The Nature of the Beast

It started with a stupid decision.

There is no reason to watch the McLaughlin Group on a Friday night.
If you're seeking news, there are far more current and detailed sources of information. If you're seeking enlightened debate superior examples can be found elsewhere as well. And nobody is honestly looking for entertainment from the McLaughlin Group, at least no one with a fully functioning sense of boredom.

 But, there I was watching a half dozen curmudgeons argue about four-day old news that had already been hashed to death by talking heads with far more verve and roughly equal insight.

I've already admitted it was stupid.

As I wondered how the show had managed to survive the media blood-letting of recent years, the hosts skipped from discussing Obama's abruptly ended vacation, to speaking on Dr. Martin Luther King and the deferment of his now well-known dream. As is common, while the discussion pretended to be about America's failure to make good on the dream King died for, it quickly became something else. They trotted out the tired factoids about the wealth gap between blacks and whites, and then cut to the statistics about the differing rates of incarceration.
(By the way, that information was actually interesting mainly because it revealed that 5 percent of the black population is incarcerated compared to 1 percent of the white population. It's not the gap that's interesting, it's the fact that despite the dominant stereotype about rampant black crime, 95 percent of us are not doing time!)

Things were rolling along in a fairly predictable manner when the white-haired and bespectacled host-- McLaughlin I presume-- asked something like "Why are black people failing to succeed?" That is a paraphrase because the ensuing emotions that comment caused made it difficult for me to remember the exact quote, but it's a fairly accurate paraphrase.

After this ridiculous comment, the token black guy on the show, Clarence Page, began to try to explain why black people fail. He talked about society and personal responsibility, and even threw a bone to racism. It wasn't a bad answer, but in a way it was terrible.

See, in my opinion, any time a white person asks a question that is so obviously asinine, it cheapens black folks when we deign to answer it seriously. I'm not saying I haven't done this, I'm just saying that I was cheapening black folks when I did it. The correct answer to that ridiculous question was "Because they are Americans." After all, failure is not a special trait of black folks, and black failure or even pathology shouldn't be treated as some aberration but instead a shining example of our humanity. Human beings fail. That's what we do.

But, the host obviously believes that black people have some sort of monopoly, or at least an affinity with failure. It's drawn to us like flies to rotting meat, and clearly that means there must be something wrong with us. After all, if we haven't managed to start succeeding 40 years after Dr. King died, when exactly were we planning to start succeeding, right?

Of course this is idiotic, but these are the types of conversations way too many white folks have and that they think are insightful. This is what they talk about amongst themselves, this is why they get so huffy when the topic of Affirmative Action comes up, and it's why there is so much thinly veiled resentment towards black folks among white people of all ages. They really and truly believe that the problems of black people are unique to black people and caused by some sort of moral, intellectual or emotional deficiency that accompanies dark skin.

That's what white supremacy looks like. And it's all around you.


Share

Winners and Losers

By most accounts, newly minted NFL quarterback Cam Newton is a winner.

He won a national championship at Auburn, secured an impressive NFL contract as the first pick in the draft, and is competing for a starting spot. I would imagine Charlie Sheen would say he's "Winning."

But, everything that sparkles ain't a diamond..

It appears that Newton's new employer notified him before he got drafted that tattoos, piercings and long hair weren't the way to go. He said this right after he hired a white player who has tattoos, long hair and piercings.


Hmmmm....

On a certain level, the demands make sense. Many businesses have formal and informal dress codes. Maintaining a job requires adherence to these guidelines. When your job pays you $24 million, it seems like a reasonable demand, correct? Hell most of us follow the dress code for far less than 1 percent of that type of money.

But, why would there be different rules for a black player and a white player. It would be easy to make a simple racial connection here, but that would be wrong. The racial connection is far more complex. Jeremy Shockey, the white tight end with the tats, piercings and hair, isn't allowed to have those things because he's white, he's allowed to have them because he plays tight end.

Cam Newton wasn't just drafted to play football, he was drafted to play the sport's glamour position: quarterback. He was drafted to be the new face of the franchise. As such, his black mug will be marketed all across Carolina to white fans with pockets deep enough to pony up for season tickets and gobs of merchandise. The bottom line is that the quarterback puts more butts in the seats than the tight end on most squads.

The concern over Newton's appearance is related to the fact that his face has to be sold to white folks, and many white folks don't want to get behind certain types of black people. They may tolerate dreads, tats and piercings, but they don't like them. They don't respect them. And if they have their druthers, they would rather support a black athlete who didn't have them. Or, better yet, a white athlete who doesn't have them.

The Panthers owner is aware of these feelings and shares them. He wants to keep those folks happy, so he's more than willing to allow their discrimination and bias to drive his actions. And for the most part, the rest of the sporting world will shake their heads, but agree that it's his right.

Just like folks agree that it is the right of businesses to serve who they want to served, or police to stop who they want to stop, or governments to fly the flags they want to fly. Way too many folks seem quite comfortable with bending their heads and saying "What can I do?" when faced with obvious instances of actions based on racial prejudice.

Seems like certain folks are just born to be losers.






Share

Why Bother?

Black people can’t talk to white people about race anymore. There’s really nothing left to say. There are libraries full of books, interviews, essays, lectures, and symposia. If people want to learn about their own country and its history, it is not incumbent on black people to talk to them about it. It is not our responsibility to educate them about it. Plus whenever white people want to talk about race, they never want to talk about themselves. There needs to be discussion among people who think of themselves as white. They need to unpack that language, that history, that social position and see what it really offers them, and what it takes away from them. As James Baldwin said, “As long as you think that you are white, there is no hope for you.”

I feel like this many days. Even when I make a little progress in opening people's eyes, I'm always left with the thought that they could have just as easily done that themselves with a little effort.

But they aren't interested.

And it's not just white people, it's black people too. In the rush to assimilate, many black folks these days have decided to abandon in-depth examinations of race mainly because they don't see any benefits.. Others are ignorant of basic historical facts and resent people who present them with information that challenges their deeply held worldviews. So, while I'm calling out the white folks, Negroes are not getting a pass here.

But, y'all white folks are the ones holding all the cards. At least with most black folks, even if they aren't interested in race, they admit to some easily accepted facts. With way too many white folks it's like pulling teeth to get y'all to acknowledge truths that should be part of your basic education on America. Then again, "basic" is an interesting concept.

I was talking to a friend the other day and we agreed that one of the benefits of attending majority black schools is the vantage point from which American history is presented. When your teachers are black and your students are mainly black, certain issues become big deals that otherwise might get glossed over. For example, the 3/5ths compromise was a big deal in every history class I've ever had. And Abe Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation was widely derided since it only freed those slaves he had no control over.

But, I would wager that for many white folks, those two factoids weren't considered key issues, nor were they something that stuck in their heads over time. While those things may have reminded black folks of the rampant hypocrisy in America's past and present, for white folks they were just answers on a test that were promptly forgotten. Basically, depending on who teaches you, the definition of "basic" changes drastically.

That can make racial discussions perilous. I often discover I'm operating from a totally different set of facts than a lot of white folks. And since we don't agree on the facts, we can't agree on the nuances.

That's the frustrating position many black folks find themselves in these days. We're asked either to allow racial ridiculousness pass unchallenged, or to engage in pointless debates where the burden of proof is ridiculously high, and the level of discourse is ridiculously low because few people have read the source material. It's a terrible, terrible cycle that often can make it simpler to just keep your mouth shut, mark people down on The List, and keep it moving.

Sometimes I just can't be bothered.




Share

It Is What It Is

One of the first things that happens when the words "racist" or "racism" are introduced into a conversation involving white folks is an attempt to mind read.

By that, I mean that if I bring up racism or racists, it's pretty much guaranteed that some white person will speak to me about the dangers of trying to judge another man's heart. It doesn't matter what was just said or done, there is always some white person who bristles instantly at the idea that the situation is about racism. Take, Sen. Tom Coburn's recent comments for example.

Granted, the paraphrase job by the reporter from the Tulsa World wasn't the greatest. The story clearly lacked some context that would have provided more insight into where Coburn's comments came from and his overall mindset. Honestly, after I read the transcript, I no longer suspected that Coburn is a closeted member of the White Citizen's Council.

But I still thought he was a racist.

That would probably surprise the reporter from the Washington Post who wrote the column about Coburn's actual comments. (Actually, maybe it wouldn't since white folks always expect black people to call somebody racist and therefore rarely believe us despite the evidence.) The reporter from the Washington Post bent over backwards to try to provide a non-racist explanation for Coburn's comments, but there isn't one. It doesn't matter if he likes Obama as a person, or thinks that the president is just misguided. His entire worldview is built on the premise that African Americans have benefited from a "culture of dependency".

That's some racist crap.

I'm not sure how white people got confused, but clearly it happened. It seems that they took a wrong turn during Jim Crow, and forgot that the government programs that benefit the poor were first created for white people by white people, and only extended to black people after we paid taxes with no benefit for a long time. Moreover, they seem to have forgotten that the sort of "dependency" programs that President Obama would have benefited from, say Affirmative Action, were created because white people couldn't seem to follow the rules of the very meritocracy they love to tout now. We don't have Affirmative Action because black people couldn't survive without help, we have it because white people refused to even give black people a fair freaking shot.

Moreover, as one of my white colleagues pointed out, if ever there was a person who has proven that Affirmative Action doesn't necessarily lead to unqualified people getting jobs, it's this president. As much as George Bush was an indictment of the legacy system and generational wealth, Obama is the living and breathing proof that if black folks are given a legit shot, we can easily excel. To claim that Obama was raised on the teat of dependency despite all the evidence to the contrary is the act of a racist.

Period.




Share