not sure what it is you think I don't get, but when we consider the many speeches of Martin Luther King and compare them to the many speeches of Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, et al, there is a night and day difference in the rhetoric. MLK's was inspiring, hopeful, helpful. Much of what comes from these others is divisive.
Forget for a moment that we're white. Forget also that these others are black. I understand the injustices leveled upon the Black Community over the centuries, but neither of us can do anything to change it.... accept to mutually agree to dial it down [the rhetoric] and insist upon constructive dialog. Reverend Wright's dialog is not constructive. How can I say this? I can say it because you cannot convince me, or any other rational thinking person, that his rhetoric does not negatively impact the views of any of his parishioners. If even one person sitting under his instruction takes that kind of rhetoric to heart and uses it to personally despise whites, and pass that canker on to his or her children.... then Reverend Wright has placed a stumbling block before at least one of his parishioners.
I hold no antipathy toward Barack Obama. Nor do I hold any antipathy toward Wright, Sharpton, Shabazz, Jackson, whomever. I do, however, hold such to their rhetoric, which is unproductive. How so? Because it gets plenty of white folks' back up.
ER, no need to apologize for Geoffrey. He's stated in the past that this is just his style of communication. He comes across mean sometimes, but that's just his style... I can't take offense to this. Nor do I. But I can't read his heart, any more than you, Geoffrey, or I can read Jeremiah Wright's heart. Who knows what he really believes. Another Jeremiah once wrote: "The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?"
All I'm saying here, AND at my place, is that Wright's rhetoric is extremely unproductive, and unhelpful to any open and honest dialog on race relations. Nor is it helpful to Obama.
Now, am I an Obama supporter? Obviously not. But that doesn't mean my honest appraisal/opinion is necessarily plastered with hate and venom. I was honest here. Polite even. ER and I disagree vehemently on a number of issues, but at his place I am respectful... though occasionally snarky.
In the future, Geoffrey, if you're going to preface a question with "I probably won't get an answer from you" you might at least ask a question.
As to your first question in a previous comment: It is not up to just blacks to make nice. Never said it was. But as I stated in the body of this comment, they do have an obligation, if they really want improved relations, to tone down the rhetoric and not wipe the stink of my white skin off their hand after shaking mine... figuratively speaking. Same goes for the ignoramuses on OUR side of the racial divide... WHOEVER they are.
But there wasn't a question anywhere in that, just an accusation. Based on what, I wonder? I never called MLK a Communist sympathizer... ever! I actually respect the man and what he managed to do in the time he was given.
I'm not sure what it is you think I don't get, but when we consider the many speeches of Martin Luther King and compare them to the many speeches of Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, et al, there is a night and day difference in the rhetoric. MLK's was inspiring, hopeful, helpful. Much of what comes from these others is divisive.
Forget for a moment that we're white. Forget also that these others are black. I understand the injustices leveled upon the Black Community over the centuries, but neither of us can do anything to change it.... accept to mutually agree to dial it down [the rhetoric] and insist upon constructive dialog. Reverend Wright's dialog is not constructive. How can I say this? I can say it because you cannot convince me, or any other rational thinking person, that his rhetoric does not negatively impact the views of any of his parishioners. If even one person sitting under his instruction takes that kind of rhetoric to heart and uses it to personally despise whites, and pass that canker on to his or her children.... then Reverend Wright has placed a stumbling block before at least one of his parishioners.
I hold no antipathy toward Barack Obama. Nor do I hold any antipathy toward Wright, Sharpton, Shabazz, Jackson, whomever. I do, however, hold such to their rhetoric, which is unproductive. How so? Because it gets plenty of white folks' back up.
ER, no need to apologize for Geoffrey. He's stated in the past that this is just his style of communication. He comes across mean sometimes, but that's just his style... I can't take offense to this. Nor do I. But I can't read his heart, any more than you, Geoffrey, or I can read Jeremiah Wright's heart. Who knows what he really believes. Another Jeremiah once wrote: "The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?"
All I'm saying here, AND at my place, is that Wright's rhetoric is extremely unproductive, and unhelpful to any open and honest dialog on race relations. Nor is it helpful to Obama.
Now, am I an Obama supporter? Obviously not. But that doesn't mean my honest appraisal/opinion is necessarily plastered with hate and venom. I was honest here. Polite even. ER and I disagree vehemently on a number of issues, but at his place I am respectful... though occasionally snarky.
In the future, Geoffrey, if you're going to preface a question with "I probably won't get an answer from you" you might at least ask a question.
As to your first question in a previous comment: It is not up to just blacks to make nice. Never said it was. But as I stated in the body of this comment, they do have an obligation, if they really want improved relations, to tone down the rhetoric and not wipe the stink of my white skin off their hand after shaking mine... figuratively speaking. Same goes for the ignoramuses on OUR side of the racial divide... WHOEVER they are.
ER,
It's something about your blog that brings out the typos. :)
Let me try again.
My experience is, that once you can get beyond seeing someone as part of a group (racial or otherwise), and develop a relationship with them it changes how you see others in the group. It seems as though in our scociety we have gotten so wrapped up in "(insert group here) is/or does x", without realizing that we are actually dealing with individual people. Until, we can get beyond groups any discussion of race will be less productive than it could be.
I hope that made a little more sense, sometime my brain and fingers get a little disconnected.
I am still interested in any ideas for churches to work together.
Craig
It's something about your blog that brings out the typos. :)
Let me try again.
My experience is, that once you can get beyond seeing someone as part of a group (racial or otherwise), and develop a relationship with them it changes how you see others in the group. It seems as though in our scociety we have gotten so wrapped up in "(insert group here) is/or does x", without realizing that we are actually dealing with individual people. Until, we can get beyond groups any discussion of race will be less productive than it could be.
I hope that made a little more sense, sometime my brain and fingers get a little disconnected.
I am still interested in any ideas for churches to work together.
Craig
# posted by : 4:06 PM
: 4:06 PM
I think the reason I'm called "racist" here is because I'm not an Obama supporter, and I question his judgment in regard to twenty years unmoved at Reverend Wright's church. Oprah left. Is she also a racist? Furthermore, is Oprah the only black person to leave Wright's bully-pulpit because of rhetoric? You don't really believe that, do you? And what about them? are they racists as well?
Craig, I think I agree with you. And I think the best way for churches to work together is to break bread, and to share worship. It really can be as simple as they. Desegegregate the most segregated hour in America.
EL, I think I see a cathartic value in the extreme rhetoric of Wright that I've heard about, which has to be just a small part of what he's been preaching. Makes me cringe. And, as much as it makes me cringe, I see a sort of similar cathartic value in the crap preaching from the right about God's judgment made manifest in Katrina, and other such nonsense.
The problem is when such speech is taken out of the family-church-community context in which it is uttered: Words speak volumes when people understand each other; they mispeak volumes when people do not understand each other.
EL, I think I see a cathartic value in the extreme rhetoric of Wright that I've heard about, which has to be just a small part of what he's been preaching. Makes me cringe. And, as much as it makes me cringe, I see a sort of similar cathartic value in the crap preaching from the right about God's judgment made manifest in Katrina, and other such nonsense.
The problem is when such speech is taken out of the family-church-community context in which it is uttered: Words speak volumes when people understand each other; they mispeak volumes when people do not understand each other.
ER,
I think I agree, the problem that we see at our church, is this. One church,(there are others who show how well this can work, this one happens to be the longest standing) who we have partnered with for several years seems to see us as a checkbook, nothing more. The desire on our (I apologize for the us/them thing but in this context I am merely differentiating between the two congregations. I can't think of a better way to do that.)part, is just that. To partner in every area of ministry. What we get is a cold shoulder, except at funding time. This is disheartening. The sad thing is it may mean we look for other churches to partner with. At some point, people from both groups/congregations need to be able to come together as equals, and have a dialogue. It can be disheartening for a church that is committed to reconciliation.
Craig
I think I agree, the problem that we see at our church, is this. One church,(there are others who show how well this can work, this one happens to be the longest standing) who we have partnered with for several years seems to see us as a checkbook, nothing more. The desire on our (I apologize for the us/them thing but in this context I am merely differentiating between the two congregations. I can't think of a better way to do that.)part, is just that. To partner in every area of ministry. What we get is a cold shoulder, except at funding time. This is disheartening. The sad thing is it may mean we look for other churches to partner with. At some point, people from both groups/congregations need to be able to come together as equals, and have a dialogue. It can be disheartening for a church that is committed to reconciliation.
Craig
# posted by : 5:44 PM
: 5:44 PM
Well, what I'm talking about is one church closing its doors on a Sunday morning, and going en masse to the other one, and vice versa, a few times a year. For worship. For breaking bread.
What partnering? Keep money out of it -- other than if one wants to give a gift to the other church when visiting, fine.
Fellowship is what I'm talking about, not missions, or outreach or anything else. Just getting together. In worship. And to eat.
What partnering? Keep money out of it -- other than if one wants to give a gift to the other church when visiting, fine.
Fellowship is what I'm talking about, not missions, or outreach or anything else. Just getting together. In worship. And to eat.
I agree, that that is a big part of it, but when all the black church sees is a checkbook, it is a big hurdle to get over.
Craig
Craig
# posted by : 6:02 PM
: 6:02 PM
Ouch. Then there's a power issue involved, when there shouldn't be. And I'd say it has to be out of balance on both sides.
If all one church sees is a checkbook, then somebody in the other church has to be *flashing* a checkbook, or being immodest with wealth, or in attitude, in some other way -- or something.
Said with NO real information to go on!
If all one church sees is a checkbook, then somebody in the other church has to be *flashing* a checkbook, or being immodest with wealth, or in attitude, in some other way -- or something.
Said with NO real information to go on!
I have lost the longer version of this twice now to a lozy connection.
Short pithy:
Don't filter me: comprehend me.
Before the speech Obama was a man running for the President. After the speech he was a black man running for the president.
I'll give him Revernd Wright if he will give me Jimmy Swaggert.
Short pithy:
Don't filter me: comprehend me.
Before the speech Obama was a man running for the President. After the speech he was a black man running for the president.
I'll give him Revernd Wright if he will give me Jimmy Swaggert.
too pithy, left out part:
Before the speech Obama was a man running for the Presindency, who happed to be black. After the speech he is a black man running for tne presidentcy.
P.S. I don't rally want Jimmy.
Before the speech Obama was a man running for the Presindency, who happed to be black. After the speech he is a black man running for tne presidentcy.
P.S. I don't rally want Jimmy.
Just want to let you know that the Four Horsemen will soon be upon us ... because not only do I agree with drlobojo ... but I also agree with elashley on this. I feel faint. :)
Why did Obama stay 20 years in that church? I left my church because my pastor went from preaching against homosexuality to mocking and insulting gay people in the pulpit. Was it easy to leave? No, it was not. But when your minister stands at the pulpit and says -- and I am quoting -- "People are too sensitive these days. You can't even make a joke about homosexuals without people getting upset." And then he flaps his hand like some stereotype and prances a couple of steps and then says, "Like they don't deserve to be made fun of." Many members of the congregation laughed. (And it's on video just in case you don't think a minister would do that)
On that Sunday morning, I realized I was going to have to leave my Southern Baptist church, the church where my friends attended, my church home, that place I thought I belonged. I'm still looking for a church. I dread Sunday mornings these days because I'm still searching, and I don't function well in new places with new people.
I went to the minister's office to let him know why I was leaving. He apologized, but said that was how he felt. And I said that just because you feel something, doesn't make it right. He told me that we shouldn't discuss it since we couldn't agree. He offered to pray with me. I refused. I left his office and threw up in the parking lot. (I'm not really made for confrontations.) Now I hear rumors once again that I am gay. Why else would I object to what a man of God says?
There is a price for standing up for what is right, and apparently Obama wasn't willing to pay it. I think El's question is a good one. I think it should be answered.
Why did Obama stay 20 years in that church? I left my church because my pastor went from preaching against homosexuality to mocking and insulting gay people in the pulpit. Was it easy to leave? No, it was not. But when your minister stands at the pulpit and says -- and I am quoting -- "People are too sensitive these days. You can't even make a joke about homosexuals without people getting upset." And then he flaps his hand like some stereotype and prances a couple of steps and then says, "Like they don't deserve to be made fun of." Many members of the congregation laughed. (And it's on video just in case you don't think a minister would do that)
On that Sunday morning, I realized I was going to have to leave my Southern Baptist church, the church where my friends attended, my church home, that place I thought I belonged. I'm still looking for a church. I dread Sunday mornings these days because I'm still searching, and I don't function well in new places with new people.
I went to the minister's office to let him know why I was leaving. He apologized, but said that was how he felt. And I said that just because you feel something, doesn't make it right. He told me that we shouldn't discuss it since we couldn't agree. He offered to pray with me. I refused. I left his office and threw up in the parking lot. (I'm not really made for confrontations.) Now I hear rumors once again that I am gay. Why else would I object to what a man of God says?
There is a price for standing up for what is right, and apparently Obama wasn't willing to pay it. I think El's question is a good one. I think it should be answered.
I don't mind that Obama is "a black man running for president."
Tech, thanks for sharing. I'm sorry yer pastor turned out to be such a git. I don't blame you for quitting. Others might not have, and didn't apparently - -and I'm sure some were just as upset as you were.
But a congregation is bigger than its pastor. I can also see how someone would stick with a church, and ride out a dislikable pastor.
Also, I really don't think white person has any right to tell any black person that he or she is wrong/racist. Sorry, but I don't. The playing field is not level, and for me, as a white person, to pretedn it is "because of the advanaces we've made on race in this country" or any other reason, would be me speaking out of turn.
The fact is: If white people wind up living in a racist society -- oh, wait! White people HAVE been living in a racist society. And most of them haven't given a damn -- until suddenly they hear voices like their own, and their daddies and grandpas, coming out of the mouth of a black man.
Tough shit.
Tech, thanks for sharing. I'm sorry yer pastor turned out to be such a git. I don't blame you for quitting. Others might not have, and didn't apparently - -and I'm sure some were just as upset as you were.
But a congregation is bigger than its pastor. I can also see how someone would stick with a church, and ride out a dislikable pastor.
Also, I really don't think white person has any right to tell any black person that he or she is wrong/racist. Sorry, but I don't. The playing field is not level, and for me, as a white person, to pretedn it is "because of the advanaces we've made on race in this country" or any other reason, would be me speaking out of turn.
The fact is: If white people wind up living in a racist society -- oh, wait! White people HAVE been living in a racist society. And most of them haven't given a damn -- until suddenly they hear voices like their own, and their daddies and grandpas, coming out of the mouth of a black man.
Tough shit.
As a card-carrying Cherokee with blacks in my ancestry, I look at it differently, ER. Racism, prejudice, bigotry is wrong. It doesn't matter the color of the skin of the person who says it -- or worse, acts on it. It's wrong. It's evil. As long as we believe past injustices justify present injustices, we will never become the united people we were meant to be.
Hell ER a bigot is a bigot because of their behavior not because of their target. I have delt with bigots of every race, color,tribe, creed, and sexual orientation. Never have I met one that was justified.
And I would have to note that after reading the above entries that Obama's White guilt card is working quite well. Oh yes, and white guilt is not a white liberal invention:See Howard University.
And I would have to note that after reading the above entries that Obama's White guilt card is working quite well. Oh yes, and white guilt is not a white liberal invention:See Howard University.
Tech: Then your opinion is part of yer birthright.
DrLobo: As I've said, as an old soldier in how we the people deal witgh race, you've earned yours, too.
I'll have to think about whether "white guilt" or my tolerance of redneckery -- whether being spouted by a white person, an Indian or a black person -- explains my own opinion. But I don't think I have "white guilt."
It could be that I'm just so sick of the GOP that I'll look the other way from the radical opinions of the elder black pastor of a young black Democrat candidate for president.
I'd vote for a Yellow Dog. Whey the hell wouldn't I vote for the mixed-heriotage parishioner of an angry black man?
DrLobo: As I've said, as an old soldier in how we the people deal witgh race, you've earned yours, too.
I'll have to think about whether "white guilt" or my tolerance of redneckery -- whether being spouted by a white person, an Indian or a black person -- explains my own opinion. But I don't think I have "white guilt."
It could be that I'm just so sick of the GOP that I'll look the other way from the radical opinions of the elder black pastor of a young black Democrat candidate for president.
I'd vote for a Yellow Dog. Whey the hell wouldn't I vote for the mixed-heriotage parishioner of an angry black man?
Worry 'bout people more? Then what will you do? God loves variety, else she wouldn't have made so many different people with so many different gifts and graces. I'll do the macro, you do the micro, all will balance.
Wright's rhetoric: I've actually got a goodish portion of that sermon YouTubed on my blog, and the whole thing is pretty damn brilliant, and any justice-oriented person would not say Amen to it. I've said it before, and it applies to this: There just aren't enough preachers or Christians getting into trouble or going to jail anymore.
Wright's rhetoric: I've actually got a goodish portion of that sermon YouTubed on my blog, and the whole thing is pretty damn brilliant, and any justice-oriented person would not say Amen to it. I've said it before, and it applies to this: There just aren't enough preachers or Christians getting into trouble or going to jail anymore.
ELAshley, I did not call you a racist. I said that certain things you wrote ignored historical facts and realities that could be construed as not being sensitive to the way others see the world. That's all.
As to comparing speeches . . . King's rhetoric, while soaked in the style of the Baptist Church, became increasingly strident as he turned from the single issue of Civil Rights to the larger issue of social justice, with his criticism of the Vietnam War becoming the focal point of a larger critique of American society. Nothing Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton has ever written or said has ever come close to the denunciations of America that appear in King's later speeches. Not one thing.
Finally, I just want to say that it is the focus on these two gentlemen that made my eyebrows rise and sit up and post the comments I did. If we compare anything they said with the words of, say, Jesse Helms, Strom Thurmond, George Wallace (before he repented), and going back in historical time a ways, Ed "Cotton" Smith, Theodore Bilbo, and John Stennis, and compare the legacies these latter men represented, and the power they wielded, and the institutions and practices they supported, and the former pair of men, I do believe you might consider the possibility that you are comparing apples and oranges. More to the point, I wish to know why it is that it is incumbent upon the historical victims of racial violence in our society to prove they aren't angry to be acceptable to the rest of us? Why do these men, who have made mistakes to be sure, and occasionally gotten overheated in their comments and controversies, for some reason represent for some people in this country, something frightening? I will address this issue on my own blog, so you may address comments there, if you wish.
I would like to be clear about something before I sign off this thread. The issue of racism, for me, is not an issue of what is in an individual's heart or mind. Since that is inaccessible, it is not so much a realm free from judgment as a straw creation set up to protect us from charges of racism. My observation on ELAshley's comment focused on his words, and his words alone. While I applaud anyone who wrestles with this very American of social sins, and sometimes sounds confused in the process, I do not think it wrong to point out that one might not realize how hurtful one is being in the process of such wrestling.
To me, this is all part of the dialogue process. If I have over-stepped the bounds here, I apologize. I shall, for obvious reasons, abide by the rules as set forth by the host.
As to comparing speeches . . . King's rhetoric, while soaked in the style of the Baptist Church, became increasingly strident as he turned from the single issue of Civil Rights to the larger issue of social justice, with his criticism of the Vietnam War becoming the focal point of a larger critique of American society. Nothing Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton has ever written or said has ever come close to the denunciations of America that appear in King's later speeches. Not one thing.
Finally, I just want to say that it is the focus on these two gentlemen that made my eyebrows rise and sit up and post the comments I did. If we compare anything they said with the words of, say, Jesse Helms, Strom Thurmond, George Wallace (before he repented), and going back in historical time a ways, Ed "Cotton" Smith, Theodore Bilbo, and John Stennis, and compare the legacies these latter men represented, and the power they wielded, and the institutions and practices they supported, and the former pair of men, I do believe you might consider the possibility that you are comparing apples and oranges. More to the point, I wish to know why it is that it is incumbent upon the historical victims of racial violence in our society to prove they aren't angry to be acceptable to the rest of us? Why do these men, who have made mistakes to be sure, and occasionally gotten overheated in their comments and controversies, for some reason represent for some people in this country, something frightening? I will address this issue on my own blog, so you may address comments there, if you wish.
I would like to be clear about something before I sign off this thread. The issue of racism, for me, is not an issue of what is in an individual's heart or mind. Since that is inaccessible, it is not so much a realm free from judgment as a straw creation set up to protect us from charges of racism. My observation on ELAshley's comment focused on his words, and his words alone. While I applaud anyone who wrestles with this very American of social sins, and sometimes sounds confused in the process, I do not think it wrong to point out that one might not realize how hurtful one is being in the process of such wrestling.
To me, this is all part of the dialogue process. If I have over-stepped the bounds here, I apologize. I shall, for obvious reasons, abide by the rules as set forth by the host.
All of this IS part of dialogue, and I'm glad to see you back.
Heck fire, I decided to apologuze to Bubba iover at Neil's place, for calling Bubba a son-of-a-bitch. Whether he accepted it or not, I haven't checked. But I gave the apology.
Hostwise, I just felt like you jumoed ugly on EL, not his words. If I was wrong, OK.
(h)apa tole me I shoulda opened the discussion with a little cup, and not the whole barrel. She's prolly right.
Heck fire, I decided to apologuze to Bubba iover at Neil's place, for calling Bubba a son-of-a-bitch. Whether he accepted it or not, I haven't checked. But I gave the apology.
Hostwise, I just felt like you jumoed ugly on EL, not his words. If I was wrong, OK.
(h)apa tole me I shoulda opened the discussion with a little cup, and not the whole barrel. She's prolly right.
Personally, I believe the very fact that we have these types of discussions actually help to perpetuate the problem. For my part, I simply don't tolerate bigotry. But I also don't tolerate the thin-skinned who can't appreciate a well crafted joke just because it might be about blacks, polacks, eye-talians or whomever. "Lighten the hell" up is my motto regarding race relations. If folks insist upon their sensitivty, we'll never get passed it.
For the day-to-day, as I said, I don't tolerate bigotry. I've worked and socialized with people of all races, religions and yes, even homosexuals. I get along with everybody who isn't an a-hole. Yet, even a-holes won't find me boxing them out unless they pull some a-hole stunt.
The past doesn't matter in this issue one iota. The reason I say that is due to the fact the institutionalized racism doesn't really exist beyond the lefty support for their version of a welfare system. Small pockets of such hatred exist, but as we are imperfect creatures born into sin, I don't place any wagers on total eradication of bigotry until the King of Kings returns.
When I hear someone talk about how their people have been treated in years past, my first thought is to wonder why they insist on dwelling on such things. Unless you've got scars on your back from the whip of your white master, you're just causing trouble.
ER mentioned a level field regarding this issue. There is no such thing. Never has been, never will be if we're lucky. How the unlevel field is negotiated is a measure of a man's character. Whining about the slant is just whining.
I side with any victim of bigotry. I don't side with those who illegitimately claim victimhood. This would likely include the lion's share of minorities in this country today.
I'm second generation American of Polish immigrants (legal ones, BTW) and NO, ABSOLUTELY NOT regarding whether or not the sins of past Americans means I've got to step up and apologize for anything.
So here it is. I don't freakin' care what color you are, what deity receives your prayers, or what your gender is. Bathe, use mouthwash and don't be an a-hole, and we're way cool.
Post a Comment
For the day-to-day, as I said, I don't tolerate bigotry. I've worked and socialized with people of all races, religions and yes, even homosexuals. I get along with everybody who isn't an a-hole. Yet, even a-holes won't find me boxing them out unless they pull some a-hole stunt.
The past doesn't matter in this issue one iota. The reason I say that is due to the fact the institutionalized racism doesn't really exist beyond the lefty support for their version of a welfare system. Small pockets of such hatred exist, but as we are imperfect creatures born into sin, I don't place any wagers on total eradication of bigotry until the King of Kings returns.
When I hear someone talk about how their people have been treated in years past, my first thought is to wonder why they insist on dwelling on such things. Unless you've got scars on your back from the whip of your white master, you're just causing trouble.
ER mentioned a level field regarding this issue. There is no such thing. Never has been, never will be if we're lucky. How the unlevel field is negotiated is a measure of a man's character. Whining about the slant is just whining.
I side with any victim of bigotry. I don't side with those who illegitimately claim victimhood. This would likely include the lion's share of minorities in this country today.
I'm second generation American of Polish immigrants (legal ones, BTW) and NO, ABSOLUTELY NOT regarding whether or not the sins of past Americans means I've got to step up and apologize for anything.
So here it is. I don't freakin' care what color you are, what deity receives your prayers, or what your gender is. Bathe, use mouthwash and don't be an a-hole, and we're way cool.
<< Home
