We all have an internal hierarchy.
It is a personal grouping of our priorities that determines how we respond to individual situations. A simpler way to put it would be to say we all have a "code."
That code determines who or what we swear allegiance to first. For some folks that might be God, or country, or family, or friends. Our codes are how we sort through the morass of experiences we have as human beings.
Everybody has a code.
In fact, that's the problem. We all have different codes and different hierarchies.
For example, the first five spots on my general hierarchy look like this:
1. God
2. Family
3. Black
4. Male
5. American
(Three and four sometimes shift positions.)
Within each of those five categories there are several subsets, but that basic structure determines how I approach situations and how I decide where my allegiance lies in any given situation. If there is a conflict between being black and being American, I'm going to side with being black 99 percent of the time.
Now some folks might find that disturbing. I've had folks get upset when they learn I don't say the pledge of allegiance. It bothers them deeply and they see it as a personal affront. In their minds, I owe America my allegiance despite this country's failure to uphold the words of the pledge. Besides, if I dislike the country that much, I should just get up and leave.
As an aside, that sentiment has always puzzled me. The whole concept of "If you don't like it you can leave" seems asinine. Is that how most people live their lives? When they have a problem on the job, in their marriage, with their kids, do they just get up and leave? What does that say about them? Is that an admirable trait?
Everyday I find myself clashing with folks because of our different hierarchies. We have different priorities, and therefore different goals. We have disparate ideas about what is acceptable and unacceptable behavior. They don't like my hierarchy and I'm not too fond of theirs.
I tend to spend quite a bit of time pondering why there is so much conflict in the world. Is it greed, or just a byproduct of survival? Do humans clash so often because we can't really understand each other, or because we understand each other too well?
Maybe it's all about our hierarchies. We can't get along because of our clashing allegiances. Even when we have the same allegiances it doesn't solve the problem.
How often do Americans fight with Americans over what is truly in the best interest of America? Can't you say the same about black folks? Or married couples?
Sadly, while I can see the problem, I can't see the solution. People will always seek to coerce others, while at the same time fighting against coercion. Most of our hierarchies will never truly mesh, and when they don't, some folks will always see that as a problem. Unfortunately, they'll also believe that they should not have to make any changes to correct the problem.
It's quite the morass.
Share
Pay Attention
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 Unported License.
19 comments:
good post, mate. I totally feel you on feeling more black than being American. It's the same for me, I'll always feel more Indian/South Asian than I do being American/British, although I do love the USA and UK.
re: the whole "leave USA if you don't like it here," just cracks me up. During Bush II era, white people often shouted at us to go back to "I-ran" (I ain't from there) and I'll reply back at them to go back to Europe, because they stole the land from Native Americans, anyway. idiots.
People will always seek to coerce others
is the entirety of the problem.
the solution is both calculated and executed very simply as a function of muzzle velocity and ballistic drift....,
Cnu
There aren't enough guns in the world. That's the rub.
sure there are...,
you'd be surprised how quickly coercive efforts cease when you make the required investment in coercion prohibitively steep.
If the battle is between those striving on parallel, frictionless paths towards Supremacy versus the radical autonomists that will cross us then it will be a battle of kill and conversion.
The idea that you can strive for Supremacy without friction is a farce.
The notion of supremacy requires vanquishing others, there is no alternative.
lol,
not to mention that history buttressed by lived experience shows beyond any shadow of a doubt EXACTLY who is serially and pathologically culpable for crime after crime committed against humanity pursuant to the insane goal of race-based "supremacy".
it's certainly not as if we abducted and pressed ourselves into chattel slavery - charitably giving over our knowledge, skill, ability, and labor value for two centuries followed by another century of legally sanctioned and violently enforced economic disenfranchisement and oppression - and the past 40-odd years of preposterous denial that any of that ever even took place and "by golly - look how good you've got it now" self-congratulation.
^^^You clowns are obsessed by your own skin color and think it has anything to do with Supremacy...
You clowns wanna break free, but ain't gotta clue how to do it unless it has muzzle velocity and ballistic drift.
No wonder you're so bent and alienated.
Again, Supremacy requires subordinates.
Check your Bible again.
Nah, lil man...
Supremacy requires nothing ESPECIALLY anti-Supremacists.
Big Man,
Do you think Larooshifer's favorite WB genuinely believes that he's never done anything to alienate, antagonize, or offend Black folk online or in person?
If so, do you chalk it up to hypocrisy, denial, delusion, incompetent sociopathic tendencies, or outright psychopathic tendencies?
Can I just say all of the above?
Craig,
Who cares what you say? You worship an autonomous god which is equivalent to being an atheist (and the liberal "Christian" comes to the atheist's defense). Those things you attribute to me don't even exist in your world other than as MEANS TO AN END. That's what it means to be a radical autonomist. If you had any intellectual integrity left you would certainly agree?
You're broke Craig just like lil man. You attacked and got cracked back. All you have to do is say sorry and you may start again with a different approach?
There is nothing immoral about battering a radical autonomist's ego. In fact, it is moral to do so.
Lil man,
Insulting the ego of a radical autonomist in black is hardly immoral. The fact that you believe offending your "blackness" constitutes self-evident immorality is a testament to your utter arrogance.
And siding with a dood that that takes trash talk to another level against a dood that hardly trash talks is hilariously. It just goes to show that hypocrisy really doesn't exist in the liberal world.
You're broke, lil man.
And siding with a dood that that takes trash talk to another level against a dood that hardly trash talks is hilariously. It just goes to show that hypocrisy really doesn't exist in the liberal world
Have you read some of the stuff you've written to Deacon Blue, Macon, Imhotep and others?
No, seriously, have you read you online comments?
Somebody who who uses the words you use, who makes the attacks you make should NEVER, EVER complain when someone else attacks them.
See, I don't attack you by design. That's the fight you would like me to fight.
But, CNu does attack you. Vigorously. And I've repeatedly seen you squeal like a stuck pig when he engages you.
That tells me something about you.
You're comfortable engaging in disrespectful attacks against those who refuse to stoop to your level, or even go beyond your level to win the battle.
You are uncomfortable having to deal with someone who shows no such reserve and is quite comfortable using whatever means necessary to go after you.
You do realize what that makes you, right? You understand what I've long known about you, don't you?
Crying about me siding with Cnulan. Point to something he wrote about your actions on the internet that was false. You can't, becasue he wrote the Truth.
You made your bed, now lie in it. Reap what you've sown. Nobody's going to protect you or feel sorry for you.
Broken is an anonymous white man who trolls black sites on the internet despite his stated belief in white supremacy in the interest of spreading his theory of radical autonomy because he could not draw enough like-minded individuals to his own failed attempts at blogging.
That's broken.
All you have to do is say sorry and you may start again with a different approach?
rotflmbao....,
Lil man,
Please... PROVIDE ONE QUOTE of mine to substaniate your take.
Show me where I called anyone of you a liberal, radical autonomist or black liberationist... Lol...
Rather than crying, I LAUGH at your predictable answer to everything. My black skin TELLS ME EXACTLY how to think. Craig isn't any different... Of course, this is when you're dealing with white boys who haven't been emasculated like deacon and macon. When dealing with those flimsies, it's a quiet but palpable contempt.
Remember THE FACTS...
Both you and fatneck CAME AT TD...
Now you whine cuz you get cracked back.
Busting YOUR EGO is not immoral EVEN IF YOU'RE black...
This is a lesson you would benefit from learning.
I tend to spend quite a bit of time pondering why there is so much conflict in the world. Is it greed, or just a byproduct of survival? Do humans clash so often because we can't really understand each other, or because we understand each other too well?
Remember THE FACTS...
Both you and fatneck CAME AT TD...
rotflmbao.....,
and just think Big Man, somewhere between 10-20% of the American body politic shares this psychosis.
This tail wagging the dog is what accounts for the country's incessant conflict operations both externally and here at home.
I believe TPTB have identified this mentality as incapable of useful contributions to society and have been seeking its gradual elimination.
Just because I don't swagger doesn't make me flimsy
And what some want to call "emasculated" is what Jesus called "compassionate"
Post a Comment