COVER -> RECOMMENDED DAILY REQUIREMENT
A TIGHT END GAME - I read Radio Raheem's article, "A Just Cause", with a bit of sadness. I felt bad for his (in my opinion) limited insight into the "layering", diversity and inner group divisions among both Afro-American and non-Afro-American peoples, Robert Jensen's patronizing (In My Humble Opinion) apology for his "white privilege", and the "two wrongs will make it right" fix Radio R advocates as a cure for the disparities in opportunities, between Afro-American and non-Afro-American persons.
One of things that seems to be a consistent in human nature, among ALL races, is the urge to attack people at the very lowest level, a level they can't escape from. When I was a kid, we had a quip that really brought this home,"I'm fat, and you're ugly - but I can go on a diet".
Hard as it may be for some people to admit, but regardless of whether you consider yourself part of the broad "Black" group, the broad "White" group" or possibly part of one of the "Other" groups (which some folks float in and out of depending on how advantageous it might be, at the time,) you probably have made some less-than-nice mental classifications of other people in and out of your group.
 |
An observation I made back in elementary school (in a district that is almost evenly divided between "white" and "black") was:
if two "black" people of vastly different skin tone got into an argument, quite commonly the "cut" of "you act like a white motherfucker 'cause you look like one" would come into play. Absent a discernable "darkness" issue to use, the next step down would be to go for body build (fat, skinny, tall, short, "nappy haired", "peanut-headed", "neck-less",etc.) followed by lifestyle, family, etc. and, of course, "Your Momma" jokes.
"White" people have their own ethnic layers they use as an insult or discrimination starting point, e.g.:
- "Dago/Whop",
- "Pollack",
- "Limey/Paddy",
- "Spic/Wet-back",
- "Kraut",
- "Chink/Jap",
- "Camel-Jockey".
And, in the same fashion as "blacks", "whites" will kick in the body qualifiers to draw a more distinct line between YOU and ME- and YOU SUCK! And lest we forget, there are the time (and battle)-tested religious, sexual and age discriminations that can be made.
I chalk most of this up to low self-esteem, on the part of ALL OF US; it validates that there are other's like us and gives us a perceived refuge against the hurts others have and will throw at us.
Truth is, at the most basic level, each of us is on our own, each of us has entertained unrealistic feelings of superiority over others - "white" folks haven't cornered the market on THAT.
"White privilege" was apologized for by Robert Jensen in the article Radio Raheem linked us to. My problem with Mr. Jensen's take on this situation, which I by no means deny exists, is: he's apologizing for a passive, arbitrary occurrence.
I hope he doesn't run around apologizing to everyone who was born taller, smaller, richer, poorer, lighter or darker than he. Now, if he has used his "whiteness" (which will be used against him under some circumstances) to actively secure unearned advantages, then yes, he should feel like a bit of a shit.
I submit that being aware of the inequities and working to avoid the apparently human temptation to destroy that which is not exactly like oneself, would be a more balanced approach. If he wants to go one step further in that direction, he could get involved in programs and activities that will help diminish the affects of less human(e) treatment of individuals - of all colors.
Why Radio decided that "white privilege" and slavery are naturally tied together escapes me: one is sad history (like most history), carried out by, and against, people who are long gone and dead; "white privilege" is a current, egregious status quo issue, which is difficult for high-minded "whites" to extricate themselves from.
Then he suggests settling things with violence: now THAT will get things moving - in reverse.
Reparations. I know, Radio didn't come right out and use that word, but that is what he was advocating. I see this proposed "fix" as having some major drawbacks.
First, how would "blackness" be determined? Example: I have a neighbor that is a very light-skinned "Afro-American" (so light that I initially thought that maybe she was American Indian (high-cheekbones, straight dark hair), and her husband is 100% English (sandy blond, blue eyes) - her son is the image of his father, so will he be "in" or "out" on this reparation plan?
I can just imagine this kid chastising his mom for marrying someone non-black, "costing" him to miss out on a free college education.
"Weighing" individuals' degrees of "blackness" wouldn't do much for strengthening the black community - just more government sanctified classification of people.
Secondly, how will we determine who should pay for the past discrimination? Sure, some family lines, businesses and other entities could be identified, but many "non-blacks/whites" would be unfairly saddled with this debt. Would a first-generation American like multi-millionaire Mike Ilich (owner of Little Caesar's Pizza and the Red Wings) have to pay the same amount as my buddy Pete, another first-generation American employed as an assembly line worker with General Motors?
The End Game. I like the idea of people making their presence uncomfortable to our lawmakers, so that strong laws would be put in place to protect people from discrimination. And yes, many "whites" have got a serious "Big Man" complex, which is mirrored in the "Small-Man/Victim" complex displayed by many "blacks". 400+ years of bad history and dysfunctional behaviour is hard to correct. I think the idea of a "final payoff" would be the worst kind of "play" black activists could possibly make: the absolution would be final, and "the debt" would cease to accumulate interest. End of Game.
RDR RECOMMENDED SITE OF THE DAY: The Geeky types out there with a bit of twisted sense of humor will get a kick out of the Bastard Operator from Hell site. Enjoy!
