The first decade of the new millenium we were all freaking out over not too long ago is now coming to a close. It was pretty unique in that many unpredictable events came to pass, but that's about where it ends. How we as a nation handled the unpredictability was, well, predictable. We handled it with the same laziness, narcissism, and excess of pride that we usually do. From 9/11 and the two wars started in its wake to the tragic handling to Katrina to the Wall Street financial disasters to electing the first black president, our country time and again showed its true colors in responding to such events.
My full thoughts have been put up on my facebook, and if you should ever want to view them, just shoot me an email or request it here and I can mail you the full document.
Personally, I'm glad to see it end. A lot of personal growth took place for me in this decade, but I think I'm looking forward to this next decade more to see what we as a country can do (if anything) to grow as well. I concluded my thoughts with saying that the word we should embrace instead of "Hope" from the left or some nostalgic nonsense from the right is the word "sense". We're lacking it in the worst way and need to get a hold of it badly.
Wednesday, December 29, 2010
I'm back
I'll be back on here periodically, as my availability to use the internet has opened up more.
:)
:)
Saturday, August 21, 2010
Explanation
I've been absent for a while. There's a fairly simple reason: I have no internet at my new place and I only get a few hours a week here at the library to read, catch up, etc.
I also have not been writing lately (bad news), but I have indeed been reading a LOT (good news). It's the only kind of escapism I can find that doesn't make me feel like I'm completely withdrawing from all things necessary to make this world a better place in some form or another. The last two books I've read haven't been about race (though I did read Frank Wu's "Yellow", which I recommend to all), but rather about the Crusades and the Middle East.
I've also been preparing for my last semester in college, so there's been a lot for me to get done.
I promise I'll be back.
I also have not been writing lately (bad news), but I have indeed been reading a LOT (good news). It's the only kind of escapism I can find that doesn't make me feel like I'm completely withdrawing from all things necessary to make this world a better place in some form or another. The last two books I've read haven't been about race (though I did read Frank Wu's "Yellow", which I recommend to all), but rather about the Crusades and the Middle East.
I've also been preparing for my last semester in college, so there's been a lot for me to get done.
I promise I'll be back.
Friday, April 30, 2010
Things to keep in mind...
Some thoughts I had after hearing and reading discussions on race recently, particularly in regards to white/non-white perspectives in a white centric society...
1. Seriously, in a discussion about race (a topic which POC live and deal with daily in a White centric society), it would help most in the discussion if Whites were to put as much effort into understanding things from the POC viewpoint as they often end up using in rebutting and dismissing.
2. As I heard it said once, "Calling out an action of racism is not calling a person in question a racist as though it were some classification of the persons irredeemably evil nature." It's calling something out for what it is. Calling an action racist is more than just calling out an action, it's an affirmation of something that has effects for individuals and society. It's not a primary personal attack.
3. White people cannot consider themselves some final authority all the time on whether something is racist, especially when the action in name comes from a White person. I say this because simply questioning and holding something up to scrutiny isn't completely legit in the respect of racism. When one has been trained to see things from a White perspective, that is how that person is going to judge unless they step outside of their experience and into anothers. All people have experiences based off of their racial status that shape their views and perceptions, and Whites are no exception here. The road-block is that many Whites feel their view is "normal", a "generic" or "individual" view and not a "White" view. This is the effect of Whiteness. Anyway, It's not about seeing things differently from one another, it's about whether one side is making the effort to see things as another one might.
4. I am getting sick and tired of hearing White people dismiss minorities are "too sensitive" and "get over it" as though minorities are easily side-tracked from relevance in a discussion and look for insult and offense at every possible opportunity, that they find pleasure from experiencing it. Unlike the White observer in most cases, the racism in the topic tends to affect the POC more often than the White person, so it's important that the White participant have empathy and an understanding beyond their own White experiences. Their limits of perception of the White person(s) do not define the scope of analysis in the situation. The ease by which Whites disavow an experience which is not their own is one of the most troubling things I've noticed lately, and it tends to spring from this sort of monopolizing the scope of discussion to their own.
Just a few thoughts.
1. Seriously, in a discussion about race (a topic which POC live and deal with daily in a White centric society), it would help most in the discussion if Whites were to put as much effort into understanding things from the POC viewpoint as they often end up using in rebutting and dismissing.
2. As I heard it said once, "Calling out an action of racism is not calling a person in question a racist as though it were some classification of the persons irredeemably evil nature." It's calling something out for what it is. Calling an action racist is more than just calling out an action, it's an affirmation of something that has effects for individuals and society. It's not a primary personal attack.
3. White people cannot consider themselves some final authority all the time on whether something is racist, especially when the action in name comes from a White person. I say this because simply questioning and holding something up to scrutiny isn't completely legit in the respect of racism. When one has been trained to see things from a White perspective, that is how that person is going to judge unless they step outside of their experience and into anothers. All people have experiences based off of their racial status that shape their views and perceptions, and Whites are no exception here. The road-block is that many Whites feel their view is "normal", a "generic" or "individual" view and not a "White" view. This is the effect of Whiteness. Anyway, It's not about seeing things differently from one another, it's about whether one side is making the effort to see things as another one might.
4. I am getting sick and tired of hearing White people dismiss minorities are "too sensitive" and "get over it" as though minorities are easily side-tracked from relevance in a discussion and look for insult and offense at every possible opportunity, that they find pleasure from experiencing it. Unlike the White observer in most cases, the racism in the topic tends to affect the POC more often than the White person, so it's important that the White participant have empathy and an understanding beyond their own White experiences. Their limits of perception of the White person(s) do not define the scope of analysis in the situation. The ease by which Whites disavow an experience which is not their own is one of the most troubling things I've noticed lately, and it tends to spring from this sort of monopolizing the scope of discussion to their own.
Just a few thoughts.
Saturday, April 24, 2010
Race and Progressives
Usually, my anger with respect to race can more often than not be found directed towards those on the right wing. It's usually them on opposing ends of race discussions. However, more and more, due to my experiences and the sharing of experiences from fellow anti-racists like Godheval, I'm noticing that many on the left are suffering from some different but related symptoms. Progressive whites are often times suffering from "Racism Displacement Syndrome".
RDS, as we shall abbreviate from here on out, is a common tendency amongst White Progressives to work towards progress on matters of inequalities, but choosing to remain oblivious to issues of race in the matters and how Whites experiences with race are crucial to understanding inequalities as well. This is often times a different manifestation of the "color-blind" approach to race, acting as if it doesn't exist as a solution to the problem of the social construct and it's effects in inequalities and privileges.
This is my basic message to White Progressives: wake the fuck up. Seriously. We live in a time of changing paradigms, technology spread out and information available in more ways than ever before, yet White people are found to be just as uneducated as ever on matters of race. White Progressives may know some about race here and there through education in other fields like Political Science or History, but the study of Racism is a topic that is tied into the social reality of the United States that needs to be studied, understood, and acted on as well. White Progressives, for all of their reading, blogging, and internet activism, have no excuse whatsoever to remain ignorant on matters of race. One cannot study the history of capitalism without realizing much of it's success is due in part to the subjugation by whites of non-whites. One cannot ignore the factor of race in the discussion on environmental degredation, as it is the pillaging, overuse, and plowing down of non-White lands that allows White companies to sell much of their products. One can not study inequalities in the economy without studying how race, one of Americas oldest and biggest legacies, is tied to it in ways that would be ridiculous to ignore.
My advice? To the White Progressive who knows something substantial about race relations: start speaking up more. You can't denounce your privilege by just 'denouncing' it, but you can give up the privilege to keep silent on matters of race. To the White Progressive who spends so much time on matters of Gay Marriage, Capitalism and Corporatism, Foreign Policy, etc.: your excuses are inadequate. It is time to start reading, educating yourself, and being just as active on those matters as well.
Matters of race permeate and intertwine in nearly every modern issue that faces people in a capitalist system. Ignoring it or running away from it will not make that change, but it will cement the reality that the fight against racism is largely a fight left for minorities when, quite frankly, whites are just as responsible for anti-racist action.
RDS, as we shall abbreviate from here on out, is a common tendency amongst White Progressives to work towards progress on matters of inequalities, but choosing to remain oblivious to issues of race in the matters and how Whites experiences with race are crucial to understanding inequalities as well. This is often times a different manifestation of the "color-blind" approach to race, acting as if it doesn't exist as a solution to the problem of the social construct and it's effects in inequalities and privileges.
This is my basic message to White Progressives: wake the fuck up. Seriously. We live in a time of changing paradigms, technology spread out and information available in more ways than ever before, yet White people are found to be just as uneducated as ever on matters of race. White Progressives may know some about race here and there through education in other fields like Political Science or History, but the study of Racism is a topic that is tied into the social reality of the United States that needs to be studied, understood, and acted on as well. White Progressives, for all of their reading, blogging, and internet activism, have no excuse whatsoever to remain ignorant on matters of race. One cannot study the history of capitalism without realizing much of it's success is due in part to the subjugation by whites of non-whites. One cannot ignore the factor of race in the discussion on environmental degredation, as it is the pillaging, overuse, and plowing down of non-White lands that allows White companies to sell much of their products. One can not study inequalities in the economy without studying how race, one of Americas oldest and biggest legacies, is tied to it in ways that would be ridiculous to ignore.
My advice? To the White Progressive who knows something substantial about race relations: start speaking up more. You can't denounce your privilege by just 'denouncing' it, but you can give up the privilege to keep silent on matters of race. To the White Progressive who spends so much time on matters of Gay Marriage, Capitalism and Corporatism, Foreign Policy, etc.: your excuses are inadequate. It is time to start reading, educating yourself, and being just as active on those matters as well.
Matters of race permeate and intertwine in nearly every modern issue that faces people in a capitalist system. Ignoring it or running away from it will not make that change, but it will cement the reality that the fight against racism is largely a fight left for minorities when, quite frankly, whites are just as responsible for anti-racist action.
Monday, April 5, 2010
Break.
I won't be blogging on very much for a while. School and some personal problems are taking their toll on my time to be creative. But sometimes it's better to deal with those head on. Maybe it will give me more fuel to create with later. In any case, see you on Facebook until then.
Jaime
Jaime
Friday, April 2, 2010
Words
Some words that describe Americans (not citizens, mind you, but what we know as the "model American")...add ones that you find appropriate.
Narrow-minded
Obtuse
Entitled
Myopic
Oblivious
Imperceptive
Unaware
Heedless
Any other ideas?
Narrow-minded
Obtuse
Entitled
Myopic
Oblivious
Imperceptive
Unaware
Heedless
Any other ideas?
Thursday, March 25, 2010
Founding Fathers.
Seriously, what is the big deal with these guys? They are not deities. They are not untouchable beings. Their judgement is and was not flawless.
Why do people have a hard time viewing things in context? The Founding Fathers set up a system that we enjoy today, but it is hardly the same system we had then. We live and work in a Post-Industrial society, which is much different from the Agrarian one they framed their ideas in. We live in a time when black-letter law of slavery, segregation, and oppression of women is done with, but these things were the norm in the time of the philosophical framework of the system the Founders agreed on. We offer public education for those who do not have the funds or the desire to see their child schooled privately. This option, however, was not something that was part of the framework for our founders vision. However, our society has prospered with those things implemented, and we've been fine. Why can other issues that may conflict with "The founders" intentions not be viewed in the same context?
If you lost all of your money or assets and had no more private school, you'd be damned happy there is a public option for your child to be educated under, to guarantee at least a minimum of education and opportunity in this society. Why should this be any different for health-care, the matter of life and death for many Americans? We have a "right" to buy cheap, subsidized fast-food (which was built up by government socialist subsidies to begin with), but not to be able to walk into the hospital or doctor to get care? I think this is less a question of freedom and more one of priorities. Government management was and is responsible for interstate highways, public schools and colleges, pell grants, GI Bill (albeit having a racist implemenation), Social Security, public libraries, bridges, NASA, and public transit. So why exactly is the government managing a public option for some a bad thing? Oh yeah, that's right. We already do have and have had public options for some for decades (Medicare and Medicaid). Somehow, the country hasn't collapsed into a socialist dictatorship. Imagine that.
Oh yeah, I forgot another large government beaurocracy: the military.
Somehow I get the feeling we'd be "okay" in adding a public option. It's our priorities with respect to who gets kickbacks, tax cuts, and subsidies that needs to be examined.
Why do people have a hard time viewing things in context? The Founding Fathers set up a system that we enjoy today, but it is hardly the same system we had then. We live and work in a Post-Industrial society, which is much different from the Agrarian one they framed their ideas in. We live in a time when black-letter law of slavery, segregation, and oppression of women is done with, but these things were the norm in the time of the philosophical framework of the system the Founders agreed on. We offer public education for those who do not have the funds or the desire to see their child schooled privately. This option, however, was not something that was part of the framework for our founders vision. However, our society has prospered with those things implemented, and we've been fine. Why can other issues that may conflict with "The founders" intentions not be viewed in the same context?
If you lost all of your money or assets and had no more private school, you'd be damned happy there is a public option for your child to be educated under, to guarantee at least a minimum of education and opportunity in this society. Why should this be any different for health-care, the matter of life and death for many Americans? We have a "right" to buy cheap, subsidized fast-food (which was built up by government socialist subsidies to begin with), but not to be able to walk into the hospital or doctor to get care? I think this is less a question of freedom and more one of priorities. Government management was and is responsible for interstate highways, public schools and colleges, pell grants, GI Bill (albeit having a racist implemenation), Social Security, public libraries, bridges, NASA, and public transit. So why exactly is the government managing a public option for some a bad thing? Oh yeah, that's right. We already do have and have had public options for some for decades (Medicare and Medicaid). Somehow, the country hasn't collapsed into a socialist dictatorship. Imagine that.
Oh yeah, I forgot another large government beaurocracy: the military.
Somehow I get the feeling we'd be "okay" in adding a public option. It's our priorities with respect to who gets kickbacks, tax cuts, and subsidies that needs to be examined.
Sunday, March 21, 2010
Family
You know, I get told a week before hand that my brother coming home, I don't have time to ask off for it, but I work a 9 hour day, drive home at 10PM, get there at 11PM, ready to spend what little time I can with him before he leaves the country again. Then, you make this comment to me over and over, in front of everyone, and try to bring yourself up at the expense of me and my life. If it were almost anyone else, it wouldn't bother me, but make me laugh heartily. But since I care about you, the comment stings badly. It stings, not because others heard it in and of itself, but because my life is hard enough than to have my own flesh and blood publicly displaying their resent about my good fortune in front of a family member I hardly ever get to see and often wonder if I will get to see again once he leaves the country.
I have done nothing but bust my fucking ass, save and scrimp every dollar I can, take care of my own affairs without begging for money to bail me out at every turn for fucking myself over, and when something good finally comes my way, you took several opportunities to slight me because of it, as if I had any say in the matter. Why can't you feel good that things finally took a turn for the positive? All this after my car died in December, I had to buy a used one and do lots of work getting it in decent shape, I had to move to a new place (which meant a big increase in rent and a nice sized deposit, take on debt for the first time (which I was openly unhappy over), and deal with even more things to pay off every month. And yet, I'm the one that's open for attacks, however 'jokingly' they are supposed to have been.
I'm hurt and offended.
I have done nothing but bust my fucking ass, save and scrimp every dollar I can, take care of my own affairs without begging for money to bail me out at every turn for fucking myself over, and when something good finally comes my way, you took several opportunities to slight me because of it, as if I had any say in the matter. Why can't you feel good that things finally took a turn for the positive? All this after my car died in December, I had to buy a used one and do lots of work getting it in decent shape, I had to move to a new place (which meant a big increase in rent and a nice sized deposit, take on debt for the first time (which I was openly unhappy over), and deal with even more things to pay off every month. And yet, I'm the one that's open for attacks, however 'jokingly' they are supposed to have been.
I'm hurt and offended.
Tuesday, March 16, 2010
La Pregunta
"I'm not a nigger. I'm a man. But if you think I'm a nigger, that means you need him, and you gotta ask yourself why."
- James Baldwin, interview, 1962.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hDjaqhuSqQE
Interesting clip of an interview with James Baldwin. He is one of my heroes.
- James Baldwin, interview, 1962.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hDjaqhuSqQE
Interesting clip of an interview with James Baldwin. He is one of my heroes.
Thursday, March 11, 2010
To those confused.
I've received comments from people who are confused, concerned, or just flat out pissed towards me because of a misunderstanding they have about why I write the way I do about racism and what that means for my feelings on White people. This is especially pronounced in my case because in the eyes of most Americans, I am a White man.
Some feel I am guilty. I'm not guilty about anything. I didn't create the system of racial privilege and I did not choose my skin color or any other physical feature. I feel no guilt. I do, however, recognize the responsibility I have now that I have become informed. Once informed, I now feel outrage when I see things perpetrated in a systemic and institutionalized way, all the way to a personal way when it comes to racism. I feel particularly outraged due to a lack thereof on the part of other White people, though ultimately my outrage isn't landed at their feet. This leads me to my second point.
I, for the record, do not and never have hated White people as a group. I don't automatically dislike them upon meeting them. How could I? I am White, most of my family is White, and some good friends of mine are White. I love all of these people dearly. Some integral people in my upbringing were White (my Grandmother on my Dad's side being one). Many well educated and respectable people in history and society today are White.
Where my outrage is ultimately directed and where I feel the most resentment (with regards to White people specifically) is with two groups:
1. White people who refuse to learn about the society they are in and how it functions. Ignorance is one thing, but that can only be allowed for so long. Flat out willfull ignorance of the problems and manifestations of injustice in society in order to preserve some fairly tale life one wishes to remain subdued in is not an excuse. I do find that many White people fall into this category, and it is with them that I hold a lot of bitterness towards upon encountering.
2. White people who know damn well what the system is, don't care, and do things consciously or unconsciously to perpetuate it on a regular basis. I have zero tolerance for these kinds of White people.
These two groups are bunched into a group and divided by a very thin line (sometimes they overlap in small ways), but I find these two to the best most problematic, followed by the "Well-meaning, do-gooder White" who is oblivious to racial issues in any authentic manner (outside from interpersonal and overt racism).
This does not mean I hate White people. If I hated White people, why the fuck would I try to reach out to and write about them and their behaviors if I hated them? Wouldn't I let it go and allow their racism to continue if I hated them?
The truth is that I think White people are better than this shit. I know what most White people act like in all-White settings. The truth is, most intelligent and educated White people are capable of learning so much about things like religious intolerance, homophobia, global climate change, politics, etc., so I know they are capable of learning this. I just also know it is a much tougher lesson for them to learn, so I go into it with a thicker skin and an attitude that is ready for all types of responses.
I also know that I have to be on the lookout for my own racism, educate myself on these matters, listen to other POC and Whites who are informed, and continually sharpen my understanding of this issue.
I believe the fight against racism to be a worthy one, as well as the fights against other injustices. But, if I treat White people like it is not their job to work against it with minorities, then that would be the one way I could show my lack of humility and caring towards the White community.
Some feel I am guilty. I'm not guilty about anything. I didn't create the system of racial privilege and I did not choose my skin color or any other physical feature. I feel no guilt. I do, however, recognize the responsibility I have now that I have become informed. Once informed, I now feel outrage when I see things perpetrated in a systemic and institutionalized way, all the way to a personal way when it comes to racism. I feel particularly outraged due to a lack thereof on the part of other White people, though ultimately my outrage isn't landed at their feet. This leads me to my second point.
I, for the record, do not and never have hated White people as a group. I don't automatically dislike them upon meeting them. How could I? I am White, most of my family is White, and some good friends of mine are White. I love all of these people dearly. Some integral people in my upbringing were White (my Grandmother on my Dad's side being one). Many well educated and respectable people in history and society today are White.
Where my outrage is ultimately directed and where I feel the most resentment (with regards to White people specifically) is with two groups:
1. White people who refuse to learn about the society they are in and how it functions. Ignorance is one thing, but that can only be allowed for so long. Flat out willfull ignorance of the problems and manifestations of injustice in society in order to preserve some fairly tale life one wishes to remain subdued in is not an excuse. I do find that many White people fall into this category, and it is with them that I hold a lot of bitterness towards upon encountering.
2. White people who know damn well what the system is, don't care, and do things consciously or unconsciously to perpetuate it on a regular basis. I have zero tolerance for these kinds of White people.
These two groups are bunched into a group and divided by a very thin line (sometimes they overlap in small ways), but I find these two to the best most problematic, followed by the "Well-meaning, do-gooder White" who is oblivious to racial issues in any authentic manner (outside from interpersonal and overt racism).
This does not mean I hate White people. If I hated White people, why the fuck would I try to reach out to and write about them and their behaviors if I hated them? Wouldn't I let it go and allow their racism to continue if I hated them?
The truth is that I think White people are better than this shit. I know what most White people act like in all-White settings. The truth is, most intelligent and educated White people are capable of learning so much about things like religious intolerance, homophobia, global climate change, politics, etc., so I know they are capable of learning this. I just also know it is a much tougher lesson for them to learn, so I go into it with a thicker skin and an attitude that is ready for all types of responses.
I also know that I have to be on the lookout for my own racism, educate myself on these matters, listen to other POC and Whites who are informed, and continually sharpen my understanding of this issue.
I believe the fight against racism to be a worthy one, as well as the fights against other injustices. But, if I treat White people like it is not their job to work against it with minorities, then that would be the one way I could show my lack of humility and caring towards the White community.
For your viewing pleasure.
Two movies you all must see:
Capitalism: A Love Story
and
Why We Fight
I highly recommend both.
Enjoy.
Capitalism: A Love Story
and
Why We Fight
I highly recommend both.
Enjoy.
Monday, March 8, 2010
Great words.
"We hungry but them belly full,
The structure is set, you never change it with a ballot pull.
In the ruins there's a network for the toxic rock
schoolyard to precint, suburb to project block,
Bosses broke south for new flesh and a factory floor,
the remains left chained for the powder war.
Can't waste the day when the night brings a hearse,
so make a move and plead the fifth cause you can't plead the first.
So now I'm rollin down Rodeo with a shotgun,
there people aint seen a brown skin man since their grandparents bought one."
"The rungs torn from the ladder, can't reach the tumor,
One god, one market, one truth, one consumer"
- "Down Rodeo", Rage Against the Machine
Listen: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9KEKL8fcvzY
The structure is set, you never change it with a ballot pull.
In the ruins there's a network for the toxic rock
schoolyard to precint, suburb to project block,
Bosses broke south for new flesh and a factory floor,
the remains left chained for the powder war.
Can't waste the day when the night brings a hearse,
so make a move and plead the fifth cause you can't plead the first.
So now I'm rollin down Rodeo with a shotgun,
there people aint seen a brown skin man since their grandparents bought one."
"The rungs torn from the ladder, can't reach the tumor,
One god, one market, one truth, one consumer"
- "Down Rodeo", Rage Against the Machine
Listen: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9KEKL8fcvzY
Wednesday, March 3, 2010
Music
I don't credit it enough, but punk and (some) metal music really did aid in my arriving to my current state of understanding of the world. Not so much going to shows and participating in the pits (though I found that unforgettably exciting and meaningful), but the feeling of like-mindedness amongst all of the people there made me remember that there are important aspects of humanity that haven't been steamrolled over. This also helped me prepare for making comrades in my current fight on the progressive front.
If I have no name specific bands, there are really only two that I was ever truly fanatical about: Bad Religion and Rage Against the Machine. This is not to say that I only enjoyed these two bands in the punk/metal genre, but that they are the only two I gave a shit enough to follow and listen to on an album by album basis.
Both of these bands, though they are in two different genres of rock music (BR being punk, RATM being metal or funk-metal), helped bring me to a closer understanding of society and the world than any other groups or artists, though others like Mos Def helped me understand things about society I could never forget.
Bad Religions cutting cual guitars and fast-paced tempos are mesmerizing in themselves, not to mention the onslaught of lyrical genius displayed in many of their songs. Tracks like "Leaders and Followers", "The Handshake", "You", and "21st Century Digital Boy" became anthems I lived with week to week. I feel like this band was the first to make me feel empowered and make sense out of the confusion I felt in this complicated society. From "Leaders and Followers":
Recognition by proximity, and a brand new face
Just a smidgen of the success pie, and a pinch of social grace
You can play with the big boys, or you can tell them what to do
But sooner or later there's another one like you.
Rage Against the Machine was the band that helped direct me once I'd been taken out of the shadows by Bad Religion. They take you step by step, song by song, through a web of lies, deceit, and hidden messages in society and government. De La Rocha's verbal machine gun fire is undeniably legit, as you can feel the passion and anger flow from each syllable.
From "Guerilla Radio":
A spectacle monopolized
The cameras eyes on the choice disguised
Was it cast for the mass who burn and toil?
Or for the vultures who lust for blood and oil?
They hold the reins, stole your eyes
All the fistagons, the bullets and bombs
Who stuff the banks
Who staff the party ranks
More for Gore or the son of a drug lord
None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord.
Yes, music played an indispensable role in my arrival to my current realization of the world.
If I have no name specific bands, there are really only two that I was ever truly fanatical about: Bad Religion and Rage Against the Machine. This is not to say that I only enjoyed these two bands in the punk/metal genre, but that they are the only two I gave a shit enough to follow and listen to on an album by album basis.
Both of these bands, though they are in two different genres of rock music (BR being punk, RATM being metal or funk-metal), helped bring me to a closer understanding of society and the world than any other groups or artists, though others like Mos Def helped me understand things about society I could never forget.
Bad Religions cutting cual guitars and fast-paced tempos are mesmerizing in themselves, not to mention the onslaught of lyrical genius displayed in many of their songs. Tracks like "Leaders and Followers", "The Handshake", "You", and "21st Century Digital Boy" became anthems I lived with week to week. I feel like this band was the first to make me feel empowered and make sense out of the confusion I felt in this complicated society. From "Leaders and Followers":
Recognition by proximity, and a brand new face
Just a smidgen of the success pie, and a pinch of social grace
You can play with the big boys, or you can tell them what to do
But sooner or later there's another one like you.
Rage Against the Machine was the band that helped direct me once I'd been taken out of the shadows by Bad Religion. They take you step by step, song by song, through a web of lies, deceit, and hidden messages in society and government. De La Rocha's verbal machine gun fire is undeniably legit, as you can feel the passion and anger flow from each syllable.
From "Guerilla Radio":
A spectacle monopolized
The cameras eyes on the choice disguised
Was it cast for the mass who burn and toil?
Or for the vultures who lust for blood and oil?
They hold the reins, stole your eyes
All the fistagons, the bullets and bombs
Who stuff the banks
Who staff the party ranks
More for Gore or the son of a drug lord
None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord.
Yes, music played an indispensable role in my arrival to my current realization of the world.
Monday, March 1, 2010
Renouncing Whiteness: Saying it and doing it.
When I look at myself, I'm Jaime. I am a mix of recent English, Native American, Mexican, French, and German descendents. I enjoy playing guitar, basketball, reading, writing, and learning more about my car and how it works. However, to the people who matter, I'm White. I don't mean the government (well, partially I do). I mean the dominant culture - White culture. To them, no matter how much admixture I have, my phenotype tells them White. So, to them, White I will be. And this, whether I want it to or not, has an unmistakeable grip on my existence and shapes, at least in some ways, without my control the context in which I live and enjoy who I identify as personally. I am not a signatory of the contract of Whiteness, but I am, without my say-so, a beneficiary.
This is the dilemma in which a progressive minded, honest with oneself, anti-racist White person finds oneself. The vast majority of whites are likely not experiencing this dilemma because they haven't reached the realization of the world they actually live in. They haven't reached it because they don't yet have the ability to see it. They don't have the ability yet because they've been tricked; tricked by whiteness. Because they have not been taught how to think otherwise, they believe consciously or subconsciously, that the world they live in exists for a reason. To them, it may be that they benefit in ways that they may or may not acknowledge, but it's only because "everyone is an individual in this society" in their eyes, so that absolves them of any historical guilt or problems they may feel with respect to their current status. This narrative of the individualistic America, where everyone rose or fell on their own merits, where each man's predecessors worked hard to get their family to where they were is a dishonest portrayal of our society. The problem with this version is that it only includes Whites, and leaves out everyone else on whose shoulders White predecessors "worked their way up".
As another author has suggested, this is what the anti-racist White lives as the "White double consciousness". It is not the same as W.E.B. DuBois' "Black double consciousness", as Whites that are anti-racist do not necessarily need to view themselves in their image of subjugated groups to arrive at their place in this society (though listening to minority groups is a fundamental way to understand racial issues). The difference here is that the anti-racist White person also needs to see his/herself as they actually are in a historical sense. For instance, this realization does not mean saying that Whites do not work hard, or one persons White grandparents did not work hard, but only that the hard work was done with certain resources reserved for White competition at the detriment of racial minority inclusions. It is this double-consciousness that is necessary for anti-racist Whites to operate in, because they must know that this is true for them in a historical sense, but at the same time operate in a way that works against the large remnants still existing today.
It is not necessarily a conflict, self-loathing, or self-guilt trip, but actually sort of a tough love. It is finding out something about yourself that you may or may not have wanted to admit for so long, but once you do, you know it incontestably redefines you and your vision of yourself in the world. It also redefines how you see the people you know, the hobbies you have, the opinions you have, the people you identify with, and whether those things are conducive to the truth you've now uncovered about yourself and others around you.
The White double-consciousness means that Whites cannot simply renounce their Whiteness as a token measure, but they must act, think, and feel their renunciation. How does a White person do this? That is the journey that I'm on and have been on for some time. Maybe there is no set "way". However, one may argue that this blog in and of itself is a manifestation of my attempts to define that "way". Maybe only through serious self-reflection, cultural critique, and authentic relationships with like-minded individuals of both White and POC groups can a White person find his/her way. Wherever the path may lead, there is no turning back, so long as injustice and dishonesty cloud the social collective on race, as well as other forms of social divisions.
This is the dilemma in which a progressive minded, honest with oneself, anti-racist White person finds oneself. The vast majority of whites are likely not experiencing this dilemma because they haven't reached the realization of the world they actually live in. They haven't reached it because they don't yet have the ability to see it. They don't have the ability yet because they've been tricked; tricked by whiteness. Because they have not been taught how to think otherwise, they believe consciously or subconsciously, that the world they live in exists for a reason. To them, it may be that they benefit in ways that they may or may not acknowledge, but it's only because "everyone is an individual in this society" in their eyes, so that absolves them of any historical guilt or problems they may feel with respect to their current status. This narrative of the individualistic America, where everyone rose or fell on their own merits, where each man's predecessors worked hard to get their family to where they were is a dishonest portrayal of our society. The problem with this version is that it only includes Whites, and leaves out everyone else on whose shoulders White predecessors "worked their way up".
As another author has suggested, this is what the anti-racist White lives as the "White double consciousness". It is not the same as W.E.B. DuBois' "Black double consciousness", as Whites that are anti-racist do not necessarily need to view themselves in their image of subjugated groups to arrive at their place in this society (though listening to minority groups is a fundamental way to understand racial issues). The difference here is that the anti-racist White person also needs to see his/herself as they actually are in a historical sense. For instance, this realization does not mean saying that Whites do not work hard, or one persons White grandparents did not work hard, but only that the hard work was done with certain resources reserved for White competition at the detriment of racial minority inclusions. It is this double-consciousness that is necessary for anti-racist Whites to operate in, because they must know that this is true for them in a historical sense, but at the same time operate in a way that works against the large remnants still existing today.
It is not necessarily a conflict, self-loathing, or self-guilt trip, but actually sort of a tough love. It is finding out something about yourself that you may or may not have wanted to admit for so long, but once you do, you know it incontestably redefines you and your vision of yourself in the world. It also redefines how you see the people you know, the hobbies you have, the opinions you have, the people you identify with, and whether those things are conducive to the truth you've now uncovered about yourself and others around you.
The White double-consciousness means that Whites cannot simply renounce their Whiteness as a token measure, but they must act, think, and feel their renunciation. How does a White person do this? That is the journey that I'm on and have been on for some time. Maybe there is no set "way". However, one may argue that this blog in and of itself is a manifestation of my attempts to define that "way". Maybe only through serious self-reflection, cultural critique, and authentic relationships with like-minded individuals of both White and POC groups can a White person find his/her way. Wherever the path may lead, there is no turning back, so long as injustice and dishonesty cloud the social collective on race, as well as other forms of social divisions.
Saturday, February 20, 2010
The Austin Pilot Attacker and Double Standards on Terrorism
Before I begin, I want to make something clear. While I certainly do not condone what Stack did with his plane in Austin, I do think he made many valid points in his goodbye letter about our system of corruption and business/government intermarriage. I think what happened and the fact that lives were taken is a truly terrible thing.
I have two beefs with our media right now following this event.
One: Where is the discussion of Stack's motives? The letter has gone largely unmentioned and uninvestigated as a source for reason behind the attacks. When the 9-11 pilots did a similar attack, their motives were widely covered (albeit distorted) and used to begin two wars and a revamping of our security in the U.S. The media has largely ignored his letter and what drove him to do this. Again, the media drops the ball on serious investigation of the matter (like Iraq), yet we know how much his house was worth and what commentary there is over what Tiger Woods is going to say publicly tommorow. This is one example of the ridiculous media we live with in the U.S.
The truth is that the letter raises serious questions abour government and it's actions, and this is why it's not mentioned. The media, yet again, tucks tail and mentions nothing when it could implicate the massive complex of business and government.
Two: Where is the investigation of Stack's religious/ethnic background, as well as the resistance groups he mentions all over the letter?
After 9-11, all news outlets mentioned the ethnic/religious backgrouns of the attackers as "Muslim" ("radical" Muslims at that). This was heavily tied to their actions and motives for the attack. However, there has been no similar coverage of Stack as a representative member of some ethnic or religious group. There has been no coverage of how his being a member of these resistance groups he mentions during his suicide letter could have aided his actions and extremism, and there has certainly been no governmental move to eradicate them as some 'enemy force' in the same way it did with respect to Muslims and Arabs in similar 'problematic' groups.
Stack is instead viewed as an individual, much like McVeigh, Kazinsky, and other 'individual' terrorists who had beefs with the government (See Kaczinsky and the Leftist Manifesto, or McVeigh's Libertarian and anti-government beliefs). All of these men belonged to or worked for goals of anti-governmental organizations, yet no smear campaign comparable to that of the 9-11 attacks takes place. There is a racial component here as well that is undeniable. If you're a white male committing terrorism, you're a troubled person. If you're a Muslim (like the Ft. Hood shooter or 9-11 attackers), get ready to have your whole ethnic group put on the spot. Meanwhile, white males can rest assured their way won't be hampered with bothersome questions all over the media about their legitimacy in the country.
Our media is a failure, yet again, and this coverage of the terrorist in Austin proves it.
I have two beefs with our media right now following this event.
One: Where is the discussion of Stack's motives? The letter has gone largely unmentioned and uninvestigated as a source for reason behind the attacks. When the 9-11 pilots did a similar attack, their motives were widely covered (albeit distorted) and used to begin two wars and a revamping of our security in the U.S. The media has largely ignored his letter and what drove him to do this. Again, the media drops the ball on serious investigation of the matter (like Iraq), yet we know how much his house was worth and what commentary there is over what Tiger Woods is going to say publicly tommorow. This is one example of the ridiculous media we live with in the U.S.
The truth is that the letter raises serious questions abour government and it's actions, and this is why it's not mentioned. The media, yet again, tucks tail and mentions nothing when it could implicate the massive complex of business and government.
Two: Where is the investigation of Stack's religious/ethnic background, as well as the resistance groups he mentions all over the letter?
After 9-11, all news outlets mentioned the ethnic/religious backgrouns of the attackers as "Muslim" ("radical" Muslims at that). This was heavily tied to their actions and motives for the attack. However, there has been no similar coverage of Stack as a representative member of some ethnic or religious group. There has been no coverage of how his being a member of these resistance groups he mentions during his suicide letter could have aided his actions and extremism, and there has certainly been no governmental move to eradicate them as some 'enemy force' in the same way it did with respect to Muslims and Arabs in similar 'problematic' groups.
Stack is instead viewed as an individual, much like McVeigh, Kazinsky, and other 'individual' terrorists who had beefs with the government (See Kaczinsky and the Leftist Manifesto, or McVeigh's Libertarian and anti-government beliefs). All of these men belonged to or worked for goals of anti-governmental organizations, yet no smear campaign comparable to that of the 9-11 attacks takes place. There is a racial component here as well that is undeniable. If you're a white male committing terrorism, you're a troubled person. If you're a Muslim (like the Ft. Hood shooter or 9-11 attackers), get ready to have your whole ethnic group put on the spot. Meanwhile, white males can rest assured their way won't be hampered with bothersome questions all over the media about their legitimacy in the country.
Our media is a failure, yet again, and this coverage of the terrorist in Austin proves it.
Monday, February 15, 2010
Sometimes...
...I can be a real asshole and not even realize it. It's worse when it's the day after Valentines Day. I hope my girlfriend can forgive me for being careless with my words.
Sometimes I wonder why she puts up with me, as thoughtless as I can be inadvertently.
Sometimes I wonder why she puts up with me, as thoughtless as I can be inadvertently.
Test Video 2
Very broad, no outline, just me talking about terror and America for a sound test.
Enjoy. All comments, criticisms are welcome.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dijGtb46Stc
Enjoy. All comments, criticisms are welcome.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dijGtb46Stc
Thursday, February 11, 2010
OKAY, here it is.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dKHHfluJnYk
First video, about Whiteness in America. Kinda weak, did it on the spot. Will have better audio and picture soon.
Comments appreciated. Be gentle. :)
BTW, I had a discussion with my friend James Rodriguez the other day. We came to a nice little conclusion: "Illegals aren't crossing our border. Illegals created the border".
First video, about Whiteness in America. Kinda weak, did it on the spot. Will have better audio and picture soon.
Comments appreciated. Be gentle. :)
BTW, I had a discussion with my friend James Rodriguez the other day. We came to a nice little conclusion: "Illegals aren't crossing our border. Illegals created the border".
Wednesday, February 10, 2010
Excellent piece.
http://godheval.net/an-open-letter-to-steven-sailer/
This is an excellent piece written by Godheval.
His premise: Okay fine, so let's accept for a moment the 'studies' that show inferiority amongst 'lesser' races under the 'superior' White man. So what? Where do these arguments go? Justified racism and discrimination?
If we're going to look at behavior and IQ that way, Godheval argues, let's look at more temporal and spacial behaviors by Whites (namely the propensity to rape, pillage, murder, and commit genocide, all the while exploiting the land and resources of non-Whites). Is it fair to label them sick, twisted thieves?
I sure hope Godheval doesn't mind, but I'll be remembering that argument for future engagements with others on racism.
This is an excellent piece written by Godheval.
His premise: Okay fine, so let's accept for a moment the 'studies' that show inferiority amongst 'lesser' races under the 'superior' White man. So what? Where do these arguments go? Justified racism and discrimination?
If we're going to look at behavior and IQ that way, Godheval argues, let's look at more temporal and spacial behaviors by Whites (namely the propensity to rape, pillage, murder, and commit genocide, all the while exploiting the land and resources of non-Whites). Is it fair to label them sick, twisted thieves?
I sure hope Godheval doesn't mind, but I'll be remembering that argument for future engagements with others on racism.
Tuesday, February 9, 2010
Myth: America "lost" it's moral authority.
It makes me snicker when I hear some conservative bray on about American exceptionalism in a world of backwards actions, immoral leaders, and corrupt governments. It makes me shake my head when I hear some liberal run his/her mouth about how America has "lost it's moral authority" in the world.
What moral authority did it ever have to begin with?
I think displaced Native Americans, past and present, might have a say on this.
I think Black slaves, then "freed" to be segregated, might have something to chime in with.
I think subjugated women might have an opinion.
I think Jews stopped at a Florida harbor and sent back to Germany by FDR might have something to say.
I think Mexican-American Tejanos in grossly underfunded schools for decades and decades might ask where this authority was,
I think the hoards of exploited European and Asian immigrants might want to see this morally sound benchmark.
Perhaps those in 1950's Iran who watched their elected leader be overthrown with the help of a CIA coup might have a say in this?
How about those who watched American interventionism in Latin America for decades?
Or can we cut these people out of the discussion on moral high ground and exceptionalism?
What moral authority did it ever have to begin with?
I think displaced Native Americans, past and present, might have a say on this.
I think Black slaves, then "freed" to be segregated, might have something to chime in with.
I think subjugated women might have an opinion.
I think Jews stopped at a Florida harbor and sent back to Germany by FDR might have something to say.
I think Mexican-American Tejanos in grossly underfunded schools for decades and decades might ask where this authority was,
I think the hoards of exploited European and Asian immigrants might want to see this morally sound benchmark.
Perhaps those in 1950's Iran who watched their elected leader be overthrown with the help of a CIA coup might have a say in this?
How about those who watched American interventionism in Latin America for decades?
Or can we cut these people out of the discussion on moral high ground and exceptionalism?
I've had it.
You know, sometimes it dawns on me just how much I can only ever really know about what it is to be Black in America.
No, I didn't just watch the CNN special of the same name, and no, I didn't just take an African-American studies course. I'm actually finding out more of how it seems Black people must feel in regards to their place in American society the more I study white society.
Because some Black people are featured as rap artists, sing and rap about things considered lewd and base, any black youth that listens to it is not only considered the rule for all black youth, but that music alone is what is stapled to their identity (even if they also enjoy jazz, punk, metal, techno, rock, or country). Meanwhile, the suburban white youth who buy the same rap CD's are viewed as "also listening to rap" in addition to their other, 'normal' and at the same time 'appropriate' artists, like Hawthorn Heights or Alan Jackson.
Loud, obnoxious bands like Blink 182 are primarily the listening products of white youth, contain lyrics that can easily be shown as lewd and inappropriate on the same grounds, yet are not tipified with white youth as being a problematic culture. Instead, it's seen as a mere nuissance that kids "grow out of" or "can turn down when it's too loud". Even in extreme examples like Marilyn Manson, it's a "contaminating" culture that makes victims out of it's listeners. With rap and black youth, the black youth "embrace" it as their culture. No victim status is awarded for them. There is a clear cut racial double standard, yet it is never discussed or challenged.
White youth who attend frat partys, drift by through coursework with a sub-par GPA, and have a higher propensity to binge drink and abuse alcohol are "experiencing college", yet if by chance a Black person walks into the store to buy a 40 oz., a less than flattering stereotype is placed upon them. And people wonder why Black Americans are not as quick to go grab a flag to go wave around, ready to march into a country for war?
Watching Chris Matthews say on TV after the State of the Union that "he forgot Obama was Black for an hour" as an attempt to prove a post-racial society makes me both laugh and feel sorry for our country. Why the fuck does one have to forget that somebody is Black in order for them to make a good speech, come across as a uniting figure, or have serious and substanative ideas for our country? What would it mean if Matthews had all of a sudden decided to think of Obama as Black during the speech? What if Obama had said or done something stereotypically "Black", if even for just a few seconds? Would that have erased any certainty that he was capable of doing what he does?
Anyone with a degree of common sense already knows the answer to those questions, so there's no sense beating around the bush with this: America is far from post-racial. Yes, MLK was right when he said "We all came on different ships, but we're in the same boat now." He just forgot to mention that we still, though it is lamentable, sit in different seats.
No, I didn't just watch the CNN special of the same name, and no, I didn't just take an African-American studies course. I'm actually finding out more of how it seems Black people must feel in regards to their place in American society the more I study white society.
Because some Black people are featured as rap artists, sing and rap about things considered lewd and base, any black youth that listens to it is not only considered the rule for all black youth, but that music alone is what is stapled to their identity (even if they also enjoy jazz, punk, metal, techno, rock, or country). Meanwhile, the suburban white youth who buy the same rap CD's are viewed as "also listening to rap" in addition to their other, 'normal' and at the same time 'appropriate' artists, like Hawthorn Heights or Alan Jackson.
Loud, obnoxious bands like Blink 182 are primarily the listening products of white youth, contain lyrics that can easily be shown as lewd and inappropriate on the same grounds, yet are not tipified with white youth as being a problematic culture. Instead, it's seen as a mere nuissance that kids "grow out of" or "can turn down when it's too loud". Even in extreme examples like Marilyn Manson, it's a "contaminating" culture that makes victims out of it's listeners. With rap and black youth, the black youth "embrace" it as their culture. No victim status is awarded for them. There is a clear cut racial double standard, yet it is never discussed or challenged.
White youth who attend frat partys, drift by through coursework with a sub-par GPA, and have a higher propensity to binge drink and abuse alcohol are "experiencing college", yet if by chance a Black person walks into the store to buy a 40 oz., a less than flattering stereotype is placed upon them. And people wonder why Black Americans are not as quick to go grab a flag to go wave around, ready to march into a country for war?
Watching Chris Matthews say on TV after the State of the Union that "he forgot Obama was Black for an hour" as an attempt to prove a post-racial society makes me both laugh and feel sorry for our country. Why the fuck does one have to forget that somebody is Black in order for them to make a good speech, come across as a uniting figure, or have serious and substanative ideas for our country? What would it mean if Matthews had all of a sudden decided to think of Obama as Black during the speech? What if Obama had said or done something stereotypically "Black", if even for just a few seconds? Would that have erased any certainty that he was capable of doing what he does?
Anyone with a degree of common sense already knows the answer to those questions, so there's no sense beating around the bush with this: America is far from post-racial. Yes, MLK was right when he said "We all came on different ships, but we're in the same boat now." He just forgot to mention that we still, though it is lamentable, sit in different seats.
Sunday, February 7, 2010
Thursday, January 14, 2010
Being American.
My voice is heard, but not listened to. I'm seen, but don't matter. What matters are things that do not define me, and what defines me are things that do not matter to society at large. What matters to society is that I'm white, I'm male, I'm a valued customer, a compensated employee, a good college student, and a citizen with no criminal background. I have a social security number. I have decent credit. I pay my rent. I know the pledge of allegiance. These are some of the things that matter to my country that do not define me.
What defines me is that I want to work to erase what comes with being white by working towards justice, that I want to keep my non-religious head raised whenever Christians bow and pray in my company and not be considered rude or immoral. I want the troops out of the Middle East, knowing full well that it damages our interests abroad. Is it because I don't want America to have interests that aid it? No. I want America to have interests that do not subjugate and supercede the interests of those in the region. I want to see capitalism compromised for the good of the earth, it's people, and it's future.
I want to make sure I'm the most well-rounded, educated, and capable person that I can be before I have children. I want to do more for the people I love. I want to teach people and learn from people - everybody, not just people who look like me, talk like me, believe like me, or have lessons that are going to be convenient for me.
I want America to be redefined, rethought, and replenished. I know this means hard steps, hard times, and doing without. I'm ready for that, as difficult as it might be.
What defines me is that I want to work to erase what comes with being white by working towards justice, that I want to keep my non-religious head raised whenever Christians bow and pray in my company and not be considered rude or immoral. I want the troops out of the Middle East, knowing full well that it damages our interests abroad. Is it because I don't want America to have interests that aid it? No. I want America to have interests that do not subjugate and supercede the interests of those in the region. I want to see capitalism compromised for the good of the earth, it's people, and it's future.
I want to make sure I'm the most well-rounded, educated, and capable person that I can be before I have children. I want to do more for the people I love. I want to teach people and learn from people - everybody, not just people who look like me, talk like me, believe like me, or have lessons that are going to be convenient for me.
I want America to be redefined, rethought, and replenished. I know this means hard steps, hard times, and doing without. I'm ready for that, as difficult as it might be.
Saturday, January 9, 2010
Sick and tired.
I'm tired of this run-around, mealy-mouthed, PC crap.
Seriously, if the news shows me clearly that members of a certain ethnic group are insane and unstable in many ways, don't I have the right to say that generally there is a good chance they are all that way? I mean, when the two kids at Columbine, Timothy McVeigh, Ted Kazinsky, or the man who shot abortion doctor George Tiller have all been covered in the news for vast killings and terrorist activity, don't I have reason to believe any white male might do the same to me?
When I read that majority of rapists are white males, don't I have reason to worry if I see my girlfriend working alongside one at her job? Is the fact that most drug users have been white enough for me to suspect them of such activity upon meeting them?
Can I question the mentality of white leaders when one of them (Bill Clinton) made such a grave error as to bomb and kill many people thought to be dangerous when in fact they were simply in a factory making aspirin? How about when one of them decided to invade a country, be responsible for the deaths of untold thousands, simply because of what turned out to be a weak hunch and doctored intelligence?
Can I assume most white males are alcoholics when it turns out the most common binge drinkers are of that ethnic group?
Not so long ago, it was revealed that white people used up most types of welfare more often and in higher per capita percentages than black people, the group who are typically stereotyped for such actions. Do I have the right to speak about whites as a lazy, unmotived, hand-out driven group?
Of course I wouldn't go and say all of that. However, it's so easy for us to speak in codified language, maintain stereotyped and racial myths, but I'm sure for many white people it's a little hard to swallow when the shoe's on the other foot.
Thursday, January 7, 2010
Saturday, January 2, 2010
Racial Code-Words, Part Deux
Disclaimer: I do not intend for this entry to be a bomb-throwing session towards President Bush. Instead, I want to focus on his words and why what he says is so embedded in our culture that the message is so much bigger than him and escapes our notice so easily.
Doing some research for a paper a month ago, I stumbled across this quote by President Bush. It wasn't until I read it a few times that I came across an interesting double message that was in his statement. Here's the quote:
"There's a lot of people in the world who don't believe that people whose skin color may not be the same as ours can be free and self govern. I reject that. I reject that strongly. I believe that people who practice the Muslim faith can self-govern. I believe that people whose skins aren't necessarily.. are a different color than white can self-govern."
Now, in this 2004 press conference, what President Bush was attempting to do here was show that he is confident in the ability of people from what we know as The Middle East to self-govern in a democratic fashion, and somehow imply that anyone who thinks to the contrary believes themselves to be superior to "other skinned people". This was the primary and most obvious surface message of what he said.
What I didn't realize until later, however, is that he was in the process of further cementing the idea of American and White being synonymous. That is, by using "people whose skin color is white" as the symbol for American in his sentence, he says it as if the most legit, generic Americans are those who are White. He furthermore uses darker-skinned people as the symbol for Muslim, and further states that Muslims can self-govern (true), but then using them as being some sort of autonomous group apart from Americans.
This is a large example of how code words in our society come to still racially divide us, even when we're not aware of the institutional way in which they're employed. By using White people are the paradigm for legitimacy in a conversation on being Americans, and Muslims as the opposite, foreign people who need to learn and embrace the "American" (read: white) way, we push forward more ideas of racial superiority and inferiority, even if the person is not overtly prejudiced or racist. These are conditioned, institutionalised behaviors.
President Bush is not the lone offender in this regard. It happens everyday, with different words or even attitudes. It's all over our mainstream media (CNN, FOX, ABC, etc.) It happens when we speak of "tragedies" in the suburbs when two (white) kids shoot up Columbine and seldom devote a fraction of that time to the weekly tragedies of the (predominantly non-white) inner cities.
How about this video? The guy even in his opening statements sort of places that "drug related, inner city" violence as "old news" and this "new, suburban attack" against a white kid as a special story.
Now, I'm not saying that I don't feel empathy, regret, and sorrow for this mentioned family. It's terrible that this should happen to any parent, and the kids who did that to this boy should be punished severely. However, my beef is also with the way the media handled the story. It's the way we paint and hand-pick stories that can be rose-tinted and tilted to keep a certain racially coded "norm" as a certain way in Americans' minds.
So, the next time you watch the news or read a speech, think a little about how words we take for granted have been institutionally crafted to hold double meanings for us about people in society.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
