So I put a tracking code on this blog so I could track the hits and know the traffic patterns. Sadly, I am like the Omega Man - hello-o-o-o-o-o-o. Is anyone out there?????? Apparently not. I love to write my thoughts and wonder if my blog is just lost in the cacophony of the blogosphere? How many thousands of people are writing, just like me? But I put my thoughts in a blog so others will read it and join the conversation. I feel like I am in the back of a very crowded room and no one can see me - apparently answering the question that is my blog address - iamhereru.
I know other bloggers put gimmicks on their site to generate viewers. Not really my style. Bloggers form mutual pacts and advertise one another's sites, which makes sense. If you like one site and they recommend another, you may like it too. That would require that I not be isolated in cyberspace. As with anything in life - being in relationship is more likely to get you the results you want than not being in relationship. So look for some site recommendations, a little more community here, and the same writing I have been doing. It's what I know. It's what I do.
Saturday, March 15, 2008
Wednesday, March 12, 2008
is appointed government good government?
My friend and housemate is running for school board. The district is heavily minority because white parents are not inclined to send their kids to the public schools. The voters of the district are split - black and white. The question being raised around town is whether it would be better to have an appointed rather than an elected school board. The question is being posed by the white, corporate, civic leaders who are tired of seeing the district perform poorly, not educate children well, and watch the board spend more time bickering than making good decisions. No doubt, the school district has been and is a mess. The current adjective used to describe the school board is "dysfunctional."
While there is some truth to this situation as posed - the district does perform poorly and the board does not manage the district or itself very well - a good bit of the controversy is related to the white civic community being frustrated with a minority dominated school district that does not pay attention to what white leaders are telling them they ought to do. A case of classic power struggle between black and white, majority and minority, oppressor and oppressed, old style and new style politics.
An appointed board is a shortcut to get an easy fix to the problem. If all it took to do a good job was to appoint the board, I think we would have done that years ago. The problem is that most of the board is not in relationship with most of the residents of the school district or the personnel. The problem is that the school board is not in relationship with key neighborhoods in the district and, therefore, has no ability to create a coalition or consensus that will withstand criticism. The problem is that the civic leaders and their suggestions have been rebuffed by the board and instead of pursuing, the leaders have just given up.
An appointed board will likely generate consensus - but will be unable to carry that forward as a mandate to the community. So while the board will function, it will not have any respect in the community of residents and parents. The only way to fix this over the long term is to develop relationships, which leads to understanding, which results in consensus. This is called the heavy lifting, which is eschewed by too many politicians. An appointed board requires no heavy lifting.
While there is some truth to this situation as posed - the district does perform poorly and the board does not manage the district or itself very well - a good bit of the controversy is related to the white civic community being frustrated with a minority dominated school district that does not pay attention to what white leaders are telling them they ought to do. A case of classic power struggle between black and white, majority and minority, oppressor and oppressed, old style and new style politics.
An appointed board is a shortcut to get an easy fix to the problem. If all it took to do a good job was to appoint the board, I think we would have done that years ago. The problem is that most of the board is not in relationship with most of the residents of the school district or the personnel. The problem is that the school board is not in relationship with key neighborhoods in the district and, therefore, has no ability to create a coalition or consensus that will withstand criticism. The problem is that the civic leaders and their suggestions have been rebuffed by the board and instead of pursuing, the leaders have just given up.
An appointed board will likely generate consensus - but will be unable to carry that forward as a mandate to the community. So while the board will function, it will not have any respect in the community of residents and parents. The only way to fix this over the long term is to develop relationships, which leads to understanding, which results in consensus. This is called the heavy lifting, which is eschewed by too many politicians. An appointed board requires no heavy lifting.
Friday, February 15, 2008
sexism and racism - 2008
Here's a good discussion of sexism and racism in our current presidential election contest between Clinton and Obama. The idea that Rush Limbaugh feels comfortable putting a parody on his show called "Barack, the magic negro" speaks volumes as does the fact that some web site can parody Sen. Clinton with toilet brushes sporting "First Cleaning Lady" label. Both of these examples are part of the new "sport" of politics and go with the territory. But what has really given me pause is the op-ed piece by Gloria Steinem making the case that sexism is worse than racism. Now, women of a certain age are supposedly supporting Hillary because we believe in the feminist cause, grew up in the fray, and support our sister. I guess I missed the meeeting, because I support Obama. Here is the link to her article and a link to the CNN discussion.
Here's the key quote from Steinem's article that I think bears reading fully:
"I’m not advocating a competition for who has it toughest. The caste systems of sex and race are interdependent and can only be uprooted together. That’s why Senators Clinton and Obama have to be careful not to let a healthy debate turn into the kind of hostility that the news media love. Both will need a coalition of outsiders to win a general election. The abolition and suffrage movements progressed when united and were damaged by division; we should remember that."
Unfortunately, the point of her message is in fact to compare racism to sexism and that Hillary is not getting fair treatment.
Sigh.
As a white woman (who fully embraces the liberation movement, mantra, and mantle) who lives in an African-American neighborhood, I feel I have a perspective on sexism vs. racism that Ms. Steinem may not have. This gives me great pause because I fully embraced the "Ms." designation when it made its debut and continue to use it to this day. The idea that I have a different perspective from GS is important for me to acknowledge. But do it I must.
Racism always trumps sexism. In my very first post on this blog I noted that I, as a white woman and my roommate, as a black man, could each only disguise our gender, but not our race. Hillary can do many things to demystify, ignore, and downplay her gender. Gender is an ascribed characteristic. What if Hillary is a lesbian? Does that change the sexism discussion or not? But you cannot change, cover, or erase the issue of race. Hillary will always, always, always have a head start on Barack Obama by virtue of being white. Hillary has white privilege to draw on, use, and gain favor. Obama will never be able to gain those points no matter how he plays the race card or tries to invoke JFK (issues raised by GS). I take issue with the very issue that GS raises - that somehow Obama gets a pass on race while Hillary has to defend her gender. A pass??? Every day Obama starts from a negative position simply because of his skin color. Surely my feminist heroine cannot be so blinded by her zeal to advocate gender that she does not see the privilege she enjoys every day.
So, while I can throw volleys at the national pundits on this topic, do I see any reflections of the issue in my own neck 'o the woods? I feel the anxiety of sexism all the time - men reacting to me in ways that are dictated by our gender differences (and darn it, not in a way that creates valentines :). When white men engage in sexism, it seems unbeatable - white men trump white women. But when men of color engage in sexism, it seems less difficult - white trumps black and that can overcome the barrier of men trumping women. Sad isn't it? I can be comforted by my white privilege even if a man is giving me grief for being a woman.
The answer to this conundrum, of course, is to recognize and reject my position of privilege. I do this on a regular basis. It is not easy to do, but essential if we are to ever get over the sexism vs. racism debate.
Here's the key quote from Steinem's article that I think bears reading fully:
"I’m not advocating a competition for who has it toughest. The caste systems of sex and race are interdependent and can only be uprooted together. That’s why Senators Clinton and Obama have to be careful not to let a healthy debate turn into the kind of hostility that the news media love. Both will need a coalition of outsiders to win a general election. The abolition and suffrage movements progressed when united and were damaged by division; we should remember that."
Unfortunately, the point of her message is in fact to compare racism to sexism and that Hillary is not getting fair treatment.
Sigh.
As a white woman (who fully embraces the liberation movement, mantra, and mantle) who lives in an African-American neighborhood, I feel I have a perspective on sexism vs. racism that Ms. Steinem may not have. This gives me great pause because I fully embraced the "Ms." designation when it made its debut and continue to use it to this day. The idea that I have a different perspective from GS is important for me to acknowledge. But do it I must.
Racism always trumps sexism. In my very first post on this blog I noted that I, as a white woman and my roommate, as a black man, could each only disguise our gender, but not our race. Hillary can do many things to demystify, ignore, and downplay her gender. Gender is an ascribed characteristic. What if Hillary is a lesbian? Does that change the sexism discussion or not? But you cannot change, cover, or erase the issue of race. Hillary will always, always, always have a head start on Barack Obama by virtue of being white. Hillary has white privilege to draw on, use, and gain favor. Obama will never be able to gain those points no matter how he plays the race card or tries to invoke JFK (issues raised by GS). I take issue with the very issue that GS raises - that somehow Obama gets a pass on race while Hillary has to defend her gender. A pass??? Every day Obama starts from a negative position simply because of his skin color. Surely my feminist heroine cannot be so blinded by her zeal to advocate gender that she does not see the privilege she enjoys every day.
So, while I can throw volleys at the national pundits on this topic, do I see any reflections of the issue in my own neck 'o the woods? I feel the anxiety of sexism all the time - men reacting to me in ways that are dictated by our gender differences (and darn it, not in a way that creates valentines :). When white men engage in sexism, it seems unbeatable - white men trump white women. But when men of color engage in sexism, it seems less difficult - white trumps black and that can overcome the barrier of men trumping women. Sad isn't it? I can be comforted by my white privilege even if a man is giving me grief for being a woman.
The answer to this conundrum, of course, is to recognize and reject my position of privilege. I do this on a regular basis. It is not easy to do, but essential if we are to ever get over the sexism vs. racism debate.
Sunday, February 10, 2008
Racial politics is local
If you haven't been paying attention, there is a racial divide that is brewing in the Democratic party. It is shameful. Bill Clinton piled on what the Clinton campaign chief started - race war on Sen. Obama. Notice how silent our former President was after South Carolina. But in today's New York Times, Frank Rich writes a right on target op-ed piece. Please read it for yourself: Link
The Obama campaign has its own response to racial divides through the Yes We Can video that is on the web everywhere. Will.i.am has brilliantly put to music what will be remembered as a great speech by modern politician that speaks to our racial divide in a way that all of us can embrace. The video is available on this blog.
I just read an article in my local newspaper about a security guard at a store that ran out into the street after a shoplifter who grabbed a package of batteries. He chased the suspect for two blocks. What happened next is anyone's guess. But the suspect had a knife and stabbed the security guard. The security guard shot and killed the shoplifter. What a horrible tragedy, whichever way you look at it. The pages and pages of comments on the newspaper website in reaction to the event provoked racists, law and order types with no tolerance, liberal redemptors, black resistance, white fear, and a general cacophony of people talking past each other - each convinced that their POV should prevail.
Yes. We. Can. is a message of hope. We can get past a horrible and needless incident like this shoplifter shooting. We can find a way to deal with race in this country that doesn't point fingers at those who are discriminated against and those who do the discriminating. We can start at the national level and let the conversation trickle down to every corner of our country to allow us to have a discussion on race that is real, productive, and transforming.
My friend that is running for local office had a wild day on the campaign trail yesterday. In the morning he was quizzed by a white guy who was convinced that my friend was nothing but a black stooge, who would be used by the entrenched black politicians in our very divided city. By the end of the event and the dynamic conversation that my friend - the candidate- constructed, the guy from the audience became a supporter. Later that day, my friend had the opportunity to meet up with a large group of high school and middle school kids that he has worked with in various settings such as Anytown - a racial justice and equity program. These kids get the conversation. They love it. Black and white parents that accompanied some of them (to oversee their precious one's interactions and well-being) were stunned at the open and candid interactions of the kids. The adults all learned something.
We desperately need a national dialogue on race and the Obama campaign is giving us what we need. But it will not be as effective as it needs to be unless we have vehicles to continue the conversation locally. Be part of that conversation. Transform the dialogue in your town. We all have to take responsibility to make this happen and it is essential that it happen.
Yes. We. Can.
The Obama campaign has its own response to racial divides through the Yes We Can video that is on the web everywhere. Will.i.am has brilliantly put to music what will be remembered as a great speech by modern politician that speaks to our racial divide in a way that all of us can embrace. The video is available on this blog.
I just read an article in my local newspaper about a security guard at a store that ran out into the street after a shoplifter who grabbed a package of batteries. He chased the suspect for two blocks. What happened next is anyone's guess. But the suspect had a knife and stabbed the security guard. The security guard shot and killed the shoplifter. What a horrible tragedy, whichever way you look at it. The pages and pages of comments on the newspaper website in reaction to the event provoked racists, law and order types with no tolerance, liberal redemptors, black resistance, white fear, and a general cacophony of people talking past each other - each convinced that their POV should prevail.
Yes. We. Can. is a message of hope. We can get past a horrible and needless incident like this shoplifter shooting. We can find a way to deal with race in this country that doesn't point fingers at those who are discriminated against and those who do the discriminating. We can start at the national level and let the conversation trickle down to every corner of our country to allow us to have a discussion on race that is real, productive, and transforming.
My friend that is running for local office had a wild day on the campaign trail yesterday. In the morning he was quizzed by a white guy who was convinced that my friend was nothing but a black stooge, who would be used by the entrenched black politicians in our very divided city. By the end of the event and the dynamic conversation that my friend - the candidate- constructed, the guy from the audience became a supporter. Later that day, my friend had the opportunity to meet up with a large group of high school and middle school kids that he has worked with in various settings such as Anytown - a racial justice and equity program. These kids get the conversation. They love it. Black and white parents that accompanied some of them (to oversee their precious one's interactions and well-being) were stunned at the open and candid interactions of the kids. The adults all learned something.
We desperately need a national dialogue on race and the Obama campaign is giving us what we need. But it will not be as effective as it needs to be unless we have vehicles to continue the conversation locally. Be part of that conversation. Transform the dialogue in your town. We all have to take responsibility to make this happen and it is essential that it happen.
Yes. We. Can.
Saturday, January 26, 2008
Are we on the verge of greatness?
I'm watching the South Carolina primary returns. I am exhilarated. My friend had asked me to prognosticate the results earlier today. I nailed it! But, I am a professional political scientist, so it is sort of my job to know these things.
We met Barack Obama and his wife Michelle on a 4th of July trip to Iowa. We took a couple of high schoolers with us and traipsed after Barack and Hillary from town to town. We went to Iowa for living room politics - and it did not disappoint. We got to meet Barack, talk to him, shake hands, and look him straight in the eye. Got to do nearly the same with Hillary and Bill and it was all thrilling. But seeing and speaking to Mr. Obama really struck me. He has the type of charisma that is hopeful, exuberant, and inspiring. I knew that I was seeing was the real deal. No pretension, no theatrics, just putting himself out there with his ideals and vision. I believe it is that character that transcends race. I believe it is what we see in South Carolina today. I believe this is the force that Hillary is facing and realizing she may not be able to overcome.
Politics is a battle, it is a winner take all environment, and it is humbling or humiliating. Most people won't risk the potential of losing and the humiliation they think they will endure. Those that do risk their ego by running do so with either a "fire in the belly" to win at all costs or a visionary leadership that says, "this is who I am and I hope to win, but if I don't, I can say I was true to myself." I am hoping this is who Barack is. I fear this is not who Hillary is. I know this is who my friend is; the one who is running for local office.
So much was said today by the political analysts about race. Blah, blah, blah,...Obama will win the black vote, but can he be competitive with Whites? Hello!!! He won Iowa - the state that is about as white as it gets, save for Idaho! The pundants want to make it a racial contest - maybe they think it will invite more viewers. The news people are mostly white. I don't think they have a clue about what is going on in the country with race relations, yet they have the strings to elevate and suppress information, spin, and insight. Tonight's election results cannot be denied. This country may have turned a corner...
We met Barack Obama and his wife Michelle on a 4th of July trip to Iowa. We took a couple of high schoolers with us and traipsed after Barack and Hillary from town to town. We went to Iowa for living room politics - and it did not disappoint. We got to meet Barack, talk to him, shake hands, and look him straight in the eye. Got to do nearly the same with Hillary and Bill and it was all thrilling. But seeing and speaking to Mr. Obama really struck me. He has the type of charisma that is hopeful, exuberant, and inspiring. I knew that I was seeing was the real deal. No pretension, no theatrics, just putting himself out there with his ideals and vision. I believe it is that character that transcends race. I believe it is what we see in South Carolina today. I believe this is the force that Hillary is facing and realizing she may not be able to overcome.
Politics is a battle, it is a winner take all environment, and it is humbling or humiliating. Most people won't risk the potential of losing and the humiliation they think they will endure. Those that do risk their ego by running do so with either a "fire in the belly" to win at all costs or a visionary leadership that says, "this is who I am and I hope to win, but if I don't, I can say I was true to myself." I am hoping this is who Barack is. I fear this is not who Hillary is. I know this is who my friend is; the one who is running for local office.
So much was said today by the political analysts about race. Blah, blah, blah,...Obama will win the black vote, but can he be competitive with Whites? Hello!!! He won Iowa - the state that is about as white as it gets, save for Idaho! The pundants want to make it a racial contest - maybe they think it will invite more viewers. The news people are mostly white. I don't think they have a clue about what is going on in the country with race relations, yet they have the strings to elevate and suppress information, spin, and insight. Tonight's election results cannot be denied. This country may have turned a corner...
Thursday, January 17, 2008
race and the politics of fear
For me, at this moment, life is about politics. I am a political junkie and having two competitive national party primary contents unfolding is about as good as it gets! Of course the negative assault on Obama by the Cintons and their surrogates is cheezy. And to do it under the guise of MLK day is a damn shame. Imagine assailing a black candidate's commitment to equality during an MLK event. Then to turn and say, I think gender and race have no place in this campaign. I'm stunned. But hey, maybe that's what 2008 will be all about.
I have a friend that is running for office. He decided to throw his hat into the ring. He is black and running against a white incumbent. The campaign is about 1 month old and the race card has already been played by the white opponent. The tactic is to suggest that if my friend gets elected, there will be too many blacks on the council and that the white voters will lose their voice - so artfully carried by this white politician. This ridiculous assault on my black friend comes as he launches a campaign to unify voters across a racial divide in our city. The tactics used by the incumbent confirm that a unity campaign is essential and will probably be ignored.
Why is the politics of fear so easily raised and so readily accepted? My suspicion is that when whites feel threatened (outnumbered), they use race as a way to draw a line of difference between options and conveniently, their option - the white option - is best. Now typically the overt race card is not played except by Confederate flag fans, reverse discrimination critics, and white supremacists. But the subtle race card is played frequently and easily. In my friend's case, the incumbent is suggesting that my friend is beholden to black political bosses. Of course the incumbent is not at all beholden to his white political bosses - the white business community! Why the business community stands for progress and civic gain. The black political bosses don't care about black citizens and businesses, but only lining their own pockets. Black bosses are bad. White business bosses who try to control politics are good and care about the community. Get it?
Whites seem to confuse racial solidarity with race-based political control. If you are black and stand in solidarity with another black, you must be a crony. Yet if whites support other white candidates, no one questions it at all. Some news person asked a national black business person why he was supporting Hilary and not Barack for President. He had to first justify why he did not support the person who looked like him - Barack, and then proceed to explain why he supported Hilary. No one is asking Bill Bradley, a white politician, why he isn't supporting Hilary and instead is supporting Barack. While Blacks may stand in racial solidarity with a black candidate, they could choose to support or not support based on other criteria. But whites are never put in the position of defending their choice to support a white candidate.
In my neighborhood, the local black political club hands out endorsement cards to cue people on how to vote. Unions do this too, so it is not just a black thing. Political machines do it too. The old Daley Machine in Chicago had it down to a science. White people I talk with think it is awful that these endorsement cards are used to guide the uninformed black voters and that blacks vote like sheep (yet I have never seen a sheep at a polling place...). While it might be ideal for everyone to study up and figure out who to support - blacks have to consider who they can trust as well as whose ideas they like. When whites have to face that added burden, then come talk to me about being uninformed.
I have a friend that is running for office. He decided to throw his hat into the ring. He is black and running against a white incumbent. The campaign is about 1 month old and the race card has already been played by the white opponent. The tactic is to suggest that if my friend gets elected, there will be too many blacks on the council and that the white voters will lose their voice - so artfully carried by this white politician. This ridiculous assault on my black friend comes as he launches a campaign to unify voters across a racial divide in our city. The tactics used by the incumbent confirm that a unity campaign is essential and will probably be ignored.
Why is the politics of fear so easily raised and so readily accepted? My suspicion is that when whites feel threatened (outnumbered), they use race as a way to draw a line of difference between options and conveniently, their option - the white option - is best. Now typically the overt race card is not played except by Confederate flag fans, reverse discrimination critics, and white supremacists. But the subtle race card is played frequently and easily. In my friend's case, the incumbent is suggesting that my friend is beholden to black political bosses. Of course the incumbent is not at all beholden to his white political bosses - the white business community! Why the business community stands for progress and civic gain. The black political bosses don't care about black citizens and businesses, but only lining their own pockets. Black bosses are bad. White business bosses who try to control politics are good and care about the community. Get it?
Whites seem to confuse racial solidarity with race-based political control. If you are black and stand in solidarity with another black, you must be a crony. Yet if whites support other white candidates, no one questions it at all. Some news person asked a national black business person why he was supporting Hilary and not Barack for President. He had to first justify why he did not support the person who looked like him - Barack, and then proceed to explain why he supported Hilary. No one is asking Bill Bradley, a white politician, why he isn't supporting Hilary and instead is supporting Barack. While Blacks may stand in racial solidarity with a black candidate, they could choose to support or not support based on other criteria. But whites are never put in the position of defending their choice to support a white candidate.
In my neighborhood, the local black political club hands out endorsement cards to cue people on how to vote. Unions do this too, so it is not just a black thing. Political machines do it too. The old Daley Machine in Chicago had it down to a science. White people I talk with think it is awful that these endorsement cards are used to guide the uninformed black voters and that blacks vote like sheep (yet I have never seen a sheep at a polling place...). While it might be ideal for everyone to study up and figure out who to support - blacks have to consider who they can trust as well as whose ideas they like. When whites have to face that added burden, then come talk to me about being uninformed.
Sunday, January 6, 2008
Flashing lights on my block
Hearing gunshots is all too common in my neighborhood. "Hearing" is a relative term, however, because you are not really sure how close or in what direction the shots are coming from. Not unlike the controversy of the grassy knoll in Dallas when Pres. Kennedy was shot, it is difficult to discern the exact location of gunshots because sound bounces off of buildings, the caliber of the bullets changes the sound, etc.
Last night I heard shots on my block. I looked out and saw a couple of guys who started to run. Then I saw a police car cruising up. This never happens - the police were at the right place at the right time. The guys ran into my neighbor's house across the street, which sees its share of drama in the multi-generational family group that lives there. Police cars are like mushrooms - they spring up in the dark and multiply quickly. Before I knew it, there were 4 squad cars with lights and police milling about. The police in my neighborhood are not stupid and once they assessed the situation they turned down their lights to the baby flashers and most of the cars left their lights off. This keeps down the anxiety level of the neighbors who don't want spotlights and disco flashing lights invading their homes. I stepped out on my porch like any good nosey neighbor to see the show. Several people were sitting on the ground being questioned. The cops investigated my car, parked on the street, with a flashlight and proceeded to come ask me questions. Here is where it gets tricky.
Most white people of middle class standing have a belief in the police department that they are the good guys, we should support them, and that we should cooperate with them. This is brought on by the fact that we see ourselves as likely victims of crime and that the perpetrators probably won't look like us. Therefore, the police are on our side. This perception of police does not carry over to the minority community or people of color. Most cops in my city are white. I have never seen a cop of color in my neighborhood. If white cops think like white people, then what feelings, assumptions, and sentiments do they bring into my neighborhood? Are you seeing where this is going? Think of the movie Crash and the duplicitous part played so well by Matt Dillon the white police officer with a chip on his shoulder. "Don't snitch" is the byword on my street and sometimes that advise is well founded.
But you don't have to have a chip on your shoulder to still go into an interracial situation with preconceived notions. I know this because of my own reactions to this little drama on my block. One of the people in the group was a white girl. She ended up in handcuffs and questioned separately (probably because of her role in the situation, not because she was white). I had some immediate feelings when I saw her being questioned - what was she doing in this group? did she have a clue what this crowd was up to or was she just a hood wanna-be? I felt empathy for her because she was white. I couldn't help it, it just is. I don't know her, I don't know the other people who were questioned, but I felt differently about her than the others. What do the white police feel? Sure they have their protocol and their routine. They aren't going to be stupid, because this white girl could be armed and shoot them as easily as anyone else could. But once they assess the situation, does she get less lip? Do they give her just a touch more room? Do they use a softer touch? It's subtle; but remember the issue of power and consider that all white people feel a sense of privilege in an interracial situation. Black people know this and will see the situation in quite different terms than whites do. And this leads to confrontation.
The way to stem violence and create community is to recognize the imbalance of power inherent in a racial situation. Some police understand that, but many do not. People of color anticipate that a white cop will demonstrate the power of white privilege and write it off to the power of being a police officer. The differences between the two are vast and until white folks understand this, I don't expect much to change in my neighborhood.
I'm so tired of white people saying that statistics don't lie and it is black people who are doing all the crimes. Indeed, there are a disproportionate number of people of color who are arrested, convicted, and sent to jail. Don't always assume that this is evidence of the number of people that are guilty. Maybe white people get let go with a warning or cop a plea and serve no jail time. It happens.
Last night I heard shots on my block. I looked out and saw a couple of guys who started to run. Then I saw a police car cruising up. This never happens - the police were at the right place at the right time. The guys ran into my neighbor's house across the street, which sees its share of drama in the multi-generational family group that lives there. Police cars are like mushrooms - they spring up in the dark and multiply quickly. Before I knew it, there were 4 squad cars with lights and police milling about. The police in my neighborhood are not stupid and once they assessed the situation they turned down their lights to the baby flashers and most of the cars left their lights off. This keeps down the anxiety level of the neighbors who don't want spotlights and disco flashing lights invading their homes. I stepped out on my porch like any good nosey neighbor to see the show. Several people were sitting on the ground being questioned. The cops investigated my car, parked on the street, with a flashlight and proceeded to come ask me questions. Here is where it gets tricky.
Most white people of middle class standing have a belief in the police department that they are the good guys, we should support them, and that we should cooperate with them. This is brought on by the fact that we see ourselves as likely victims of crime and that the perpetrators probably won't look like us. Therefore, the police are on our side. This perception of police does not carry over to the minority community or people of color. Most cops in my city are white. I have never seen a cop of color in my neighborhood. If white cops think like white people, then what feelings, assumptions, and sentiments do they bring into my neighborhood? Are you seeing where this is going? Think of the movie Crash and the duplicitous part played so well by Matt Dillon the white police officer with a chip on his shoulder. "Don't snitch" is the byword on my street and sometimes that advise is well founded.
But you don't have to have a chip on your shoulder to still go into an interracial situation with preconceived notions. I know this because of my own reactions to this little drama on my block. One of the people in the group was a white girl. She ended up in handcuffs and questioned separately (probably because of her role in the situation, not because she was white). I had some immediate feelings when I saw her being questioned - what was she doing in this group? did she have a clue what this crowd was up to or was she just a hood wanna-be? I felt empathy for her because she was white. I couldn't help it, it just is. I don't know her, I don't know the other people who were questioned, but I felt differently about her than the others. What do the white police feel? Sure they have their protocol and their routine. They aren't going to be stupid, because this white girl could be armed and shoot them as easily as anyone else could. But once they assess the situation, does she get less lip? Do they give her just a touch more room? Do they use a softer touch? It's subtle; but remember the issue of power and consider that all white people feel a sense of privilege in an interracial situation. Black people know this and will see the situation in quite different terms than whites do. And this leads to confrontation.
The way to stem violence and create community is to recognize the imbalance of power inherent in a racial situation. Some police understand that, but many do not. People of color anticipate that a white cop will demonstrate the power of white privilege and write it off to the power of being a police officer. The differences between the two are vast and until white folks understand this, I don't expect much to change in my neighborhood.
I'm so tired of white people saying that statistics don't lie and it is black people who are doing all the crimes. Indeed, there are a disproportionate number of people of color who are arrested, convicted, and sent to jail. Don't always assume that this is evidence of the number of people that are guilty. Maybe white people get let go with a warning or cop a plea and serve no jail time. It happens.
Sunday, December 30, 2007
Idyllic Towns and Absurd Stigmas
I came across a rerun of the Andy Griffith show the other day, set in idyllic Mayberry, NC where nary a word about race relations was ever spoken, despite its deep south setting. Meanwhile over on another channel was a rerun of Good Times, set in the stigma-laden housing projects of Chicago where black people hustled to survive, but few whites were seen in the heart of this black community. Are communities better or worse off in terms of race relations than these two divergent examples suggest?
There have been a lot of racial tensions in my community which has a long history of being racially divided, but the polite culture here tries to overlook any overt racism. Unfortunately, the divisions have accelerated this year and the hounds of bigotry have been unleashed. I have been shocked at the level of vitriol expressed in local blogs and comments on news articles. Politeness has gone out the window and many whites feel compelled to "call a spade a spade" in no uncertain terms. It has become quite uncomfortable and I wonder if this is just occurring in my town or part of a general elevation in urban racial rancor.
I decided to look at news accounts around the country on race relations. I found that my community is not alone in the division over race and that some cities are experiencing extremely hostile incidents of race divisions. School desegregation became especially contentious in St. Petersburg, FL where neighborhood schools would now mirror segregated communities. A small town in PA experienced some nasty racial conflicts at a local school that spilled over to the city's general population. Milwaukee, San Diego, Fort Worth, Richmond, VA, Kansas City, MO, Portland, Seattle, Memphis, and Philadelphia all had multiple articles on school and/or employment conflicts that stemmed from racial divides. Racism seems to be alive and well in the USA.
Why is it that tensions escalate so rapidly when race is involved? It becomes a matter of life and death the way white people approach it. A columnist in Kansas City wrote about racial tensions in that city and the level of scathing criticism of this black columnist from white readers was astonishing. It amounted to a written lynching. Letters to the editor in St. Pete were edgy over the needs of kids to go to schools in their neighborhood and the liberal, social agenda of integrating schools. Writers made the point that if people don't want to live together, the "state" should not force kids to go to school together. The secondary point was the need for kids to be able to go to school in their neighborhood. Apparently the integrated schools look like "Good Times" while white communities are "Mayberry." Sorry folks, you can't have it both ways.
This is a common fallacy that white folks make as they try to deal with racial issues. Their white neighborhood is always portrayed as a safe haven where Sheriff Griffith and Deputy Fife stroll by with a kind word. The city council, school board, schools, and inner-city neighborhoods are portrayed as the squalid projects of "Good Times" where everyone is a hustler or uneducated and no one is up to snuff. This is the default view of a white community that sees itself as the quintessential representative of the way people want to live. Wouldn't everyone want to live in Mayberry? And if you are not just like us, then you should be vilified for not living up to our standards. We deride your "Good Times."
What we white folks don't see is that Deputy Fife is out on the back roads intimidating the blacks to keep on their side of town so that the streets are safe for Aunt Bee. The other things we don't see are the good families, hard working, and ethical people who live in the 'hood. While we prefer to see only crime and gangs and unemployed men with women on welfare, the reality is much different. We choose to see what we want to see. Our neighborhoods are idyllic while black neighborhoods are stigmatized. It's about as silly as saying that middle east terrorists are jealous of us so that's why they flew into the World Trade buildings.
City councils, school boards, chambers of commerce, and other bastions of white control need to wake up to their contribution to the fear and loathing that defines race relations in our cities today. Ease up on the idyllic and lighten up on the stigmas. Maybe that's how we can start to get along.
There have been a lot of racial tensions in my community which has a long history of being racially divided, but the polite culture here tries to overlook any overt racism. Unfortunately, the divisions have accelerated this year and the hounds of bigotry have been unleashed. I have been shocked at the level of vitriol expressed in local blogs and comments on news articles. Politeness has gone out the window and many whites feel compelled to "call a spade a spade" in no uncertain terms. It has become quite uncomfortable and I wonder if this is just occurring in my town or part of a general elevation in urban racial rancor.
I decided to look at news accounts around the country on race relations. I found that my community is not alone in the division over race and that some cities are experiencing extremely hostile incidents of race divisions. School desegregation became especially contentious in St. Petersburg, FL where neighborhood schools would now mirror segregated communities. A small town in PA experienced some nasty racial conflicts at a local school that spilled over to the city's general population. Milwaukee, San Diego, Fort Worth, Richmond, VA, Kansas City, MO, Portland, Seattle, Memphis, and Philadelphia all had multiple articles on school and/or employment conflicts that stemmed from racial divides. Racism seems to be alive and well in the USA.
Why is it that tensions escalate so rapidly when race is involved? It becomes a matter of life and death the way white people approach it. A columnist in Kansas City wrote about racial tensions in that city and the level of scathing criticism of this black columnist from white readers was astonishing. It amounted to a written lynching. Letters to the editor in St. Pete were edgy over the needs of kids to go to schools in their neighborhood and the liberal, social agenda of integrating schools. Writers made the point that if people don't want to live together, the "state" should not force kids to go to school together. The secondary point was the need for kids to be able to go to school in their neighborhood. Apparently the integrated schools look like "Good Times" while white communities are "Mayberry." Sorry folks, you can't have it both ways.
This is a common fallacy that white folks make as they try to deal with racial issues. Their white neighborhood is always portrayed as a safe haven where Sheriff Griffith and Deputy Fife stroll by with a kind word. The city council, school board, schools, and inner-city neighborhoods are portrayed as the squalid projects of "Good Times" where everyone is a hustler or uneducated and no one is up to snuff. This is the default view of a white community that sees itself as the quintessential representative of the way people want to live. Wouldn't everyone want to live in Mayberry? And if you are not just like us, then you should be vilified for not living up to our standards. We deride your "Good Times."
What we white folks don't see is that Deputy Fife is out on the back roads intimidating the blacks to keep on their side of town so that the streets are safe for Aunt Bee. The other things we don't see are the good families, hard working, and ethical people who live in the 'hood. While we prefer to see only crime and gangs and unemployed men with women on welfare, the reality is much different. We choose to see what we want to see. Our neighborhoods are idyllic while black neighborhoods are stigmatized. It's about as silly as saying that middle east terrorists are jealous of us so that's why they flew into the World Trade buildings.
City councils, school boards, chambers of commerce, and other bastions of white control need to wake up to their contribution to the fear and loathing that defines race relations in our cities today. Ease up on the idyllic and lighten up on the stigmas. Maybe that's how we can start to get along.
Sunday, December 23, 2007
R-E-S-P-E-C-T
A friend relayed a neighborhood incident to me and it made me think about the role "respect" plays in race relations.
A white neighbor was rehabbing his house and made an agreement with his black neighbor to park an extra vehicle on that neighbor's property, so as not to damage the car by parking it in his own driveway. After the rehab was mostly done, the white neighbor did not remove the vehicle and in fact added a tool trailer. He had permission from the black neighbor. One day, the grandson of the black neighbor had enough and argued with the white neighbor to remove his vehicles, that it was time to end the agreement, and that the issue was respect. Well, the white guy had no clue. "Respect?," he said, "why you should respect me because I have an agreement with your grandmother to park my vehicles here." The grandson went ballistic and angrily expounded on his position. "You don't respect me because you are taking advantage of my grandma by parking here. You can use your own driveway now because your construction work is done. You are just using us." The white guy protested and said, "I'm not taking advantage. I have standing. I have an agreement. I'm not hurting you."
What the white guy did not get is that the black grandson saw this as an issue of disrespect. The white guy was using the neighbor after the obvious need to do so was over. Therefore, he was poaching on the neighbor and using his whiteness to do so. The black grandson was rankled by the lack of power he had in the situation and that every day the white neighbor continued this visual sign of power over the grandmother.
At one point the grandson tried to explain the logic to the white neighbor. He said to him, "You have your own property, why do you have to use ours? You are not respecting me and I have lived here all my life. This is my neighborhood." Part of what he meant by this was that he, as the black resident in a black neighborhood, should be allowed to set the terms of relationship.
The white neighbor felt that the grandson was playing the race card by complaining. After all, as a good white neighbor, he had gotten a legitimate agreement with the grandmother. But the white neighbor had introduced a new "agreement" that did not match the expectations of the grandson. The grandson saw this clearly as a race issue of the white guy using his race power.
This example demonstrates the subtleties of white privilege. We have the privilege of making agreements and never have to worry about someone taking advantage of us because of our race (except when we are blind to this and call it playing the race card). People of color are in the position that they assume race will be a factor in any interracial agreement. It doesn't matter what our white intent is. It only matters what the perception is.
The white neighbor is known to call the police when he feels that the neighborhood guys are smoking weed or possibly selling weed on the street. The grandson sees that as interference in his activities. Does the white neighbor have the right to call the police? Sure he does. It is effective? Not if you want to be in relationship with your neighbor. Try a conversation. Try to comprehend the point of view of those young men. You don't agree with them. I get that. Have a conversation anyway in order to hear their point of view. Show some respect. Because I can guarantee that without that relationship, the perception will be that you, as a white person, will always use your race to your own advantage and disrespect your black neighbor.
A white neighbor was rehabbing his house and made an agreement with his black neighbor to park an extra vehicle on that neighbor's property, so as not to damage the car by parking it in his own driveway. After the rehab was mostly done, the white neighbor did not remove the vehicle and in fact added a tool trailer. He had permission from the black neighbor. One day, the grandson of the black neighbor had enough and argued with the white neighbor to remove his vehicles, that it was time to end the agreement, and that the issue was respect. Well, the white guy had no clue. "Respect?," he said, "why you should respect me because I have an agreement with your grandmother to park my vehicles here." The grandson went ballistic and angrily expounded on his position. "You don't respect me because you are taking advantage of my grandma by parking here. You can use your own driveway now because your construction work is done. You are just using us." The white guy protested and said, "I'm not taking advantage. I have standing. I have an agreement. I'm not hurting you."
What the white guy did not get is that the black grandson saw this as an issue of disrespect. The white guy was using the neighbor after the obvious need to do so was over. Therefore, he was poaching on the neighbor and using his whiteness to do so. The black grandson was rankled by the lack of power he had in the situation and that every day the white neighbor continued this visual sign of power over the grandmother.
At one point the grandson tried to explain the logic to the white neighbor. He said to him, "You have your own property, why do you have to use ours? You are not respecting me and I have lived here all my life. This is my neighborhood." Part of what he meant by this was that he, as the black resident in a black neighborhood, should be allowed to set the terms of relationship.
The white neighbor felt that the grandson was playing the race card by complaining. After all, as a good white neighbor, he had gotten a legitimate agreement with the grandmother. But the white neighbor had introduced a new "agreement" that did not match the expectations of the grandson. The grandson saw this clearly as a race issue of the white guy using his race power.
This example demonstrates the subtleties of white privilege. We have the privilege of making agreements and never have to worry about someone taking advantage of us because of our race (except when we are blind to this and call it playing the race card). People of color are in the position that they assume race will be a factor in any interracial agreement. It doesn't matter what our white intent is. It only matters what the perception is.
The white neighbor is known to call the police when he feels that the neighborhood guys are smoking weed or possibly selling weed on the street. The grandson sees that as interference in his activities. Does the white neighbor have the right to call the police? Sure he does. It is effective? Not if you want to be in relationship with your neighbor. Try a conversation. Try to comprehend the point of view of those young men. You don't agree with them. I get that. Have a conversation anyway in order to hear their point of view. Show some respect. Because I can guarantee that without that relationship, the perception will be that you, as a white person, will always use your race to your own advantage and disrespect your black neighbor.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
