Race, Religion, and Politics

Hopelessness

Tue, 07 Aug 2012 14:25:00 -0400

… Race Matters [was] written by Cornel West back in 1993. West’s analysis of the state of American politics was so spot-on that it still applies today, go figure. I’m going to disregard how discouraging I find the fact that liberals and conservatives are still making the same arguments twenty years later. West spends his first chapter addressing another issue that also persists today.

West’s first chapter is entitled “Nihilism in Black America,” and it covers precisely that. To put it succinctly, blacks have had to deal with nihilism since first arriving in the New World and are as in danger of succumbing to it now as ever before, if not moreso.

I’m aware of the feeling of black hopelessness; it has persistantly creeped around the periphery of my life. In my immediate family, hope is strong. Hope got my parents a brick home and their son into college. Hope, hopefully, will land me a job straight out of college. But at the same time, my grandparents’ neighborhood has steadily declined since my mother lived there, affecting the young family members still raised there. Politicians still avoid talking about these issues. Enough has remained the same that growing up in the 90s and into the new millenium, I still heard the sentiment that the white man doesn’t want the black man to have anything.

What West does is provide a reason for this hopelessness. Yes, “racism” still exists, but in a more abstract way. When blacks complain about being harassed by cops or overlooked by taxi drivers, whites respond by bringing up all the whites that don’t exhibit such behavior, as if this somehow erases the racism that was still present in the initial experience. Blaming the white man was easier when racism was not only systematic, but explicit; it was written in textbooks, preached in churches, and displayed on street corners. Now, when even conservatives emphasize the adoption of colorblind professional and educational practices, pinpointing the problem is more elusive. Blacks still see it, but it’s much more difficult to articulate it, and even more difficult to organize against it.

The social bonds that have held together black communities are losing strength. When blacks had no where else they could turn, they could rely on the church as an escape from the social hierarchy forced upon their daily lives. Now, blacks have other outlets. With white kids all over the country immitating Jay-Z and idolizing Michael Jordan while their parents elect Barack Obama, blacks have come to expect a cetain degree of racial tolerance in most places that they go. The problem comes in talking about the places that they can’t. They still exist, but now that the places black people can’t go are outnumbered by the places that they can, there lacks a single institution that can reach and organize black people, and there isn’t a clear institution to organize them against. The movement for civil rights has become diluted ever since equal rights became something that most white Americans hold in high esteem. Whites defined what equality meant to them, and the country has been moving towards that ever since.

Yet despite how similar the definition of equality may be, the experience remains different. The problem is, how? And after that, why?

This is where West’s analysis comes in. He describes the way capitalism has altered American values and values within the black community. As social bonds have weakened, they have been replaced by an increasingly relentless wave of marketing. But the values of love, patience, and caring are not values pushed in the marketplace. Conservatives are right in pointing out a deficit of values in parts of the black community. Where they drop the ball is that they refuse to acknowledge why. Liberals are at least right in wanting to provide the economic programs and incentives necessary to begin to alleviate the problem, but they, too, skirt around the root cause.

Black America isn’t suffering solely because it is disproportionately poor or adversely affected by prison, drugs, and discrimination. Black America is losing hope because it exists within a country that thinks its eyes are wide open and refuses to open its eyes wider. Broader America refuses to see that it still makes blacks feel not that they are afflicted by problems, but that they remain the problem. America still has yet to view all Americans as Americans and to help one another as such.

- The Thought Painter

This piece has been edited for timeliness since its original posting. The piece can be read in its entirety by following the link.

If I see one more thing that equates being gay and being black I will set something on fire.

Mon, 30 Apr 2012 12:40:00 -0400

Here’s the thing mainstream gay movement, by doing this you’re erasing me. You’re pretending that queer black people don’t exist just to make your point. And then you can subsequently blame the black community for any pro-gay legislation failing.

How about instead of doing this (AGAIN) find more ways to make queer people of color visible in your mainstream conversations as well as just fucking including us! Don’t just use black people as your prop, we’re people. Also for your information there were many queer people of color in the civil rights movement. So take your fucking water fountain advertisement and go away. You’re making it harder for black queer people to live comfortably.

- Micky Alexandria

White Guilt

Thu, 01 Mar 2012 20:21:43 -0500

White Guilt:

I have a friend who identifies as a strong conservative. Yesterday, in defense against something I said, he claimed that he does not and will not feel white guilt. His primary lines of defense were that he has done nothing wrong and that his ancestors, the Irish, were treated worse than slaves.

I will address the latter first, since it can be addressed relatively succinctly. Part of American political and social discourse has been over acknowledging how bad blacks have been treated and holding up false dichotomy where whites have been spoiled throughout history and blacks have always found themselves at the bottom of the totem pole. History is never that simple. As my friend recalled, there were jobs that Irish immigrants were asked to do because the work was considered too dangerous for slave labor, which was expensive to sustain and replace. However, this does not amount of worse treatment than slaves, because while the jobs may have been awful, the Irish were not stripped of their status of being “free” men. Their English peers may have portrayed the them as ape-like and assaulted their social character, but they did not codify this difference into law.

My friend is able to recall his Irish heritage, which I can not do. Slavery was a process that ripped Africans from their homes, killed untold millions on the passage over (a degree of genocide that no other American immigrant group was forced to experience), replaced their language and religion, and deprived them of their ancestry. The idea of having and raising a family was not a given, but a form of resistance, and no matter how poorly any other immigrants were treated — and they were, undoubtably, treated pretty badly — they did not have to fight just to get their peers to acknowledge that they had families and their own family names. Only Native Americans have been more wrongfully treated than African Americans deliberately, consistently, and systematically over the course of American history.

This friend also raised the point that whites get all the credit for slavery, when the Africans were enslaving themselves. This is true, as slavery existed in most parts of the world in one form or another. Europeans generally did not hunt down Africans and rip them from their homes themselves. They offered African leaders clear incentive to do it for them. They flooded African societies with new technologies and economies that turned slavery from a result of war to an economic stimulant. Slavery was no longer a byproduct of war, but a primary tactic. A leader could reduce his enemies’ numbers while growing his own economy and better arming himself for future battles. Europeans turned a pre-existing system of slavery into substantially larger slave trade, one that took Africans from a culture they were familiar with to an entirely new world, if they were “fortunate” enough to survive the journey. This sytem was established long before Americans became involved, but we actively engaged in the system and partook in it after the British had lost their stomach for such things.

Okay, that was succint. Now to move on to the former point, that my friend has personally done nothing wrong. This is true, he never enslaved a black person, and judging by his treatment of me, he doesn’t view people of other racial backgrounds as inferior. This is good. Does this mean that he should not feel guilty for the sins of his fathers? Well, yes and no (as a humanities major, I’ve found that to be the answer to every question).

First, I clearly do not intend to incriminate him personally when I express any need for white guilt. He was not alive when slavery was practiced, nor does he live in a region that practiced slavery. Even if I don’t refer to his ancestry as white and focus on it primarily as Irish, the Irish do not escape from the race debate clean. They may have been demonized and caricatured in similar ways to Africans (to the point that before slavery became a hardened American institution, they were on comparable ground), but they did not view blacks as their equals. They despised blacks, with whom they had to compete with the same low level jobs. And as the Irish gradually became accepted as white, they did not fight to bring blacks up the social ladder with them. They were happy to beat down on blacks from their new higher vantage point.

Okay, so I’ve re-established that everyone that ever existed in American history was racist (that may be hyperbolic, but work with me here). Should my friend now feel guilt? Well, I think guilt is the wrong word, but it is a powerful force. Lets explore this.

I’m American. More specifically, I’m African American. For most of my country’s history, my ethnicity’s biggest threat came not from outside the country, but from within. While conservatives and liberals alike feared communists, Koreans feared the Japanese, Jews feared Germans — and later, Palestinians feared Jews, African Americans primarily feared their fellow Americans. Until modern times, African Americans had more to gain from an outside force toppling their white oppressors than maintaining the status quo (and yet they still fought in every major American war). When I look over a history book, for most of its pages, my enemy lies at home.

Still, I’m American, and on the international stage, I identify as such. Thus, I feel badly about how Americans treated Native Americans, the Mexicans during the Mexican American war, immigrants at home, the Japanese during World War II, Arabs in the Middle East, and, really, what feels just about every corner of the world. I feel this way, even though during most of these time periods, people of my race had no say in how any of this was done and generally saw these people as shared victims of the white man. I feel this way because as an American today, I want to strive to make this world a better place, to be aware of and to work to repair the damage our country has done in parts of the world, and the damage it continues to do. Some people may read this and think I’m just another apologetic liberal who refuses to acknowledge the good America does in the world, but that simply isn’t the case. In absolute dollars, America is the most generous nation in the world when it comes to foreign aid, and as our honorable soldiers have just recently displayed in their daring rescue of Iranians captured by pirates, we’re even willing to help those who nationally may be closer to enemies than allies. But America doesn’t need to be reminded of the good we do in the world, and we don’t make foreign policy blunders on account of our being too humble. We improve ourselves by remembering and acknowleding that we do make mistakes and how we’ve made them. Besides, focusing on American successes is irrelevant to my larger point in this post.

I don’t want whites to walk around feeling like they owe all other racial or ethnic groups a persistent apology. But just as America can improve its image abroad by remembering and acknowledging what it’s done, so too can white people improve their image domestically (something every other group in America can also do, but stay focused here). Racial affirmative action isn’t reverse racism, it’s an attempt to right a past wrong. Still, it isn’t perfect, but a better way to fix it is to try economic affirmative action, rather than strip affirmative action altogether. To pretend we’re all on the same playing field spits in the face of the reality that just 30 - 40 years ago, we could not even attend the same schools. It ignores the reality that there is no way that in just 30 - 40 years, our country has overcome centuries of systematic discrimination, oppression, and repression. It masks just how many whites also stand to fall between the cracks and how no one stands to gain by letting those who always had the resources to continue to invest the resources in their future generations, while those without have to struggle to catch up.

Our country has to tackle many complex issues in the days and years ahead, issues that encompass economic, social, political, geographical, and, yes, racial factors. To forget the effect any of these factors has makes tackling those complex issues all the more difficult.

And as to my friend, this post was not meant to demonize him in anyway (I am referring to him as my friend, after all — but then again, so do politicians, but that’s besides the point). I enjoy my conversations with him, because they stir this degree of thought within me. There was much that I did not find the words to say as I was talking to him yesterday, and I think it would be a waste not to articulate them somehow. This is less about wanting to change what he believes and more about making sure that I know what I believe.

So with that said, is there a place for white guilt? Yes and no. And I’m sure my professors would be absolutely proud.

- The Thought Painter

Is Democracy the End, or Just the Beginning?

Fri, 10 Feb 2012 21:24:49 -0500

Is Democracy the End, or Just the Beginning?:

Today, a good friend of mine and fellow member of the tribe wrote a blog post (http://blogs.wm.edu/2012/02/10/the-evolution-of-democracy/) commenting on Fukuyama’s assertion that, in 1989, liberal democracy had reigned supreme over communism and that there would no longer be a need for new innovative political thought. Teshima asks whether democracy really is the pinnacle of human political thought and whether we will continue to innovate governance, which he suggests that we should. I agree, only I disagree with his primary assumption, that the United States and other liberal democracies are already representative of what democracy can and/or should be.

Teshima asserts that American politicians are guilty of putting their parties over their constituencies. The problem goes deeper than that. When Congress bailed out the banks, it was acting in its constituents’ best interests. After all, many people and the economy would have suffered greatly had the banks that were too big to fail actually failed. Admittedly, they rush to the aid of banks much faster than they help underwater homeowners, whom they don’t know how to help without “rewarding failure,” and whom lack the money to have the political influence that banks have (if they did, they wouldn’t be underwater in the first place, but that’s by the by). Regardless, Congress recently formed a settlement with a handful of major banks that is intended to help homeowners over the next few years (even though the banks still come out of this agreement better than homeowners do). Neither party likes to the banks (in public, anyway), but they have worked with them in attempts to best benefit their constituents.

Thanks to consistent and shameful gerrymandering, representatives in the House have to choose less and less between representing their constituents and their parties, because they have so hand-selected their constituents that their re-elections are guaranteed, for their districts are drawn to include the most partisan assortment of voters possibe.

So what we have here is a situation not where Congress blatantly ignores its constituents (after all, voters tend to approve of their representatives even while disapproving of Congress as a whole). Instead, we have a situation where Congress disproportionately represents the interests of those with the most money (hence the rise of the Occupy Wall Street movement) and districts drawn in such a way that politicians are encouraged to be as partisan as possible to get re-elected. The problem goes beyond politicians; we have a political climate so toxic that moderate governance is punished. Think back to 2010, when moderate Republicans were tripped at the ankles so that candidates with “purer” ideologies could take their place. We filled the House with politicians we knew would not compromise, and as a result, we have even worse gridlock than there was before. We are experiencing one of the primary problems of representative government; we find ourselves with exacty the kind of governance we deserve.

There is also another problem with representative governance: far too often, only the winners get represented. Republicans can disregard the desires and opinions of LGBT voters, because they know they have already forfeited the LGBT vote to the Democrats. The same can be said for the black vote and, increasingly, the immigration vote. If a candidate can get into office without their support, then those groups aren’t their constituents, so they could care less if their interests aren’t represented. This is a process that actually increases the closer to a pure democracy a country becomes. There is a reason the United States isn’t a pure democracy: The minority need protection from the majority.

Neither the United States nor any other liberal democracy is purely democratic. The United States is a republic, with institutions such as the Senate, the Supreme Court, and the Electoral College designed to be non-democratic by nature. Many states still use caucuses to nominate candidates, a non-democratic process that discriminates against voters who can’t take enough time away from work or children to attend a caucus. In a pure democracy, George W. Bush would not have been president. Before we can gauge whether democracy is as far as human governance can go, we must first see if we will ever get that far. Or at least close.

Perhaps that point has already come and gone. In engaging the question, we shine light on democracy’s best kept secret — it was never perfect to begin with. We known for a long time now that democracy is not the pinnacle of human governance, and we’re spent hundreds of years trying to improve on what the world increasingly agrees was a solid foundation.

So let the innovating continue.

- The Thought Painter

My cousin’s late grandfather, 2nd Lt. Vashon Eagleson, was...

Sun, 22 Jan 2012 22:32:00 -0500

My cousin’s late grandfather, 2nd Lt. Vashon Eagleson, was a Tuskegee Airman. I never got the change to met him, but in honor of the film Red Tails (in theaters now) I’d like to pay tribute to him as well as the other African American men and women who fought to make a difference during this time period when they weren’t seen as good enough.

"I am convinced that if we are to get on the right side of the world revolution, we as a nation must..."

Mon, 16 Jan 2012 18:15:04 -0500

““I am convinced that if we are to get on the right side of the world revolution, we as a nation must undergo a radical revolution of values. We must rapidly begin the shift from a thing-oriented society to a person-oriented society. When machines and computers, profit motives and property rights are considered more important than people, the giant triplets of racism, materialism, and militarism are incapable of being conquered.””

- MLK on the radical challenge presented by growing materialism

(via rebelapplause)

knowhomo: LGBTQ* People You Should Know Bayard Rustin - Dr....

Mon, 16 Jan 2012 18:13:54 -0500

knowhomo:

LGBTQ* People You Should Know

Bayard Rustin - Dr. Martin Luther King Jr’s strategist and adviser. Rustin, along with King, runs and organizes the largest non-violent protest in the United States of America.

Rustin was also openly gay.

(video from the documentary OUT OF THE PAST)

Franchesca addressing, “Shit White Girls Say… to...

Sat, 14 Jan 2012 22:17:12 -0500

Franchesca addressing, “Shit White Girls Say… to Black Girls” On Anderson.

Shit People Say

Sat, 14 Jan 2012 22:15:22 -0500

Recently there has been an ongoing Youtube trend, “Shit (insert type of person here) Say,” and the most famous of the aforementioned trend is the “Shit White Girls Say to Black Girls” video that I posted on this site not too long ago; the same video that created a heated discussion on my friend’s Facebook page.

Let me first begin by saying I loved this video. I’ve watched many of the different videos that went along with this trend but I related to this one the most. I did not form a monolithic opinion of all white people because of this one video, (like many of the Youtube comments seemed to indicate) I did however reflect on my life and the many statements similar to the ones in the video that I’ve heard. One as recent as today. I had to explain concepts of black hair to a co-worker. I have no problem with explaining the ideas I have or cultural traits/actions that I personally engage in, however I would just appreciate if the topic is not introduced to me like I’m an art or zoo exhibit being scrutinized, poked and prodded. I’m one person, I do not represent the black race and I simply can not (that is physically impossible).

The Youtuber responsible for this video, Chescaleigh, was invited to the Anderson Cooper show because of all the controversy surrounding her now popular video. The people offended who were personally offended by her video or called it racist missed the point entirely. It’s satire, it’s not pointing to YOU specifically. It’s reflecting on her personal experiences with white women who have made ignorant (NOT RACIST) statements to her in the past. The one woman who claimed that the video is racist because it mentioned black and white puzzled me. Mentioning race and talking about race does not equal racism. If this was a white woman making a video about things black girls say there would be little horror or outcry from the overall white community, they wouldn’t care. Just like there was no nation-wide outcry for the “Shit Black Girls Say” video as racist in their eyes. People of color are often seen in the media in one monolithic sense, a set of stereotypes that are often played and remade and updated. So when words like “ghetto” are used as synonymous with bad or dirty, you are then painting people of color with that image because they are often pictured as those in lower income areas. See how that can be problematic? There can be movies and television shows and jokes about ghettos and “ghetto” people, but where is that same urgency when the millions of people in poverty continue to stay in poverty? There’s needs to be an equal amount of concern about ensuring that neighborhoods stay safe and up to date and have the resources they needs to provide quality education to the children who live there.

- Micky Alexandria

Creating a Better World

Mon, 09 Jan 2012 22:10:00 -0500

Creating a Better World:

I just finished reading The Spirit Level by Kate Pickett and Richard Wilkinson, and I won’t hesitate to call it one of the best books I have ever read. I deeply believe that its message about how greater equality improves most of society is one that everyone should be exposed to.

After reading the book, there are several priorities that I never want to forget. First and foremost, money and material possessions are not the most important things in life. If I don’t end up owning a large house with multiple vehicles and expensive clothing, I should not see myself as a failure. It’s easy to qualify this statement by saying, “If I don’t have these things, but I have a loving family and a job that I enjoy, then I will have done fine with my life,” but that’s not going far enough. There is no need for me to qualify it, I should not live my life feeling that how much I make or how much I buy have any impact on how well I’ve done in life. Yes, making money makes other achieving goals easier, but I never want to forget that money is only a means to an end, not an end in itself.

Furthermore, my actions need to reflect what I believe. On a personal level, I shouldn’t let my financial situation stress me out when my day to day life is going quite well. I get by just fine with or without the amount of money I hoped to have available, and I have friends and family willing to help if I need it. These social relationships are more important than material wealth.

On a broader level, I shouldn’t sit around wishing that our society was one built upon fair trade, small businesses, and employee-owned companies when there are businesses of this type or size already in existance that I could support. I can’t put all of my money into the hands of greedy corporations and then wonder why our economy is so dictated by profit driven, loophole pursuing, exploitative, and harmful corporate policies.

I can bluntly say that I love capitalism. I love to shop, and I make no apologies for that. In wanting to reduce my carbon footprint, shopping is not something I want to compromise on. I love the feeling of acquiring new things, supporting those who make things I like available, and giving to others things I no longer want. I love touchscreens, instant communication, and fast CPUs. I love Android, Wiimotes, and Netflix. I love the ever-changing landscape of video games that market forces influence, and as an independent author, I love the possibility of someday making a living from my own imagination.

But these passions do not mean that I must accept the market as it is. CEOs do not need to make hundred times more than their employees to inspire innovation and bring goods to market. Good people in third world countries need not be exploited so that I can save a few dollars shopping at one store over another. Pollutants need not be released into the air while companies ship goods between countries in order to best avoid and manipulate tax policies. My love of shopping and participating in the marketplace does not mean I must accept these abuses. They are not inherently part of the system, and I can do something about it.

The best way for me to impact society is not (solely) by how I vote or what I profess, but by how I live my life, and I can live it in a way that supports the kind of future I want to see. I may not be able to change the world, but I can change my world. I can make it one where I do my best to be fair to others and to support those who are trying their best to do the same.

- The Thought Painter

Response to, "Shit White Girls Say... to Black Girls" on my Facebook.

Fri, 06 Jan 2012 00:14:00 -0500

Micky Alexandria: "Why isn't there a white entertainment television?" lol oh you mean EVERY channel lmao
Marli: How do you REALLY feel?
Micky Alexandria: lmao, people act like BET is so amazing, it's annoying as hell. There are about 10,000 ways to make that nonsense better. Lesson #1 for television every rapper, rapper's girlfriend, housewife, mob wife, basketball/baseball/what the fuck ever sport wife does NOT need a reality show -_____-
Julius: LMBO! Yo tell me why I used to hear some of this stuff when I was around my sis and one of her white friends!
Dan: In all fairness to the media, Micole, networks and advertisers consistently broadcast programs and ads with pretty diverse casts. If media that doesn't explicitly cater to non-whites can be thought of as white, I think that only makes sense insofar that they demonstrate the intense desire on the part of whites to accommodate those unlike ourselves- something for which we rarely seem to get credit.
Micky Alexandria: Maybe but just because a cast is diverse that does not guarantee well rounded characters or storylines that don't rely on stereotypical and/or problematic information about different ethnic groups. Even people of color who are the most well known actors/actresses are so often typecast into being a particular brand of "black" or "hispanic" or "asian" It often operates in extremes, either they are cast as characters who make no mention of their race and usually remain the sole minority of the film/tv show or they are characters who place an over emphasis on race resorting to stereotypes, as well as projecting misinformation to those watching. Of course everything isn't like this, but it happens enough to become a pattern.
Dan: Regardless of whether or not this is the case, I don't think this makes media other than BET, Ebony, and the like "white entertainment television." Most media is meant for everyone, some of it is meant for specific groups, but little to none is ever meant just for whites.
Julius: I agree with your point Dan but only to an extent, because even though shows typically arent mean for just white people they unfortunately cater to white people to make them feel more comfortable. For example if you look at relationships on t.v. either the non-white person is with someone of their own color or with someone white, you hardly ever see anyone of different races dating on t.v. unless one of them is white which I believe sends out a negative message to people.
Micky Alexandria: Yes good point Julius, and I'd also like to point out another example, commercials. Just watching commercials for 30 minutes it can be clearly shown who the target audience is -- the straight white/middle class range. Of course there are occasional commercials that specifically target people of color, but a good majority of the time when people of color are shown they are of a lighter skin tone/straighter hair/thin person because that ties more into the "acceptable" range for the target audience. This is even worse with people in the LGBT community, practically never seen in a commercial and if they are it'll probably be a white couple.
Dan: While I see a fair amount of interracial couples on TV, Julius, I don't see how that comes from a desire to cater to whites. Also Micky, as long as I see plenty of shows on major networks geared towards specific races, while whole networks explicitly target certain races, genders, and sexual orientations, I can't agree with the idea that any mainstream media can be considered "white."
Micky Alexandria: Because Julius is just trying to show that the majority of the time interracial couple equals white person + "other". And while this is fine, the problem comes when that is the main example of interracial couples seen in mainstream media. You have the occasional black/hispanic pairing, but other than that it's usually white/other. And some shows are geared towards certain races/sexual orientations/genders but you then have to look at what the message of those shows sends out. Is it putting out a negative view of these groups? Just having people of color/other orientations/women there doesn't solve the problem. And also the reason certain networks were created were because those segments of people were being ignored or marginalized in mainstream media. And even with these separate network, every groups is not equally or accurately represented.
Julius: Ok two points what makes you think Dan that networks like BET are geared towards certain races besides the name? If you believe that shows on other stations are for everyone what makes BET any different its not as thought they say that people of other races cant watch thier shows so what about it makes it seem that it is race specific? They show people of other color on there so by your definition BET doesnt cater to just one race right? And to answer your question showing things like that make it seem like whites are the golden race as if you arent gonna date your own race then the only other race you should consider are whites.

An interesting parody of actual statements that many black women...

Fri, 06 Jan 2012 00:08:58 -0500

An interesting parody of actual statements that many black women hear, I know I’ve heard a few.

-Micky Alexandria

My Faith

Thu, 05 Jan 2012 11:20:34 -0500

My Faith:

… while perusing through Google’s new Currents app (which I love), I stumbled across an article in The Root entitled “I Didn’t Lose Faith. I Just Don’t Have It” (http://www.theroot.com/views/i-didnt-lose-faith-i-just-dont-have-it) by Harvard Professor Tommie Shelbie. The article briefly describes Shelbie’s journey into and out of believing in a Christian God. He then lays out a brief argument for why he became an athiest and then described the reaction he received from his family members.

I’m happy to have found this article for a number of reasons: I can relate with Shelbie’s religious experience; I’m an atheist in a society that professes general belief in a god; and I’m an African American, part of a disproportionately Christian segment of that society. I like Shelbie’s piece not because it lays out a thorough argument for why all religions are false, but because it reflects my own desire to be accepted by those who see religion as the one and only way to live, without being pitied or shamed in the process.

Like Shelbie, I acknowledge that faith is what gives my parents strength, and I have no desire to strip them of their faith. Actually, I have no desire to strip anyone of their faith. All I want is a society, community, and family where my opinions on God, gods, and faith are respected in spite of disagreement.

With that said, do I have faith? Yes. I, too, have faith that everything will work itself out, that I will find a job after graduation, that my girlfriend and I will someday get married, that people will enjoy my book, that I will pass this current wave of exams, and that my relationships with friends and family will only improve as I get older. I don’t need an underlying belief in the existance of a god pulling all the strings to give me the strength and encouragement to get through each day, but if you draw comfort from that idea, that’s perfectly fine by me.

What matters to me is not what motivates you to be a good person but that you’re motivated to be a good person. I want to see all of us motivated to be the best that we can be.

- The Thought Painter

This piece has been edited for timeliness since its original posting. The piece can be read in its entirety by following the link.

Giving Back

Sun, 01 Jan 2012 20:57:00 -0500

Giving Back:

An article in … The Nation, “Austerity vs. Accountability” (http://www.thenation.com/article/164079/ows-supercommittee-accountability-not-austerity), mentions a proposal by Representative Jan Schakowsky to tax millionaires at 45% and billionaires at 49%. Given the nature of American politics, I don’t see this plan getting anywhere, and I find that to be quite sad. I have regularly told friends that were I a millionaire, I would gladly pay 50%, or even 70%, in taxes. My parents raised me on what could only politely be considered a lower middle class income, and I would feel like a failure if I was not able to support a family with $300,000.

I would not be at the College of William and Mary were it not for the generosity of others. As Bill Clinton said during his birthday celebration … “I never ever believed I was born in a log cabin I built myself.” All of us are where we are because of those around us and those that came before us, and if I ever find myself a millionaire taxed at 45%, I would be honored to be able to give back so much to the country that has given me the opportunities that it has.

- The Thought Painter

This piece has been edited for timeliness since its original posting. The piece can be read in its entirety by following the link.

The Race Card

Sat, 31 Dec 2011 20:54:00 -0500

The Race Card:

The Autobiography of Malcolm X … I feel should be among the must-read books for anyone seeking a thorough understanding of 20th century America. Much of the insight Malcolm X offers is simply remarkable.

With that said, I found it especially thought-provoking when trying to relate the text to the 21st century. Why is it that I can relate so easily to much of what Malcolm X said when so much has changed?

I can’t simply say that this is because racism still exists. Such a trite explanation doesn’t do justice to those who feel discriminated against and those accused of doing the discriminating. I most certainly cannot say that the devil is the white man, given that I read the book now only because it was assigned to me by a white professor, and I will be discussing it in a class filled predominantly with white students — most, if not all, of whom will be working to defend Malcolm X’s train of thought. I cannot honestly state that white people, as a whole, are racists, when most of the nice people I have encountered in my lifetime have been white.

Why, then, do Malcolm X’s words resonate so well? This is largely because there are so many topics where I find it’s difficult for me to articulate a feeling to white friends for whom non-white friends require no-explanation. For example, I have a co-worker whom I have much in common with. We both come from rural counties, which is not the norm in a university such as ours. However, he’s white and happens to be a conservative. His favorite Republican candidate happens to be Herman Cain, and when he asked me why I found Herman Cain offensive, I found myself fumbling over words, whereas with my non-white friends, the question doesn’t even have to be asked. Most inherently understand why Herman Cain is offensive. They are offended by him their selves.

The same holds true for issues of how to spend tax dollars. I wouldn’t call most young conservatives today racists. Their politics may feel that way, but my day-to-day interactions with them have shown otherwise. Yet at the same time, our differences in politics remains heavily coded by race. Many of them see social programs as unfair uses of tax dollars, whereas people like me see them as the best use of our tax dollars. I’d much rather see our tax dollars feed the hungry than kill foreigners or prisoners. And given that I come from a low-income family, I know how difficult things would be were it not for government benefits (and I’m not referring to welfare, but to all the other tax deductions and benefits that are woven into our government policy, such as the EITC). The rhetoric of wealth being a result of hard work holds no appeal to me, for my father has worked all of my life and remained unable to pay for my college. The hardest working people, working the most unpleasant of jobs, often make the least amount of money. The idea that hard work is financially rewarded is a myth, something disproportionately understood by minorities whom have been systematically barred from the higher paying jobs. Why should we trust the private sector as the solution to our problems when for most of American history, the private economy has served mainly to exploit us to make someone else rich?

These are questions that many conservatives don’t ask themselves, not because they’re racists, but because their histories have been on the better end of this arrangement. They often see race as an issue that should be made irrelevant (opposing affirmative action, leaving race off college applications) in the name of fairness. I cannot do this, because when race has been used as a tool to deny my ancestors wealth, to completely ignore race now would leave the inheritors of that wealth with an inherent advantage. To disregard race now, as much as I can agree with the sentiment, would only aggravate the problem.

These nuances I’m trying to get at are not clean cut issues. As in, they do not evenly hug any ideological line. It’s easy to provide examples of differences with conservative whites, but much remains the case with liberal whites as well. The whites most criticized in Malcolm X were northern whites, for he argued that their racism was even more harmful. I would call today’s liberal white person no more racist than a conservative white person, but given how many of them grew up in predominantly white neighborhoods, they make similar assumptions that non-whites often cannot make.

Even this is not as simple as I make it sound. But my point is that regardless of how much progress has been made since the days of Malcolm X’s autobiography, the modern day is still so heavily affected by race that much of what Malcolm X said can still be related to, even as things have changed. Much of what Malcolm X says is more hard-line than most African Americans felt in his day, but it offers tremendous insight into why many current day African Americans see racism in things where many whites don’t.

The race card isn’t a card African Americans hold on to, waiting to use at just the right time. It’s the card that as soon as we put down, the deck always has another one to return to our hands. It’s the magical card of which there are more than four, which whites often hate to see played, and African Americans hate to have to hold.

- The Thought Painter

This piece has been edited for timeliness since its original posting. The piece can be read in its entirety by following the link.

Photo

Sat, 31 Dec 2011 13:05:45 -0500

Queer, Female, and Black.

Sat, 31 Dec 2011 12:37:00 -0500

I am currently a Virginian, but this has never really been something I identify strongly with. I was born in Ft. Lauderdale, FL and the majority of my mother’s side of the family are Florida natives. My father was born there as well, as with the majority of his family, but now many of them reside in Georgia. I also have family in New York, Maryland, North Carolina, Alabama, and California. So although I may have lived in Virginia the majority of my life, it’s just another place for me. I see myself as a traveler, and hopefully when I have the means, I will move to California to pursue a film career.

I’ve gone though a continual search of identity, belonging, and and satisfaction. I went to college at the University of Maryland for 2 years, with the intention of majoring in Architecture, then Government, next Communication, and finally I found my love for Film/Cinema. This is due to the few Women’s Studies classes I took before I left school for financial reasons. They opened my mind to ideas that I identified with, but never had a name for. An introduction to more concrete examples of racism, sexism, homophobia both in the widespread media and on an institutional level. I felt like I had to do something. It inspired me to dream. I want to create films/media that speak to more than just the white, heterosexual, middle-class audience that many blockbusters pander to. More specifically, I want to aide in queer representation, especially queers of color, and help them find a voice and a story.

I’m currently working on a documentary, which uses webcam video footage from people all across the country and a few from the United Kingdom. It explores the idea of sexual fluidity. Sexual fluidity is a concept that wants get rid of the rigid ways of looking at sexuality and acknowledge that many people can change or grow in their sexual preferences. It is still in the editing phase, but I hope to finish it in January.

This year, and part of last year, sparked my interest in sexuality; as well as started my evolution in sexual/emotional preference. What began as purely an interest in lesbian porn, I soon realized that I also had feelings for women, something I’d never explored or thought of before (Other than my high school interest in “The L Word”). This then evolved into my first relationship with a women, a long distance one at that.

Through much thought and research I’ve now come to identify as queer. Not gay, not lesbian, not bisexual, but queer. It leaves room for interpretation, gives me room to grow and change. While I do love women, I also can be attracted to men, trans* men, as well as those that identify as genderqueer. So limiting myself to just lesbian/bisexual doesn’t feel right. Although I may use the word bisexual at times depending on who I’m talking to.

- Micky Alexandria

A Virginian, Born and Raised

Sat, 31 Dec 2011 12:00:00 -0500

A Virginian, Born and Raised:

I am a Virginian. I was born and raised here, just as my parents and, to my knowledge, their parents before them. My history is very much tied to my local area, as where my family lives has remained relatively static for generations. Yet despite this, I grew up feeling like an immigrant in the only country I have ever known.

I major in both history and government at the College of William and Mary, and both majors have benefited me intimately, regardless of what career awaits me later in life. The College has a phenomenal history department, in which I have been exposed to many different lands and many different histories. However, my focus has been on American history, for this is the only country I have ever known and the only one I will live in for the foreseeable future.

Still, a focus in American history has left me with a broad range of classes to learn from. I have studied general American history, women’s history, immigration history, and African American history; and all have enlightened me in ways I could have only hoped for. Despite not having a single African American professor throughout my entire time at the College, my professors have provided me with an African American history so richly developed and analyzed that for the first time I have genuinely come to see myself as an American. My history, as woefully under-represented in general K-12 American history as it is and despite being so often excluded from the valued common lore, is intrinsically connected and entirely inseparable from the country in which I live.

The wonderful professors at the College of William and Mary have exposed me to a history of more than how African Americans were treated in America, but how all ethnic groups have arrived in America and undergone their own process into becoming American. I have been exposed to how nothing is inherent about the assumptions we all make, and how the most basic of these assumptions have been created, altered, and forgotten over time; whether these assumptions concern race, gender, religion, sexuality, or any other topic for which nothing is as true or absolute as any of us may be inclined to believe. This may make many of us uncomfortable, but I find encouragement knowing that many of today’s biggest struggles will someday seem as small or be as forgotten as many controversies and norms from the past. For most of Virginia’s history, people like me were not formally considered Virginians, but they were inherently Virginians, for this was where they lived, loved, and died. I may not take pride in Virginia’s Confederate history or “rebel pride,” but Virginia has always been filled with people of different backgrounds and different values. That, too, is part of being Virginian.

- The Thought Painter

Part of this piece has been removed since its original posting. The piece can be read in its entirety by following the link.

An Introduction

Sat, 31 Dec 2011 11:22:00 -0500

This blog is a joint project between Micky Alexandria and myself. Here we intend to consolidate the posts we make regarding race, religion, politics, gender identity, sexual orientation, and other topics considered not fit for the dinner table or unsafe to discuss with the in-laws. Some posts will be new, others will be ones we have already posted on our respective blogs. You’re welcome to join in on the discussion. We welcome asks and submissions, as long as the content is well-written. We hope you enjoy our commentary and the conversation that hopefully results.

Who are we? We’re both African Americans in our early twenties who find ourselves not represented in mainstream American and African American dialogue. I major in Government and History, while Micky intends to focus on Film Studies and Women’s Studies. We’re good friends who agree on many things, but our opinions do differ, sometimes greatly, as do our approaches. Still, one thing remains constant: we are both very passionate about these issues. Thanks for sharing your time with us.

- The Thought Painter