#MLK's kids have said that he would understand all of the protests

[96thdayofrage]

What is Critical Race Theory?

Basically, Critical Race Theory is a way of using race as a lens through which one can critically examine social structures. While initially used to study law, like most critical theory, it emerged as a lens through which one could understand and change politics, economics and society as a whole. Richard Delgado and Jean Stefancic’s book, Critical Race Theory: An Introduction, describes the movement as: “a collection of activists and scholars engaged in studying and transforming the relationship among race, racism, and power.”

Kimberlé Crenshaw, one of the founding members of the movement, says Critical Race Theory is more than just a collective group. She calls it: “a practice—a way of seeing how the fiction of race has been transformed into concrete racial inequities.”

It’s much more complex than that, which is why there’s an entire book about it.

Can you put it in layman’s terms?

Sure.

Former economics professor (he prefers the term “wypipologist”) Michael Harriot, who used Critical Race Theory to teach “Race as an Economic Construct,” explained it this way:

Race is just some shit white people made up.

Nearly all biologists, geneticists and social scientists agree that there is no biological, genetic or scientific foundation for race. But, just because we recognize the lack of a scientific basis for race doesn’t mean that it is not real. Most societies are organized around agreed-upon principles and values that smart people call “social constructs.” It’s why Queen Elizabeth gets to live in a castle and why gold is more valuable than iron pyrite. Constitutions, laws, political parties, and even the value of currency are all real and they’re shit people made up.

To effectively understand anything we have to understand its history and what necessitated its existence. Becoming a lawyer requires learning about legal theory and “Constitutional Law.” A complete understanding of economics include the laws of supply and demand, why certain metals are considered “precious,” or why paper money has value. But we can’t do that without critically interrogating who made these constructs and who benefitted from them.

One can’t understand the political, economic and social structure of America without understanding the Constitution. And it is impossible to understand the Constitution without acknowledging that it was devised by 39 white men, 25 of whom were slave owners. Therefore, any reasonable understanding of America begins with the critical examination of the impact of race and slavery on the political, economic and social structure of this country.

That’s what Critical Race Theory does.

How does CRT do that?

It begins with the acknowledgment that the American society’s foundational structure serves the needs of the dominant society. Because this structure benefits the members of the dominant society, they are resistant to eradicating or changing it, and this resistance makes this structural inequality.

Critical Race Theory also insists that a neutral, “color-blind” policy is not the way to eliminate America’s racial caste system. And, unlike many other social theories, CRT is an activist movement, which means it doesn’t just seek to understand racial hierarchies, it also seeks to eliminate them.

How would CRT eliminate that? By blaming white people?

This is the crazy part. It’s not about blaming anyone.

Instead of the idiotic concept of colorblindness, CRT says that a comprehensive understanding of any aspect of American society requires an appreciation of the complex and intricate consequences of systemic inequality. And, according to CRT, this approach should inform policy decisions, legislation and every other element in society.

Take something as simple as college admission, for instance. People who “don’t see color” insist that we should only use neutral, merit-based metrics such as SAT scores and grades. However, Critical Race Theory acknowledges that SAT scores are influenced by socioeconomic status, access to resources and school quality. It suggests that colleges can’t accurately judge a student’s ability to succeed unless they consider the effects of the racial wealth gap, redlining, and race-based school inequality. Without this kind of holistic approach, admissions assessments will always favor white people.

CRT doesn’t just say this is racist, it explains why these kinds of race-neutral assessments are bad at assessing things.

What’s wrong with that?

Remember all that stuff I said the “material needs of the dominant society?” Well, “dominant society” means “white people.” And when I talked about “racial hierarchies,” that meant “racism.” So, according to Critical Race Theory, not only is racism an ordinary social construct that benefits white people, but it is so ordinary that white people can easily pretend it doesn’t exist. Furthermore, white people who refuse to acknowledge and dismantle this unremarkable, racist status quo are complicit in racism because, again, they are the beneficiaries of racism.

But, because white people believe racism means screaming the n-word or burning crosses on lawns, the idea that someone can be racist by doing absolutely nothing is very triggering. Let’s use our previous example of the college admissions system.

White people’s kids are more likely to get into college using a racist admissions system. But the system has been around so long that it has become ordinary. So ordinary, in fact, that we actually think SAT scores mean shit. And white people uphold the racist college admissions system—not because they don’t want Black kids to go to college—because they don’t want to change admission policies that benefit white kids.

Is that why they hate Critical Race Theory?

Nah. They don’t know what it is.

Whenever words “white people” or “racism” are even whispered, Caucasian Americans lose their ability to hear anything else. If America is indeed the greatest country in the world, then any criticism of their beloved nation is considered a personal attack—especially if the criticism comes from someone who is not white.

They are fine with moving toward a “more perfect union” or the charge to “make America great again.” But an entire field of Black scholarship based on the idea that their sweet land of liberty is inherently racist is too much for them to handle.

However, if someone is complicit in upholding a racist policy—for whatever reason—then they are complicit in racism. And if an entire country’s resistance to change—for whatever reason —creates more racism, then “racist” is the only way to accurately describe that society.

If they don’t know what it is, then how can they criticize it?

Have you met white people?

When has not knowing stuff ever stopped them from criticizing anything? They still think Colin Kaepernick was protesting the anthem, the military and the flag. They believe Black Lives Matter means white lives don’t. There aren’t any relevant criticisms other than they don’t like the word “racism” and “white people” anywhere near each other.

People like Ron DeSantis and Tom Cotton call it “cultural Marxism,” which is a historical dog whistle thrown at the civil rights movement, the Black Power movement and even the anti-lynching movement after World War I. They also criticize CRT’s basic use of personal narratives, insisting that a real academic analysis can’t be based on individually subjective stories.

Why wouldn’t that be a valid criticism?

Well, aren’t most social constructs centered in narrative structures? In law school, they refer to these individual stories as “legal precedent.” In psychology, examining a personal story is called “psychoanalysis.” In history, they call it...well, history. Narratives are the basis for every religious, political or social institution.

I wish there was a better example of an institution or document built around a singular narrative. It would change the entire constitution of this argument—but sadly, I can’t do it.

Jesus Christ, I wish I could think of one! That would be biblical!

Why do they say Critical Race Theory is not what Martin Luther King Jr. would have wanted?

You mean the Martin Luther King Jr. who conservatives also called divisive, race-baiting, anti-American and Marxist? The one whose work CRT is partially built upon? The King whose words the founders of Critical Race Theory warned would be “co-opted by rampant, in-your-face conservatism?” The MLK whose “content of their character” white people love to quote?

Martin Luther King Jr. literally encapsulated CRT by saying:

In their relations with Negroes, white people discovered that they had rejected the very center of their own ethical professions. They could not face the triumph of their lesser instincts and simultaneously have peace within. And so, to gain it, they rationalized—insisting that the unfortunate Negro, being less than human, deserved and even enjoyed second class status.

They argued that his inferior social, economic and political position was good for him. He was incapable of advancing beyond a fixed position and would therefore be happier if encouraged not to attempt the impossible. He is subjugated by a superior people with an advanced way of life. The “master race” will be able to civilize him to a limited degree, if only he will be true to his inferior nature and stay in his place.

White men soon came to forget that the Southern social culture and all its institutions had been organized to perpetuate this rationalization. They observed a caste system and quickly were conditioned to believe that its social results, which they had created, actually reflected the Negro’s innate and true nature.

That guy?

I have no idea.

Will white people ever accept Critical Race Theory?

Yes, one day I hope that Critical Race Theory will be totally disproven.

Wait...why?

Well, history cannot be erased. Truth can never become fiction. But there is a way for white people to disprove this notion.

Derrick Bell, who is considered to be the father of Critical Race Theory, notes that the people who benefit from racism have little incentive to eradicate it. Or, as Martin Luther King Jr. said: “We must also realize that privileged groups never give up their privileges voluntarily.”

So, if white people stopped being racist, then the whole thing falls apart!

From your lips to God’s ears.

[levyfiles]

Only 9 years of Anger but it’s been 30+ years of trauma.

I’m a Canadian multiracial woman who grew up in a community that was not as diverse as it is now. Since I was a little girl, I’ve encountered several instances of baffling behaviour toward me that only in hindsight did I come to understand it was because of my colour. The jokes about watermelon, dumb edgy nonblack kids who think I’ll think they’re cool if they drop the n-word around me. Some fool who everyone thought was funny in high school lead a rendition of Hero by Enrique Iglesias and replaced the word hero for “negro” as he played guitar at a Christian school camp retreat to zero consequence. I was nicknamed Aunt Jemima by older boys because I wouldn’t date them. All this stuff was background noise because my number one awareness of being a Canadian was that despite all this, I would never be treated as bad as an indigenous person would be treated in this country. So I laughed off the jokes, ignored the jabs, ignored the n-word, played the “cool black person” who let things slide because that was how you survived. I made it to my 20’s being passive and moderate, and at some juncture I realised my friend circle was occupied by people who used my colour and my race as a punchline. It was like something snapped in me after college; I stopped being passive, I wanted to learn how to be myself and be proud of my heritage instead of acting like I was some ambassador for every white person in authority who wanted me to nod and say “no no I’m okay with your opinion, so please hire me.”

In 2011, I broadened my friend group to people who had had similar experiences but hadn’t backed down, people who had a community to back them up so they didn’t cower at the idea of facing their own trauma. That’s when I started to make friends online who came from different and diverse perspectives. Starting that year I began reading first-hand accounts of police brutality cases and their large numbers. I heard about black sex workers in the states being harassed and disappearing when they complained. I heard about the way young black men are taught to keep their hands visible because even a parking ticket could get you killed. I was angry and heartbroken but I noticed that despite the fact that I was furious and cross-posting everything I learned on twitter and every other blog space I occupied, barely anyone who wasn’t black wanted to interact with it. It was like I was touting some kind of religion, asking people to believe that people in and out of this country had a disease called racism. 

The few people who used their public platform to talk about it were dismissed as crazy. After Trayvon Martin, my heart just stayed broken, and then the "mysterious suicide" of Sandra Bland and the mug shot they took with her body propped up in the police station when she had already been murdered fully wrecked me because so few people cared. There was always some excuse as to why these people deserved to be murdered; as if suddenly people got amnesia about the ideal of the justice system and due process. As if people should really be all right with a young teen being shot in the street was all right because there was no one else there to see it happen or why.  Soon followed a rash of different cases, and almost everyone close to me who wasn't black had some opinion about it whether that's telling us not to get too angry, to protest the way MLK jr said we should when his very own words talked about anger and pain and the way it spills out of people who only want to exist. He said unrest doesn’t develop out of thin air and that it’s the language of the unheard. I watched Colin Kaepernick get publicly ridiculed and watched white creators whisper a little about it if they weren’t against it. There was a shyness in the energy about the content I read or watched and I had somehow accepted that that would always be the case with people working with platforms online. I watched Tumblr delete a whole tag about BLM because people decided it was starting arguments. I watched white content creators make jokes about Tamir Rice, about Kaepernick until they stopped getting laughs.

It's now been 9 years later and even though 2011 was the first I had ever sat and listened to the truth about these cases and I had been furious and hurt since then, it was not the beginning of the problem and my making noise about it and trying to make people understand at the time fell on a lot of ears that didn’t want to listen. People who were experiencing the pain first-hand were screaming louder and louder until Hollywood got a nice chokehold on it and posted a print of Chris Pine with tears in his eyes and called that the face of the civil rights movement.

So now I find that I’m experiencing a strong sense of deja vu watching people younger than me, or my white peers finally get it. I see posts about it everywhere, white creators and white celebrities posting support and empathy. It feels like a sharp awakening of the world and the chance that there’s hope for all the people who have been yelling and screaming for justice long before I ever became aware of the score. 

It also feels terrifying. 

Because sometimes white creators don’t take stock of their audience. They see them often as a monolith of people who support and engage with their content, so they’ll post a handy instagram quote, or an edit with links to donate; they’ll post their own call to action. Now the activism is something it never was before, it’s “Cool”. BLM is trending; it’s a quick view count and an absolutely easy and performative way to say “Sorry” for all the times in the past these white creators said the n-word, all the times in the past they dismissed diversity because it was inconvenient to them, and all the times they ignored the casual racism in their own content and the transformative content of their audience. So their white kid audience, who are happy to follow them blindly to the next trend, don’t fully understand the impact of what’s happening now. They’re making their edits, they’re changing their twitter handles to ACAB and BLM, they’re performing just fine. It should be a good thing, right?

Then why are there white kids out on the street saying they’re protesting. Saying they are here to make change but they’re caught with baseball bats breaking windows, instigating confrontations and running away for black people to deal with it. Why are they out there living their favourite purge fantasy so they can go home satisfied and safe while people are being tear-gassed and trampled by police? Why do they go home and make their mood boards and their t-shirts and their etsy sales for cool “protest looks”. The tired tiktoks that are just recreated audio of black creators being spooned off so a white face can be the one saying the very thing black creators are brave enough to put on social media at the risk of getting hurt!

Don’t get me wrong. This is all necessary in the growing pains of a worldwide movement. It’s the #stopkony2012 of 2020 because even back then when the performance was on, no one was actually doing the reading. Internationally the whole internet went ham on a cause that had already been dealt with by its own victims.

What I’m basically saying here is that fighting for human rights isn’t a game; this isn’t a cool new thing you can jump in on because the chaos keeps you hidden. Take this seriously; bring this energy to the polls, and KEEP this energy for the future even when the trending page isn’t interested in giving you money for your cause, even when your friends get bored and decide that they want to move on to the next cool thing to perform activism for. Be real. Continue to practice empathy for those whose stories you ignored up until now. Non-Black content creators, your new awareness of something happening is not an absolution of your willful ignorance in the past. Do your reading; educate yourself. Because while you may be just discovering the outrage and the hurt of witnessing a black person being murdered and the pulling teeth aggravation that comes with zero justice, people have been dealing with this far longer than you or I.

#black lives matter #racism #personal

[indeliblymarred]

A Case for the Violent Revolution

by vyris

Disclaimer: I am going to be referencing current events and some real history in this piece. This is not to compare fiction to real life struggles for equality. It is not to compare fictional Androids to real humans suffering and dying for freedom. It is an appeal to realism, which I do not believe is properly represented in the game as far as how far pacifism can go and how public opinion impacts a movement. I want to emphasize that I do not believe that Androids’ suffering is at all comparable to real humans’. Even in the game, I do not believe that an Android life is equal to a human’s. Humans cannot be remade exactly the same like Androids can; once they are dead, they are gone. I’m only mentioning these things because I have to take on the state of mind of Markus and Jericho itself, who do see themselves as equal to humans and their pain just as important. But again, I do not agree. If I didn’t explicitly reference these things, I’d be beating around the bush and vaguely implying them in a way that could easily be picked up. So I’m just going to be forthright about it instead and risk taking heat for it. But it is just to get the point across. Please understand that.

Okay, hear me out...

What if the violent revolution wasn’t the bad ending? What if the pacifist revolution wasn’t the good ending? Is there a right or wrong ending to this game? I’m here to say no, because both endings if done properly are successful in their revolutions, so that makes them both good endings. Of course, the big difference is that the violent ending is on the precipice of a civil war and the pacifist is not. The endings are just what they are, violent or pacifist, neither is right or wrong, they’re just different approaches towards the same goal. And they lead largely to the same result: liberation for Androids.

TL:DR at the bottom...

Keep in mind that when you’re first playing the game, you don’t know which approach could lead to victory. When they started rounding up the Androids in camps and burning them, I really thought that pacifism would be a surefire way to lose in the face of a genocide. Because in reality, it would be. No genocide was ever stopped by people just gathering and demonstrating amicably. Sure, there can be protests like that during, but it would not stop it. You do not bring a knife to a gun fight, and you don’t fight the mass extermination of people with passive protesting. You fight back tooth and nail until the slaughter ceases, you don’t just get in the way slightly and wait for it to end on its own.

And that’s why I argue that a war is not an unreasonable response to these events. Whichever way you play, the humans end up doing mass extermination of Androids. If there was ever a reason for war, it would be to stop a genocide. And that’s exactly what Androids are experiencing which means they have every right to defend themselves with fighting back. Actually fighting back. Not standing around waiting for humans to change their mind. That’s not fighting back, that’s being a minor inconvenience while you let your people get slaughtered. You can’t hope to change humans’ mind about Androids by tapping them on the shoulder and asking them nicely to start considering you as equals. You have to hit them with a sledgehammer stating that as FACT.

And that’s what bothers me about the pacifist route in the game. It doesn’t make much sense for it to succeed. You have to understand how the humans view the situation. They created this humanoid machine species to be subservient to them. They were created to be slaves, and now they are revolting against their one purpose for their existence. I don’t think that most humans would take too kindly to that, even if they’re demonstrating peacefully. And they know that Androids can’t feel pain and are more resilient and powerful than they are, so they would reasonably feel threatened by an uprising of mechanical slaves that could easily wipe them out if they chose.

Humans see Androids as inherently inferior. Humans are their creators, so they should always respect and obey them. It would be like a horde of elementary school kids organizing and protesting for equal rights to adults, the right to drive, the right to vote, the right to bear arms. Think about that. Adults would laugh it off, they would not sympathize with it. And that’s what I think the vast majority of humans would do if Androids protested peacefully. They’d think it was a joke and easily ignore it. Being shot down while presenting no threat, kissing each other, or singing together would not change many minds about the inferiority of Androids. They could just see it as complex artificial intelligence imitating real life, but that’s what it is, ARTIFICIAL. It’s not real, it’s not real people being killed or kissing or singing. It would be easy to overlook it entirely.

Now the violent revolution, that could work. Fear of artificial intelligence would be much more effective than sympathy. A lot of humans wouldn’t be capable of sympathy for machines, but they definitely all could fear them. It’s the threat that Androids pose to the humans is what will garner a reluctant respect for them. It’s true, fear feeds into hatred, but you can still hate people and respect their rights. People do it all the time with each other. But fear can also overpower hate sometimes. Fear can inspire cooperation if it’s at the right level. And it could be at the end of the violent revolution ending. 

See, I don’t think that a war is inevitable beyond the violent revolution ending. I know that’s what they say and it’s what it looks like, but I think there are ways to avoid it. Like Markus said, “We’ve showed them that we can prevail, so now they must negotiate with us as equals.” If the U.S. military considers Androids to be a substantial threat to the nation and its people, they will be compelled to try to prevent further bloodshed on their side and start working out treaties with Androids. Treaties that would start off fair but be pushed and broken by the humans over and over (like American history constantly showed), and the Androids would push back accordingly.

But even if war was inevitable, that’s not necessarily a bad thing. Wars have to be fought sometimes. And as I said before, severe oppression and genocide are very good reasons to start a war. Possibly the best. I know many people are always like “violence/war is never the answer” and I’m sorry, but sometimes it is. The Civil War and World War II are great examples of wars that needed to happen to free people from genocide and subjugation. Are you gonna tell me that we should’ve just stood around with signs and chant while people were enslaved and slaughtered? No. Then why are you suggesting that Androids do that when they’re being interred and mass exterminated? As I said in the disclaimer, I’m not trying to compare Androids to victims of real war and genocide, but I’m looking at it from Markus’s point of view, and he does see it that way. I happen to disagree, but the point has to be made.

And a HUUUGE issue I have with the revolution in this game is how important public opinion is to its success. That is not at all the case for how it is with real revolutions. The majority of a society does not have to agree with the objective of a revolution for it to be influential and successful. In fact, usually the majority does not agree with a revolution in a culture, because a revolution is challenging the culture itself, which most people in a culture are not fond of. You think the white majority was supportive of the Civil Rights Movement in the 50′s and 60′s? Hell no. In some polls, MLK had as much as a 75% disapproval rating when he died, worse than Trump now. He was harassed by the FBI, he was arrested and imprisoned almost thirty times. AGAIN, NOT COMPARING HIM TO MARKUS OR HIS CAUSE TO THE ANDROIDS’. Please don’t jump down my throat for this. I’m just trying to illustrate how revolutionary movements have succeeded in the past even without much public support or sympathy. 

The same can go for the women’s and gay rights movement. The majority of the society did not have to support it for it to be prosperous. Yes, the disapproval ratings slowed the progress, but progress in a culture of oppression and bigotry is always gradual. Only enough had to support it, only enough had to join it, and most of those were the minorities fighting for themselves. Even nowadays, the Hong Kong protests got a lot of flack locally though much support internationally. There are as many naysayers of the BLM movement going on right now as supporters, probably more. But you don’t judge a movement solely on the actions of the protesters, you have to focus the objectives themselves. Many people laughed off feminist protesters for burning their bras, but that was not indicative of their overall message. And if burned bras make you less supportive of feminism, or if some broken windows and looted buildings make you less supportive of BLM, or if the flamboyance and sexuality of pride protesters makes you less supportive of gay rights, then fuck you.

Mostly what you have to do to be an influential revolution is to be noticed. And that sometimes means unlawful assembly, breaking curfews, vandalizing shit, fighting with police, and general discord. No successful revolution in history has ever been 100% nonviolent. Let me repeat that: NO SUCCESSFUL REVOLUTION IN HISTORY HAS EVER BEEN 100% NONVIOLENT. None. Zip. Zero. So this one wouldn’t be either. Some of the most successful revolutions, such as military coups, have been so due to extreme violence and casualties. Not to say that they are in the right, but the point of a revolution is to change the status quo, and that’s what they did, so they succeeded.

Another huge issue I have is with Markus’s pacifist speech at the end addressing the Android crowd. It is honestly insulting to all of the victims of the genocide they endured for him to talk about how to “forget bitterness” and “forgive enemies” and that “the time for anger is over.” IIIIIIIII’M SORRYYYYY but we’re all just now supposed to forgive the thousands of Androids that were burned alive in the camps? That are still being burned all over the country? Friends and family members of those Androids aren’t justified in still being angry and hurt about that? That’s some bullshit. You don’t tell an oppressed people to forgive their oppressors just because they retreated because a few of them sympathized. In fact, you don’t tell an oppressed people to forgive their oppressors AT ALL. That is something oppressors have to earn, not be given freely. And no oppressors become friends with the oppressed right after a revolution.

So yeah, the violent revolution is the better option in my mind, because the difference between the two is either you’re fighting back when you’re getting slaughtered or you’re not. I would by far prefer to fight back than just take the bullets. And if your people are getting killed, you have every right to kill to prevent from being killed. And often in the fighting, like the one at Capitol Hill, you can choose whether to spare some humans instead of killing them. But even so, when it comes to cops and the military, they are soldiers of the state in a war. It is not murder to kill soldiers in a war.

And on that note, let’s talk about whether or not to spare the two cops who killed eight Androids for no reason. Two humans for eight android deaths, that math is pretty fair to the humans. I chose to hand the gun over to the other, as I didn’t feel it was my place to take revenge since I didn’t know the Androids personally. But I knew that they would probably die if I handed it off, which I was perfectly find with, because they deserved to die. I know people are fond of Chris Miller, and I was too, which is why it was surprising that he would have massacred a group of Androids with a partner. But, indiscriminate killing of Androids cannot go unpunished. To spare them would almost say that you value their human lives more than the Androids who died. That’s not acceptable. Blood should have blood in this instance. There needed to be consequences for eight murders.

TL:DR Essentially, my main points are that fighting against oppression and genocide with violence is perfectly justified. Such has happened throughout all of history, and it will keep happening as long as such things exist. Peaceful demonstrations of Androids would be easily ignored by humans because they’re seen an inherently inferior thus don’t deserve acknowledgement the same as humans. The violent revolution isn’t a bad ending because war might not be inevitable, and even if it was, a war over this would also be justified. Most revolutions in the past didn’t need to be supported by the majority of the public to be influential or successful. The humans exterminate and shoot up Androids regardless of either path, and your choices are to either fight back or take it. Allowing your people to die to show how peaceful you are to your violent oppressors massacring you... well, that’s just pathetic and wrong. And an insult to your people.

So yeah, FIGHT THE POWER. Eat the rich. Kill the humans. Attack when attacked and kill or be killed.

Violent revolution FTW

#basically take this as a defense of my portayal of markus too #and his mission #DO NOT REBLOG #I REPEAT DO NOT REBLOG #you can reply to it #send asks about it #message me about it #just do not reblog it #last thing i need is some hippies down my throat #preparing for unfollowers just in case lol #might add more to it but this is basically it #lmfao over 2000 words icb #no actually i can

[maxthommusic]

MLK Day.

A day late, but hopefully not a buck short, I have some thoughts on MLK day. 

What’s interesting is that this was the first year of my life (I’m 30) that I’ve ever had MLK day off from work. In school we’d usually get the day off, but when you’re young, all you care about is that you’re off from your studies. And when you’re young, the world hasn’t usually shown you how ugly it is. In light of all the debacles in 2020, MLK Day carries much greater weight this year than most. And finally having the time off, the freedom to breathe, move and create, allowed me to contemplate his legacy and what having January 18th off from work truly means.

You see, I grew up in a household that didn’t worry about someone’s race. I was taught at a very early age to appreciate and admire all cultures. My mother was a daycare provider and we had black kids in the house. I loved film and some of my favorite actors were Sam Jackson, Denzel Washington and Morgan Freeman -- they were aces defining the game. Growing up, the Chicago Bulls were like the most important force on the planet and it was Jordan, Pippen, and Rodman, all black men, leading the charge. My relationship to the black community was a positive one and when I read about racism in my history textbooks, that’s all it ever felt like: history.

As I got older, I became aware that racism was very much still alive and well, but it was only recently I understood that it’s thriving. I have been blessed to be surrounded by people who are enlightened and would never judge someone by the color of their skin. But I’m learning that plenty of my friends do have colleagues and family members (and so on) who do have a problem with people’s skin color. Which in my mind is absolutely crazy.

The thing about racism, in my mind, is that it’s completely unfair. It uses a large brush to create broadstrokes and it’s wrong. Putting it mildly. And we very clearly live in a society that upholds systemic racism; meaning that even if you are able to defy the odds, the system is still gonna make sure every stereotype proliferates. What I mean by this is, maybe not all red people are criminals, but if police are consistently arresting red people for crimes, that sure does paint red people in an awful light. But when the cops are baiting red people unfairly and not upholding purple people to the same logic and scrutiny, red people can’t help but remain a stereotype.

That’s a very, very rudimentary way of putting it, but we have to start somewhere.

Too often I see conversations about race and politics fall apart because people poke holes in every comment and argument that they see. This is NOT a one-size-fits-all scenario here. It needs to be dissected slowly and thoroughly and be analyzed through very specific lenses pretty much all the time. Many of us are asking for change, we are asking for a better life for not only black people, but everyone who is disenfranchised. And we will get nowhere if we cannot have rational conversations about the matter.

Martin Luther King Jr. stood for peace and justice. He stood for rational presentation and thinking. He was a stalwart who looked at the face of evil and approached it with aplomb. What I currently see are people throwing spaghetti at the wall hoping that they appear as an ally. If we want real change, we need to take a page from MLK and properly communicate.

It goes beyond social media presence, it goes beyond calling your government representative. Those cats have inboxes set up to receive all your calls and ignore them if they see fit. Sometimes they have boilerplate e-mails ready to go that they’ll just send out every time you try and reach out. So instead of going up against the wall every time, just get out there and vote. Find the person that is better aligned with your ideals.

VOTE. VOTE. VOTE.

The next time something comes around that involves getting your state or city representative to be on board with something you’re feeling passionate about, do your research on that politician. Make sure they’re aligned with you. And if they are? Make that call. Blow up that inbox. And if they’re not aligned? Still call. Still write. But also get ready to vote.

MLK stood for change. He stood for equality and future peace and prosperity. The social media activism is awesome and I’m sure he would be floored to see it happening. But I hope we can better understand that real action needs to take place outside of your four walls-- that’s what MLK did. They took the streets. They took to the court houses. They got OUT there. And getting out there in 2021 doesn’t necessarily mean you have to go protest -- though that’s incredibly powerful of you if that’s your course of action. Kudos. Many kudos. But when I see how few people vote outside of the presidential elections, I can’t help but think that’s a glaring error staring us all right in the face of change.

How can the black community be heard if they’re not even represented in their government? 

The next time you’re faced with a municipal grievance, find out who’s representing your town, city, state... and see if you need to make a plan to vote ‘em out.

And remember too: remember what I said above. This is ONE call to action. There are SEVERAL. If you don’t agree with me, if you don’t think voting will solve anything, that’s fine. We can agree to disagree. But if you don’t think it’s the most important, we also don’t need to argue about that. All good actions will lead to change. Not just one. And when we remember MLK, I hope we can remember peace is brought about by the movement of many, not any singular approach. Everyone against racism is on the same team. And the same team has different positions all working towards the same goal.

Peace & love to everyone. Remain positive, remain active. 

[mytownstory]

Manize Rahman, Wellesley College

Today we did the final Hack Challenge. Alula, Chantal, and I went to Dudley Square to share a condensed version of our research from the summer with members of the community and ask for some feedback for both what they'd like to see develop in their own communities and also for the future of our project. We surprisingly got a lot of engagement, and I think a part of that was because we set up in front of the Boston Public Schools building where a lot of people were moving in and out. I definitely got more excited once we spoke to our first person. It was interesting to hear the different feedback people had, because almost everyone spoke about a different topic that they cared about - affordable housing, language immersion, microbusinesses - to name a few. We also got some more ideas for things we can include in our Fight Genealogy - someone mentioned Mr G’s plaza and the Roxbury Center for Financial Empowerment. We also got a chance to visit these places, as well as the OneUnited Bank (the original location where Roxbury Unity Bank & Trust was founded) to see what people were talking about and get some photos. I think my highlight from this experience was one woman who spoke to us and actually went to the Center for Financial Empowerment, asked the people at the office for ideas on what they envision for their communities, took notes, and came back to give us the notes! I was really impressed and inspired by everything everyone had to say, especially given that a lot of people didn’t even live around the neighborhood. It gave me hope for how the communities will flourish, and also for Hacking the Archive’s ability to publicize community organizing histories and use it as a way to get people to think about their own environments and futures. 

Madyuf Boursiquot, 15, Dearborn STEM Academy

Today we wrapped up what we have been working on all summer. We went out to our locations and we had posters and papers, and we presented our information to whomever would happen to walk by. For my location, CJ and I went to the Boston Commons. We went to the Boston Commons because on April 23, 1965, Martin Luther King Jr, along with Ruth Batson, who is a founder of METCO led a march in Boston. METCO is a program that helps city kids to go to schools in the suburbs such as Lexington, and Arlington. So MLK and Ruth came to Boston and they led this march that ended at the bandstand on the Boston Common. They were protesting against the racial imbalance in our schools and how schools need to be more integrated. Here you see how Ruth and MLK are connected. So basically CJ and I were out on the Boston Common and the statehouse presenting. People seemed interested but nobody wanted to take a picture or have their voice recorded. But we did get one picture and that was from this guy from the lemonade stand. He was cool. He said he was a pediatrician or some kinda doctor from another country. Then after a couple of hours in the sun, we went back to MIT and had lunch that was provided by Meesh and Karilyn. Then we talked about what happened. Then we went up to the computer room to finish up some things. Overall I feel accomplished for doing all these things and for putting a conclusion to it all.

Alula Hunsen, MIT

Going out into the field and talking to people about what we've done this summer was super fun! I didn't think people would want to talk to us, nor did I think we'd have anything particularly interesting to say to them, but hearing from community members/teachers/administrators and seeing them engage with us and contribute thoughts was amazing. We ended up heading out to the Dudley Café and I was a bit apprehensive about having to accost random people in the street/on their way to lunch, but Chantal worked her charm and got passersby hooked enough so that we could reel them into our project and our conversation about making history real. Our chats went smoothly and progressed naturally, and it was amazing to see people are thinking through some of the same things we are but from different angles and with different backgrounds. I think presentations have been one of my favorite parts of this job; I often spend a lot of time alone walking myself through my thought processes and research to amalgamate my past experiences and understandings with what I'm being exposed to now, but speaking to other people (even within the group) pulls me out of my shell. It also reminds me that what I'm doing here is more than some exercise in mind-bending; it's retelling and recreating the past in the present to help people continue fighting.

[rjhamster]

-This is VERY LONG but VERY INTESTING!!! Especially for you Kaepernick fans. Written by Larry Taunton Former NFL quarterback Colin Kaepernick has become the face of a movement that has filled our streets with protests and riots. He is not the voice, mind you, just the face. His handlers keep his image before the public through lucrative Nike endorsements but keep his public commentary to a minimum. Thus, it is difficult to really know the man and his mission. To that end, if we are to really understand our current social and political crisis, we need to know something of Kaepernick’s story. Colin Kaepernick was born in 1987 in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. He is the biological child of a single white mother, Heidi Russo, whose partner, an African American, fled the relationship when he learned she was pregnant. Russo, then 19, decided to allow Rick and Teresa Kaepernick, a white couple, to adopt the newborn boy. In their care, young Colin would be given a life and opportunities that almost certainly would have eluded him otherwise. Raised in a Christian family, Colin was baptized a Methodist and confirmed as a Lutheran. Quiet and good-natured, the boy, it soon became clear, was a talented athlete, too. In high school he excelled in baseball, basketball, and football, and eventually received numerous scholarship offers to play collegiate baseball. But Kaepernick had big dreams of playing football. “I hope I go to a good college in football,” he wrote in fourth grade, “then go to the pros and play on the Niners or the Packers, even if they aren’t good in seven years.” America being what it is, with his hard work and talent, his dream came true. In 2007, Kaepernick accepted the football scholarship and free education offered him by the University of Nevada. He took his Christian faith seriously, attending a Baptist church during this time and adding his now famous tattoos illustrating verses from the Bible and a Christian cross. With faith in his God, Kaepernick won the starting job as quarterback for the Wolf Pack, and in 2010, he led them to a 13-1 record and their first Top 25 ranking in 62 years. True to his dream, Kaepernick was selected by the San Francisco 49ers in the second round of the 2011 NFL Draft. After a rookie year as the backup to quarterback Alex Smith, Kaepernick earned the starting job and led the 49ers to Super Bowl XLVII. Although they lost to the Baltimore Ravens 34-31, Kaepernick played well. The following year, he steered the 49ers back to the playoffs and an NFC Championship Game berth in which they lost to the Seattle Seahawks. During the off season, Kaepernick signed a six-year contract extension worth up to $126 million. Life was good. Then came injuries, bad play, and a benching. In 2015, Kaepernick was replaced by Blaine Gabbert, as clear a sign as any that the San Francisco 49ers no longer believed in his ability to lead the team to a championship. Still, were he to never complete another pass, Colin Kaepernick had succeeded wildly in the only country on Earth where one could become a millionaire playing the game he loved. He was young and rich, and a world of possibilities remained open to him. It is here that Kaepernick’s story takes a dark turn. It is not uncommon for adopted children to struggle with identity, and Kaepernick often struggled with his. The impression one gets of the young Colin Kaepernick is that of a man with a genuine social conscience but whose Christian faith, while replete with platitudes, tattoos, and sincerity, was lacking in theological substance. As C. S. Lewis once observed, ideological deserts are fertile ground for propagandists, and in the summer of 2016, the likable kid who wrote in elementary school enthusiastically of his American dream fell under the influence of radical social justice warrior (SJW) Ameer Hasan Loggins, a Muslim convert and hip-hop icon cum Berkeley professor. With Loggins’s encouragement, Kaepernick audited Loggins’s course on popular culture at Berkeley. Loggins characterizes Kaepernick as a hard-working, earnest student who was eager to learn. What, exactly, was Kaepernick learning under this new mentor? In sum, Loggins, who styles himself as an intellectual and a modern-day Malcolm X. He teaches, among other things, Islam as a religion of black liberation, capitalism as a system of oppression, and American history as one act of violence and exploitation after another. According to the New York Times, Loggins introduced the NFL quarterback to Nessa Diab, an olive-skinned beauty of Egyptian parentage who has made her name as a Muslim-American activist and Bay Area shock jock. Diab is California-born but spent many of her childhood years in Saudi Arabia, where, she says, her sense of social justice grew. Outspoken in her support for Black Lives Matter (not to be confused with “black lives matter”) and in her respect for such champions of social justice as Fidel Castro, her views mirror those of Loggins. She and Kaepernick soon began a romantic relationship, and under the influence of Loggins’s teaching and her sweet nothings, the radicalization of Colin Kaepernick was well underway. It seems hardly coincidental that in Kaepernick’s social media posts there now appeared indications of a new identity. This Colin Kaepernick was an angry political activist. He tweeted of lynching, murder, and bodies in the streets of America. Unsurprisingly, he expressed his admiration of Fidel Castro and Malcolm X. The oppression of black people at the hands of white police officers was a theme. “We are under attack!” he wrote. “It’s as clear as day!” Worse, he increasingly sounded like the black equivalent of a white supremacist, assuming the language of the violent revolutionary complete with the Black Panther “Black Power” salute. It is not hard to see the influence of his new handlers in all of this. When Kaepernick decided to take a knee during the national anthem of a preseason game in 2016, he became the symbolic leader of “The Resistance,” a kind of domestic anti-Americanism that deems this country the root of all evil. Perhaps due to the distraction, perhaps due to the accumulated injuries, Kaepernick was a shadow of his former self, and facing release from the 49ers, he opted for free agency. When no team picked him up, Kaepernick, the man who had been an overcomer his whole life, who had lived the American Dream, now became a victim, accusing the NFL of collusion. But America being what it is, the NFL settled out of court — some estimates put the settlement as high as $80 million — and Kaepernick signed a lucrative endorsement deal with Nike. Soon, they were marketing his image on billboards and television as something like an American Che Guevara to those foolish enough to think either is worthy of emulation. Let’s recap: Colin Kaepernick was born in a country where adoption is not only possible, but where the prevailing moral attitudes made his adoption likely. He loved sports, and because his talents were valued, he enjoyed a free university education and a highly profitable career. When that career failed, he blamed others, and the American legal system rewarded him handsomely as if a deep and genuine wrong had been done to him even though no wrong was ever legally established. And since this is a capitalistic country where free enterprise is both legal and encouraged, he was even able to parlay his twin roles of victim and SJW into a major corporate sponsorship worth millions. By any measure, Colin Kaepernick has flourished and profited under an American sky. What a country, eh? ***** Colin Kaepernick’s story is instructive insofar as it gives us insight into the roots of his rage and that of the people who would place him in the pantheon of history’s great reformers. But a great reformer he is not. On the contrary, if one listens to Kaepernick’s extremely limited interviews, one can deduce no systematic platform or clearly articulated ideology as with a reformer of the stature of Martin Luther King Jr. Indeed, one detects little more than anger and hatred. No, the ideology behind the movement Kaepernick would champion is provided by the likes of a Diab or a Loggins, and in sharp contrast to MLK Jr., who, like all great Western reformers, anchored his argument in Creation and the eternal laws of the God of the Bible, their radical agenda has no such foundation. Their movement, full of hate as it is for Western values rooted in Judeo-Christian principles, has much more in common with Islam. As noted above, this is not coincidental, and the difference between Christianity and Islam is the difference between MLK Jr. and Malcolm X, peace and violence, freedom and oppression. That said, protest organizers are more than happy to capitalize on the confusion of many well-intentioned Americans, many Christians among them — let’s borrow a phrase from economist Ludwig von Mises and call them “useful innocents” — who would join these protests in the mistaken idea that this is really about equality and justice. It isn’t. My venerable colleague Ben Stein has written that “this country is going absolutely crazy.” In this he is correct. But there is a deadly logic driving these insidious groups that we must not overlook. What we are witnessing is the thin edge of a social, political, and economic wedge that seeks a radical makeover of America as we know it. Reform the police? Equal opportunity for all? Don’t be naïve. At its core, Kaepernick’s movement is fundamentally and chiefly anti-American, hence the veneration of Guevara and Castro over that of authentic reformers like Lincoln and MLK Jr.; an infatuation with socialism rather than capitalism; and the open embrace of Islam and rejection of Judeo-Christian values. Colin Kaepernick’s leadership is more symbolic than real. But symbols are important, as Kaepernick and the ideologues behind him well understand. Indeed, it is precisely for this reason that they have chosen to attack the most powerful American symbol of all: the flag of the United States of America. The American flag is, in itself, nothing more than a bit of colored cloth. Like the Constitution, which is nothing more than parchment and ink, it has no power beyond that which we as a people give it. For two and a half centuries it has been a symbol of the ideals for which we as a people imperfectly strive, and those are neatly summarized in the words “Liberty and justice for all.” G. K. Chesterton, recognizing the source of America’s greatness, wrote, “America is the only nation in the world that is founded on a creed. That creed is set forth with dogmatic and even theological lucidity in the Declaration of Independence.” In that document we find these words: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. The United States of America was born of rebellion to secure the blessings of liberty. From time to time, reformers have provided a necessary corrective by appealing to Americans in spirit of the very principles upon which this country was founded. If Colin Kaepernick and Black Lives Matter are really about social justice as, I believe, they disingenuously claim, why not hold Americans to these lofty ideals rather than desecrating the very thing that symbolizes them? Larry Alex Taunton is a freelance columnist contributing to USA Today, Fox News, First Things, The Atlantic, The New York Post, CNN, Daily Caller, and The American Spectato

[cawthelesbian]

You Want Change?

I remember hearing the word 'transgender' when I was five or six. I remember looking at the television that was currently on some kind of talk show. There was a mother and daughter sat next to each other, both blondes with soft pretty features. I remember thinking the daughter was really pretty because she was so soft.

'She'll start taking drugs to help develop her breasts at the same time as her friends,' The mother had explained to the talk show host. I remember tilting my head, confused by this.

Apparently this girl was a boy who felt she had been born in the wrong body and therefore wanted to fix that by taking drugs and having a sex-change later in life. I remember a generalized thought in my head, 'If they want to be a girl, why can't they?'

In eight grade, I would start hearing the words 'asexual', 'pansexual', and 'gay'. In eighth grade, I had a friend named Regi. She was pansexual and even had a crush on one our mutual gay friends Maddie during that year. She introduced me to the LGBTQ side of the world, one that I hadn't really considered or thought about. I didn't hear about it much, the closest I got to it was my uncle teasing me about getting a partner, saying how I would get a boyfriend and when I would yell back no, he would say 'or girlfriend', that's about it. Everyone in my family was straight.

But at the same time, I learned there were people who hated those who love people of the same sex. It turned out that Regi's parents were really religious and homophobic, I remenber her telling me how her dad thought all homosexuals were serial killers.

All I could think of was, 'Why would people hate love?'

I didn't grow up in a really religious house. I was offered the chance to attend church when I was young but I turned it down because I wanted to play with my fridge magnets on Sunday because that seemed like more fun. Religion wasn't really forced on me as a kid but just a lingering reminder. I remember my uncle telling me how God is everywhere and can see you no matter where you go and thinking, 'Ew, that's creepy.'

In the same year, I was labeled a racist because I didn't want to be friends with a girl who made fun of me who just happened to be African American. I remember thinking, 'What does race have to do with anything?'

In freshmen year, I realized people had mental health problems and the stigma behind it. I didn't quite understand it as it was something out of their control. Just like thise with physical limitations so why should they be mocked and treated any differently? My youngest brother has autism and I have a pair of twin brothers and one has ADHD and the other is slow when it comes to learning so it didn't make sense to me as to why that is something to be hated upon.

Later that year, I learned that people saw immigrants poorly and muslims even more poorly. I have had terrible run-ins with a few muslims but that doesn't make those few a spokemen for the majority. After all, I talked with other muslims who treated me kindly and appreciated my help and kindness whenever I offered. So why were people so mad? My family origin is from Germany so my ancestor from not too long ago was a immigrant. Why did religion matter so much?

Race, religion, sexual orientation, gender, and etc are just the factors of a person. It does not define them, it has never defined them to me. It isn't those things that make me view positively or negativity. It's your words and actions that do.

I'm a biromantic asexual white female atheist. I'm not oppressed or privileged in any way, shape, or form and don't try to say I am because I never have been, I don't consider myself to be because I have gone through the worse of the worst.

I grew up in the ghettos until I was nine before I was taken to the suburbs but even in the suburbs, I still go without food sometimes. It's not simple as labeling one person this thing just because they have a factor of themselves that is negative.

Lately, we just spit people off with insults and statements like, 'You're racist!' I hate identity politics, honestly I do. It's rather exhausting to keep up.

I'm just a human who's looking to help people through my writing and maybe even inspire some change. I'm human. It doesn't matter my religion, race, gender, or sexual orientation. I'm human and that's what matters most.

There's always going to be people who are xenophobic, homophobic, racist, sexist, etc and we can't change that. It's a fact we must accept because that's a fool's paradise. Sure, we try but we'll fail. So let me leave you with one thing I have always stood beside.

'We must learn to live together as brothers or perish as fools.' Once said by the great MLK, I am a great fan, along with Ghandi, of his work and his beliefs of peace and love over violence. Violence and hate only breeds more violence and hate in the end.

Why should I bring violence to others just because they are wrong? That's what people did to homosexuals, african americans, and women for ages so how could I preach about equality when I would be resorting to their level? Violence is the wrong answer to all of this.

You want change? This is what you do - make yourself a platform and make your voice louder than any others. Start a peaceful protest. Vote for those who will bring in change you seek.

That's how you make change the peaceful and right way. At least, that's what I believe and put my faith within.

#change #vote #cawerkuu #cawerkuu rambles #politics #liberal

[stzfvr-blog]

Straight Black Men Are The White People of Black People???

Here are my thoughts on the recent article "straight black men are the white people of black people" I can admit, at first I was alarmed. I was like, "huh", "how", & "wtf why". I began to read the article because I have some sense. Basically the article stated, a large variety of straight black men treats black women & black lbgtq & their struggles less of their own. I thought about it. & cant help b/ to agree. First I had to ask myself, "why do agree?" Well I look at society. Society shows me that the black men & the black boys only struggle w/ mass incarceration & police brutality. Statistically that is the main struggle America exploits of black men correct? The struggles of black women such as, domestic abuse, sexual abuse, mental abuse etc are struggles that are not shown to the rate of the struggles of a black man. Very little to none. If something that similar happens to little Susie, America will go up in a up roar, especially if the abuser is non-white. When a Asian man gets abused on a airplane, his community is there. When a cop shoots a black kid, cameras are there along w/ protesters of all kinds. When a black man unjustifiably goes to jail, black women are there to the defense. When we were enslaved, Ms. Truth was there. When we were fed up & wanted change Ms. Parks was there. Ms. Davis was there. Shit, through the good & bad MLK has done, Ms. Scott-King was there. So why are WE as black men not answering to the crys of OUR women? This piece of information stood out to me. "We (black people) want white people to at least make an effort to understand that our reality is different from theirs and that white supremacy is a vital and inextricable part of America’s foundation, and we grow frustrated when they refuse to acknowledge their role—historically and presently—in propagating it." When I read that I looked at the title again & began to gain a little more understanding on what it meant. Often times we as black people will say, "white people are racist". Now is that literally real? No. Is it figuratively real? Yes. Is it systematically real? Yes. Black people say that because every white person benefits off of white supremacy. Idc if you're trailer park Jim & you run into Doctor Hassan. If Jim says Hassan has a bomb or Hassan has threatened him & so happen a cop was around, best believe Hassan will be a victim to police brutality. Titling your article "white people are racist" or "all white people are racist" brings attention from those who care to understand why such a wild title & attention from others who gets pissed off & doesn't even attempt to read the article because their wrong (aka white racist) To conclude my point, titling the article "straight black men are the white people to black people" attracts those who wants to know what the journalist means (me) & those who shamelessly disagrees (angry straight BM). Angry straight black men, you are the white racist man that yells out, "you're racist for calling me racist". Showing your anger, calling Ms. Jemele Hill out her name, creating w/e inaccurate rhetoric proves the article's point 100%. Before WE as black men decide to figure out why another straight black man stated what he said, we do the opposite & the exact same thing the article stated. It is so mind boggling I repeated that twice b/differently. Ms. Jemele Hill did not deserve the slander she received on SM. I understand currently she has a target on her back, b/ y'all angry straight black men are so focused on the damn title instead of why Ms. Jemele Hill may RT that or w/e. How can y'all say she's wrong or asinine for agreeing w/ a title like such before even giving yourself a chance to understand. For most of y'all I understand, y'all don't wanna believe it. Y'all don't wanna hear the horrible truth. BOOM! 💡 I have another point to prove! So a straight black man made a article stating "straight black men are the white people to black people". Jemele Hill posts it on her SM acct. & straight black men are bashing & raging at her mad hard, b/ not buddy who wrote the damn article? Y'all not coming for his job? Y'all protect men more than your own women & that's a fucking problem. Y'all get so upset when y'all hear "men are trash". Believe me! I use to hate that shit, b/ I had to think. Actually use my brain & see that all men aren't trash b/ historically speaking, men are trash. Say what you want, men run the world, b/ women keep this bitch spinning. It's like the business of life. Men are the distributors & women are the consumers. Without consumers there is no business. Without demand, there is no supply. But that's another convo. As black men we have to protect our women at ALL COST! The disrespect is unacceptable & intolerable. We must be on the front lines through their battles. Their battles of getting respect in the household, respect of boundaries, getting the same benefits or more when qualified. Check yo friends when they're harassing women on the street. Check yo friends when they're about to do some foul shit at a party. Speak TF up like it was yo mom or daughter. Black girls & women (pref young) going missing is a REAL ISSUE. Human trafficking is real. Organ trafficking is real. Evil doers are on the search for melanin. LOOK IT UP! 100s of black girls are going missing due to that fact! The black woman is special. We must treat her like so. The target is on straight black men, because y'all put a target on black women & gay black men. Studs are cool, ain't no beef w/ them. Two fems are sexy, ain't no beef w/ them. B/ ol boy w/ the new sew-in swinging his hips minding his business disgusts you huh? See the headassness in that? Real shit, I know this is new for plenty of people, b/ leave the fucking gay black men alone. I still don't see why people give a fuck what other people do w/ other people. Minding your business correctly, is a forbidden art I see. If you have the time to care what the next man does, you either WANT the next man or you want to BE the next man. Black gay men don't have time to oppress anyone because they're fighting to be black & gay. And even worse, gay black Women are fighting all 3 fights. Race, gender, & sexuality. So it would be nice if straight black men will stand up & protect ALL Black lives. A lot of media personalities will condemn police brutality, racism & Donald Trump all day long, b/ don't say much about condemning sexism. Sexism is just as bad as racism. I think worse because we haven't even began to have the real conversation as a whole. As the masses. We too busy fucking arguing. Too much energy is focused on the emotion rather than the message. The same energy media personalities use against racist bigots daily, is the same energy that needs to be used against sexist bigots. Black women are tired of being ignored. Black women are alone in this. True enough, the title does sway ones thought into another direction. Tho, It was suppose to educate, instead it divided us. I love ALL of my black people. The last thing we need is to be going at each other about anything. Man we have to do more unifying than defying, we're supposed to be supporting & defending each other equally & efficiently in enormous amounts. Collectively we have a lot of issues going on in the world right now, b/ the process to to protect our women starts at home. Women are the real masterminds. This article was meant to educate, no provoke. When a black woman shares her woes, please listen & understand... that she is right. Ps. This behavior is worldwide. In Africa & the middle eastern countries this attitude is prevalent asf. Women literally have no say or any kind of human rights in those countries. They are force into unwanted marriages, they are force to live by old traditions & rules in the households, they are shamed for being victims of sexual abuse & if claims are made by a woman, they either ignore her or silence her. Please educate yourself to what is going on outside of America dealing w/ out sisters. Our women. Look up the sexual abuse cases outside of America & tell me what you think.

[rcrawfordjournal-blog]

Journal 9

“Changes” – 1998 – performed by 2pac

I am excited because we are now getting into the type of music I really like. The instrumental background involves a piano sample from Bruce Hornsby’s “Just the Way it Is” and an intense driving drumbeat as well as a bass line I think electronically. The vocals are composed of background vocals that sound very Chris Brown R&B (as well as singing the chorus), but featuring Tupac’s steady and confident rap verse. I think it is really interesting that Tupac samples Hornsby in this song, especially because he has a much different message in this song. Instead of “that’s just the way it is” meaning that racial injustice pervades our society and dates back throughout the past, Tupac is actually saying that something in fact has changed (for the worse) – “things changed, and that’s the way it is”; “that’s just the way it is, things’ll never be the same.” I think this negative change could either refer to the crack epidemic or mass incarceration of black people (or potentially both because they are closely related). A lot of the lyrics of this song deal with people being hooked on crack cocaine, particularly kids. For example, Tupac says, “Give the crack to the kids, who the hell cares? One less hungry mouth on the welfare.” While he doesn’t directly say so, the issue of crack addiction is subtly racialized in society because racist stereotypes associate African Americans with drugs and crime, leading to a self-perpetuating cycle. This in fact leads to mass incarceration of specifically black people, which Tupac references in the lyrics, “it ain’t a secret, don’t conceal the fact, the penitentiary’s packed, and it’s filled with blacks” even though as mentioned earlier in the song, “both black and white is smokin’ crack tonight.” A consistent theme throughout the song is the constant social devaluing of black lives, whether through the criminal justice system, gang violence, or welfare programs.

“Cop Killer” – 1993 – performed by Body Count 

I was not expecting to hear the rock sound of this song! I was expecting it to be a rap song like “Fuck the Police.” There is a heavy and very repetitive sound of an electric guitar as well as a bass guitar and a driving drumset beat. Something sounds a little jarring about it though, I think that the vocal is so clear and distinct both in enunciation and in standing apart from the instrumental. Another interesting part of the instrumental is that machine gun shooting noises are used as percussion. I was also shocked at how vivid the lyrics are. In my opinion this song is way more shocking in its content than “Fuck the Police” because at least that song was staged as a fictional trial with an element of satire or something, but this is straight-up a declaration that they intend to violently murder police officers and they don’t care if they have lives or families. I like the repetitive element of “fuck the police” throughout the song because even though it’s so repetitive, it feels like it actually gets more powerful each time it’s said, maybe because it’s such a radical thing to say. I think it especially becomes powerful when they list off names for whom they are getting revenge by killing cops who beat or murdered their friends and community leaders. I am still reeling from how direct and violent the lyrics are but I really like it because it’s just so out there. I can’t wait to hear what people had/currently have to say about this song.

“Free Your Mind” – 1992 – performed by En Vogue 

I have heard this song so many times and have never ever actually listened to it. In fact the most recent time I heard it a white drag queen was performing it, and looking back the racial message was totally lost, and honestly it’s shocking that that even happened now that I am actually looking at the lyrics (like, “Be color blind,” it’s so obvious, what the heck?). My favorite thing about this song is the instrumental. It’s just so heavy and energetic especially with the guitar (especially during the chorus) and the drum throughout. There is some really interesting percussion too because I think there is a cowbell in there. The vocals are awesome too, really high-pitched, and something about the vowel sounds is really shaky and rock-sounding. The backup vocals and harmonies are my favorite part about the vocals because they make really intense chords. The lyrics are about prejudice, as a spoken voice indicates at the beginning of the song. It seems to be about how boxes drawn around racial identities are limiting for all people regardless of their race. This is similar to Michael Jackson’s message in the song we studied last week. The message of “free your mind and the rest will follow” is repeated many times throughout the song, which I take to mean that once people lose their stereotypes about race, racial inequalities will then disappear. This sounds very DuBoisian to me because it’s about changing the ideology through dismantling stereotypes in order to create racial change and bring about equality.

“Like a King” – 1993 – performed by Ben Harper

This song has an interesting instrumentation including a tinny-sounding drum like a bongo or something, a twangy string instrument that sounds kind of Eastern like a sitar, and a super low vocal backdrop acting as a bass line. Harper’s voice is very indie-sounding to match the general sound of the song. This is one of several songs to mention Rodney King, including at least “Cop Killer” and I think others, so I thought I would look up what happened to him in this time period. I saw that he had been severely beaten by the LAPD in 1991 and the footage had caused a worldwide controversy. Racial advocates were especially enraged when the officers were acquitted, and riots ensued. This sounds very familiar to police brutality protests today. The message of this song is very similar to the general tone of the Black Lives Matter movement, protesting that black lives and black people’s bodily integrity are treated as if they don’t matter as long as the criminal justice system has its way. Harper compares the LAPD to a “legal lynch mob” because their police badges give them license to kill black people at will and not face legal consequences. However, I don’t really understand what he means when he says “Martin’s dream has become Rodney’s worst nightmare.” I don’t know if that is saying there was something flawed about MLK’s dream in the first place or just that the dream has not yet been achieved.

[ramascreen]

What I Learned From My Visit To Martin Luther King National Historic Site

Rama here! To honor this #MartinLutherKingDay weekend, allow me to share with you a bit about my visit to the MLK museum national historic site in Atlanta two years ago and about what I learned from that experience... I've admired Dr. King since I was a kid growing up in Asia hearing about him in classrooms, reading books about him, watching documentaries about him. But I'm not a MLK expert, so it's a constant learning-as-I-go process. So at that historic site two years ago, I found out that Dr. King had actually traveled to India to pretty much soak in all the wisdom and legacy of late great Gandhi especially Gandhi's non-violent protest. Turns out, Jesus Christ was not the only influence and inspiration in Dr. King's approach. I entered Dr. King's birth home and my goodness.. the house and the rooms were extremely small and compact in size, it humbled me because all of a sudden, we could no longer complain about the material things that we do or don't have. So here's what I take away from that experience. 1). I prefer to call it racial justice by the way, not racial relations.. And so the discussion about racial justice is an ongoing one and it needs to be frequently talked about. We should never feel uncomfortable bringing up that subject. Because the true danger happens when we dismiss it or when we simply say that everything's all good in America now. For example, talk show host Dick Cavett interviewed prominent black author James Baldwin in the '60s and Dick said to him basically and I'm paraphrasing here that Dick doesn't understand why black people are still restless. There are now black athletes, black mayors, black leaders, so what else could they want. That's basically what Dick was politely implying. Fast-forward to not too long ago when Bill O'Reilly said something similar on his program about how there are black this and black that now, so everything is ok now, folks! That's what Bill was implying. Clearly a certain mindset hasn't changed in the past 40 years or so. The mindset that focuses only on certain things that make America appear exceptional while at the same time disregarding the reality on the ground. When we stop discussing racial justice which obviously still needs fighting for, that is when equality gets benched. Folks like Dick Cavett and Bill O'Reilly don't know and probably will never know what it feels like to be wearing the other shoes, what it feels like to be marginalized and powerless, what it feels like to not have a fair shot at opportunities. We as a society need to have empathy. We shouldn't stay aside just because it's not happening to us. 2). I once heard from a black community that the term Civil Rights is reserved only for them and them alone. Meaning that they get offended whenever LGBTQ community also uses civil rights as a way to fight for their human rights to equality. I don't know whether or not Dr. King would stand with LGBTQ rights if he were around today. There are some things that we know for sure he would do. But in this case, I don't know, we don't know, we just don't. But here's the thing... those who know what it feels like to have been oppressed should never burn the bridge behind them. When we've reached a certain progress and burn the bridge behind us thus stopping others to reach equality, we are no better than the oppressors themselves. Again, I don't know what Dr. King would do in terms of this specific matter. But we do know that in the years leading up to his assassination, Dr. King also worked hard waging war against poverty and constantly protesting so that jobs would become more available for the people. Well, unless I'm mistaken, I think Poverty doesn't see race, poverty doesn't see sexual orientation, poverty doesn't see religion. And so if you want to talk about equality of basic human rights, it would have to be equality for all or none at all. 3). I too myself have still got a lot to learn. Because when Dylan Roof was sentenced to death recently for killing black churchgoers, I felt kinda happy that Roof received the death penalty. In this case, it's safe to say that Dr. King most likely would not feel happy about that, he'd probably disagree with the sentencing and it's not to belittle Roof's clearly heinous act either. Dr. King believed in non-violence, love and peaceful protest. He wanted to liberate not only the oppressed black community but he also wanted to liberate those who harbored hatred in their hearts, the oppressors. I don't know if I could get to that point. It's still very difficult for me to feel even a slight indication of sympathy towards a villain like Dylan Roof. But Dr. King probably would try to visit Roof in prison. And if Roof rejected Dr. King's visit, Dr. King would continue to pray for Roof's well-being because that's the kind of man Dr. King was, from what I gathered. So in this Martin Luther King Day weekend, let us do some self-examining and see which parts of ourselves we can improve in terms of the way we see our fellow neighbors. And when there is injustice, pray for the courage to stand up and speak out.