Black History Month; The Subject that Segregates
copyright © 2009 Betsy L. Angert. BeThink.org The history of Black Americans is a glorious one. It is a chronicle filled with much triumph, as well as many trials and tribulations. Yet, many debate whether a month that commemorates people, pitch in color, defies reason. Do the days dedicated to the acknowledgement of African American achievements divide us as a nation? The answer, some say is a complex one. Consider the thoughts of Columnist, Clarence Page of The Chicago Tribune. Is Black History Month already history? Well, it depends. Another view comes from a fellow Journalist and contributor to The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Cynthia Tucker. She is more emphatic in her evaluation. Ms Tucker writes; Month robs blacks of part in U.S. history, It seems the subject, Black History Month, segregates opinions.
A newborn was brought to his adopted parents who, while well educated, seemingly ethical, and definitely well-established in the community were cruel to the infant. The proud father and mother were happy to take the neonate in. "Dad" and "Mom" were fine folks. Each spoke eloquently. They wrote wondrous words such as "all men are created equal." Yet, in the New World they acted as barbarians would. All that they said they thought sacred was negated. The patriarch brutally beat the baby. He may not have physically laid a hand on the toddler. Nonetheless, he had overseers do the dirty deeds. The matriarch, while outwardly sweeter, swiped at the "boy" whenever he was near. The man who acted as a father, and his spouse, did all they could to ensure the tot remain enslaved.
The head of the family provided no books for the little tyke. His wife did not discuss deeper issues with the child. Ignorance would surely suppress desires for advancement. If nothing else, a lad, without formal erudition, would not believe, he could succeed. Surely, a child who had not learned to express himself well or to imagine would not wander far. It would be best, the couple conceded, if the Black baby did not have the means to survive without assistance from the Lord and Lady of the land.
As much as the couple worked to keep the dark-skinned "boy" in his place, the curious lad proved to be creative. He invented. He was innovative. At times, he achieved beyond expectations. Still, the youngster, the adolescent he grew to be, and the adult man, pitch in hue, was not rewarded for his achievements. Traditionally, his caregivers took credit for his achievements. The pinker persons who housed him, confined the Black man to a symbolic cage, a field of cotton, a city slum, or a prison, far from civilized society.
The ebony man escaped when he could. He sought an education. He excelled when given a semblance of equal opportunities. However, even in good times, someone, somewhere sought to subjugate him. Away from his parents' home, from father and mother's persistent grip, the Black man remained subordinate. What he did well, he had to be better than his white counterparts. For Caucasians, it seemed impossible to separate him from his color.
Given an inch, an inspired "Negro" would take a mile, a week, or a month, his parents once mused. Indeed, children of color did. In 1926, Historian, Carter G. Woodson, a man born to former slaves, went on to earn a doctorate degree from Harvard and invite Americans to adopt Negro History Week. In 2009, with the first African-American President of the United States in the White House, countless citizens conclude, Black History Month isalready history.
Today, Americans are told the narrative is no longer relevant. Accounts of African ancestors "robs" purplish-brown persons of the prominent role they played in the United States. Journalist Cynthia Tucker writes, "The commemoration is a damaging form of apartheid, setting the contributions of black Americans aside as separate and unequal."
Commentator, John Ridley disagrees. He opines, and offers, Yes, We Still Need Black History Month. He believes the legends must be shared. Mister Ridley fears the anecdotes will be forgotten. Most, he observes, are yet to be told, or taught in school. Society remains segregated when the subject is race relations, or Black History Month.
Perchance that is why people in this country are, as the first African-American Secretary of State says the actions of pale skinned Americans are,"polite, restrained" when the races mix or muse over their shared history. The story of what was, and was not, in a country founded on freedom for all, is a sensitive topic, When broached, anger boils over. Excuses are made, or the embarrassed blame the Black man or woman for overreacting.
On February 18, 2009, Artist, Sean Delonas. appeared in the New York Post, The Artist once nicknamed the Picasso of prejudice, castigated the Commander-In-Chief, the first American charcoal in color to occupy the Oval Office,
Mister Delonas penned a political cartoon many thought racist. In the image, a chimpanzee lay dead in the grass. Blood streams from the two bullet holes in the primate's chest. Police shooters, gun in hand, look at the slain beast and state; "They'll have to find someone else to write the next stimulus bill." While some would wish to say the toon is but an innocent commentary, readers cannot negate an historic association. Anglos have long referred to Black brethren as apes. An African-American, even a President, the author of the financial package, is not exempt from scorn.
Perhaps, in a cynical way, this is the proof those who prefer we not observe Black History Month seek. In America, all men are created equal. Any American might receive praise or punishment. Surely, a defiant The New York Post Editor, Col Allen would concur.
Upon receipt of reprimands for the pictorial essay, newspaper executive Allen issued a statement in defense of the stimulus/chimp cartoon. He said the caricature was but a parody of current events. An actual chimp shot down in Connecticut was coupled with acts of Congress, or at least that is what thePost hoped people would believe.
However, many Americans remember their history. In the year 2000, long after the adoption of Black History Month, Doctor Marcus Neiman, Chairman Emeritus of Creation Anthropology at Landover Baptist University, published what was characterized as "his important findings."
In an article entitled "It Took A True Christian To Find The Missing Link," the esteemed scholar stated; "God created human beings separate from primates. There are different kinds of hominids, just like there are different kinds of mustard. There are small primates called chimpanzees. They are the cute little fellows who live in trees, like the one in that movie our greatest President, Ronald Reagan, starred in -- "Bedtime for Bonzo." . . . There are large primates that live on the jungle floor and scare missionaries, who, being Christians, are armed against them. They are called gorillas. There are even primates that play basketball, rob liquor stores, organize marches and make some attempt at imitating human speech. They are called Negroes. Regrettably, if there is such a thing a "natural selection," most of them have selected to be naturally lazy. They are living examples of the Lord's unfinished business because these more primitive hominids are still evolving."
Granted, those who think there is no need to teach Black History might argue there are infinite illustrations that counter a single comic strip or an eccentric scientist. The little Black lad of yore lives no more in modern American history.
African-Americans have arrived. Barack Obama is our President, elected by the people, Black and white. Michelle Obama, America's First Lady, an African-American scholar in her own right, by her very presence teaches Black History literally and figuratively.
Oprah Winfrey is among the wealthiest women in the world. The entertainer's entrepreneurial story is a "phenomenon, a modern-day Horatio Alger, up from roots in poorest America." Tiger Woods is highly successful. Perhaps, these accomplished individuals demonstrate "race no longer defines us,"or as Eric Holder so aptly stated, what "now passes as meaningful interaction . . . in reality accomplishes very little." Surely, we are separate and unequal when we pretend that our past does not still define us, or that there is no reason to discuss the differences that continue to divide us.
Rather than rant or rage, Black History month is no longer relevant, as a nation we might realize as our Attorney General offered, "This nation has still not come to grips with its racial past." (What) will be, at first, a process that is both awkward and painful," will reap rewards.
What we may learn when we honor Black History, will be "potentially great," As Eric Holder espoused on the same day the controversial Delonas cartoon appeared. The subject of segregation need not divide us. When we acknowledge a problem, we can begin to solve it.
Those who think there is no need to actively honor African-American history might wish to ponder the prominence of African-Americans who are unfamiliar to most. Might those whose names we do not know from the past, and in the present, be representative of the young Black "boy" whose parents protected him, punished him, and did not honor him, or acknowledge his accomplishments?
Please ponder the draftsman, engineer, and inventor, Lewis Howard Latimer who worked as the original draftsman for Thomas Edison. Scientist Latimer invented an electric lamp with an inexpensive carbon filament and a threaded wooden socket for light bulbs. He also helped advance our current conversation, when he drafted the patent drawings for Alexander Graham Bell's telephone. Yet, American's, for the most part do not memorialize the man who allowed us to chat more freely. Black Americans' History, a month of homage? Let us talk.
Might many have thought purplish-brown Americans arrived in 1941? When the United States went to war, Doctor Charles Richard Drew was named Director of the Blood Bank for the National Research Council. His expertise, allowed America to collect blood for the American Armed Forces. The groundwork for the American Red Cross, blood collection, and procedures that allow for the storage of plasma are attributed to this African-American. Yet, few know his name.
White patriarchs were, and are, perhaps more prominent in the minds of many who have forgotten the tale of the young lad and his adopted parents. In America, absentmindedness for a prideful past affects our present.
The African-American man or woman who sits beside his Anglo brethren is not segregated by homage to history. A lack of awareness, acceptance, and praise for a people divides America.
Perhaps the question Americans might ask is not whether to set aside days to discuss the trials and tribulations of Black people. The query, instead, might be, is colormuteness characteristic in a country segregated, not by Black History Month, but by the actions of man. Could it be that citizens wish to claim American culture is a colorblind. In a nation where racism remains rampant, albeit politely restrained, and better hidden, would Americans rather not remember the glorious history of Black brothers and sisters?
Certainly, a commemoration of feats and foibles, trials, and tribulations will not divide the country as much as ignorance of our past and present does.
References for race relations, and a reality too long restrained . . .
- A History Lesson in the East Room, By Rachel L. Swarms. The New York Times. February 18, 2009
- Learning to treat Negroes like human beings. The Landover Baptist Website. July 2000
- Delonas for Wednesday February 18, 2009. New York Post. February 18, 2009
- U.S. Is a 'Nation of Cowards' on Race, Says Holder, By Bernie Becker. The New York Times. February 18, 2009
- Month robs blacks of part in U.S. history, By Cynthia Tucker. The Atlanta Journal-Constitution. Sunday, February 08, 2009
- Yes, We Still Need Black History Month, By John Ridley. Morning Edition. February 17, 2009
- Is Black History Month already history? Well, it depends, By Clarence Page. Chicago Tribune. February 15, 2008
- Oprah is course focus and jumping off point for study of race issues. By Andrea Lynn. University of Illinois. February 1, 2001
- cablinasian like me, By Gary Kamiya. Salon. April 199
- New York Post Chimp Cartoon Compares Stimulus Author To Dead Primate, By Same Stein. Huffington Post. February 18, 2009
- Unbound: Profiles in Black History. Charles Drew. 1904-1950
Posted by Betsy L. Angert on February 18, 2009 at 02:45 PM in Black History, Past/Present, Civics, Civil Rights, Racial Discrimination | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Katrina's [America's] Hidden Race War
Katrina's Hidden Race War: In Aftermath of Katrina, Vigilantes Shot 11 Blacks in New Orelans (1 of 2)
copyright © 2008 Betsy L. Angert. BeThink.org Racism, in reality, is fear of the unknown. It is apprehension for what is alien to us. A bigot is often one who claims to be colorblind. However, indeed, he or she is more likely colormute. Rarely do persons who think themselves tolerant speak of the scorn they feel for those who differ from them. Often the intolerant are not aware of the rigidity that rules their lives. Few amongst Anglos in America, since most appear as they do, consider what the life of one whose complexion is cause for rejection. However, in an exposé, A.C. Thompson muses of what most rather not mention. The author addresses"Katrina's Hidden Race War."
It is common to hear Caucasians say, "Some of my best friends are Black, Brown, Yellow, or Red." People hope to create an impression. Most wish to prove they willingly accept those unlike themselves. However, the acquaintance they speak of may be the one and only person of color that they know. People may think the person that they associate with is the exception to the rule. He or she is a good gal or gent. All other folks who do not don a pinkish hue are not to be trusted.
In this country, to publicly proclaim a hatred for a person whose complexion is dark is just not done. That is unless a person can conceive of a circumstance that allows for a reasonable abhorrence. Hurricane Katrina afforded such an opportunity for white residents of Algiers Point, Louisiana.
Algiers Point has always been somewhat isolated: it's perched on the west bank of the Mississippi River, linked to the core of the city only by a ferry line and twin gray steel bridges. When the hurricane descended on Louisiana, Algiers Point got off relatively easy. While wide swaths of New Orleans were deluged, the levees ringing Algiers Point withstood the Mississippi's surging currents, preventing flooding; most homes and businesses in the area survived intact. As word spread that the area was dry, desperate people began heading toward the west bank, some walking over bridges, others traveling by boat. The National Guard soon designated the Algiers Point ferry landing an official evacuation site. Rescuers from the Coast Guard and other agencies brought flood victims to the ferry terminal, where soldiers loaded them onto buses headed for Texas.
Facing an influx of refugees, the residents of Algiers Point could have pulled together food, water, and medical supplies for the flood victims. Instead, a group of white residents, convinced that crime would arrive with the human exodus, sought to seal off the area, blocking the roads in and out of the neighborhood by dragging lumber and downed trees into the streets. They stockpiled handguns, assault rifles, shotguns, and at least one Uzi and began patrolling the streets in pickup trucks and SUVs.
The newly formed militia, a loose band of about fifteen to thirty residents, most of them men, all of them white, was looking for thieves, outlaws or, as one member put it, anyone who simply "didn't belong."
The Nation Magazine, in the January 5, 2009 issue, recounts tales as told by those foreign elements who, while residents of the broader community, were shot as though they were criminals. Their crime was perhaps only their skin color.
The way Donnell Herrington tells it, there was no warning. One second he was trudging through the heat. The next he was lying prostrate on the pavement, his life spilling out of a hole in his throat, his body racked with pain, his vision blurred and distorted.
It was September 1, 2005, some three days after Hurricane Katrina crashed into New Orleans, and somebody had just blasted Herrington, who is African-American, with a shotgun. "I just hit the ground. I didn't even know what happened," recalls Herrington, a burly 32-year-old with a soft drawl.
The sudden eruption of gunfire horrified Herrington's companions--his cousin Marcel Alexander, then 17, and friend Chris Collins, then 18, who are also black. "I looked at Donnell and he had this big old hole in his neck," Alexander recalls. "I tried to help him up, and they started shooting again." Herrington says he was staggering to his feet when a second shotgun blast struck him from behind; the spray of lead pellets also caught Collins and Alexander. The buckshot peppered Alexander's back, arm, and buttocks.
Herrington shouted at the other men to run and turned to face his attackers: three armed white males. Herrington says he hadn't even seen the men or their weapons before the shooting began. As Alexander and Collins fled, Herrington ran in the opposite direction, his hand pressed to the bleeding wound on his throat. Behind him, he says, the gunmen yelled, "Get him! Get that n*gg*r!"
Persons who were presumed guilty, merely by their presence, were neighbors from another section of town. The poorer people sought safety and shelter after the storm placed them in a precarious situation. Contrary to reports, the Black population did not loot or engage in thievery. African-Americans did as the Anglos who were also chest-deep in floodwaters. They "found" food and fluids to drink from a local grocery store after Hurricane Katrina destroyed all they had. However, trepidation distorts perception. Frequently, white Americans are apprehensive when they consider African-Americans.
From birth, children are taught not to talk to strangers. Little ones are cautioned to beware. Different is dangerous. Perchance, the Associated Press Reporters or Editors who covered the Katrina story were Anglos. Hence, when Journalists, just as the residents of Algiers Point, saw persons who look as they do, they defined their actions as honorable. However, the sight of a Black individual in a similar situation was not viewed through a clear lens. The question might be asked, in America will it ever be.
Please ponder the images. Then, consider the captions.
Shared By Dustin
Some, of every complexion, did take possession of life's littlest necessities. In a few neighborhoods, not Algiers Point, white persons were benevolent towards those "others" of color. However, Caucasian citizens might contemplate the reality that, before Katrina, the plight of Black Americans was hidden, and it is again.
The depth of poverty experienced by many African-Americans, the people whose ancestors physically built this nation, was not realized until a natural storm churned up a crisis so critical.
White Americans acknowledge that in some areas, a bridge was built. Yet, few wish to admit this association only appears in a time of crisis. While a scant few channels were opened another, many more were closed. In other locales, where dark skinned persons were presumably welcome, the Anglo inhabitants roared with resentment. Reports offered the rationale for what in America is the conventional wisdom of an apprehensive Anglo populace.Karina victims are to blame for an increase in Houston crime. Certainly, these same "undesirables" would propagate misdeeds wherever they may be; hence, we have Algiers Point.
Granted, pinkish persons in other neighborhoods, even in New Orleans, opened their hearts. A restaurant proprietor, aware of the depth of destruction, 80 percent of the city was under water, opened their eateries to anyone in need.
Tommy Cvitanovich, co-owner of Drago's Seafood Restaurant, is but one of what might be many. This sympathetic fellow spoke of the reason he, his family, and his staff felt they must serve all survivors. For the entrepreneur, there was no reason to fear. Mister Cvitanovich, when confronted with the circumstances of his fellow man, felt he could not turn away. Nor could he, his kin, and the folks they worked with grab a gun and shot at persons who sought food and a safer shelter. The tale is beautiful and worth a peek.
"For eight weeks we gave away meals. People were waiting in line," he says.
For five weeks, the meals were given outside the restaurant. When the restaurant reopened, Drago's moved the effort to Lakeview where the need was greater.
"There were no fast food restaurants, no convenience stores or grocery stores open," he says. "Most people brought food (from outside the area) Food sources were non-existent."
In a moment of horror, what is often hidden, good, and bad is revealed. Honorable Americans such as Tommy Cvitanovich are to be thanked for what their endeavors can teach. Some persons pale of skin felt the pain of the poorer, less protected population. However, when the waters receded, might residents of the United States inquire; would benevolence still prosper.
Several, such a Tommy Cvitanovich might show compassion as they had done in the past. Yet, we cannot be certain.
In America, sweetness is often subdued by racism. Much is restrained, not realized, or hidden from view when consternation is prevalent. When people react to anxiety, rather than act and discover we are not that different, we have what we had in Algiers Point, guns ablaze
Inside and outside of a New Orleans enclave, Caucasians are challenged to conceive that persons of color did not seek to violate the law. Indeed, white vigilantes victimized those who have, for centuries, been casualties in a civilized American society.
What received less attention from the press and from the paler people is Whites Sought More Katrina Aid Than Blacks. African-Americans, too often buried by the burden of bigotry, did not know that they might be able to apply or appeal a decision for inadequate assistance. Nor did some have the means before the tempest to secure property or proper insurance. What also was and remains out of sight are the financial abuses brownish-purplish persons are victim to. Credit is not colorblind.
In America, privilege is a white man's prerogative. Prosecution is reserved for "other" races.
Tulane University Historian Lance Hill, who runs Tulane's Southern Institute for Education and Research, has studied the city's racial divide. He understands why Algiers Point gunmen have avoided arrest. "By and large, I think the white mentality is that these people [the Anglo lawbreakers] are exempt--that even if they committed these crimes, they're really exempt from any kind of legal repercussion." People of color only commit crime, in the mind of many.
Professor Hill ponders and proclaims; "It's sad to say, but I think that if any of these cases went to trial, and none of them have, I can't see a white person being convicted of any kind of crime against an African-American during that period." Such is the sound of silence. When people are blind, or white, racism becomes a more colorful spectrum.
The stories of Algiers Point, and the plight of Katrina, tell a tale too terrible to imagine. Perchance, that is why in America people prefer to remain colormute. To report as The Nation did is to attest to what most prefer to hide. Racism remains rampant in the land of opportunity. In a country considered great, bigotry is not criminal. Fear is not a felony. Trepidation, even with a gun in hand, and shots fired, is fine in United States.
Apparently, as long as Caucasian citizens transgress only against the unfamiliar, the supposed unruly, persons whose only crime is that his or her skin color is not white will suffer fates so ghastly, even storm waters will not wash the stain away.
Please peruse the portrait of America, "Katrina's Hidden Race War." Ponder what might be too true. If Americans do not love thy neighbor, if fright rules, no one is authentically free and fewer are brave.
References for Racism . . .
- "Katrina's Hidden Race War," By A.C. Thompson The Nation.December 17, 2008 - January 5, 2009
- Racism on Yahoo News, By Matthew Wheeland. AlterNet. August 31, 2005, 10:47 AM
- Racism. Flickr.
- Katrina Victims Unwelcome in Fresno. Fox News. October 4, 2005
- Katrina Victims Blamed for Houston Crime, By Paul J. Weber. Associated Press. The Washington Post. August 15, 2006
- Whites Sought More Katrina Aid Than Blacks. CBS News. October 24, 2006
- Black Americans given less access to credit, report finds, By Gail Liberman and Alan Lavine. Market Watch. April 15, 2008
Posted by Betsy L. Angert on December 19, 2008 at 09:00 AM in Being Black in America, Black History, Past/Present, Black Men, Poverty in America, Quality of Life, Racial Discrimination | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Who is he?
copyright © 2008 Betsy L. Angert. BeThink.org
The tale is true. Names were changed to protect the innocent.
Last evening Mister Gregory had a chance to speak to Mister Fairbanks of the issue. "Who is Barack Obama?" Barry thought he might introduce the topic delicately. The two men were in a car together. They had traveled across the country to meet with school Principals, Superintendents, and other professional educators. The hour was late, and dinner was on the agenda.
As the gents drove to the restaurant, Barry began the conversation; "Just as Barack Obama might not have known Bill Ayers background, who would think someone in this car was a member of SDS, Students for a Democratic Society?" Sean smiled and quickly replied, "I would." He then revealed that he was in fact a member of the largest and most influential radical student organization of the 1960s. The devout Republican, a man who might represent the Corporate Class belonged to an organization, which was "initially concerned with equality, economic justice, peace, and participatory democracy." Sean recounted stories. He told tales of his participation in anti-war protests. Mister Fairbanks helped to close his college. Sean showed "determined resistance," he was a radical, a rebel. He could be considered a less visible, and less violent, Bill Ayers.
Barry was aghast. When he posed the question, he never imagined such a response from Sean. Barry Gregory, an extremely reserved, shy, and quiet man meant to reveal his own history. When he was in his twenties, two score ago, the now Vice President of a prestigious company, was active in the same Student organization. More than a thousand miles away from where Sean incited revolution, Mister Gregory did his rebellious "thing."
Senator John McCain asks Americans to ponder; "Who is Barack Obama?" Sean wonders, as he has for quite some time. The President of a large multi-million dollar-company does not think he can trust this man of color. Nor, does Mister Fairbanks favor a Democratic President. Sean Michael Fairbanks is among the more than seventy (70) percent of Chief Executive Officers who fear an Obama presidency will be a disaster. This tycoon intends to vote as he long has, just as all Americans have and do. Sean will cast a ballot in his own perceived interest. As a businessman, Sean believes he will benefit more if he commits to the Grand Old Party. Mister Fairbanks will vote Republican. Senator McCain and Governor Palin are his candidates of choice. Sean knows who John Sidney McCain and Sarah Louise Heath Palin are. He does however wonder of Barack Obama.
Sean Michael Fairbanks frequently expressed his preference to his protégé, and Vice President of the corporation, Barry Gregory. Barry and Sean are about the same age. Each experienced rites of passage in the 1960s. While the men work very well together and have for near a decade and one half, the fine fellows differ politically. Mister Gregory considers himself a peacenik. Each week, he stands in vigil on a street corner. He protests for peace. As naive as some may think him to be, Barry Gregory humbly holds up a banner, which invites passer-bys to ponder impeachment. Dennis Kucinich was his original choice for President of the United States. Now, this Vice President of a major firm, endorses Barack Obama.
Sean and Barry do not argue the divergent dynamics. Political debates are not prominent discussions when they are together. However, these are not avoided. The two share a mission, a vision, as it relates to the business at hand. Granted, personal revelations are realized. The chaps are more closely connected because they speak of their individual interests and issues. Each is empathetic. They understand the other believes as he does.
For Misters Fairbanks and Gregory distinctions are fine. Few friends and fewer acquaintances agree no matter the issue. Sean and Barry accept the differences and enjoy the relationship that has evolved between them. The well-established professionals on occasion, delve more deeply as they did after the most recent Presidential debate.
Sean Fairbanks, the more senior in the company, says of the McCain/Palin ticket, "The two mavericks are known entities. He says, "Barack Obama is an unfamiliar to the people. The Illinois Senator is untested, inexperienced, and perchance, he is not as innocent as he appears to be." Barry Gregory muses of the Democratic candidates record. He reasons as he shares his own sensibility. Barry says to Sean, "Barack Obama has a record." Mister Gregory refers to past performance that is respectable, not criminal in nature as Sarah Palin and John McCain would want Americans to believe.
Statistics: Barack Obama has sponsored 121 bills since Jan 24, 2005, of which 115 haven't made it out of committee and 2 were successfully enacted. Obama has co-sponsored 504 bills during the same time period. (Starting Sept 17, 2008, these numbers do not include resolutions.)
Some of Obama's most recently sponsored bills include . . .Passed Senate
Sep 22, 2008 S.Con.Res. 96: A concurrent resolution commemorating Irena Sendler, a woman whose bravery saved the lives of thousands during the Holocaust and remembering her legacy of courage, selflessness, and hope.
Passed Senate
Jun 26, 2007 S.Con.Res. 25: A concurrent resolution condemning the recent violent actions of the Government of Zimbabwe against peaceful opposition party activists and members of civil society.
Passed Senate
Jun 24, 2008 S.Res. 600: A resolution commemorating the 44th anniversary of the deaths of civil rights workers Andrew Goodman, James Chaney, and Michael Schwerner in Philadelphia, Mississippi, while working in the name of American democracy to register voters and secure civil rights during the summer of 1964, which has become known as "Freedom Summer". . .
Introduced
Sep 17, 2008
S. 3506: A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to increase the credit for purchase of vehicles fueled by natural gas or liquefied natural gas and to amend the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users to reauthorize the Clean School Bus Program of the Environmental Protection Agency. . .
Introduced
Jun 3, 2008
S. 3077: Strengthening Transparency and Accountability in Federal Spending Act of 2008
Introduced
May 21, 2008
S. 3047: Enhancing Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education Act of 2008 . . .
Introduced
Oct 18, 2007
S. 2202: Renewable Fuel Standard Extension Act of 2007 . . .
Introduced
Sep 18, 2007
S. 2066: Back to School: Improving Standards for Nutrition and Physical Education in Schools Act of 2007 . . .
Introduced
Jul 26, 2007
S. 1885: Military Family Job Protection Act
In a discussion with Sean, Barry offers, it seems Barack Obama, holds dear American values. He wishes to pay homage to those who saved lives during the Holocaust. Senator Obama rejects violence against a citizenry here and abroad. The Illinois Legislator understands the importance of Civil Rights and democracy in action. He also reveres the role of church and clergy in American lives. Mostly, as evident through his proposed policies, Barack Obama cares about the quality of life for average Americans.
Presidential hopeful Obama wishes to amend Internal Revenue policies that punish the poor and Middle Class. The lawmaker from Illinois hopes to strengthen laws that mandate transparency in government spending. Senator Obama supports alternative, renewable sources of energy. Surely, proposals that reduce a reliance on petroleum will end our dependency on oil. Military families will be better provided for if Barack Obama's Bill passes. Perhaps, most prominent among the laws Barack Obama introduced are those that relate to children. Barack Obama believes in education.
Fascinatingly, so too does Sean Michael Fairbanks. Indeed, the business Sean founded facilitates the acquisition of knowledge for students of all ages. Mister Fairbanks profits from policies that address improving learning, especially for the little ones. Still, Sean is not convinced that Barack Obama is any less scary than Sarah Palin says he is.
Republican Vice Presidential nominee Sarah Palin speaks to a truth that those such as Sean embrace. She does not inquire as to who Senator Obama might be. She is sure she knows. Recently, at a well-attended rally, the former small-town Mayor of Wasilla, Palin answered the question that haunts people such as Mister Fairbanks, "Who is Barack Obama?"
The "sensational Sarah," as Sean calls her, says, according to The New York Times, Presidential hopeful Obama is "our opponent, (he) is someone who sees America as imperfect enough to pal around with terrorists who target their own country.” Sean Michael Fairbanks agrees. As a registered Republican who admires the Alaskan Governor Palin, Mister Fairbanks does not inquire further. He does not read the actual article, Obama and ’60s Bomber: A Look Into Crossed Paths. Had he, perchance, he would not have been swayed. For Mister Fairbanks, the query is unnecessary. Sean trusts that a man with a name such as Barack Obama cannot be "one of us."
However, while the wise and wondrous Sarah Palin and Sean Fairbanks may believe as they do, another reader of the article might see the statement, "Since 2002, there is little public evidence of their relationship," and conclude that the two are not chums. Nor do the infamous Bill Ayers, founder of the radical Weathermen, and the much younger Barack Obama have a close relationship. Indeed, once Barack Obama learned of the historical link to illegal and destructive activities by a man who twenty-six years later is an Education Professor, he expressed antipathy for the radical views and actions of Mister Ayers.
Presidential hopeful Obama proclaimed, Bill Ayers is “somebody who engaged in detestable acts 40 years ago, when I was 8.” The Senator had not known that the person who served with him on a board that oversaw the distribution of education grants in Chicago was part of a group that, had he been old enough or prominent to voice a public opinion, Barack Obama would have condemned.
Senator Obama, at the time, was only certain that the Chicago Annenberg Project, which bestowed money to networks of schools from 1995 to 2000, was a worthy cause. As Chairman, it made sense to Barack Obama that an Education Professor, Bill Ayers, a man active in the community would care about the quality of instruction in his home city. Barack Obama was concerned about children and their education, then and now. Mister Fairbanks is as well. Barry wondered; is that not why Sean began his business.
Sean Michael Fairbanks built his life and career on instruction. He hoped and helped to ensure the younger generation would have quality schools in their neighborhoods. Edification is his priority, just as, in recent decades it has become Bill Ayers main concern. Yet, there he is; Sean the critic of a person who could have been considered his cohort.
Each had a history of radical activism. Sean could be considered as Bill Ayers is. A Republican, an entrepreneur, and a John McCain/Sarah Palin supporter who is a detractor of an esteemed educator who has a background similar to his own. Barry was stunned. He pondered; who might the President of his company, Sean Fairbanks be? For so long Mister Gregory had an impression of the man who sat in corporate office. Sean was a mogul, his mentor, and the man who taught him of the business world. He never imagined that Sean was once liberal or liable to be among a radical group of antiwar protestors. An association with the Weather Underground? Sean's may be stronger than Barack Obama's ever was.
As the two corporate cronies talked, they realized the question might not be "Who is Barack Obama?" Possibly, each might inquire, "Who is this man I thought I knew?" Who is Sean Michael Fairbanks and who might Barry Gregory be? Americans may wish to ask themselves, not the query Sarah Palin and John McCain scream at every opportunity. Citizens of this country might wonder who are we all, and what might any of us have done in our past.
Perhaps we might ponder; long before Barack Obama ever thought he might actually pursue the presidency, he wrote an autobiography. His openness was stark. The publication was praised for its transparency. What a wondrous world it might be if lucidity was the law. Might the electorate recall among the Bills Barack Obama introduced was an initiative that would Strengthen Transparency and Accountability. Might the people wonder who will vote for such a measure. Will John McCain? Does the American public authentically know who John Sidney McCain is?
Sources that reveal what was never a secret . . .
Posted by Betsy L. Angert on October 9, 2008 at 11:00 AM in Black History, Past/Present, Black Men, Elections, Emotional Decisions, Xenophobia | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
The Black Soldier
copyright © 2008 Betsy L. Angert. BeThink.org
Three score ago, after a long history of service, superior, and yet segregated, Black soldiers were recognized as equal, or at least consideration for the possibility was put forth. In truth, then and perhaps now, manpower needs took precedence over racial prejudice in name only. The story begins on July 26, 1948, or perchance, years earlier. Historians speak of President Harry S. Truman's doctrine, Executive Order 9981. The directive states, "It is hereby declared to be the policy of the President that there shall be equality of treatment and opportunity for all persons in the armed services without regard to race, color, religion, or national origin." While the words are wondrous, the tale of what was and is, does not begin or end with this decree.
Segregation in the Armed Forces was perhaps a source of embarrassment to many Americans and the President of the "United" States. Before 1940, and America's entrance into World War II, African American soldiers served with honor and little acknowledgement. Troops whose complexion was dark were forbidden from flying for the U.S. military forces. Frustrated with the reality that, years after being freed from slavery, African-Americans, had little opportunity to "soar," "Civil Rights organizations and the Black press exerted pressure." The strength of community outreach and a media delivered message helped to bring about long overdue change. Ultimately, in 1941, an all African-American squadron based in Tuskegee, Alabama, was formed. They became known as the Tuskegee Airmen. After the Second World War, the honorable actions of the Tuskegee Airmen were recognized more than once amongst average Americans. Indeed, these prized professionals were revered.
Perchance, Harry Truman heard the words of praise for the Black military pilots and realized he could no longer ignore the issue of segregation amongst servicemen; nor would he wish to. For, possibly, to this President, it had become obvious; when a man is allowed to be truly powerful, as the Airmen were, they serve in more than name only. The President proposed as he placed his signature on the proclamation,
"Whereas it is essential that there be maintained in the armed services of the United States the highest standards of democracy, with equality of treatment and opportunity for all those who serve in our country's defense.. . .It is hereby declared to be the policy of the President that there shall be equality of treatment and opportunity for all persons in the armed services without regard to race, color, religion or national origin."
Had Harry Truman not been aware of the esteemed Airmen, he may have known of the presence of dark skinned soldiers in American history, Buffalo Soldiers. These troops may have influenced his thoughts. The all-Black brigades became better known after the second war meant to end all wars. From 1941 through 1945, in World War II, Black military men served proudly and prominently, under the direction of Commander-In-Chief Truman.
Some 500,000 Blacks were stationed overseas, amounting to 4% of the 11 million Americans who served on foreign shores. About 10% of blacks were in combat units. The all-black 92nd Infantry was in Italy, and had 616 killed in action and 2,187 wounded. The 93rd Division was stationed in the South Pacific, losing 17 KIA and 121 WIA. There was also the black 366th Infantry (Separates).During the Battle of the Bulge, 2,500 blacks were formed into all black Infantry platoons and attached to larger units. The famed 761st Tank Battalion spent 183 continuous days in combat in the European Theater, earning a Presidential Unit Citation. The 333rd Field Artillery bravely supported ground operations in France.
Three all-black air units flew overseas: 332nd Fighter Group, 477th Bombardment Group and the 99th Fighter Squadron. Sixty-six Black pilots were killed in action. A total of 140,000 blacks served in the Army Air Forces. Nearly 150,000 Blacks served in the Navy. Of the 12,000 Black Marines, 9 were killed in action.
President Truman may have understood all that African-American soldiers had done to help achieve an American victory. Yet, he also understood, that no matter what the Black troops did in the service to their country, they would always be seen as unequal, that is unless action was taken to correct the fate of soldiers whose skin was a purplish-brown hue.
This was made more apparent when, on February 13, 1946, two years before President Truman signed Executive Order 9981 into law. On Valentine's Day eve, love was lost for an African-American World War II veteran, Isaac Woodard. The honorably discharged Sergeant, a decorated soldier, was attacked and blinded by policemen in Aiken, South Carolina. President Truman took notice. Actually, he had too. Although, initially the periodicals did not cover the story, word did spread. Soon the major news outlets printed reports and the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) publicized the occurrence. Manpower, precedence, and prejudice again are considerations in the life of a Black soldier.
(N)ews soon also emerged in popular culture. Via his radio show, broadcaster and movie celebrity Orson Welles soon began to crusade for the punishment of Shull (the officer who intentionally blinded Mister Woodard) and his accomplices. Welles, a follower of the civil rights movement, found the reaction of the South Carolina government to be intolerable and shameful.The news would also have an impact on music as well. A month after the beating, calypso artist Lord Invader recorded an anti-racism song for his album Calypso at Midnight entitled "God Made Us All," with the last line in the song directly referencing the incident.
Perhaps, President Harry Truman was not moved by music or media personalities. Possibly, more prominent in his mind were the internal communications that circulated through the White House. Two years to the day, before Executive Order 9981 was signed a memorandum "Re: Stoppage of Negro Enlistments" marched through the halls at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. The document, from the desk of Philleo Nash, Special Assistant to the President, was addressed to David K. Niles, Administrative Assistant to Harry Truman. The communication referenced "undesirable and uneconomical" Black soldiers.
As the discussion of what to do with Black troops raged on within the walls of the White House, a Caucasian crowd pulled two African-American veterans and their wives from their automobile near Monroe, Georgia. The Black citizens were shot to death; their bodies riddled with bullets. Upon investigation, it was discovered sixty (sixty) rounds were fired into the purplish brown flesh of these four innocent persons. Their only crime was the color of their skin. Whites in the community found the darker hue objectionable. Again, it mattered not that the men were soldiers, honorably discharged after years of service to the country that denied them equal rights, the "United" States of America. On this occasion, the need or want of a few white men took precedence over racial justice. This may have disturbed the man in the Oval Office, Harry Truman. The Commander took action.
Within days of the horrific occurrence, on July 30, 1946, Attorney General Tom Clark announced that the President had instructed the Justice Department to "proceed with all its resources to investigate [the Monroe, Georgia atrocity] and other crimes of oppression so as to ascertain if any Federal statute can be applied."
Months later, in a letter to the National Urban League, President Truman resolved; the government has "an obligation to see that the civil rights of every citizen are fully and equally protected." Yet, it became increasingly apparent the Administration had done nothing to ensure the rights of African-Americans, in, or out of the Armed Forces.
As months turn into years, and racism remained rampant on the streets and in the barracks, Presidential Advisor Clark Clifford urged President Truman to consider the importance of the African-American vote and Civil Rights issues in the 1948 Presidential campaign. Perhaps, that was the catalyst. Expedience advanced equality. Thus, Executive Order 9981 was signed into law. End of story, all is well, and sixty years later Americans celebrate the anniversary of equal Rights for Black soldiers, or so it would seem.
Yet, on the same day the order was executed, Army staff officers spoke anonymously to the press. Each official explained the Executive Order 9981 did not specifically forbid segregation in the Army. Then Army Chief of Staff General Omar N. Bradley stated desegregation would come to the Army "only when it becomes a fact in the rest of American society."
While Americans may wish to believe that the ugly face of bigotry is gone for good, indeed, even in the twenty-first century, intolerance surfaces in subtle ways. Once again, manpower needs took precedence over racial prejudice in name only. Filmmaker Clint Eastwood had a need for a cast of characters. He hoped to document the mêlée at Iwo Jima, 1945. Yet, he did not tell the story a Black soldier who served in the battle might have.
On February 19 1945, Thomas McPhatter found himself on a landing craft heading toward the beach on Iwo Jima."There were bodies bobbing up all around, all these dead men," said the former US marine, now 83 and living in San Diego. "Then we were crawling on our bellies and moving up the beach. I jumped in a foxhole and there was a young white marine holding his family pictures. He had been hit by shrapnel, he was bleeding from the ears, nose and mouth. It frightened me. The only thing I could do was lie there and repeat the Lord's prayer, over and over and over."
Sadly, Sgt McPhatter's experience is not mirrored in Flags of Our Fathers, Clint Eastwood's big-budget, Oscar-tipped film of the battle for the Japanese island that opened on Friday in the US. While the film's battle, scenes show scores of young soldiers in combat, none of them are African-American. Yet almost 900 African-American troops took part in the battle of Iwo Jima, including Sgt McPhatter.
Apologies are offered. Yet, not to Sergeant Thomas McPhatter, or by the director, Clint Eastwood. The filmmaker said he did not include Blacks in the script "because there were no Afro-American soldiers involved." Notwithstanding, the facts, many servicemen of color fought for this country long before they were acknowledged or recognized by the State, society, or a screenwriter such as Clint Eastwood. Mostly, the military men of color fought on two fronts. First, Black servicemen battled with foreign foes. Then they clashed with those at home who only saw their skin color. Neighbors acted as local combatants, not allied forces. Civilians, protected by active duty Black soldiers, accused those whose complexions were charcoal of crimes they had not committed. The evidence offered was but a reflection of reality; racial prejudice is preeminent. Please consider a tale too true.
Army apologizes to soldiers convicted after 1944 Fort Lawton riot
By Keith Ervin
Seattle TimesFor decades, Willie Prevost kept his secret.
Like most of his World War II Army buddies, he never told his family about his conviction for rioting during a night of violence that left a number of men injured and one dead at Seattle's Fort Lawton in 1944.
But on Saturday, his family was there as the U.S. Army apologized in a ceremony to clear the names of Prevost and 27 other African-American soldiers who were convicted in a now-discredited court-martial.Sixty-three years after they were sentenced to hard labor, and nearly all dishonorably discharged, "The Fort Lawton 28" were given military honors, with an Army band and color guard, gospel choir and speeches by U.S. Rep. Jim McDermott, Mayor Greg Nickels, King County Executive Ron Sims and Assistant Secretary of the Army Ronald James.
Only two of the veterans lived to see the day. . .
In total, the families of five veterans were present.
Saturday's ceremony took place on a Fort Lawton parade ground — now part of Seattle's Discovery Park — 60 years to the day after President Harry Truman desegregated the armed forces.
Again, actions taken six decades earlier prove profound. The past permeates the present. As Americans celebrate six decades, since the end of segregation in the Armed Forces, we must accept that in actuality, prejudice still permeates and is prominent. While it might be argued; there has been some progress. Decades later, apologies are offered to a few, or two. There is still much to be done to right persistent wrongs. Perhaps we may wish to ponder the present,
Blacks still rare in top U.S. military ranksWhile blacks make up about 17% of the total force, they are just 9% of all officers, according to data obtained and analyzed by The Associated Press.
The rarity of blacks in the top ranks is apparent in one startling statistic: Only one of the 38 four-star generals or admirals serving as of May was black. And just 10 black men have ever gained four-star rank - five in the Army, four in the Air Force and one in the Navy, according to the Pentagon.
All is not well on the Western front. America and Americans do not honor the contributions of all hues. Accolades of "equality of treatment and opportunity for all persons in the armed services without regard to race, color, religion, or national origin." aside, pinkish persons have yet to embrace the notion; we are one, the human race.
References Racial Discrimination and Executive Order 9981 . .
Posted by Betsy L. Angert on July 29, 2008 at 09:00 PM in Active-Duty Troops , Black History, Past/Present, Black Men, Military Missions | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Race Relations; Reflections, Realizations, Reactions, and Rejections
copyright © 2008 Betsy L. Angert. BeThink.org
"Nothing is more certainly written in the book of fate than that these people are to be free.
Nor is it less certain that the two races, equally free, cannot live in the same government.
Nature, habit, opinion has drawn indelible lines of distinction between them."
~ Thomas Jefferson (Autobiography, 1821)
It was a Saturday morning, late in June. The year was 2008. In the background, radio broadcaster, Scott Simon could be heard. The host of Weekend Edition offered his Reflections on Race and the Presidential Election. Alexander listened halfheartedly. It was not that he was not interested in the topic; he is and he was. Alex was distracted. The gentleman glanced over at Donna, a young Jamaican woman he knows so well. Donna's skin is as Black as pitch coal and as rich as sweet crude. She gracefully moves across the room. He thinks of how he loves the way her hips sway to and fro. Her voluptuous bosom fills the full cup of her brassiere. As she bends down to feed his ailing cousin Anna, Alex reflects on how lovely the dark skinned woman is. His sentiment is not sexual in nature. Alexander is analytical.
As Alex watches the woman stir, he contemplates human nature. Recent research fascinates the senior fellow. For years, Alexander wondered what was the attraction to female breasts and beauty. He recalled the article he reviewed days earlier, What Women Want (Maybe.) Alexander marveled as he appraised the study. Rapt by the results as reported, “Looking at a naked man walking on the beach is about as exciting as looking at landscapes,” Alexander wonders of women, men, and how they relate. How much of what occurs between the sexes is biological? Are two-legged mammals acculturated? Do we acquire opinions that then become habits? Perhaps, had Alex's attention been elsewhere he would have heard the words Scott Simon uttered as they drifted through the air. Alexander might have stopped and sputtered as Journalist Simon mused, "How many people can there be who truly don't know that Senator Obama is black - or care."
Alexander definitely knows Presidential hopeful Obama is African-American; and yes, he does care. Alex would never express his anxiety as blatantly as thousands have. Nor would he actually join a fellowship of known fanatics. This white man, genteel in nature, cannot imagine why extremists react as they do. For Alex, racial discrimination is not a source of pride. He wonders if that is why much intolerance is hidden, neatly tucked away in the Internet.
Hate Groups' Newest Target
White Supremacists Report an Increase in Visits to Their Web Sites
By Eli Saslow
Washington Post
Sunday, June 22, 2008; A06Sen. Barack Obama's historic victory in the Democratic primaries, celebrated in America and across much of the world as a symbol of racial progress and cultural unity, has also sparked an increase in racist and white supremacist activity, mainly on the Internet, according to leaders of hate groups and the organizations that track them.
Neo-Nazi, skinhead, and segregationist groups have reported gains in numbers of visitors to their Web sites and in membership since the senator from Illinois secured the Democratic nomination June 3. His success has aroused a community of racists, experts said, concerned by the possibility of the country's first black president.
"I haven't seen this much anger in a long, long time," said Billy Roper, a 36-year-old who runs a group called White Revolution in Russellville, Ark. "Nothing has awakened normally complacent white Americans more than the prospect of America having an overtly nonwhite president." . . .
"The truth is, we're finding an explosion in these kinds of hateful sentiments on the Net, and it's a growing problem," said Deborah Lauter, civil rights director for the Anti-Defamation League, which monitors hate group activity. "There are probably thousands of Web sites that do this now. I couldn't even tell you how many are out there because it's growing so fast."
Granted, extremists do not represent the Grand Old Party, John McCain, or Alexander. Nonetheless, Alex knows the rise in racist rhetoric demonstrates many care about the undeniable. Our potential President is a Black man. Alexander admits, he is not surprised by the speed with which the trend towards intolerance increased once Barack Obama become the presumptive nominee. The lovely mild-mannered man recalls, Senator Obama was placed under the protection of the Secret Service Agency earlier than any Presidential aspirant had been. This action, this election is unprecedented.
Alexander recalls the day he read the accounts in the newspaper; the United States Senator from Illinois began his bid for the Oval Office and almost immediately received threats on his life. It was obvious, Barack Obama and his family were not safe. Excessive concern for the candidate's race was expressed. Bullies observed Barack Obama is Black, and they did not like that.
Journalist Scott Simon might ruminate; these persons play on the fringe. Fanatics are peripheral to the population. However, the more moderate man, Alexander has watched as generations of white people exerted extreme power over Black people. He was also well aware of how Caucasians hid the emotions that had an effect on their every exchange. Alexander quietly avows on rare occasions, he too does not reveal what he truly feels when in the company of a person of color.
His relationship with Donna may illustrate, the illusive nature of race relations in America. The two are friendly; they spend much time together. However, neither feels particularly close to the other. Each understands they are employer and employee. Encounters occur for there is a need, physical, financial, practical, and personal only in the sense that when two people come together they cannot help but talk. Still, a genuine emotional connection is forever elusive. Neither wishes to create what is not comfortable.
Perhaps, the relationship that exists between Alexander and Donna explains why, the seventeen (17) million persons voted for Barack Obama in the primaries, may not if the realities of racism are emphasized before the general election. Blacks and whites can come together when the commitment is tentative, but would pinkish persons want their daughters to marry someone that looks like Senator Obama. Would Anglo Americans wish to place a Black man and his African-American family in the White House. Could it be that countless who cast a ballot for Barack Obama during the primaries, struggle with the reality that he might become their President and ever so powerful.
Alexander asserts people can be polite when what they perceive to be a potential threat is less than pervasive. However, Alex, who with great reluctance, voted for Barack Obama early in the election season, understands for possibly millions of American citizens, the idea of a Black man as President of the United States is perilous.
He need only consider his own inner turmoil. Alex understands what apparently escapes Mister Simon; people care what a color a person is. The possibility that our President may be a Black is reason for concern. Bethany grasps what her cousin continually contemplates. She sees and hears that Alexander relates to the fear others express outwardly. He is just a bit more refined when he articulates his distress. A Black man, Barack Obama must not become President of the country he loves. Alexander is not ready for such a radical transformation. He often muses, "Why change?" The man who has made much of his life says with a sigh, "What we have here in America is good." He does not trust that an African-American will have his interests at heart.
Alexander battles with what may become a brutal truth, a Black man might lead the nation, indeed, the world! Animated and with much apprehension and angst, Alex's wife Mary recounts what she says many assert. "Barack Obama has an army." "I hear it is 2500 strong; maybe it was 25000," Mary storms. "You know they are angry people." She continues, "You heard what Michele Obama said did you not?" Energized by her own expertise Mary marvels and asks her audience to entertain; "The Obama's live in a big house. They have white servants. Can you imagine that?" .Implied in her statements, is what Mary says is conventional wisdom. "Those people are vengeful." She reluctantly admits, perhaps, Americans have not treated Senator Obama's ancestors well. Nor have our contemporary Caucasian countrymen been kind to people of color. She then adds, "You know he is Muslim and has ties to terrorist."
Bethany wonders and asks aloud, "Where did you read this?" Mary happily responds, confident her sources are credible, "I read it on the Internet." The younger cousin inquires might Mary share her references. Bethany acquaints Mary with what she "knows" to be true. However, Mary does not hear her. The want for other information wanes, if it was ever really there.
Mary, as her husband Alexander, is a registered Democrat. Neither ever misses a vote. For decades, Mary proudly worked at her local election polls. From dawn until long after dusk she monitors what occurs within her precinct.
Alex does not acknowledge that he agrees with Mary. Nor does he offer disagreement. He merely remains absorbed in all that disturbs him personally.
For months Alex wrestled with the fact that as admirable as the candidate's education might be, as calm as the demeanor of the aspirant is, even when under fire, Barack Obama is Black. While Alex may wish to think of himself as colorblind and open-minded, he cannot help but question Barack Obama's qualifications. Frequently, in conversation, Alex couches his concern. "The man does not have the necessary experience." However, on occasion, and only when in the company of Bethany, a relative who he fondly thinks of as a very good friend, Alex admits he is biased.
He has confessed; it is difficult for him to plead guilty to this truth even to himself. Alex recognizes he is intolerant of those whose skin is dark. He fears Black persons he encounters on the street. He suspects, those whose cocoa brown complexion glistens in the light, engage in criminal activity. Perchance, had Alexander harkened to the words Scott Simon offered days earlier he would have engaged in a conversation in that moment. He had many thoughts on the topic. However, when the Journalist spoke Alexander was absorbed elsewhere. He pondered, who and what is Donna to him.
Alexander says he does not think of Donna as a servant. Yet, he recognizes she is an economic slave. In an abstract way, he is her master.
Donna is an authentic person, equal to Alex in every way, except for the fact that she is not. The wondrous white man may never wish to divulge as three (3) in ten (10) Americans did. He is biased. In a very recent Washington Post – ABC News poll, people acknowledged a prejudice. Alexander may be inclined to think the Black women with who he engages, or any person of color, is perhaps less profound than a Caucasian certainly is. For this carefree chap, who openly chats with many a Black person, the race of an individual creates an impression, although he appreciates this is often unconscious.
Alexander assumes, since he frequently converses with people whose epidermis is the color of bittersweet chocolate he knows what it means to be an African-American, Jamaican, Haitian, or just dark in skin tone. While he may honor an individual Black person who he associates with, none of the labels Alex would apply to this group of people as a whole is good. Much as he tries to be tempered when he associates with people purplish-brown in hue, some would say Alexander is a bigot, a well-camouflaged racist.
Most may not see the subtleties of Alexander's prejudice. Likely, he does not realize how deep his predispositions are. Alexander does not think of himself as intolerant. Perchance, he would be among the fifty-three percent in the Washington Post – ABC News survey who presume race relations in America are superior.
In truth, Alex is a bit more realistic. He realizes there are problems. He has said himself, prejudice is prevalent. However, he might quickly add, skin color does not cloud his vision. Alex believes he is merely selective in his associations. Perchance, he adopted his parents' opinions, or habits. Alex is not naïve enough to think nature keeps the races separate and unequal. He only knows what is and always was, at least as long as he recalls.
The self-proclaimed aware and astute fellow believes there are a few special persons, no matter the skin color. He just happens to associate more with those fair of face. That does not mean he excludes African-Americans from his life.
The ones that once worked for him when he owned his own business were wonderful men . . . as far as he could tell. They were polite. The delivery drivers did their work. These burly men, brown as the bark on a weathered oak tree, never complained. There was Natalie, and Josephine; they nursed his mother to health. Certainly, Donna is a delight.
Donna knows her place. She fills a necessary space in Alexander and Anna's life. The purplish hue cast by the beautiful brown complexion of this woman ensures that she will never be seen or treated as a peer, at least not by the cousins who employ her. When the white man and woman gaze upon Donna, they forever see her as a Black person. Thankfully, they say, she is not an African-American. Those people cannot be trusted.
"Just ask her," Alex says to his very close "friend" Bethany. "Donna will tell you." "American Blacks are lazy," he continues. "They do drugs." Donna says, "It is true. Those Black people born in this country just collect welfare." She speaks of her son, Christopher. "Look at him; he was awarded a full scholarship." Beaming with pride, the Health Care Aide reminds everyone in the room, when Christopher was a Senior in High School, he was one of three, nationwide selected to attend a prestigious college. Her son, she boasts, is motivated. He is a scholar, not like those "Black boys" native to America.
Alexander listens and nods. Donna affirms his opinions are not racist. He has reason to believe as he does. "Did you hear what Donna said," he asks his companion. "See. She knows." Exasperated and in a desire to prove his point, Alex points to Donna and reminds his confidant, "She is a woman of color!"
The conversation began innocently enough. Alexander wanted to explain why he could not in good conscious cast a ballot for Barack Obama. The older white man had done his duty in the primaries. Perhaps, his vote for Senator Obama affirmed he is not a bigot. Alexander actually did vote for the Senator from Illinois in the Spring of the year. He hesitantly speaks of how he had to.
The World War II veteran had no other choice. No, he did not approve of Barack Obama then. Nor does he condone crass humor as was exhibited at the Texas Republican Convention just days before Scott Simon made his comment.
Mr. Alcox said he made 12 of the pins after seeing a comic strip where Barack Obama was standing in front of a sign saying “The White House,” with the building behind him. Mr. Obama is depicted thinking, “That’s the first thing we’ll change.” . . .The offending pin stated: “If Obama is president . . . Will we still call it the White House?” . . .
“Obviously, it’s been offensive to people. It was not meant to be that way. We’re into humor - not racism,” Mr. Alcox said.
Regardless of the intent, many were offended. Bigotry only begets belly laughs from other bigots. The object of intolerance, if given the opportunity can speak to what eludes the prejudice. However, in a nation where an esteemed broadcaster expresses a wishful belief as truth, no one "cares" what color Barack Obama, a Black man is, few take the time to probe beyond what they think correct. Americans are not colorblind as they claim to be. They are colormute and hence, frequently insensitive. On the rare occasion when Blacks and Caucasians speak of racism much is resolved, empathy expands.
(Mr. Alcox) said after having a conversation with a black man who called him about the blog post, he came to understand more about the nerve he had hit.
Sadly, prior to this incident it seems the vendor did as Alexander does. While cordial and conversant with people of every color, bias against those of color is not typically, if ever the topic. He did discuss the elections with Donna. He even asked her what she thought of Barack Obama. "You remember Bethany. Donna thinks Black Americans are worthless."
That is why Alexander was able to do as he did in good conscience. Earlier in the year, Alex went to the polls as a good citizen does and was handed a Democratic ballot. He is a registered Democrat; however, only in the primaries does he usually vote for someone in his Party.
Before, the presumptive Presidential aspirants were assured, Alex was certain he would have, voted for Mitt Romney. He is white . . . (Did he say that aloud) highly educated; he comes from good stock. His father and he were successful Governors. More importantly, each accrued ample wealth. Alexander is a very affluent man, self-made. He admires such qualities, that is unless the erudite, esteemed man, or woman is Black, although, Alex is careful never to say that directly, not even when with Bethany. He is embarrassed by his bigotry.
At times, he does softly state what he hopes will remain a secret. He does not wish for others to know what he is unwilling to acknowledge to himself. Still, almost inaudibly he has told Bethany. He has little tolerance for people whose complexions are dark. Alexander hopes he can trust his truest thoughts and feelings with his cousin and best friend Bethany. History tells him, with her, he is safe. The relationship is one of reciprocal reverence. Bethany shares her heart, soul, and all her stories with Alex. The two learn of what they never imagined when together.
They also share a common bond, many in fact. Most significant in this election season, Alex and Bethany each harbored much disdain for Hillary Clinton. Neither struggle with the idea of a woman President. It was only that woman! Bethany understands why Alex did not vote for the New York Senator. "Bobby,' as she likes to be called, could not consider the former First Lady either.
However, Bobby remains unconvinced that Alexander would chose to cast a ballot for Barack Obama when it counts. She recalls the day Alexander quietly revealed, "Maybe I am prejudice." Bethany had helped Alex to realize what he never considered before. As a child, she, who is also pinkish in color, was raised with a Black family as much as her own. She has never felt as though she was Caucasian. This feminine Anglo American notices what many white persons do not, she is intensely cognizant of color. Bobby, unlike countless whose skin is light is very aware of what is whispered to her. What may not mean much to those who think themselves colorblind
When with a white acquaintance Bobby will feel a tug on her arm. "Let us cross the street," the friend says suddenly. Bobby wonders; why might her colleague seem so distraught. She looks ahead and the answer is revealed. A group of Black men appeared up the avenue.
Bethany hears the hushed tones. In a casual conversation, when a person of a particular color is identified, clarification is also offered. "He or she is Black you know." This classification is meant to explain why that individual might think, say, do, feel, or be as he or she is.
A brilliant African-American is not merely a gifted and talented artist, academic, athlete, or author. He or she is "Negro" first. Then, the deftness is discussed. "Actually," the inference is, "the fact that this individual is a person of color makes them more exceptional."
Most of us recall a cavalier comment offered by a prominent, practiced politician little more than a year ago. Delaware Senator, and former Presidential spirant, said of his friend, Barack Obama, "I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy," Biden said. "I mean, that's a storybook, man." Of, course the remark was followed by an apology. "I really regret that some have taken totally out of context my use of the world “clean.” The sorrowful Senator explained. "My mother has an expression: clean as a whistle, sharp as a tack." Neither the regret, nor revelation, would lessen the blow of bigotry. If a person is Black, he or she may bow and accept what has become too familiar. An Anglo may never notice such remarks. Extremely offensive evaluations make sense when they are all you have ever heard.
Barbara Trepagnier, Sociology Professor at Texas State University-San Marcos has written much on the subject of Silent Racism. She speaks of the culture of consciousness that evades many white Americans. Ms Trepagnier, on the topic of careless commentary reflected on another incident. She was reminded of Trent Lott and the callous statement he offered at former segregationist Strom Thurmond's 100th birthday celebration. Then two, the orator offered a defense. The Sociologist declared . . .
“I argue when we say things off the cuff, that’s what we really mean,” Trepagnier said. “His comments weren’t taken out of context.”Her book contends that “silent racism” fosters routine actions not recognized by an individual as racist, but upholds the status quo.
Trepagnier says that this form of superiority remains prevalent in American society, and is a major reason African-Americans continue to struggle. Blacks are outperformed by their white counterparts in most social demographics, including factors such as education, employment, and income. She says that whites that deny the existence of racism or dismiss it as unimportant are often protecting white privilege.
Trepagnier says that some whites become detached from the race issue while others are so concerned with it that they become apprehensive about it, avoiding even the mention of the topic. In both cases, this passive stance silently provides the racist actions of others an endorsement, or worse, encouragement.
Alexander's confidant Bethany does not negate what is too obvious to her. Nor does she mindlessly wish to advance such postures. Bobby shares her stories and feelings with Alex, if only to further his awareness.
When Bethany is accompanied on a dinner date, she feels the stares when her cohort is a man of color. The conversation with a server differs dependent on her company. People at the next table are more likely to engage the couple when Bobby is with a white man. When in a restaurant of quality, Bethany observes if there are many or any Black persons about, they are often the hired help. Rarely is the clientele shades of purplish brown or Black in hue. Mostly, people are light; skin tones are parchment in color.
When in the mall together, strolling down the street, in the bank, or other place of business, Bobby and Alex see numerous African-Americans. Contrary to Scott Simon's contention, each of them cares to recognize these persons are Black.
Alex intentionally associates with people of color. He hopes to work through the habitual bigotry that bothers him. Bethany also engages. She is aware her personal history shades her sense. Black people are for her beautiful, inside and out.
The sensitive gentleman, Alexander, truly feels for those who are not treated as well as he is. Bobby yearns to build bridges. For so long she felt alone in her desire to end discrimination. Frustration with a colormute community consumed her. The two think of what it might mean to those whose skin is ebony in color, black as coal, coffee brown, or cinnamon spice, if Barack Obama becomes President. What will it mean to Anglos such as Bobby or Alex if Barack Obama becomes the world's leader.
Millions may think the possibility is beautiful. "I am Black and I am proud." A few might be as Bethany, whose skin may be a sweet pink, but whose soul was joyous soaked in a world of brilliantly rich color. Millions could be ready to create the change that was once unimaginable. For billions this possibility is still but a dream, or a nightmare. Alexander, who has witnessed much history doubts that anyone is indifferent.
Much is unspoken. More is said in a subtle manner. Reflections on race relations in America are approached and avoided. People worldwide care and ponder the color of Presidential hopeful Barack Obama. They just may not chatter freely or have the forum Commentator Scott Simon does. If we are ever to move beyond bigotry perhaps, we must acknowledge, what is "politically more injurious" is not the insinuation of racism; it is the reality. Mister Simon, might I suggest, people care about the color of a Presidential candidates skin.
Post Script . . .
Dearest Scott Simon . . .
While many may believe it is disingenuous for Barack Obama to claim the funds raised for his campaign will fight racism in America, it is no more sincere to deny the truth that racial discrimination flourishes. Might people also consider Senator Obama and others who fear what will be in this campaign season feel they have reason to-reaction to a historical habit they know too well. I believe, if we are to cure the ills associated with skin color, we must empathically speak to what is pervasive and persistent on this planet.
People embrace habits and opinions as though they are facts of nature. We all do this, whether we are Black, white, brown, red, yellow, olive, or pink. Republicans, Democrats, and Independents are not exempt. Greens, I shutter to say, are also two-legged creatures trapped in a prison they think rational and reasonable. Perchance, it is time for humans to transform. I wish to support a campaign slogan I believe is strongly needed, "Let change begin with me."
References, Reflections, Race Relations . . .
Posted by Betsy L. Angert on June 26, 2008 at 01:00 PM in Americana, Being Black in America, Black History, Past/Present, Elections, Racial Discrimination | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Trinity United Church of Christ; Pastor Wright Homilies and Hope
Audacity To Hope Jeremiah Wright Part 1
Please review and reflect upon the inspirational text. Wright’s Sermon - “The Audacity To Hope”
copyright © 2008 Betsy L. Angert. BeThink.org
The fact that so many people are surprised to hear that anger in some of Reverend Wright’s sermons simply reminds us of the old truism that the most segregated hour in American life occurs on Sunday morning.
~ Barack Obama [Senator and Potential President] March 18, 2008
When we are separate, our experience is never equal. African-Americans mingle among the many Anglos in this country. However, individuals with dark-complexions do not fully unite or fit into a society that segregates by color. While Americans have forcibly progressed beyond the laws that allowed for racial discrimination, the bias and bigotry that filled the hearts of many citizens in the United States for centuries still thrives. While we muse, we love thy neighbor, we react to those whose race is not our own.
Americans claim they are Christian, inclusive. Indeed, we are a Judeo-Christian nation. Yet, Jews are still scorned in America, as are people of any color that is other than a pinkish white. Amongst Caucasians, the habit of hate has been passed on for generations. Yet, when those whose skin is pale, hear the words of a Black man, a Reverend, Jeremiah Wright, who has been wounded by racism for all the years of his life, speak of his distress, they react as though they had never uttered a racial epithet in their lives.
The most respected Americans, white in color proclaim, "I have never heard such vile derisive language in an Anglo church." "No preacher, pastor, priest, or rabbi would ever express him or herself in such a loathsome manner." Shocked Caucasians inquire as if to invite a shared criticism, "Is this what Black people believe?" If reasons are presented for such resentment, the response from self-righteous lovers of G-d and man is, "African-Americans are bigoted!" "How dare they." The pink persons declare, "In the House of the Lord only words of love are spoken, at least that is the way it is in white churches, temples, and synagogues."
However, this may not be the case. Hate is harbored on every avenue in America, even in places of worship. As Barack Obama dared to remind us, on Sundays African-Americans and Anglos who reside in the United States are perhaps more divided than they are on any other day. The pale persons pray with those whose skin tone is similar to their own. When we look at only the surface, all whites may appear equal; and they are in the eyes of the Almighty. Yet, as humans gaze upon each other, they see differences.
A white man or woman, whose gender preference is unlike those of the self-ordained "absolved of all "sins" congregation may experience discrimination even in death.
Church learns vet was gay, cancels memorial
Texas congregation acted out of principle, not malice, pastor says
Associated Press. MSNBC
August 11, 2007Arlington, Texas - A megachurch canceled a memorial service for a Navy veteran 24 hours before it was to start because the deceased was gay.
Officials at the nondenominational High Point Church knew that Cecil Howard Sinclair was gay when they offered to host his service, said his sister, Kathleen Wright. But after his obituary listed his life partner as one of his survivors, she said, it was called off.
“It’s a slap in the face. It’s like, ’Oh, we’re sorry he died, but he’s gay so we can’t help you,”’ she said Friday. . .
Simons said the church believes homosexuality is a sin, and it would have appeared to endorse that lifestyle if the service had been held there.
“We did decline to host the service — not based on hatred, not based on discrimination, but based on principle,” Simons told The Associated Press. “Had we known it on the day they first spoke about it — yes, we would have declined then. It’s not that we didn’t love the family.”
Love rears its ugly head in many odd ways. Fondness, in the form of fury and foment, is found on film throughout cyberspace. As the "average" American bears witness, people, pale in color, have become a community of contempt. Condescension is what appears in the Judeo-Christian churches throughout the land of the free. Americans, be they Jewish, Mormon, Protestant or Christian are calm when they contemplate the G-d and the all that he creates. People are polite in public; however, when they are in the comfort of their homes they express what they claim is never stated. The proper and pink teach their progeny to believe as they do.
The Year In Hate, 2005
A 5% annual increase in hate groups in 2005 caps a remarkable rise of 33% over the five-year period that began in 2000.
By Mark Potok
Intelligence Report
Southern Poverty Law
Spring 2006Fueled by belligerent tactics and publicity stunts, the number of hate groups operating in the United States rose from 762 in 2004 to 803 last year, capping an increase of fully 33% over the five years since 2000.
The expansion of hate groups last year, documented by the Intelligence Project of the Southern Poverty Law Center, seemed to be helped along by aggressive maneuvers that landed them on front pages and in national news broadcasts. The National Socialist Movement, for instance, repeatedly made national news with provocative attempts to march through black, inner-city neighborhoods. Other groups rallied with increasing fervor and frequency, and even undertook sure-to-infuriate campaigns like "Operation Schoolyard," an attempt in the 2004-2005 school year to distribute 100,000 free racist music CDs to schoolchildren . . . A growing Internet presence also helped groups' propaganda to flourish; there were 524 hate sites counted in 2005, up 12% from 468 in 2004.
Yes, whites individuals and groups do indoctrinate their young. The practice amid the pink population is as odious as they believe it is among African-Americans. Whites are as blackened by bigotry as their brethren may be.
Sadly, too frequently when we look upon another we see only what appears on the surface. Just as the oppressed of one color or creed voices words that may be defined as dishonorable, so too do those in the supposed superior sect. Each of us errors. We are all emotional beings, complex and never viewed completely. New York Times Columnist, Nicholas D. Kristof, addressed this truth in his recent editorial, Obama and Race. The articulate author writes of what goes on within the walls of Trintiy United Church of Christ, Chicago, Illinois.
Many well-meaning Americans perceive Mr. Wright as fundamentally a hate-monger who preaches antagonism toward whites. But those who know his church say that is an unrecognizable caricature: He is a complex figure and sometimes a reckless speaker, but one of his central messages is not anti-white hostility but black self-reliance.“The big thing for Wright is hope,” said Martin Marty, one of America’s foremost theologians, who has known the Rev. Wright for 35 years and attended many of his services. “You hear ‘hope, hope, hope.’ Lots of ordinary people are there, and they’re there not to blast the whites. They’re there to get hope.”
Professor Marty said that as a white person, he sticks out in the largely black congregation but is always greeted with warmth and hospitality. “It’s not anti-white,” he said. “I don’t know anybody who’s white who walks out of there not feeling affirmed.”
Mr. Wright has indeed made some outrageous statements. But he should be judged as well by his actions — including a vigorous effort to address poverty, ill health, injustice and AIDS in his ministry. Mr. Wright has been frightfully wrong on many topics, but he was right on poverty, civil rights and compassion for AIDS victims.
What should draw much more scrutiny in this campaign than any pastor’s sermons is the candidates’ positions on education, health care and poverty — and their ability to put those policies in place. Cutting off health care benefits for low-income children strikes me as much more offensive than any inflammatory sermon.
Indeed, what is an affront to a person affected by a policy or practice is barely observable to one who will never realize how a political promise or lack thereof can destroy the life of those they love. When in an impoverished community people depend on the kindness of a culture such as the society Thomas Paine described, one in which the commonweal was more important than the needs of any individual. The disenfranchised rely on the good will of people who believe in the Lord, practice as Jesus preached, "Love your neighbor as yourself.' Yet, inside and outside of a religious house, mere mortal man fails to adhere to the principles preached from the pulpit. We need only remember the plight of a sweet young child, a twelve year old, Deamonte Driver who died of a toothache Sunday, February 25, 2007.
A routine, $80 tooth extraction might have saved him.If his mother had been insured.
If his family had not lost its Medicaid.
If Medicaid dentists weren't so hard to find.
If his mother hadn't been focused on getting a dentist for his brother, who had six rotted teeth.
By the time Deamonte's own aching tooth got any attention, the bacteria from the abscess had spread to his brain, doctors said. After two operations and more than six weeks of hospital care, the Prince George's County boy died.
Few in a white American world can imagine such a situation. Certainly, a Caucasian churchgoer does not subscribe to the belief a child must suffer. No clergy would caste a little one to the wolves or ask them to endure the burden of a national budget disagreement. An ordained Minister, Reverend, Pastor, Priest, or Rabbi, a Shaman would not will a poverty-stricken parent, people within an impoverished community, or those not yet empowered, to care for a child without adequate means to assist the young person. That is unless the religious leader is part of the "Fellowship" or "Family," who congregates in Washington District of Columbia or other Capitols throughout the globe.
The Fellowship believes that the elite win power by the will of God, who uses them for his purposes. Its mission is to help the powerful understand their role in God's plan.
This group of world leaders, the affluent and comfortable from Congress to the Cabinet, from the White House to the wondrous world of power elite, accepts as part of their mission, that those whose pigmentation is darker, or persons deemed to be of lesser value may be left to die when they no longer serve the "masters." This theological order differs from some of the other organized religion.
The Family avoids the word Christian but worships Jesus, though not the Jesus who promised the earth to the "meek." They believe that, in mass societies, it's only the elites who matter, the political leaders who can build God's "dominion" on earth. Insofar as the Family has a consistent philosophy, it's all about power -- cultivating it, building it and networking it together into ever-stronger units, or "cells." "We work with power where we can," Doug Coe [Fellowship leader] has said, and "build new power where we can't."
African-Americans rarely and barely have authority equal to those of Anglos in this nation. "Affirmative Action," a policy established to appease those embarrassed by the actions of their ancestors, is granted and taken away. Caucasians complain of "reverse racism," for few can comprehend.
[B]lacks have not simply been treated unfairly; they have been subjected first to decades of slavery, and then to decades of second-class citizenship, widespread legalized discrimination, economic persecution, educational deprivation, and cultural stigmatization. They have been bought, sold, killed, beaten, raped, excluded, exploited, shamed, and scorned for a very long time. The word "unfair" is hardly an adequate description of their experience, and the belated gift of "fairness" in the form of a resolution no longer to discriminate against them legally is hardly an adequate remedy for the deep disadvantages that the prior discrimination has produced. When the deck is stacked against you in more ways than you can even count, it is small consolation to hear that you are now free to enter the game and take your chances.
Chances are opportunities will be scant and tentative at that. Former Congresswoman and Vice Presidential candidate Geraldine Ferraro reminds us of this. For the Clinton cohort, and a former member of the Clinton Finance Committee, Barack Obama, and perhaps all Black Americans are "lucky" to be where they are today. For Ferraro, another Anglo American who evidently cannot connect to the experience of being poor or purplish-brown in hue, being Black in this country is apparently an advantage. Perchance, it is a privilege to suffer at the hands of those in power, the people who do not wish to speak of their work or worship. We cannot know. For unlike the scenes seen in volumes of video in the worldwide web or in news network libraries, there are no recordings of what occurs in "Fellowship" [Family] meetings. The "cells" remain cloistered, just as the rich do.
[T]he prayer groups have become cherished sanctuaries for their members—providing respite, however brief, from the cacophony of political Washington. Speaking about a group is strongly discouraged, and what transpires at meetings is strictly off the record.
No one will know if these elite powerbrokers express their racial hatred aloud. One can only determine what is true through the policies these persons enact. They may say they prayer for equality; however, the laws introduced and passed frequently, further disenfranchise the poor and people of color.
There is much evidence, anecdotal as the Ferraro affair may be, and research analysis, to suggest Caucasians in this country find it difficult to relate to the circumstances of those whose skin is a darker color. The predicament of people whose skin gleams a brownish-purplish hue is incomprehensible to those who do not suffer from the effects of racism.
A Jew can pass amongst gentiles. An Asian can climb, albeit inch-by-inch. Hispanics are hindered in their assent; yet, not in the way a Black man or woman is. An African-American is never fully free from the stereotypes. On screen dramas, depict African-Americans as villains. The nightly news amplifies this message. The public presumes if a crime is committed, certainly the lawbreaker will be Black.
Our language leads us to believe black is bad. White is good. From childhood on Americans are indoctrinated. Slavery may have ended with the Emancipation Proclamation; however, African-Americans remained incarcerated in caricatures.
From the introduction of animated film in the early 1900s to the 1950s, ethnic humor was a staple of American-made cartoons. Yet, as Christopher Lehman shows in this revealing study, the depiction of African Americans in particular became so inextricably linked to the cartoon medium as to influence its evolution through those five decades. He argues that what is in many ways most distinctive about American animation reflects white animators' visual interpretations of African American cultural expression.The first American animators drew on popular black representations, many of which were caricatures rooted in the culture of southern slavery. During the 1920s, the advent of the sound-synchronized cartoon inspired animators to blend antebellum-era black stereotypes with the modern black cultural expressions of jazz musicians and Hollywood actors. When the film industry set out to desexualize movies through the imposition of the Hays Code in the early 1930s, it regulated the portrayal of African Americans largely by segregating black characters from others, especially white females. At the same time, animators found new ways to exploit the popularity of African American culture by creating animal characters like Bugs Bunny who exhibited characteristics associated with African Americans without being identifiably black.
By the 1950s, protests from civil rights activists and the growing popularity of white cartoon characters led animators away from much of the black representation on which they had built the medium. Even so, animated films today continue to portray African American characters and culture, and not necessarily in a favorable light.
Perhaps, the portrayals burned into our brains, when we were toddlers, those heard in church, in homes, in movie theatres, and on televisions, helps to explain why Anglo Americans cannot imagine what it like to be Black in America. Few Caucasians have experienced the pain of prejudice. Pinkish people cannot comprehend what it feels like to consistently be a victim of avoidance. An Anglo does not think that their mere appearance might threaten another. White people walk down the street without a care. No one crosses the boulevard in order to steer clear of them as happens frequently to a Black man or woman approaching from the other direction.
Anglos do not know what it feels like to be shunned, snubbed, or scorned because your skin is dark. Caucasians cannot pretend to know how what some say is a tease is truly a threat. When Golf Channel anchor Kelly Tilghman smiled and suggested today's young players should "lynch Tiger Woods in a back alley," African-Americans did not laugh. A noose in the neighborhood can cause ones' blood to curdle. A word as vile as n*gg*r, does not cut to the core of a white man or woman who has never lost a loved-one to brutal aggressions based only on race. There is much the white world does not realize or rationalize as they sit in their ivory churches.
To whites, for example, it has been shocking to hear Mr. Wright suggest that the AIDS virus was released as a deliberate government plot to kill black people.That may be an absurd view in white circles, but a 1990 survey found that 30 percent of African-Americans believed this was at least plausible.
“That’s a real standard belief,” noted Melissa Harris-Lacewell, a political scientist at Princeton (and former member of Trinity church, when she lived in Chicago). “One of the things fascinating to me watching these responses to Jeremiah Wright is that white Americans find his beliefs so fringe or so extreme. When if you’ve spent time in black communities, they are not shared by everyone, but they are pretty common beliefs.”
This thought is not merely a personal opinion, research documents the truth of this assessment. White Americans don't truly comprehend racial disparities in our country. Philip Mazzocco, co-author of the a study titled, Whites Underestimate the Costs of Being Black, and Assistant Professor of psychology at Ohio State University's Mansfield campus states, “The costs of being black in our society are very well documented." “Blacks have significantly lower income and wealth, higher levels of poverty, and even shorter life spans, among many other disparities, compared to whites.” Researcher Mazzocco avows, "white households average about $150,000 more wealth than the typical black family." Overall, the total assets for an Anglo family are about five times greater than that of an African-American family. The disparity seems a constant in American history. The chasm has persisted for years. Mazzocco said. . . .
“When white Americans find it within themselves to say ‘I must be compensated for a past injustice done to me' but the same logic evaporates when the injustice concerns black Americans, they are staring straight at bias,” Banaji [co-author Mahzarin Banaji, the Cabot Professor of Social Ethics at Harvard University] said.
What is good for thou, is not tolerable for thee. Hypocrisy is a theme we know all too well. We witness it here in America. We hear charlatan expressions in our daily lives. Is this not the concern Caucasians present, when they criticize Reverend Wright?
Opportunely, those who protest too much forget the numerous groups who hate in the name of G-d, or the “Family” formed amongst the elite. Nonetheless, pinkish people preach; white worshipers never speak words of woe, or wrath. The Judeo-Christian clergy, and the congregation, at least when in church, do not speak badly of their brethren. If only Jesus had known. The Son of the Holy Father may not have felt a need to warn the hypocrites.
"Judge not, that you be not judged. For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and the measure you give will be the measure you get. Why do you see the speck that is in your brother's eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? Or how can you say to your brother, 'Let me take the speck out of your eye,' when there is the log in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother's eye."~ Matthew 7:1-5 RSV
Perhaps, our best teachers, those who see most clearly, understand the complexity that is humankind. Perchance, a parishioner hears what is truly said. One with love in his or her heart does not hear the gospel as a reason for grief. He, or she, the commoners within a congregation may understand the clergyman in a manner consistent with the whole being that stands before them each and every Sunday. It seems Kennise M Herring, an "average" disciple of Jeremiah Wright lives the lessons of the Lord more fully than those who gather in gentler, kinder churches.
I am a member of Trinity United Church of Christ and have been for 17 years. Interestingly, I’ve never seen Barack in church, which may simply speak to the fact that there are 3 sermons and our family attends a different service than the Obama family.I was in attendance in the sermon after 9/11 that has been circulated. Ironically, I felt soothed following that sermon. I certainly remembered upon viewing the clips the infamous God Damn America comments, but that is not what stood out for me in that service. At the start of the service, Reverend Wright spoke poignantly about his fears as he was in New York on that fateful day. He spoke about the tremendous pain he observed, the evil and horror of the event and of his personal realization that he may never get to tell all of us how much he loved us. He spoke of realizing that his life with his family was not guaranteed and that he could not take anything for granted. He made a commitment to tell us at each service that he loved us and I experienced his words–I love you–simply and freely offered as real and soothing.
Yes–he spoke about policy matters and clearly used strong language but at the time, neither I or my three children or my husband found it the salient part of the talk. Despite the strong rhetoric, I left church feeling that “there is a balm in Gilead." Reverend Wright delivered the eulogy at my aunt’s funeral and it is not hyperbole to say that I was more moved by his words than I have ever been at a funeral. He was warm, compassionate, empathic, and genuinely sad for as he said repeatedly about my aunt, “this was not ordinary parishioner, this was my friend."
Reverend Wright frequently chided those of us too constricted to freely experience the passion often evident in the sanctuary and suggested that we were too educated to show our love for Jesus. I, being one of the more reserved–ok–constricted ones simply smiled for I longed for the kind of intimate, passionate relationship with God that he seems to have cultivated with God.
In finishing, I have seen this man on too many occasions do too much that is good and meaningful. He is imperfect–he will tell you that in a minute but I am certain in my core that he is doing God’s work and he loves God’s children even if he is disgusted by their behavior at times.
There are two Americas and the one I occupy is often invisible. How I wish that the peek inside my world had offered a fuller portrait of this man and not the caricature.
Might the Anglo individuals who dwell in the more visible America, assess their own passion, principles, and preachers. Might Caucasians consider the hypocrisy that lives within them and their clergy. Would white Americans be willing to judge one of their own people as harshly as they do Barack Obama or his Pastor, Reverend Wright?
Would Anglo Americans condemn one of the most profound and powerful Senators, Presidential aspirant Hillary Rodham Clinton for her affiliation with the "Fellowship?" Potential President Barack Obama "condemned, in unequivocal terms, the statements of Reverend Wright that have caused such controversy." Yet, Hillary Rodham Clinton, an active participant of the "most elite cell" [their term] says nothing of the fact that . . .
The Family takes credit for some of Clinton's rightward legislative tendencies, including her support for a law guaranteeing "religious freedom" in the workplace, such as for pharmacists who refuse to fill birth control prescriptions and police officers who refuse to guard abortion clinics.
The former First Lady, Caucasian Clinton may not have considered how these laws affect those in the Black community. Certainly, one would imagine that the Senator, a scholar would understand that without birth control, abortions are more likely. Perhaps, she, as most Anglo Americans is unfamiliar with a life that differs from her own.
As an elite, among the "Family" Hillary Clinton may not have experienced the hurt that is an African-American's life. Those in Black neighborhoods have limited access to pharmacists and clinics. The notion that African-Americans might shop around for someone to serve them is absurd. We need only consider the availability of viable transportation, the cost to travel, and the ultimate truth, the quality of health care services. Those whose complexion is dark in color remain separate and unequal in an America dominated by the affluent who are lighter in color and pray within a selective Fellowship.
Perchance, prosperous persons, members of the Family "cells," people such as Senator Clinton, do not rant and rage as they reflect on racism. They cannot; they do not relate. These prominent individuals do not need to discuss their mediation which remains publicly unmentionable. They to talk of prejudice or the policies they ratify in order to retain power. Possibly, affluent Anglos and those who merely wish to appear proper do not need to speak of the strife that is their life in church, synagogues, or temples, for their situation does not compare.
For most Caucasians and for former First Lady Clinton, church conversations are yet to be called into question. However, we might wonder, what if Senator Clinton's religious beliefs, her practices, and her pastor are not subjects of scrutiny. What if all Anglos were subject to such severe scrutiny? Might the discussion help eliminate the disdain? Could empathy be the cure for what ails America. Barack Obama asked us to consider that possibility. Yet, apparently the request is denied.
Churchgoers in the white community continue to think they do not speak of cruelties committed against them, few as these may be. These pious people truly believe they live by the Golden Rule, "Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself." Sadly, it seems Anglos do not wish to discuss hypocrisy either. Perhaps, those with paler complexions should. From Americans reaction to the topic of racism, it is obvious, parishioners in pinkish neighborhoods still have much to learn of the Lord and the lessons he hoped to impart.
Audacity To Hope Jeremiah Wright Part 2
Please review and reflect upon the inspirational text. Wright’s Sermon - “The Audacity To Hope”
Sermons, Sources, A Search for Truth and Hope . . .
Posted by Betsy L. Angert on March 21, 2008 at 03:12 PM in Americana, Being Black in America, Black History, Past/Present, Elections, Hillary Clinton | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Are African-Americans Black Enough or Anglo Americans Too White?
copyright © 2008 Betsy L. Angert. BeThink.org
This year, perhaps more than any time in the past, Americans are reminded of race relations each and every day. On televisions, on the radio, airwaves are filled with talk of the current Presidential campaign. For the first time in this nation's history, a viable Presidential hopeful is not a white. Barack Obama is a Black man; he is profound and has purpose. Early on, Anglo Americans, and even some people of color, wondered if Obama authentically represented African-Americans. Countless inquired of Obama's experience, not in Congress, but in the ghettos of this country. The prominent periodical, Time Magazine, published a cover story titled, "Is Obama Black Enough? As Sociologists assess, there is reason to believe another question is apt, "Are Caucasians white enough, or are they too white to understand the Black experience?"
The Black experience is as all other occurrences. Each is unique to the individual. Nevertheless, in a society where clear delineations are evident, we can observe, life as an African-American is not as easy. Circumstances common among Blacks are unthinkable to Caucasians. Anglos rarely appreciate persons of color are not truly different, only the conditions they live under vary.
While white Americans are happy to acknowledge that the Black man or woman they work with, as a singular person, is wonderful, Caucasians are quick to avow, that the individual they know is not like the rest of "those" people. Pinkish people do not understand. Hence . . .
Whites Underestimate the Costs of Being Black
Columbus, Ohio – How much do white Americans think it “costs” to be black in our society, given the problems associated with racial bias and prejudice?The answer, it appears, is not much.
When white Americans were asked to imagine how much they would have to be paid to live the rest of their lives as a black person, most requested relatively low amounts, generally less than $10,000.
In contrast, study participants said they would have to be paid about $1 million to give up television for the rest of their lives.
The results suggest most white Americans don't truly comprehend the persisting racial disparities in our country, said Philip Mazzocco, co-author of the study and assistant professor of psychology at Ohio State University's Mansfield campus.
“The costs of being black in our society are very well documented,” Mazzocco said. “Blacks have significantly lower income and wealth, higher levels of poverty, and even shorter life spans, among many other disparities, compared to whites.”
For example, white households average about $150,000 more wealth than the typical black family. Overall, total wealth for white families is about five times greater than that of black families, a gap that has persisted for years.
“When whites say they would need $1 million to give up TV, but less than $10,000 to become black, that suggests they don't really understand the extent to which African Americans, as a group, are disadvantaged,” Mazzocco said.
What Anglos do understand are the generalizations they hold dear. Black persons are different than whites, and they are, in large part because a society that favors people of pinkish paler hues has created a cast system that bars African-Americans from achieving as they might.
Incomes are lower, access to adequate educational facilities are few. Health Care coverage is out of reach for those with limited opportunity and wealth. Discrimination against those whose color differs from the main is ample. In the abstract, Anglo Americans grasp that those placed lower on the socio-economic ladder suffer. White Americans know they would not wish to live as a Black American does.
[I]n one study, whites were told to imagine that they were about to be born as a random white person in America, but they were being offered a cash gift to be born as a random black person. Once again, white participants requested relatively small sums to make a life-long race-change. In addition, some were given a list of some of the costs of being black in America, such as the racial wealth disparity. The result was that whites in this latter scenario requested significantly higher amounts than those in the previous studies – about $500,000.Finally, some participants were given a similar scenario except all references to blacks, whites, and America were taken out. They were asked to imagine they were born into the fictional country of Atria, and were born either into the “majority” or “minority” population. They were given a list of the disadvantages that the minority population faced in Atria (which were identical to the real disadvantages faced by blacks in America). In this case, white participants in the study said they should be paid an average of $1 million to be born as a minority member in Atria.
“When you take it out of the black-white context, white Americans seem to fully appreciate the costs associated with the kinds of disparities that African Americans actually face in the United States,” Mazzocco said. “In this case, they asked for a million dollars, similar to what they want for giving up television.”Mazzocco said blatant prejudice was not the reason for the findings. Results showed that whites who scored higher on a measure of racial prejudice did not answer significantly differently than others in the study.
Often those who are out of touch with what is true for another are not knowingly bigoted. As children, we learn to believe as we do. Most Americans are oblivious, no matter how well informed they, we might be.
However, if we are honest with ourselves, people know what is philosophically true for them personally, may not be valid. We are each similar, yet, never the same. A human desire to categorize places us in jeopardy. When we define others, or ourselves as Black or white we cripple our communities, as evident through statistical data. The numbers speak volumes, so too do people if we bother to ask them of their values.
Social Scientists surveyed those of disparate groups, and discovered what we could know intellectually. Those who physically do and do not resemble us share our values. Although experiences may be divergent, we need only think of our siblings to realize the adage "All men are created equal," does not mean every being is identical in appearance; nevertheless, essentially we are related. My blue eyed-sister is not as I am. She sees the world through her own lens. A brown-eyed brother cannot think, say, do, feel, or be as me. Still, we are akin. Biologically persons may be similar. They are never the same; nor are there stark contrasts.
Every human values principles that honor all men, women, and children unvaryingly. Innately, two-legged creatures crave caring connections. We all want to have the rights reverence affords, just as our brethren do. Every person is made of blood, sweat, and tears. Humans have inherent worth. Shared ignorance does not allow people to act on our deepest beliefs. the essence of our beauty is not just skin deep. It is part of our being whether we are Black or white.
Researchers remind us, in November 2007, it is time to "Redefine What It Means to Be Black in America." The Social and Demographic division of Pew Research Center, in conjunction with National Public Radio surveyed a large group of Americans, a large portion of those who participated were Black. This fact alone sets this report apart from earlier examinations which most relied on data from white Americans. The review titled, Blacks See Growing Values Gap Between Poor and Middle Class, Optimism about Black Progress Declines, we discover the times and trends are changing, or perhaps our awareness of what is has been altered. Many African-Americans do not identify themselves with the accepted definition of Black.
A Single Race?
Another revelatory finding in the Pew poll is that 37 percent of African Americans now agree that it is no longer appropriate to think of black people as a single race. A little more than half of the black people polled, 53 percent, agreed that it is right to view blacks as a single race. And the people most likely to say blacks are no longer a single race are young black people, ages 18-29.Forty-four percent of those young black people say there is no one black race anymore, as compared to 35 percent of the 30- to 49-year-old black population, and 34 percent of the black people over age 65.
The split in the black race comes down to a matter of values, according to the poll. In response to the question, "Have the values of middle-class and poor blacks become more similar or more different?" 61 percent of black Americans said "more different." White Americans agreed, with 54 percent saying there is a growing values gap between the black middle class and the black poor; 45 percent of Hispanics agreed, too.
At the same time, 72 percent of whites, 54 percent of blacks, and 60 percent of Hispanics agree that in the last 10 years, "values held by black people and the values held by white people (have) become more similar."
While the ethos may appear equivalent, upon closer examination a variance among respondents emerges. In nationwide telephone interviews, with a representative sample of 3,086 adults, conducted from September 5-October 6, 2007, we learn what an "over-sampled" total of 1007 African Americans, 388 Hispanics, and 1671 Anglos believe.
Big gaps in perception between blacks and whites emerge on many topics. For example, blacks believe that anti-black discrimination is still pervasive in everyday life; whites disagree. And blacks have far less confidence than whites in the basic fairness of the criminal justice system.
Over the past two decades, blacks have lost some confidence in the effectiveness of leaders within their community, including national black political figures, the clergy, and the NAACP. A sizable majority of blacks still see all of these groups as either very or somewhat effective, but the number saying "very" effective has declined since 1986.
These statements may correlate to what is real for too many African-Americans. Income Gap Between Blacks, Whites Expands. The Brookings Institute in cooperation with National Public Radio revealed in a recent report, while Black Americans can no longer be thought of as a distinct group, if they ever were, as a whole, people of color have not benefited from a "free and open" society, as Caucasians have. Anglos remain oblivious. Intolerant attitudes inform whites. The same bigoted perspectives hinder an ability to relate, and recognize how different the Black experience is.
Again, in November 2007, Americans were given an opportunity to assess the clash bias has created. In a culture, founded on the principles of equality, Americans prefer to practice prejudiced policies. In the United States, people whose skin is dark are not afforded the opportunities bestowed upon their counterparts, Caucasian Americans.
Economic Mobility of Black and White FamiliesIn brief, trends show that median family incomes have risen for both black and white families, but less so for black families. Moreover, the intergenerational analysis reveals a significant difference in the extent to which parents are able to pass their economic advantages onto their children. Whereas children of white middle-income parents tend to exceed their parents in income, a majority of black children of middle-income parents fall below their parents in income and economic status. These findings are provided in more detail below.
Median family income for both black and white families has increased over the last 30 years, but income gaps still persist.
Between 1974 and 2004, white and black men in their 30s experienced a decline in income, with the largest decline among black men. However, median family incomes for both racial groups increased, because of large increases in women's incomes. Income growth was particularly high for white women.The lack of income growth for black men combined with low marriage rates in the black population has had a negative impact on trends in family income for black families.
There was no progress in reducing the gap in family income between blacks and whites. In 2004, median family income of blacks ages 30 to 39 was only 58 percent that of white families in the same age group ($35,000 for blacks compared to $60,000 for whites).
Black children grow up in families with much lower income than white children.
White children are more likely to surpass parents' income than black children at a similar point in the income distribution.
Overall, approximately two out of three blacks (63 percent) exceed their parents' income after the data are adjusted for inflation, similar to the percentage for whites.However, a majority of blacks born to middle-income parents grow up to have less income than their parents. Only 31 percent of black children born to parents in the middle of the income distribution have family income greater than their parents, compared to 68 percent of white children from the same income bracket. . . .
White children are more likely to move up the ladder while black children are more likely to fall down.
Startlingly, almost half (45 percent) of black children whose parents were solidly middle class end up falling to the bottom of the income distribution, compared to only 16 percent of white children. Achieving middle-income status does not appear to protect black children from future economic adversity the same way it protects white children.Black children from poor families have poorer prospects than white children from such families. More than half (54 percent) of black children born to parents in the bottom quintile stay in the bottom, compared to 31 percent of white children.
Perhaps, the way in which the Black population experiences income inequity and discrimination, accounts for the lack of confidence in African-American leaders among the population, or did until very recently. In the Fall of 2007, before the first caucus in Iowa or the initial primary ballots in New Hampshire were cast, people of color in the United States expressed a glimmer of hope. While many people whose skin cast a brownish-purple hue were devoted to the Clinton campaign, they recognized that Barack Obama shed a powerful light on the issue of color. Again, the Pew Research Center, Social and Demographic Trends division concluded . . .
The most newsworthy African American figure in politics today - Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama - draws broadly (though not intensely felt) favorable ratings from both blacks and whites. But blacks are more inclined to say that his race will detract from his chances to be elected president; whites are more inclined to say his relative inexperience will hurt his chances.
Three-quarters of blacks (76%) say that Obama is a good influence on the black community. Even greater numbers say this about Oprah Winfrey (87%) and Bill Cosby (85%), who are the most highly regarded by blacks from among 14 black newsmakers tested in this survey. By contrast, just 17% of blacks say that rap artist 50 Cent is a good influence.
Months prior to these results a conversation ensued that may have helped to alter a long accepted perception. The son of a white woman from Kansas, whose father was native to Kenya, Barack Obama was asked, "How important is race in defining yourself?" Perhaps, esteemed Senator, and Presidential candidate, Obama spoke for many African-Americans, most of whom understand their bloodline may be mixed. He might have also addressed what Anglo Americans understand, if not consciously. No matter the color of our skin, few of us are purebred. While people may presume to know who we are based on a preconceived notion, we are all more than our appearance. [If only as a society, we acted on this veracity.]
Obama: I think all of us in America and particularly African-Americans have to think about race at some point in our lives. The way I like to think about it, I am rooted in the African-American community, but I'm not defined by it. I am comfortable in my racial identity and recognize that I'm part of a very specific set of experiences in this country, but that's not the core of who I am. Another way of saying is that's not all I am . . .One of the things that helped me to resolve a lot of these issues is the realization that the African-American community, which I'm now very much feel a part of, is itself a hybrid community. It's African. It's European. It's Native American. So it's much more difficult to define what the essential African-American experience is, at least more difficult than what popular culture would allow.
What I also realized is that the American experience is, by definition, a hybrid experience. I mean, you know one of the strengths of this country is that we have these people coming from, you know, all four corners of the globe converging, and sometimes in conflict, living side by side, and over time coming together to create this tapestry that is incredibly strong.
And so, in that sense, I feel that my background ironically, because it's unusual, is quintessentially American.
Americans of any race know that their ancestry is likely mixed. Whites are not pedigrees; nor are Blacks. Yet, pinkish people feel they can or must delineate when they define a dark complexioned person. Too often, in the United States, an African-American is described by their visible lineage, set apart because of the color of their skin. Yet, what of whites? How do we classify a paler person who may be part Irish, Italian, German, or English?
Apparently, a year ago, in February 2007, 60 Minutes Host Steve Kroft thought he knew what it meant to be Anglo or to be raised among white people. Mister Kroft made repeated references to the candidate's Caucasian mother, and Obama's childhood history. He said, "You spent most of your life in a white household." "I mean, you grew up white." "You were raised in a white household?" These statements were presented as though they were significant. The presumption was, in a white home people think, say, do, feel, and are different than those in a Black family. The evidence says this is not so. Yet, the myth remains firm. Hence, the journalist offered an observation, odd as it may be to some.
Kroft: [A]t some point, you decided that you were black?
The answer might have informed Black and white alike. The response may have encouraged African-Americans to be more vocal by the time they were surveyed nine months later. Possibly, the response had no influence. After centuries of racial discrimination, Black person may just be sick and tired of being sick and tired.
Whatever the reason for the realizations that emerged in the Pew Research report, finally, there is an incentive to believe. Hope is alive. A Black American, or many African-Americans, together, can change the persistent culture.
Presidential aspirant, Senator Obama spoke a truth that rattled a rigid reality. Stereotypes are exactly that. They need not characterize any of us, nor do we, as a nation need to endorse what divides us. Barack Obama explained . . .
Well, I'm not sure I decided it. I think if you look African-American in this society, you're treated as an African-American. And when you're a child, in particular that is how you begin to identify yourself. At least that's what I felt comfortable identifying myself as . . .[T]here is racial prejudice in our society that we do continue to carry the historical legacy of Jim Crow and slavery. We've never fully addressed that. It manifests itself in much higher rates of poverty and violence and lack of educational achievement in minority communities. But I know in my heart that there is a core decency to the American people, and that decency can be tapped.
I think America is at the point now where if a white person has the time to get to know who you are, that they are willing on average to look beyond race and judge you as an individual. That doesn't mean that they've stopped making snap judgments. It doesn't mean that before I was Barack Obama, and I was just Barack Obama, that if I got into an elevator, a woman might not clutch her purse a little tighter. Or if I'm walking down the street, that you might not hear some clicks of doors locking, right. I mean, there's still a host of stereotypes that I think a lot of people are operating under. But I think if they have time to get to know you, they will judge you as they would judge anybody else, and I think that's enormous progress.
We've made progress. Yes, things are better. But better is not good enough. And we've still got a long way to go.
Indeed, America has much to do as a nation if we are to heal what has harmed us as a people. If this country is to be truly healthy and authentically honorable, we must act as equals. To allow Black Americans to suffer at the hands of "compassionate" Caucasians, to deny the similarities, and amplify the differences does not bode well. A man, woman, or child must be judged by the quality of his character, not the color of his skin. Let us have the courage of our convictions. It is time to create a culture of community.
~ Soren Kierkegaard [Danish Philosopher]
Sources and Stereotypes . . .
Posted by Betsy L. Angert on February 18, 2008 at 01:45 PM in American Dream, Americana, Being Black in America, Black History, Past/Present, Black Men, Civil Rights, Communities, Economics, Education, Effects of Poverty , Income Inequity | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Race Relations in America; Colormute, Not Colorblind
copyright © 2008 Betsy L. Angert. BeThink.org
In any Presidential election year, we hear of the race. Yet, discussions of "race" are void, or are since a truce was tendered. Americas would like to think of themselves as colorblind. We are not. Citizens of this country embrace “colormuteness, a term coined by Mica Pollock, Associate Professor of Education at Harvard University. What Professor Pollock observes in classrooms and in the hallways of schools throughout the nation occurs each day on the campaign trail. Children who wish to achieve excellence in the classroom are restricted by conventions they learned at an early age in our nation's communities.
When a young Caucasian child encounters a Black being, if they have never seen a person with a dark complexion, may point, tug at the a parent's trouper, point, and say, "Mom, Why is his skin so brown?" A lass might inquisitively exclaim, "Daddy, What is wrong with her complexion? Characteristically, Mother or Father will say, "Shush! It is not polite to point." Then the parent will pass on the message that they learned at their parent's knee. That communication will vary dependent on the family. Nonetheless, what is true, no matter who the guardian might be, the tone will be hushed. The tot will learn, we do not discuss the differences in skin tone or facial features.
What we were taught in our youth resonates in adult life. We see it on the campaign trail. Certain topics are acceptable and the one is forbidden. This etiquette is evident in our most recent election. Criticism is fine, as long as we do not broach the single most sensitive subject, "race," as it relates to the color of one's skin.
Candidates compete as they sprint towards the White House. They rack up the votes, and rail against their rivals. As Presidential hopefuls run for the Oval Office, they find themselves embroiled in discordant campaigns. Whatever they might say, the electorate will react. A delicate balance must be maintained.
Attack advertisements will fill the airwaves. Hurdles will be jumped in an attempt to make an opponent look or sound bad. The war veteran is no hero, and the soldier who stayed behind did not truly serve. In cyberspace, the calculations are conventional. The conversation can be extremely cruel. Religion will rule if he or she becomes President. His or her faith is not "right." His wife, her husband is [fill in the blank.] Can a damsel deliver as Commander-In-Chief, or will a drama result in her distress. However, the question that is addressed tentatively is, "Is America ready for a Black President?"
Americans are intimately familiar with the scandals. Constituents have witnessed what a little gossip can do. Within each campaign, people observe divisiveness. The demise of a fellow Democrat is fine. A rival Republican can ridicule another with reason. All is fair in love and war. While an aspirant may be fond of Party loyalty, in a Presidential campaign, faithfulness and friendship are not generously applied to adversaries. It is important to focus on differences if a candidate wishes to be the nominee for his or her Party, as long as the variation in skin color is not mentioned.
Our countrymen think it vital to understand Mitt Romney is a Mormon. The public believes it is important to contemplate, Mike Huckabee is a Preacher. It is grand that Hillary Clinton is a woman, but do we need to say aloud, Barack Obama is Black.
Sure, the words are said and the response is consistent. "It should not make a difference." Yet, it does. No one wishes to be labeled a bigot. As adults, individuals recall what their parents said, "African-Americans are people too," or one would hope they were thought to be in the United States. Still, each citizen of this country understands, Black people fight for parity. Even when conditions and circumstances improve for African-Americans, a few thrive, most struggle to survive.
Our Constitution claims "all men are created equal." However, in the States it seems that has never been the case. While Americans are proud of the fact that finally they can choose to vote for someone who is not white, they do not wish to speak of "race," only of the race. Ah, how well-trained Americans are.
Supposedly, citizens have progressed beyond our repressive roots. However, in truth, racism is rampant. Just as Americans have done in past Presidential election years, and do each day of our existence, we place one "race" above another.
Being Black in the United States is a topic discussed among those who are, and balked at by persons who rather believe themselves without bias. Carefully colormuted Caucasians do not wish to admit that that the sight of a dark skinned person can cause them to tightly clutch the pocketbook that hung loosely at their side. Anglos do not wish to confess that they feel an the urge to clench a fist, or place keys between their fingers, just in case they need to use the pieces of metal as a weapon when in the presence of a person whose complexion is a purplish-brown.
Few white individuals will tell of how they tremble when near an African-American stranger. Fortunately, many need not think of what they might do if a Black individual was near. In the United States, numerous neighborhoods are segregated, sometimes subtly, often overtly.
"Is it true that "Anna" stands for "Ain't No N*gg*rs Allowed?" I asked at the convenience store in Anna, Illinois, where I had stopped to buy coffee."Yes," the clerk replied. "That's sad, isn't it," she added, distancing herself from the policy. And she went on to assure me, "That all happened a long time ago."
"I understand [racial exclusion] is still going on?" I asked.
"Yes," she replied. "That's sad."
~ conversation with clerk, Anna, Illinois, October, 2001Anna is a town of about 7,000 people, including adjoining Jonesboro. The twin towns lie about 35 miles north of Cairo, in Southern Illinois. In 1909, in the aftermath of a horrific nearby "spectacle lynching," Anna and Jonesboro expelled their African Americans. Both cities have been all-white ever since. Nearly a century later, "Anna" is still considered by its residents and by citizens of nearby towns to mean "Ain't No N*gge*s Allowed," the acronym the convenience store clerk confirmed in 2001.
It is common knowledge that African Americans are not allowed to live in Anna, except for residents of the state mental hospital and transients at its two motels. African Americans who find themselves in Anna and Jonesboro after dark — the majority-black basketball team from Cairo, for example — have been treated badly by residents of the towns and by fans and students of Anna-Jonesboro High School.
Towns like Anna and Jonesboro are often called "sundown towns," owing to the signs that many of them formerly sported at their corporate limits — signs that usually said, "N*gge*r, Don't Let The Sun Go Down On You In ____." Anna-Jonesboro had such signs on Highway 127 as recently as the 1970s. In some areas, these communities were known as "sunset towns" and, in the Ozarks, "gray towns." In the East, although many communities excluded African Americans, the term "sundown town" itself was rarely used. Residents of all-white suburbs also usually avoided the term, though not the policy. . .
The overlooking of sundown towns, stands in sharp contrast to the attention bestowed upon that other violent and extralegal race relations practice, lynching. The literature on lynching is vast, encompassing at least 500 and perhaps thousands of volumes; at this point, we have at least one book for every ten confirmed lynchings. Still the books keep coming; Amazon.com listed 126 for sale in 2004.
Yet, lynchings have ceased in America. Sundown towns, on the other hand, continue to this day.
Nonetheless, the threat of such an act looms large in the United States. In the enlightened era of the Twenty-First century, Americans have discussed or dismissed the appearance of nooses throughout our homeland. More than a year passed before the mainstream media reported on the appearance of three nooses hung on a tree in Jena, Louisiana. Naturally, the incident was said to be a Southern phenomenon. However, weeks after a march on the city, in support of Civil Rights, another hangman's rope was displayed on the office door of a Black faculty member at the Teachers College at Columbia University. At a prestigious, Northern educational institution of higher learning, Americans were subject to lessons from the past. In this nation, Blacks, regardless of their economic status, or social stature are not safe; nor are they respected as peers.
Granted, the goodly among us will state as Lee C. Bollinger, President of Columbia University, declared, “This is an assault on African-Americans and therefore it is an assault on every one of us;” however, unless we speak of the unmentionable, those not victim to an attack, cannot imagine the wounds. Niceties do not heal the invisible and deep scars. Wounds are easily opened for they were never attended to. Colorblind as Caucasians allege to be, they are not cured of the ills of prejudice.
Only weeks ago, Americans again observed how easily we move from the topic of racial discrimination to decrees of settlement. No harm done, no words of division will be uttered. The offender and the offended do not discuss inequity, injustice, insults, and intolerance; the reality of race relations is left behind. School grounds, the campaign scene, and the world of sports are as the streets of America, battlegrounds for bigotry. Yet, in each of these venues, participants replace the actual topic with another. Apologies suffice. Our parents would be proud. Americans can admit when they are wrong and move on, or pretend to.
When Golf Channel commentator Kelly Tilghman joked on-air during the second round of the Mercedes-Benz Championship that ambitious young players should "lynch (Tiger Woods) in a back alley," she set off yet another incidence of the stagecraft that passes for racial discourse in this country, with a tragic moment followed by the requisite scenes of accusation, remorse and demands for the protagonist's head, all backed by a chorus of conflicting voices echoing to the rafters.There were plenty of soliloquies but distressingly little dialogue and no catharsis. For her part Tilghman was held accountable through a public scolding by the punditocracy and a two-week suspension by her employer; but for me, there's another, far more interesting character in this drama — Tiger Woods. . . .
Whether Woods likes it or not, the episode serves to remind him, and everyone else, that regardless of how he attempts to transcend race with his accomplishments on the golf course, he can never fully escape his status as a person of color.
Much the way the fried-chicken-and-collard-greens joke Fuzzy Zoeller made at the 1997 Masters pushed Woods into the role of African-American Golfer, Tilghman's gaffe reinforces his heritage and its burdens, lumping Tiger in with the estimated 5,000 men who were lynched in America between Reconstruction and the Civil Rights movement of the '60s. . . .
For his part Tiger was quick to forgive and forget, saying through his agent, Mark Steinberg, that the incident was a "nonissue" and later releasing a statement that said, "Regardless of the choice of words used, we know unequivocally that there was no ill intent in her comments."
Rarely does the individual who delivers a racist epithet mean to offend. The child who points does not intend to hurt someone's feelings. The parent who speaks in hushed tones purposely attempts not to insult. For those raised in a world where in the privacy of a home, unkind comments in reference to people of color abound, such assertions seem sound. Empathy escapes those who are not victim to the wrath of whites.
Anglos do not understand how a seemingly innocent statement can slice an African-American to the core.
To suggest that a successful Black man might need to be put in his place, or lynched, is to acknowledge a truth that is always apparent to an African-American gentleman or lady. A dark-brown-complexioned person who is perceived as one who does not know his or her station can expect to be reminded regularly, he or she is not equal to whites.
Decidedly, a dark-skin man or woman may do well in school or in the work place. A gentleman or a lovely lady may excel beyond all belief. A few elite Afro-Americans might be invited to live among Caucasians in an all white neighborhood, even in a Sundown Town. A token or two is always welcome. One with fame, fortune, and finesse may actually be appreciated. After all, a community must make a good impression. No locality would wish to be labeled intolerant, just as a parent, or child, does not desire to discriminate aloud. Consider cities in the Northern region of the United States. These humble townships have long maintained a noble image, false as it maybe.
Outside the traditional South—states historically dominated by slavery, where sundown towns are rare—probably a majority of all incorporated places kept out African Americans. . . .Ironically, the traditional South has almost no sundown towns. Mississippi, for instance, has no more than 6, mostly mere hamlets, while Illinois has no fewer than 456.
Appearances are a lovely illusion. Indeed, the presence of a Black person in a white world can be wrought with peril. Driving While Black is a common crime. Even so, in an automobile, there is some protection for the brownish-purple complexioned person passing through a predominantly Anglo section of town. If a Black man, or women, were to walk alone in an alley, in an affluent area, or in a slum, unaccompanied by an entourage, his or her life could be in danger. Tiger Woods, [Michel Jordan, Denzel Washington, Venus and Serena Williams,] in casual clothes, without the cameras, or a gold plated golf club to identify him, could easily become a casualty of racial chauvinism. Anglos, when alone or amongst an allied group of racists, are not colorblind. Nor are they colormuted. Whites will see, and say, as they truly believe. Indeed, if a successful man or woman, whose facial features, and color, are not characteristic of a Caucasian, they may well find themselves in a position to be attacked. In all likelihood, a Black person will be assaulted.
At times, the barbs will be verbal. On occasion, physical jabs will be offered. Perchance, a Black person may suffer a slight. Most who react to 'race' are subtle in their approach. However, it is rare when a white American does not express the bias that has been building for centuries sooner or later. What simmers and stews within eventually will come to a boil. The pain that hate gives rise to will spill out. As a culture, when we pretend to be colorblind, and act on colormutedness, we give no air to what is real. Racism has caused us to rot from within.
Intellectually, Anglos know that to diminish the worth of those whose complexion is a brownish-black, to scorn or snub an African-American merely because their appearance is considered less "acceptable," or to suggest that someone of color might be lynched is outrageous. Yet, as long as Americans refuse to acknowledged the roots of racism, and recognize their own bigotry, intolerance will flourish. If conversations are hushed, as they have been in this year alone, what we have witnessed will continue to burgeon.
Within days of the Tilghman incident, Golf Week Magazine glorified the schism. The sportscaster and her employer were the cover story or were meant to be. So much for these intentions, be they ill-willed or wise.
Golfweek Noose Elicits Strong Reaction
By Doug Ferguson
The Associated Press
Friday, January 18, 2008; 12:18 AMThe editor of Golfweek magazine said he was overwhelmed by negative reaction to the photo of a noose on the cover of this week's issue, illustrating a story about the suspension of a Golf Channel anchor for using the word "lynch" in an on-air discussion about how to beat Tiger Woods.
"We knew that image would grab attention, but I didn't anticipate the enormity of it," Dave Seanor, vice president and editor of the weekly magazine, said from the PGA Merchandise Show in Orlando, Fla. . . .
"Look at the executive suites at the PGA Tour, or the USGA, or the PGA of America. There are very, very few people of color there," he said. "This is a situation in golf where there needs to be more dialogue. And when you get more dialogue, people don't want to hear it, and they brush it under the rug. This is a source of a lot of pushback." . . .
Asked if he regretted the cover, Seanor paused before answering.
"I wish we could have come up with something that made the same statement but didn't create as much negative reaction," he said. "But as this has unfolded, I'm glad there's dialogue. Let's talk about this, and the lack of diversity in golf."
Golfweek Editor Seanor may have thought the conversation vital; however, the mainstream, the average Joe and Joanna, the persons in power, and those who have none, would rather not discuss the disparity that envelops us. Remember, etiquette is essential. Colormuteness and colorblindness are cool. Those who do not heed these calls are not. Editor, Dave Seanor was replaced one day after a racially insensitive graphic, a noose, 'graced' the cover of Golfweek.
Any lack of compassion, when public, can cause quite a controversy. When the same deficit is subtle, there are few problems, that is, if the offender's skin is pinkish in color. This contrast is sharply evident in this election season, just as it was in Elementary School. Our Presidential candidates and political Parties, like Mom and Dad, endorse colorblindness and colormuteness. The electorate embraces a truce that prohibits colorful conversations.
When race relations are discussed, the Democrats wish to appear more compassionate than the Conservatives. While it may be a tad true that the Democrats did better for Black America than the Republicans have, still, every Administration since America became a nation, did not authentically embrace equality. The statistics, even when improvement is apparent, reveal an awful truth.
The Conservative Agenda: Serving African Americans?
By Tim Westrich and Amanda Logan
Center For American Progress
January 17, 2008How have African Americans fared since conservatives have been in charge of the economy? Not very well. Their increases across key economic indicators have been slower under Bush as compared to the 1990s. Here’s a look at the numbers:
African Americans’ median income declined by an average of 1.6 percent per year under the current administration.
In 2006, African Americans’ median income was $32,132, which is actually $2,603 lower than their median income of $34,735 (in 2006 dollars) in 2000. This is an annualized average growth rate of -1.6 percent. In contrast, this number increased at an annual average growth rate of 3.2 percent from 1992 to 2000. And African Americans’ median income is still substantially lower than Whites: In 2006, their median income was $32,132, as compared to $52,432 for Whites.Under Bush, the percent of African Americans without health insurance has increased from 18.5 percent to 20.5 percent.
In 2006, 7.9 million African Americans were not covered by health insurance. The rate of African Americans not covered by health insurance increased by an annual average percent point change of 0.30 between 2000 and 2006. This is a much different picture compared to the 1990s. From 1992 to 2000, the number of uninsured African Americans decreased from 20.1 percent to 18.5 percent, an average annual percent point change of -0.20.The employment to population ratio for African Americans has declined faster than that of the Whites under the current administration.
In 2007, the employment to population ratio - the percentage of the civilian population that is employed—for African Americans stood at 58.4 percent compared to 63.6 percent for white Americans. Between 2000 and 2006, the employment to population ratio for African Americans declined by an average of - 0.4 percent each year after increasing by 0.8 percent on average between 1992 and 2000. The employed share of the African-American population grew faster than the employed share of the White population throughout the 1990s, but has shrunk faster than Whites since then.The increase in African-American homeownership has been slower under Bush than the 1990s.
The homeownership rate for Whites increased three times faster than the homeownership rate for African Americans between 2000 and 2006. During this time, the homeownership rate for African Americans increased by an average annual growth rate of just 0.1, from 47.2 percent to 47.9 percent, whereas Whites’ homeownership rate increased by an average annual growth rate of 0.3 percent. This trend is in part because African Americans have actually seen their rate decline since 2004. Compare this to the 1990s, when African Americans’ homeownership rate increased by an average annual growth rate of 0.8 percent from 1994 to 2000. Whites' rate was 0.6 percent during this time (homeownership data by race are not available before 1994).More African Americans are in poverty under Bush.
More African Americans were in poverty in 2006 than in 2000, just after we saw a vast improvement the 1990s. In 2006, 24.2 percent of African-American individuals were in poverty. Compare this to 2000, when 22.5 percent were below the poverty line, a percentage point change of 0.28. Poverty among African Americans decreased substantially from 1992 to 2000, going from 33.4 percent to 22.5 percent, or an annual average percent point change of -1.36.
The number of impoverished persons of color frequently increases. At times, it decreases. On occasion, it remains the same. Yet, no matter who is in the Oval Office, Americans worry less about the fact that the dark skinned among us are more likely to live in poorer neighborhoods. African-Americans are less likely to have adequate Health Care. Doctors discriminate.
Schools are segregated along racial lines. Citizens of this country understand that a person who lives on the wrong side of the railroad tracks is probably Black. Sundown Towns may have begun to allow Afro-Americans in; however, these persons better realize, they have their place. Dark-skin people are encouraged to believe they are powerless to create genuine change, and Anglo Americans like it that way.
There was hardly a rumble when the former First Lady, and Presidential aspirant explained, "Dr. King's dream began to be realized when President Lyndon Johnson passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964," Clinton continued. "It took a president to get it done." This statement seemed reasonable to those who have deterred the dreams within the Black community. Rival candidate, and Senator Obama softly declared the comment "unfortunate and ill-advised"; nonetheless, he too was willing to remain colorblind and colormute. A Black person knows better than to incite a riot. African-Americans, in the childhood are taught as well as whites.
In this country, citizens of all colors accept the truth and dare not drastically change it. It is for this reason the electorate is barely disturbed by statements from a former President, his aides, or allies. Even prominent Black Americans, grateful for small favors, and Presidential appointments, will stand by the side of a spouse and a former Commander-In-Chief when he states bigotry is believable and logical.
Voting for president along racial and gender lines "is understandable because people are proud when someone who they identify with emerges for the first time," the former president told a Charleston audience while campaigning for his wife. . . .Bill Clinton said civil rights leaders Andrew Young and John Lewis have defended his wife. "They both said that Hillary was right, and the people who attacked her were wrong, and that she did not play the race card, but they did," he said. . . .
Clinton also told about 100 people in Charleston that he was proud of the Democratic Party for having a woman and a black candidate.
For the former President, colorblindness and colormuteness helped to heal a division that he now justifies. In America, racism, and chauvinism, are not only acceptable, these characteristics are considered a source of pride, and not a sign of prejudice. Americans would rather be smug [and self-important] than address the sad fact people are not treated equally.
However, the message is mixed. On one hand, the Clintons are prideful of the support they receive from the African-American population. On the other, the two Clinton's conclude Blacks will automatically congregate around their brethren. When people do not admit to the color they see and will not hear of it, there is ample confusion.
The puzzlement continues. As votes are tallied, the temptation is to discount a rival's win, or blame it on the color barrier, the one that supposedly does, or is it, does not exist. When a Presidential aspirant or her husband speaks of the race [to the White House], the implicit untouchable topic of "race," is tenderly tackled.
In Charleston [South Carolina, during the 2008 primaries] last week, Bill Clinton said, "They are getting votes, to be sure, because of their race or gender, and that's why people tell me that Hillary doesn't have a chance of winning here."
Again, Americans must decide, does a person's race make a difference? Can people of color perform miracles as an Anglo might? In this country, we still argue whether we have seen this occur in the past.
Hillary Clinton reminds white Americans of the accepted wisdom, even a great and honorable Black leader, such as Reverend, Doctor Martin Luther King Junior could not "get the job done." This prominent person of color needed the white man [or woman] in the White House to achieve what had never been accomplished before. Senator Clinton's words help cultivate the belief, a Caucasian, has the power to change the nation or make dreams come true. Americans cannot know with certainty if this is true for even as some select Black persons climb, the old adage is reinforced.
"Race doesn't matter!" the crowd at Obama's victory celebration in Columbia chanted last night, and when he spoke, the senator elaborated on the theme. He said his victory disproved those who argue that people "think, act and even vote within the categories that supposedly define us" -- that blacks will not vote for a white candidate and vice versa."I did not travel around this state and see a white South Carolina or a black South Carolina. I saw South Carolina," he said. The election, he said, "is not about rich versus poor or young versus old, and it's not about black versus white. This election is about the past versus the future."
Americans wonder what will the future bring. Can the United States, as a country, change so significantly. After all, although voters are older and hopefully wiser, each was trained as a toddler. Perhaps, we must go back to school, to begin at the beginning. It may be that what we witness among adults could be quelled in the early years. Conventionally, in Elementary School, and on into Secondary Schools children were separated or tracked. In a desire to create a more balanced educational environment, the racial divide can be more apparent.
Beth C. Rubin, an assistant education professor at Rutgers University in New Brunswick, N.J., describes how a school system’s efforts to end tracking—the practice of grouping students in separate classes by academic ability—inadvertently stigmatized minority students in one high school classroom. In that class, a teacher’s careful efforts to balance student work groups by race, gender, and ability enraged an African-American student.“You trying to get all the black kids away from each other, before we cause a nuclear holocaust!” the student exclaimed. Meanwhile, the white students in the class, most of whom were high-achieving, relegated the minority students in their groups to roles that gave them little opportunity to hone their academic skills, according to Ms. Rubin’s account.
“I guess I’m asking teachers to think about race a little differently, and not so much about having to have kids equally distributed among groups,” Ms. Rubin said in an interview. “And also,” she added, “to think of group work as skill-building over the course of the year.
Americans are reminded each day, integration without conversation does little to create balance. People must not merely live together in neighborhoods, or work with one another in schools, or in offices. We must learn to be open, honest, and willing to work through our differences. What we do not understand will destroy us.
A word, a look, will be interpreted through our personal background and experience. If you are Black, a criticism might mean, "Get Back!" If white, the same statement might be construed as, "It will be all right." If we remain colormute and colorblind, if we never bother to learn who each of us is, we can be certain, change will not come. This is evident in numerous studies. Our expectations rule.
Balance is also key to the kind of instructional climate teachers should provide in racially diverse classrooms, [communities or campaigns] according to Ronald F. Ferguson, the director of Harvard’s Achievement Gap Initiative . . .Geoffrey L. Cohen, an associate professor of psychology at the University of Colorado-Boulder, recommends that, in offering students critical feedback, teachers convey the idea that the criticism reflects a high standard, and that they believe in the student’s ability to reach that standard . . .
Mr. Cohen has found that such messages can be more motivating for minority students, who are often wary of the feedback they get from teachers, than when educators overpraise them or give the same feedback to all students.
“Being a member of a stereotyped group puts one in a sort of bubble in which one can’t be certain whether the critical feedback comes from bias against their group or a teacher’s motivation to help one improve,” Mr. Cohen said in an interview. “In general, though, whites can enter a school situation thinking, ‘Teachers here believe in me.’”
For many Black Americans, an educator is frequently another white person who works from a premise of fear or futility. Too often, a teacher seems pompous or pretentious. It is not uncommon for an African-American to feel patronized when in the presence of an Anglo authority figure. A comment meant to express care, can be heard as contrived.
Every individual, regardless of color, has a history. Experience teaches us more than a professional mentor might. It is hard to trust that a person might be colorblind, if that is even possible, if they are colormute.
As long as Americans choose to avoid the discussion of diversity, to deny differences, and to reject hat our distinctive appearances enhance our experience, then life will be as it is and was. Change cannot come. Admittedly, Anglos are [color] blind. Apparently, Caucasians, and even Blacks prefer to be [color] mute. This must end if we are to evolve.
When Americans, teachers, preachers, or Presidential hopefuls, do not empathetically approach the topic of intolerance then, as a society, we will continue to clash and crumble. We may wish to hide from what haunts us. However, there is a price to pay for racial discrimination and the income inequity we accept.
Economically and emotionally, bigotry is expensive. Americans can see the cost of dilapidated schools. Residents in this Northern region of the globe experience what occurs when students do not have the opportunity to soar. Employment possibilities are limited. Without a satisfactory job, homeownership is not feasible. Even apartment life is not cheap. In a culture that creates illiteracy, the streets may provide the only shelter.
A society that houses hordes of those with dark skin in slums does not truly serve us equally. Citizens of the United Sates might understand, when a person is poor, as too many Black people are, they cannot afford adequate Health Care. Hence, everyone, the affluent, and those who struggle but survive, contribute to the costs an ill and impoverished America creates.
In this country, in our local communities, during this political campaign, if Americans remain colorblind and colormute, nothing will change. The possibility that conditions will worsen is one we must acknowledge.
Barack Obama may be correct. Differences exist. However, they need not divide us. Conversations about colorblindness and colormuteness can make his dream, our shared hope, come true. Let us imagine that one day, this vision will be ours together. As one people, united, perchance in time Americans will say . . .
The choice . . . is not between regions, religions, or genders. It’s not about rich versus poor; young versus old; and it is not about black versus white.It’s about the past versus the future.
It’s about whether we settle for the same divisions, distractions, and drama . . . or whether we reach for . . . common sense, and innovation – a shared sacrifice and shared prosperity . . .
When I hear that we’ll never overcome the racial divide . . . I think . . . Don’t tell me we can’t change.
Yes, we can change.
Yes, we can heal this nation.
Yes we can seize our future.
Anglo-Americans must no longer hold their children tightly when in the company of Black man or woman. Pinkish people cannot continue to caution their progeny, to tell them they must pretend to be colorblind, and authentically become colormute. If we are to ever heal, Caucasians in this country must mentor their offspring to believe, colors are beautiful. Americans need to see the tone of a person's skin, to speak of an individual's race, and the realities without criticism. If this country is going to change, if the United States expects to excel, then, we, the people must truly be, and act as equals.
Resources For Racism . . .
Posted by Betsy L. Angert on February 1, 2008 at 11:00 AM in "Take me as I am!", Americana, Black History, Past/Present, Black Men, Civil Rights | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Little Rock Nine Commemorated; Separate and Unequal Survives
Little Rock 9 - 50th Anniversary
copyright © 2007 Betsy L. Angert. BeThink.org
It has been fifty years since America sought to integrate its schools. It was September 25, 1957. The Little Rock Nine, a group of young Black pupils, crossed the threshold into history. Three years earlier, the Supreme Court of the United States of America ruled educational institutions could no longer remain separate and unequal. Unity in our schools was sanctioned in 1954. Brown versus Board of Education was the catalyst for change. However, even after the judgment was handed down, in actuality, few Districts altered enrollment. Assimilation was slow and frequently forced.
Two score and ten years ago, a reluctant locality was required to register young learners. Central High classrooms in Little Rock, Arkansas would receive students from the "wrong side of the tracks." The climate was volatile. The community was up in arms. The Governor fought for what he thought right, separation of the races.
Nevertheless, President Dwight D. Eisenhower decreed school populations would be mixed. One thousand soldiers from the 327th Airborne Battle Group of the 101st Airborne Division were deployed to Little Rock from their base in Kentucky. The troops would accompany young Black students as they entered the High School campus. The guards would stay with the scholars during the day to ensure their safety. The Eisenhower Administration was determined to end discrimination. However, the public was not. Perhaps, a prejudiced populace was more successful than principled people were. We did not eradicate the injustice of bigotry. Racism lives large today.
As we commemorate this historic occasion, Americans face a quandary. The doctrine we advocate is contrary to what we adopt. The current Supreme Court, recently ruled in favor of re-segregation. Educational facilities in local neighborhoods returned to a policy of separatism prior to the judgment handed down only months ago. The 'Robert's rule' reinforced what was allowed to occur in the last decade or more.
Yet, half a century later, one of the nine speaks with hope.
''You can overcome adversity if you know you are doing the right thing,'' said Carlotta Walls Lanier, one of the nine.
Four-thousand five hundred [4500] people joined her. On the anniversary of the entrance into Central High School, fifty two [52] percent of the school is Black. One might delude them selves to think this is inspiring; yet, it is not.
Return to a Showdown at Little Rock
By Felicia R. Lee
The New York Times
September 25, 2007CAMBRIDGE, Mass. — When Minnijean Brown Trickey and eight other black teenagers desegregated Central High School in Little Rock, Ark., 50 years ago on Sept. 25, they were escorted by 1,200 soldiers through spitting and jeering white crowds. Those images were beamed worldwide through the new medium of television, and the public response helped propel a civil rights movement energized by the 1954 Supreme Court ruling against school segregation.
On a recent visit to Central High, Ms. Trickey spoke to a self-segregated classroom: whites on one side, blacks on the other. An African-American student apparently dozed as she spoke. Students and teachers alike spoke blithely or painfully of the low educational aspirations and achievements of too many black students. Central, many said, is now two schools in one: a poor, demoralized black majority and a high-achieving, affluent white minority.
Separate and unequal survives. Only the façade varies. Americans are subtle in their manner, more so than they might have been in the past. Nonetheless, ethnic chauvinism, the chill of a cold shoulder, and racial slurs remain. Fifty years have come and gone. The United States is still divided. Hope is but a dream not realized. America, when will we embrace as our founders put forth, "All men are created equal."
Source For Segregation . . .
Posted by Betsy L. Angert on September 26, 2007 at 02:23 PM in Being Black in America, Black History, Past/Present, Black Men, Civil Rights, Education, Education, Effects of Poverty , Fear, Racial Discrimination, School Days, Xenophobia | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Jena Six. Justice: Permission Granted. Judgment: Permission Denied
copyright © 2007 Betsy L. Angert. BeThink.org
Please listen to the audio presentation. Interviews Tell Tales. Jena Six: Black Students Charged w/Attempted Murder
I am thankful, not for the strife, the situation, or the state of affairs in Jena, Louisiana. I am grateful for the discussion, the focus on what for too long remains beneath the surface. For weeks, race relations, a topic conveniently hidden, is in the news again. I think this inconvenient truth must be made visible if we are to move beyond the bigotry that is America's signature.
The Jena Six, a group of young Black students in a small southern town, were severely punished by the Courts for possible participation in a schoolyard brawl. One of many unfair judgments was overturned, and some Americans rejoiced. Others understood the deeper dilemma. Conversations commenced. Protests are planned. All that is good.
However, what is not wonderful and brings me no joy is what I fear, the outcome. Americans seem frozen in time. I believe the plague that permeates American society will survive.
Supremacy sickens me. Preeminence is, for me, the profound issue. While many claim in this nation no one race feels a sense of superiority over the another, there is ample evidence to suggest some do. This story may speak to the situation; it is one of many that occur daily in this country. Any of us whose skin is light may wish to deny it, but ask a Black friend or neighbor, if you have one.
Days ago, after a too long delayed mass media coverage, the narrative immerged again. This time the spotlight fell on the Bayou State. The subject of white rule and the inevitable result, Black rebellion, became more public. The details buried in local news and neighborhoods for close to a year, came to the surface.
Last September, a black high school student requested the school's permission to sit beneath a broad, leafy tree in the hot schoolyard. Until then, only white students sat there.The next morning, three nooses were hanging from the tree. The black students responded en masse. Justin Purvis, the kid who first sat under the tree, told filmmaker Jacquie Soohen: "They said, 'Y'all want to go stand under the tree?' We said, 'Yeah.' They said, 'If you go, I'll go. If you go, I'll go.' One person went, the next person went, everybody else just went."
Then the police and the district attorney showed up. Substitute teacher Michelle Rogers recounts: "District Attorney Reed Walters proceeded to tell those kids that 'I could end your lives with the stroke of a pen.'"
Indeed, the District Attorney proceeded to do as he threatened. The town's people stood by. As bad went to worse. Injustice piled onto injustice garnered the attention of a public reluctant to accept what is standard in this country. Racism is rampant.
I believe we must ask ourselves, why in America, or anywhere else on this Earth, might someone feel a need to ask for permission to sit under a tree on public property. I believe that aspect of this narrative alone is, dreadful. When a source of beauty, light, and the symbol for life is designated "For Whites Only," this says more than my heart can bear. I do not solely struggle with the age of the defendant, the criminal charges, the beating or battering of individuals, white or black. For me, the greater concern, the one that causes me to weep is what is often forgotten in news reports.
In this country, citizens are reticent to admit to their own bigotry. White citizens gleefully claim this nation is colorblind. However, if you are Black, step back. If you are Brown, get down. On the ground you go. Pick the crops, or scrub the floors, just do not sit under that tree.
Details differ each time we open our eyes, nonetheless, the saga is the same. Whites want what they want when and how they want it. If Blacks dare to threaten the delicate "balance," even if they ask permission to walk on the path Caucasians occupy, crosses are burned, nooses hung from trees, and the violence unfolds.
People are injured. Some enter prison. No matter the circumstance, whites fare far better than Blacks. On each occasion, when Blacks and whites meet, the question of fairness fills the air. Individuals and families question the fairness of a judicial decision. Slowly, over time, the word spreads; yet, the actual situation is hushed.
As I listen to discussion after discussion I am haunted by the fact that in most reports Journalists, Civil Rights Leaders, historians, literary agents, the little guy or gal on the street, or even the victims themselves dismiss what for me is most daunting. People, Black or White, Yellow or Brown, Red or Green, felt a need to ask for permission to sit under a tree.
It is as though even nature is restricted. "For Whites Only" signs settles into every nuance of life. On September 7, 2007, the story broke throughout the land. I listened to the tale on the radio as I arose that morning. I was grateful. National Public Radio shared the scandalous drama and made mention of what for me was the essence of the yarn.
[T]he black students who sat under the tree had asked the principal's permission to do so.
The account I heard told on that date, addressed more of the significant minutiae people rather discuss. How old was Mychal Bell? Might he have been tried as a juvenile? How badly was Justin Barker, a white student beaten. White students were not as severely punished as Black learners were? All this is true, pertinent, and imperative. We must thrash out each and every aspect of this case.
Yet, if we focus on the symptoms and miss the essence, I believe this scenario will be as similar occurrences in the past, a missed opportunity. The plight of the Jena Six will be over another lesson unlearned.
As the coverage increases, and I read more reports, I am reminded of what we wish to forget. Days turn to night. I watch and listen. Television Journalists clamor. Pundits shout. Social Scientists prophesize. Average people predict. Presidential candidates weigh in. Harvard Law School Professor Charles Ogletree, an advisor to the defendants in the Jena Six case speaks. He too is frustrated by what society forgets.
Collins: And our Sean Callebs is joining us now live this morning from Jena, Louisiana.While Harvard Professor Ogletree and Cable News Network Broadcaster Heidi Collins remember the specifics, they too forget what for me is most telling. Why might a young man or woman enrolled in school need to ask for permission to sit under a tree on campus. In a country with a Constitution that decries "All men are created equal," why would any of us feel compelled to request consent to place ourselves in the shade of an olive branch, an oak bough, a maple limb that quietly graces the grounds of our school. Yet, in America, Black students know what Caucasians shutter to confess. People are separate, separated, and treated as though they are not equal.So, Sean, we saw a little bit of a reaction from people who live in the area. Overall, how do they think this whole process has gone so far?
Callebs: Well, we went to a fair that was held here in Jena over the weekend and we probably tried to talk to 30 people on camera. Only one would speak with us. Many of them unsolicited would actually say to us, you know what, we didn't think that Mychal Bell should have been tried as an adult to begin with, but we're really upset at what they view as outside agitation. Meaning the media coming in, focusing attention on this, and to a big -- in a big way, the civil rights demonstrations planned here.
To show you the kind of press this is getting, this is the local paper. This is the big headline, "Jena prepares to rally." This is this morning. And if you look down here, about three column inches is the O.J. story. So, it really puts the Jena 6 story in perspective in this community. And quickly, a couple of points. We did have a chance to speak with the D.A.'s office and so far the D.A. has not re-filed charges in juvenile court and there's been no movement on a bond hearing for Mychal Bell.
Collins: All right, Sean, we're glad you're there following that one for us out of Jena, Louisiana.
Sean Callebs, thank you.
Want to talk a little bit more about this morning with Harvard Law School Professor Charles Ogletree. He's an advisor to the defendants in the Jena 6 case.
Thanks for being with us, Mr. Ogletree.
We know there's a hearing going on right now, on whether or not the judge in this case should actually recuse himself. Your thoughts on that.
Charles Ogletree, Harvard Law School: Well, there are a lot of reasons the judge should recuse himself. And this criminal justice case has been a colossal failure of justice for these young men. The judge has made mistakes in allowing the charges to go forward. Having this man in jail since last year, Mychal Bell. And now the appeals court's involved in it.
So this is a case that was waiting to have some fresh air and publicity. I think now it's very likely this D.A. will try to re- bring these charges. And I hope it means that these other young men will be tried as they should be tried, a schoolyard brawl with a suspension, not federal -- not serious felony charges.
Collins: You do think it's unlikely that D.A. Walters will move forward?
Ogletree: One of the problems that the D.A. in this case has been pointing fingers at these young black men since the schoolyard incidents. We forget there were nooses hung in a tree. We forget an African-American male in that community was hit on the head with a beer bottle. We forget that a gun was drawn on one of these young men.
There's a whole series of failures of the system. And I think the district attorney is being watched nationally. The judge is being watched nationally. Some good lawyers are being brought into the case now. And I hope that these young men will not only avoid criminal charges, but they'll be back in school before this year is out.
Collins: I don't think everybody forgets about the way that this whole case started, certainly with the nooses.
But let me ask you this, your defendant not being tried in an adult court now, possibly as we've said, going to juvenile court system, how will that change things for him?
Ogletree: Well, it will change dramatically. First of all, the lawyer who represented him before did a poor job of challenging the government's evidence. Didn't call any witnesses. Didn't investigate the case. And now, hopefully, a judge, a juvenile court judge, will be able to listen to the evidence dispassionately, hear Mychal Bell's defense and come back with the judgment of not responsible in the juvenile terms. So I think it's going to make a huge difference.
But the most important thing is that he should be released.
There's no reason he should be in jail now having been found not guilty not guilty of some charges, having had some reversed, and facing no charges right now. I think he should be released. And that might change the whole method of this case as well.
Collins: You know, you have to wonder as you watch sort of the process and the way that this story developed, if there was any responsibility that should have been placed on the adults in this case. The adults at the school. People in the community to help sort of diffuse tensions between the kids at the school before it got to this point.
Ogletree: Well, I think Jena never imagined that this case would have the national, international attention it has generated. They never imagined that you'd see civil rights leader, national press coming and watching. And if you look at the school board, which revoked -- reversed the principal's decision to punish those who hung nooses in the tree, if you look at the apathy of the community when these black kids complained about being treated differently, adults played a significant role.
And adults are going to have to cure it.
If they don't think there's a problem of race in Jena, they're not living in the 21st century. And I think hopefully the good news is that black and white families will come together, live together and they'll be a positive result after this case is resolved, hopefully in the next couple of months.
Collins: Yes, we certainly hope so. All right. We'll continue to follow this story as always right here on CNN.
Charles Ogletree of Harvard Law School, thanks for your time this morning.
Ogletree: Thank you.
African Americans, Negroes are regarded as inferior. They are wanted only to serve the needs of those that think them selves supreme. We have not progressed much beyond the days of Reconstruction.
As the citizens of Jena prepare for trial and for a protest, Confederate flags fly. Symbols of support for slavery fill the air. Authentic conversation is stifled. We wish to think that there has been a change. Some muse drastic measures have been taken. Today, Americas Black citizens are free. In a democracy, we question justice and work for civil liberties. However, as long as a Black person, man, woman, or child senses he or she must seek approval to sit and enjoy the serenity of a tree, nothing has changed. Nothing will. Circumstances may be different. The dynamics are not. When Black congregate where whites wish to be the principle is fight or flight.
References to Racism, Jena Six . . .
Posted by Betsy L. Angert on September 19, 2007 at 10:30 PM in Americana, Being Black in America, Black History, Past/Present, Black Men, Civil Rights, Communities, Looking at Life, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
