This print advertisement by Intel has been causing quite a stir of late [via Huffington Post]. It seems to convey the idea that owning an Intel chip will help you tackle the same amount of work as you could with a ship of slaves (while making you feel powerful):
I almost fell out of my seat when I saw Intel’s new advertising campaign. It shows six bowing African American athletes before a chino-clad, oxford-shirted white manager with the slug: “Maximize the power of your employees.” This ad reminds me of a slave-ship, and it’s hard to imagine the same imagery did not come to mind for the savvy ad exec that created it…Intel is not just promoting insensitive images, it’s also leading a signature drive for a California ballot measure that would eliminate class action lawsuits over civil rights issues. Intel’s board of directors have been sent 25,000 faxes calling upon the company to withdraw that pending ballot measure. [Link]
<
p>There is also a YouTube clip capturing some people’s reaction to this ad:
<
p>
<
p>
<
p>
Here is the even more interesting part. When the ad was printed in Indian print media they replaced the white dude with a very light skinned Indian “massa'”:
It should be noted that Intel has apologized for and withdrawn these ads, but seeing the same ad in two different cultural contexts does reiterate just how much the idea of “white” putting black to work was a central part of the perceived “effectiveness” of this campaign. It’s rare that you are able to so completely unmask the subtle bigotry of many advertising campaigns.
I love it!!
Yes they had, but in the 50s they were saying it with the clear implication that they could go no further (when now, we know they could), look at the southern manifesto link, the entire document is against the passage of brown v board of education, resisting change. the same way the people who are saying right now “look how far we’ve come” are saying it with the same subtextual meaning: there’s no further to go.
HMF, do you not see the irony here?
There you go again with the sub-concious-textual interpretation. And again totally wrong. My point on how far we have come is to show that the attitudes of people TODAY are not the same as 50 years ago, specially in matters of race. No one is naive to suggest that we don’t have a long way to go – not only for whites, but desis and other ethnic groups – in accepting each other.
In reality, the irony of it, is that you yourself are an example of why we have a long way to go. In these past two days, you have stated that you feel threatened by blacks at night which in your mind is ‘natural’, you have cited an anti-semitic site to prove your point, and have made the outregeous comment that what constitutes hate speech is highly subjective. I guess you have the higher ground to accuse Intel of producing racist material, uh?
HMF, I don’t know about that. The first part of your sentence (“how far we’ve come” – which I agree with) does not lead me to the second part (“no further to go” – which I disagree).
Amit, I think in the context of discussions on race when someone says “but look how far we’ve come far” it is used as a rhetorical device to undermine any sense of urgency around issues of inequality or racism. It’s a way of dismissing the conversation or topic. I think PindaUSA actually summed it up fairly well. I’m also relatively disgusted that someone would say “look how far we’ve come from 1850” — I mean, really? I’m sure it wasn’t meant this way, but that is the same rhetoric that was used extensively to justify the separate but equal clause as well as the delay of integration, and it’s the same phrase used to dismiss contemporary concerns regarding racial inequality (e.g. in the prison system or in public schooling).
Are you saying that since there has been a proven pattern in the past of using those words to stifle debate, so anyone who now uses those words is automatically suspect, even if they don’t mean it that way? If so, it seems a very odd way of having a debate if people have already been slotted into places. Maybe it’s my inexperience talking here…
I think visualizing the problem of racism as ‘something that will go away eventually’ is itself the problem. Yes, one hopes it will, but one also knows that human nature is not going to transform dramatically in a few generations. Trying to figure out how much progress there may have been in the last 50 or 100 or 150 years is not totally useless, but since social conditions change, and the economic system (mercantile capitalism, semi-feudal agriculture, or internet-mediated globalization) changes, the form in which racism makes its presence felt also changes, and sometimes this gives the illusion of temporal progress. This might even be true, occassionally, for a small group, within a particular community, or professonal situation (e.g., Jews on Wall Street, going by Manju upthread), etc. But that doesn’t mean the thing itself has gone away.
Cisco, you said:
I believe this suggests the minimizing of subtextual racism, insofar as it connects to history.
Look, you can say your motivation for saying whatever you say is a big pink elephant that dances to the song “chocolate rain”, and there’s no way I could challenge it. However, at every juncture in history, the white majority has always said the attitude of people TODAY (relative to that pt in time) was not the same as 50 years ago, so in 1960 they were better than 1910, in 1910 they were better than 1860, etc.. in the context of “it’s not so bad for the blacks, why are you complaining?” as puli said.
Look pal, if anyone here is claiming higher ground it’s you. I’m being completey honest with myself, notice the point I said about crossing the street hasn’t really been contested or even harped on by anyone else, because it rings true. According to this book, black crime is overrepresented in the media say like 300-400%, or something crazy like that. If you don’t think that the US has a national consciousness that positions us to fear black men disproportionately, with how they’re portrayed in tv, music, etc.. and that you are completely divorced from it “because you have a few black friends” then you’re just being unrealistic or you haven’t spent that much time in the US.
POC need to step up and grow some balls.
No I don’t, because I think your attitude is tantamount to ‘blaming the victim.’ and it much more represents “the further to go” In every case it was the white majority who made changes to their lawbooks (and collective changes to their psychology slowly followed – ie. it was ok to own black people in the 1800s, now its just ok blame them for their problems) Just because there are fewer laws to change, this doesn’t absolve them of responsibility as you presume here.
But since you keep trying to steer the conversation back into the Jewish situation, I’ll say this again, I definitely thing there is a double standard in the way oppression & discrimination is discussed in this country. When black people complain about racism that lingers from the 50s arena, they are told to ‘shutup because look how far we’ve come’ when Jews mention the holocaust they get no such response, in fact all of us are expected to reflect on how inhumane it was and reaffirm that we should never let something like that happen again.
Which is completely fine, but let’s equalize this response. Oppression is oppression. But like I said, I learned who Hitler was when I was ten years old. TEN. I’m still learning to this day about systematic barriers against nonwhites that have existed in this country.
No, I’m just saying that this is OFTEN the case. It’s a common line used to divert the conversation. That doesn’t mean every person who says that has some kind of nefarious intent; in the context of the written word, it’s often hard to interpret tone without relying on previous experience (either with the author, or with the rhetoric an author uses).
How does demanding POC get brave and call out racism constitute “blaming the victim” for racism? strawman argument?
.
I have no idea what you’re talking about and you offer no proof. to be fair, i’ve seen this form of McCarthyism practiced by both sides. in fact, on this thread alone you have one individual use the “self hating” argument to describe blacks who don’t toe the party line, not unlike the self-hating jew argument for those who oppose israel.
This is a follow-up to chachaji’s question re: the California initiative process/Intel
I wasn’t going to post this originally because I wasn’t sure how on topic it is, but given ak and chachaji’s interest in the issue, I hope folks will indulge me as I answer their questions re: Intel’s interest in an anti-(civil rights class action) amendment to the California Constitution.
1. How the CA Initiative Process has become a corporate playground chachaji writes:
A little background on process/logistics for initiatives:
The initiative process is often tauted as the “common man’s” avenue for promoting and encouraging home-grown legislation. In California, however, that is rarely the case, and corporate interference in the process dates back to the passage of Proposition 13 in 1978, if not longer. Nearly all initiatives amend the California state constitution. Consequently, most cannot be repealed or amended directly by the Legislature. Initiatives are increasingly used as a means of “getting around” legislative oversight and bipartisanship in the statehouse.
In order to qualify for the ballot, an initiative petition must meet the following:
In the last California election, there were 16,557,273 people registered to vote (75% of the total # of eligible voters) [cite]. Let’s assume only half actually showed up at the polls. You would have to get between 413,932 and 662,291 people to sign your petition at least 2 months before the election (generally you have a 1 year window to file). This is just to get it qualified and vetted. Let’s assume you hire workers at minimum wage to get these signatures over the course of 364 days:
So, what we’ve seen is a growing number of pro-business constitutional amendments that are promoted through business lobbies and PACs and that are financially backed by business leaders. It’s difficult to fundraise money for an initiative, unless it is being strategically played (which the business and conservative lobbies are historically better at, in California).
2. Why Intel may be interested in pushing an initiative I don’t know if Intel is at risk of litigation — I tried to look up their case history, and the only information that came up was re: 14th amendment/civil rights as they apply to the internet (i.e. not in the context of race, etc.), and anti-trust and copyright litigation. My hunch is that Intel, along with other big California employers/businesses, are simply riding the success of their previous initiative win in 2005 and are trying to limit their exposure to lawsuits even further. It’ll be interesting to see if more “watchdog” information comes out as this initiative proposal advances. The thing that makes this attempt unique is that it completely overturns decades of precedential case law. It’ll be interesting to see if the Secretary of State rules it germane or out of order (I would hope the latter, but who knows?).
Well,not really, it depends, do you say it with the implied belief that the majority if not exclusive responsibility lies on POC? In terms of POC’s “getting” brave, I think it’s highly repugnant to suggest it, as millions of POC’s have suffered tremendously to achieve the gains gotten so far. POC have always been brave, and always will be, as it’s a matter of survival. However, it’s whites who can so easily dodge responsibility by saying exactly what you said, or using statements like yours and the Cos’s. (I think they can use the Cos’s statement more effectively than yours)
Are you really contesting that Jewish oppression and say, black oppression are treated differently in this country and quite possibly most of the western world? Please explain why one genocide has capitilized on the term ‘holocaust’, technically the first holocaust on US soil was the genocide of the native american, I remember when I was 10, a teacher was explaining this, and saying, “Yes, Holocaust with a capital H means what the Nazi’s did in Germany” and I thought to myself, “why is that? why is one suffering given more attention than another?”
Yes. That’s what I’m saying. As to why the Jewish genocide is a capital “H” there are all kinds of discrepancies. I mean there is no real slavery denial movement. Other genocides, especially stalin’s and mao’s, don’t get the same attention. certainly in the academy, attacks on israel and jews are not policed like those against affirmative action (like the university that tried to ban the affirmative action bake sale). I’ve seen bullying both ways, probably more on the leftist side as america is for good reason more sensitive to racism against blacks, thus the emergence of a tawana brawley culture, but maybe that’s just me.
Are you saying the Jewish holocaust got heightened exposure in the United States as a result of the denial movement? There’s no “official” slavery denial movement, but there is loads of subtextual minimization of it, James Loewen did an amazing treatment in his book, “Lies my teacher told me” where he exposed how elementary & junior high school history books deal with the issue as something that ‘just happened’ rather than something that had an active agent behind it.
Secondly, any bringing up of slavery results in nothing but moans and groans by nearly every white person around, “why don’t you just move on?” is the repeated message. I’ve seriously never heard this said against any Jew who brings up the Jewish holocaust (not that I want to, but I’m just noting the difference)
please, don’t conflate these types of incidents with some kind of hypersensitivity on the part of black america, Im surprised you didnt cop out and bring up the duke rape case.
Just because I know some folks are really into data, here’s a poll asking both blacks and whites about corporations that have may benefited from slavery:
in particular: “Do you think corporations who made profits from slavery in the United States should or should not set up scholarship funds for black Americans who are descendants of slaves?”
Whites 35 61
Blacks 75 20
.
“Do you think the government should or should not make cash payments to black Americans who are descendants of slaves?”
Whites 6 90
Blacks 55 37
while the “not supporting any kind of reparation” doesn’t equate to denial, I’d say these numbers at the very least indicate strong differences of perception on the effect slavery has on opportunity available today.
You seem to be spending way too much time on Nation of Islam sites. History needs to be taught so that we understand the lessons of the past, but we do need to move on… isn’t this what you have been moaning about? That we have a historic racist link that still prevails sub-text-consciously? Shouldn’t we move on from that?
We HAVE indeed come along way since 1850 and 1950’s. And guess what? This give us hope that the next 50 years we will keep MOVING on. That is the message of an optimist… not a moaner like yourself, who still wants to perpetuate the “minority as a victim” mantra.
Camille, fair enough. I don’t know about others, but I personally see evidence that much still needs to be done when it comes to race issues, but I also acknowledge that some progress has been made over the past century. And, I’m not for stifling any debate.
at this point, HMF, I seriously don’t know what world you’re living in. This nation has gone thru and continues to go thru a massive conversation about race. I learnt abaout slavery and jim crow starting in elementary school.
it’s not hyper sensitivity…it’s the use of racism the way joe mccarthy used communism, as a way of demonizing opponents for ones own personal and political gain. you see it in this thread, certainly in the vile “the field negro” blog. McCarthyism set back the great cause of anti-communism and I think this racial McCarthyism is doing the same for the cause of anti-racism. You made the point yourself:
Why the double standard?
It interesting the most bigotry on this thread was displayed by you and Leutisha (“african american self haters”, “it’s very subjective what’s considered ‘hate speech’ and what’s not”–which is true, but you said it in the context of discussing a virulently anti-semetic hate site!
“This nation has gone thru and continues to go thru a massive conversation about race. I learnt abaout slavery and jim crow starting in elementary school.”
Read James Loewens book, its not about what is taught, but the way, Slavery and Jim Crow are taught as not having an active agent behind it. He’s done a thorough study of 16 or so textbooks. The real comparison I would guess, is to compare how the Jewish holocaust is taught in the states vs. how it’s taught in Germany.
“Why the double standard?”
I don’t get it, are you saying because people bring up racism so much, it’s hard to fight racism? Give me a break, I hate to sound like a ‘conspiracy theorist’ but there are clear indications that the Jewish community has far more infrastructural capability, and while yes, they have faced barriers, cannot be equated to the barriers blacks and nonwhites have faced (particulaly in big cities like NY, LA) You honestly sound like Rush Limbaugh here saying, “well [insert group here] can do it, why can’t the blacks?” When you have two different groups with two different histories, you need two standards.
“it’s very subjective what’s considered ‘hate speech’ and what’s not”–which is true, but you said it in the context of discussing a virulently anti-semetic hate site! “
No, actually if you re-read my response, I say I don’t disagree with your assessment of the site, but rather stated that hate-speech classification is subjective. I wasn’t trying to defend the site, however I do believe that no true assessment can be made of Jewish behavior as a result of our national culture.
No. Because people bring up false charges of racism, or in other contexts, false charges of being a communist or anti-semite.
it’s a free country. you have to be brave, like dinesh d’souza or bill cosby. israel gets criticized all the time, there’s even a big divestment movement and a movement to boycott israeli universities and professors. so i don’t know what you’re afraid off. sure, some will think you’re an anti-semite (just as some think d’souza, charles murray, cos or clarance thomas are racists) and your views will intersect with anti-semitism so it’s understandable, but stand your ground. just don’t link to anti-semitic websites, play down the bigotry of hate groups like NOI, and try to condemn obvious anti-semitism with more than a a lame “After looking at it, I can’t say I completely disagree with you”
“I tried to look up their case history, and the only information that came up was re: 14th amendment/civil rights as they apply to the internet (i.e. not in the context of race, etc.), and anti-trust and copyright litigation.”
Just out of curiosity, what do you use to look up case histories in general?
“That is the message of an optimist… not a moaner like yourself”
by that def’n MLK was the biggest moaner of all time.
“you have to be brave, like dinesh d’souza or bill cosby”
how convenient, when people take a stand that happens to coincide with the white world view (ie. people of color need to wake up and bla bla), it’s being brave. when people do the opposite, it’s “making false claims of racism”
“and try to condemn obvious anti-semitism with more than a a lame “After looking at it, I can’t say I completely disagree with you”
It’s obvious to you, and I don’t consider the NOI a hate group, no more than I do the JDL.
it’s not convenient at all. i inconveniently attacked those who label israel’s critics anti-semetic. you convienently want to retain the very McCarthyism you condemn. pot meet kettle.
so it’s not obvious to you that this is a hate site. interesting. i’ll let other’s decide. i see now why you are always being charged with anti-semitism when you put forth arguments you think are legit.
Farrakhan: “Is the Federal Reserve owned by the government?” Audience: “No.” Farrakhan: “Who owns the federal reserve?” Audience: “Jews.” Farrakhan: “The same year they set up the IRS, they set up the FBI. And the same year they set up the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai Brith…It could be a coincidence…[I want] to see Black intellectuals free…I want to see them not controlled by members of the Jewish community.” (Source: Dallas Observer on-line, August 10, 2000)
Don’t confuse Nation of Islam with MLK. And I guess you and people like you are not very keen with Mandela’s “moving on” attitude, for the sake of the new South African generations.
The FBI and the anti-defamation league have referred JDL as a violent extremist Jewish organization, and is listed as terrorist organization. But you would not need to know about JDL’s credential’s if you actually read its virulent anti-arab and anti-muslim articles. This leads me to believe that you are either clueless, or worse, have fallen into a radical line of thought, which explains your constant bitching about jews and whites. The article you cited about how jews exploit blacks is really despicable.
“so it’s not obvious to you that this is a hate site. interesting. i’ll let other’s decide. i see now why you are always being charged with anti-semitism when you put forth arguments you think are legit.”
I didn’t see the site directly, I saw the article, and admittedly didn’t read it carefully. And how many times do I have to disprove your equating of the Jewish situation with anti black racism in the US? Because the jewish people have an entire infrastructure available to them (which was acheived by their efforts, I agree) that simply doesn’t exist for anyone else, despite how powerful you think Sharpton and Jesse are. You’re saying the same shit over again. But anti-semitism is having some hatred towards the Jewish religion (a la Hitler, the Pope’s father, and Mel Gibson) which I do not have or never claimed any legacy with.
Furthermore, whats the point of posting Farakhan’s statement? I never said I 100% agree with the man, I do agree with him on some points, probably not the one which you posted.
i didn’t equate the two situations, just the” McCaryism.” I agree, they are different and even acknowledged that America’s heightened sensitivity to racism is justified. I do see jews as a model minority, though, who we all can learn from, especilly browns whose experience with racism may paralell jews. I think the next step in the civil right struggle is economic empowerment, which means an embrace of the free markets, but that’s another arguemnt.
this:
Unfortunately, the NOI and Farrakhan are not synonymous, I guess when I look at the NOI, I look at it from it’s inception, from the time of W.D. Fard, who prediates Elijah Poole, later on to become Elijah Mohammed, and their early messages of black unity, supporting their own, etc.. (actions which the Jews have themselves done) I’ve read a bit more about the NOI and the FOI, than just wiki summaries. Secondly, I’d like to know what you think about this, as it, to some degree represents my position. I don’t agree with Farrakhan’s talk of general ‘misbehavior’
It’s an ideal sure, but I think you too easily wash away the barriers of ‘whiteness’ as it’s a social condition that is indeed connected to skin reflectance, It’s just a little too Rush Limbaugh’ish to say, “look at them, if they can do it, we can do it” Vijay Prashad talks about this in the Karma of Brown folk.
oh god, i just find farrakhan so full of guile. I haven’t studied him or the NOI in depth, but just see him in speeches that reach the news and he seems so full of prejudice.
Then you need to check out Dr. Malachi York. He takes it even to the next level.
If corporations who benefitted from slavery compensate the present descendents of slaves, then how much more so should the corporations who benefitted and still benefit from the exploitation of women compensate the girls and women of today!!!
That way today’s black women would benefit two-fold, as we should, since we have been on the very bottom of the rung for centuries.
That way today’s black women would benefit two-fold, as we should, since we have been on the very bottom of the rung for centuries.
I wish that this country didn’t have this sordid history of exploitation and slavery…but it does and how to compensate money-wise for this – I think it’s almost impossible. That’s the only reason why I’m not for slavery reparations b/c it doesn’t seem a doable public policy – how to set the criteria? what other groups do we include?
The intel ad to me is racist, pandering to the lowest common denominator. I understand a little of what CiscoKid is wary of —seeing racism in everything to the point where (and I think this is what Manju meant) its Mccarthyite racism. But this ad, to me, isn’t an example of that.
CiscoKid, if you are South Asian descent, let me ask you a question. What if the ad showed a picture of a white man standing in the middle, surrounded by Indians dressed as coolies carrying luggage. Would you find that racist?
I agree with HMF says until he started supporting his argument with anti-semitic websites, and Farrakhan…after that, I’m afraid, HMF’s arguments lost credibility, even though I agreed with what he was intially saying about how this ad is so racist.
But the fact of the matter is that Indians have a skin colour similar to blacks and hispanics, and we are currently the most successful ethnic minority in the US (and indeed in the UK). Obviously, we have it much easier now than blacks and jews had it 50 years back, and such success would never happen in the 1950s where there were laws that would have prevented us from achieving what we have today. Obviously, I do believe that the legacy of repression certainly has its effects in the black community today, but I don’t believe that skin colour is a handicap to success at this day and age.
I agree, it’s not skin colour that is a handicap neccessarily.
Asians in general have a much different family dynamic going on from black and hispanic Americans, communities that see alot of divorce and pregnancy out of wed-lock. A lack of a strong male role model and the over-compensation of the strong female role model is part of this. Most asian Americans kids grow up in two parent homes and those parents tend to be quite strict and their emphasis is on higher education.
If the family unit is the basis of any society, this is an indication of why things are they way they are in America.
I completely agree with your point.
Yes, I would think it was racist. Blacks pictured as slaves or servants bowing to the white… racist. But I believe that you and others are handpicking what you want to see in this picture in order to see racism: that they are not dressed as sprinters, and that the “bowing” is not the starting position of a sprinter. Furthermore, besides blacks being depicted as athletes which in our popular culture are glorified regardless of race, they also represent an employee of the company, which is quite evident in the fact that each of them has a desk. So their position is not of a slave or a coolie, but of a high paying job in either form – as an athlete or as an employee.
Some people went even further saying that Intel’s racism was with intent, but that is ridiculous because no company wants to be seen as racist. Intel is not an american company, it is a global company. And only a foolish company would want to alienate its client base. I would certainly not buy anything from a company that I perceived to be racist to my people, or to any other.
I can see how this ad can be seen as racist, and I think the marketing people are paid well to make sure that their ads are not interpreted the wrong way. But I feel that many of you are overreacting over this ad. I think when tackling racism and injustices that exist in the world, we must be fair and objective, or we will fail miserably. But that is just my opinion.
He was originally Louis X, and only given Arabic name Farrakhan in light of the division with Malcolm X. It had everything to do with the internal politics of the NOI in the few months predating Malcolm’s assassination and the years that followed. The clip of him I put up was from Al Jazeera, a network that rarely overlaps the US main stream media in terms of programming content. Do I agree with everything Farrakhan says? No, but I also think its silly to outright label him a boogeyman as what mainstream white America usually does.
If you go back and read, you’ll see the entire Jewish discussion was tangential to the discussion of the ad.
Exactly. Athletes are proud of their athletic careers and black people are proud that we represent well in sports. It is nothing at all to be ashamed of.
The real core of the lack of equal representation in other fields of expertise in this country has to do largely with social structure which is largely dependent on the family structure. Black fathers are absent in large numbers throughout the African American community. That is a huge issue for us.
http://noi.org/muslim_program.htm
“10. We believe that intermarriage or race mixing should be prohibited.”
How about that? An organization that doesn’t even hide that they’re opposed to intermarriage or race mixing -in 2007. And calls it the muslim religion.
To the extent that Farakhan, the NOI, or any other organization can get black men to step up their program and become and stay committed husbands (legally married, not common-law) and fathers, to the same extent I will support them, not more, not less.
No offense, but.. so the F what? opposing interracial unions is the least of their problems. But I suggest you to consider the climate in which the organization was formed, during that time a black man could get lynched for walking alongside the same side of the street as a white woman, let alone marry her. I agree that some of their tenets are outdated and no longer serve a real purpose, as the climate in which it was established has changed.
HMF, opposing interracial unions is being on the same side as the lynchers, not the lynchees. I think Harry Belafonte had the right stance on this. Louis Farakhan and the NOI, the wrong stance.
“HMF, opposing interracial unions is being on the same side as the lynchers, not the lynchees”
awesome dude, you just out-extremed me. nice.
As I noted earlier, I don’t think its ever useful for a “black” POC to notice racism, on the job,unless you have a burning cross on your desk, with someone swinging a noose shaped lasso at you. Manju it does sound brave for you to write “POC need to step up and grow some balls. if you think something is racist, say it. ” and then a few lines later characterize it as part of a “tawana brawley culture“… and no, it’s NOT just you. I suppose you have to be the “right” type of victim.
Leutisha and “the field negro” blog obvisoulsy rubbed you the wrong way. I’m quite conservative in my politics and “social mores”. For the record I’m not for reparations, apology for slavery etc. As you seem interested in other blogs check out “Booker Rising” (right leaning), one of the most “prolific”, rarely censored commenter’s there, would definitely fit the bill of a “self hater”. You’ll have no trouble, if you check a couple of the threads, in finding someone who would have been banned ages ago, from commenting here. It’s a psychosis with some “right leaning” AfAm that literally equates “black” with a mental/moral/aesthetic deficiency. An honest self hater. You might find it [the blog]useful time wasting, especially since you confused “the field negro” with the voice of black America.
In my limited sample,there IS a correlation between “conservative” politics and questionable self image (generally the 40+ crowd). Of course that is not always the case, but I’ve seen it too often to dismiss it.
Whats really interesting to me, is the discussions on racism you choose to engage in and the ones you don’t. Then again, we all have our images of who we are, and are not, and what realities we choose to give attention to.
It’s hard out here for an Af-Am. If we speak out about the very real problems in our community that hold us back, such as a lack of positive male role models for our fatherless children, we are seen as “self-haters”. Yet if we ignore the problems, say and do nothing, and try to act all proud and cultural, nothing changes and we remain the same (down and out) year after year, decade after decade, left only to decry and bemoan our fate and of course play the blame game without any personal responsibility. We are stuck between a rock and a hard place.
“It’s hard out here for an Af-Am.”
but look how far we’ve come
The reason for this is that it is much easier to blame others for our shortcomings than to admit our own responsability. The solution is to address these problems head-on for the sake of future generations, and ignore those who prefer the easy route which is to play the blame-game, and keep their heads in the past rather than looking in the future. History is very important, and injustices of the past should serve as a guide to the future, not an excuse for things to remain the same.
Time to boycott Intel!!!
We’ve come far in some arenas, but in the marriage and family arena we have fallen way behind.