A series of interesting posts that began when a progressive blogger decided to tell the world I am a racist. Looking back, I rather like the way it all turned out.
At least Joe Taylor seems to think so.
Oh, well…
Blunted at Blunted on Reality actually responded as well as I could, and Tomato Observer gets blogrolled immediately, but here are my specific responses:
Actually blunted, this is an old, old gripe that has no basis.
Joe, read my site. Find something you consider racist other than my partisanship for Black issues. In fact, read Where we stand, published right here on OSP.
I wonder if you consider women's rights activists to be sexist. Is Abe Foxman racist? How about all the people that march in St. Patricks Day or Columbus Day parades?
I'm curious too why you think masking my being Black is a good idea. Do you mask being white? Can you? Being Black, the culture, the experiences, is part of my identity and I will mask it no more than I will mask my American-ness: an equally conceptual, socially constructed affair. If you can speak of American interests…America being as diverse as the Black communities…you can speak of Black interests.
I'll cross-post this thread at P6.
and
Just occurred to me:
Anyway, Earl Dunovant is black. He's not black like some people I know, who simply have a black skin; Earl is a self-professed "black partisan" who has a strong black identity. He quotes Malcolm X: "Who taught you, please, who taught you to hate the texture of your hair? Who taught you to hate the color of your skin, to such extent that you bleach, to get like the white man? ... Who taught you to hate your own kind? Who taught you to hate, the race that you belong to?"
Now, Malcolm X is an interesting figure. Reverse everything he says - i.e. replace white with black, etc. - and you get something that David Duke et al would say. What I quote above is pure, unadulterated racism;
Let's try that reversal you suggest:
Who taught you, please, who taught you to hate the texture of your hair? Who taught you to hate the color of your skin, to such extent that you bleach, to get like the Black man? ... Who taught you to hate your own kind? Who taught you to hate, the race that you belong to?
Doesn't parse. Because no one taught white people to hate themselves. That's that the whole "replace Black with white" this is just so much bullshit. It makes as little sense as grabbing Gloria Steinam's stuff and replacing every instance of "men" with "women."
Finally—seriously finally—you really should have linked to the post you're complaining about so people could see I was linking to Ampersand at Alas, a Blog talking about womens issues.
I've spent much of the time I normally spend checking the news in responding to the discussion Joe Taylor initiated with his flame. That's gotten me all thoughtful and shit. That plus the fact that the news for the next few days will be pure momentum effects inclines me to share a few developing thoughts and concerns.
I want to start with Open Source Politics. I was one of the original members. I dealt in detail with many of them, read maybe four of each five member blogs. This flame is not a reflection on the site, its outlook, approach or philosophy. Don't consider it as such.
I've also noticed a couple of folks who find it a problem that his attitudes are held by a progressive. Well, yeah.
But you know what? Had he kept it to himself or simply expressed them to me, it would be exactly the sort of thing I don't give a shit about.
I would not like to see any sort of ostracism; numbers count, and as long as he supports positions that I benefit from I want his number counted as regards those positions. I can handle the ones where we disagree just fine…I will not forget them, trust me.
I do feel he would benefit from associating with a more open-minded sort. No, that's wrong. He needs to hang with a more experienced sort…someone who's managed to navigate between the Scylla of liberal guilt and the Charybdis of conservative anger to an actually humane position.
Given the way he's approached this, that someone ain't gonna be me. But I would not dissociate myself from any position or organization we coincidentally support because of his presence.
I've decided to make an example of Mr. Taylor, both in the comments to his little rant and in the following, which also appears on Open Source Politics. I should post this shit on Blogcritics, too.
Why am I proud of being Black?
I'm proud of the history of Black people. The myth of African acquiescence to slavery is exactly that-a myth. I'm proud of the way emancipated Black folks never abandoned their enslaved brethren. They worked the legal and literary channels…never mind that they were ignored. To this day Black people give more of their income to charity than anyone else. Even though we're brokest. That's noble.
I'm proud of the creativity we've mustered; we were forced into it by exclusion from mainstream but our response has still been robust. All that is unique in the USofA came about through a kind of feedback loop: American Indian and African influences were absorbed into the mainstream until America's culture is as African as it is European. Watch the loa come down on a couple dozen old ladies at Billy Graham's Crusade if you doubt me.
I'm proud because my people survived. Because even with the obstacles we face we still compete in numbers that are pretty amazing when you consider we're only three generations from chattel. We produced W.E.B. DuBois. Frederick Douglass, Sojourner Truth, Fanny Lou Hamer, Carter Godwin Woodson, Booker T. Washington, David Walker, Zora Neale Hurston, Claude McKay, Langston Hughes, Jackie Robinson and Larry Doby, just to name a few.
And yes, Malcolm X.
"I believe in the brotherhood of man, all men, but I don’t believe in brotherhood with anybody who doesn’t want brotherhood with me. I believe in treating people right, but I’m not going to waste my time trying to treat somebody right who doesn’t know how to return the treatment." Speech, Dec. 12 1964, New York City
"When a person places the proper value on freedom, there is nothing under the sun that he will not do to acquire that freedom. Whenever you hear a man saying he wants freedom, but in the next breath he is going to tell you what he won't do to get it, or what he doesn't believe in doing in order to get it, he doesn't believe in freedom. A man who believes in freedom will do anything under the sun to acquire . . . or preserve his freedom."
"You don't have to be a man to fight for freedom. All you have to do is to be an intelligent human being."
"Dr. King wants the same thing I want. Freedom."
"I want Dr. King to know that I didn't come to Selma to make his job difficult. I really did come thinking I could make it easier. If the white people realize what the alternative is, perhaps they will be more willing to hear Dr. King." ...in a conversation with Mrs. Coretta Scott King.
"I am not a racist. I am against every form of racism and segregation, every form of discrimination. I believe in human beings, and that all human beings should be respected as such, regardless of their color."
Try exchanging every instance of "Black" and "white" in that shit.
It's true we had no more choice in having the dire concept of race inflicted on us. But we did not have to respond as well as we have. Given the conscious decision to shape us into mere tools and the forces still arrayed against us we should have been destroyed. We weren't. I'm proud of how we responded and declare myself the inheritor of that history and tradition.
Why am I a Black partisan?
Because the alternative is absurd.
Definitely read that last link. It's an essay I wrote in 1997 and posted at Prometheus 6 in February 2004 that explicitly spells out what I mean by "Black partisan." If there's any confusion.
Everything looks different from the inside and I can appreciate that. And I have no problem with reasonable pride and identification with one's background, whether it be racial, religious, ethnic, linguistic, etc.
You just resolved some 30% or more of all the problems you could have with a person.
But I see all those things as secondary to being a person and to being an American, which is a unifying, voluntary (since 1865 or so) construct, and as such has more meaning than simply the way one's genes happened to come together.
We know that the social concept "race" has no biological basis. Therefore we know being Black isn't simply about the way one's genes happened together.
There's a book, The Black Notebooks: An Interior Journey by Toi Derricotte (<--Click, please-- it's that I'm one degree of seperation from her). A "Quote of note" from the NY Times review:
In ''The Black Notebooks'' a light-skinned black woman, Toi Derricotte, examines in journal form her recurring longings for ''escape from blackness'' -- and her indulgence of those longings during intervals of ''passing'' for white. The book's achievement lies in the telling light it casts on how white skin functions in a multiracial world, what whiteness sees and can't see and why whites harm themselves as well as blacks when they dismiss black claims that white vision is defective.
This isn't about meaning so much as practical, day-to-day experience and fulfilling human requirements. You're familiar with Maslow? You realize after the primary need of physical survival comes the need to belong? That it comes prior to self-esteem? And that pursuit of each level requires practical mastery of the prior one?
That belonging is all Black people have looked for from day 1…those that feel absolutely rejected notwithstanding. And we cannot force the mainstream to accept us. Membership is always granted by the members. Ask the German immigrant wave, if you can find them...they've assimilated into unity. Ask the Irish wave, and the Italian wave, and the current Eastern Bloc wave.
Can you honestly say that, to this day, America has made Black people collectively feel at home?
But we have to belong. Second level need.
(is White also captialized?)
If you like. I don't believe I've used the term yet. I note you respect my choice so I'll respect yours.
I am curious what the practical ramifications are of your Black partisanship. Do you relate to me differently because I am White because of it?
Fair question. I'm assuming you mean on a personal level.
As I see it, it makes no difference. It doesn't take much conversation to pick an initial mental model of a person. I modify that model as I learn about the individual.
However, relativity is a bitch and I could see you concluding I do.
I need to be a bit picky-precise here. People who self-identify as White tend to get assigned one of the models that have never experienced effective prejudice, while people who self-identify as Black tend to get assigned one of the models that has. That experience has repercussions…there are there are experiences I share with people who self-identify as Black that must, with the White models (can I just say that? the self-identity part is implied) must be an equivalent discussion that I do not expect you to understand right away…like this one.
What I do about that depends on other characteristics I've assigned as I've individuated the mental model. If I've assigned the Fuckwad attrribute…
Politically, all it means is I make noise when an issue of interest to Black folks in particular is given short shrift. See, each of our human needs are the same, physical and psychological. Each culture provides for some of those needs by their existance, makes some possible and even likely. Each culture is the material we build our lives from. And since each culture is different, each provides different things and we each as a result need different things. There are things I would offer Black folks because they need it that I would not offer you because you don't.
Make sense?
Well, I've gotten myself hip-deep in conversational shit over at Blogcritics. The post itself I duplicated here. The comments are great, though. Eric Olsen is my primary conversational partner…we're disagreeing on certain levels, but I can't even call him a conversational opponent.
Comment 16 posted by Eric Olsen on May 11, 2004 08:11 AM:
P6, I find the notion of different cultures providing different things very interesting and most likely true, but I think it reinforces my point that identifying too strongly with a single "culture" (technically subculture within the larger American culture) is constraining. As African-American culture has informed American culture to a remarkably large degree, so has "American" culture informed "African-American" culture. What would American culture be without African-American culture? Look to Europe. What would African-American culture we without American culture? Look to Africa. I would argue the larger, hybrid (also with strong Latin-American, Asian, Caribbean, American Indian, etc influences) American culture is stronger, more vibrant, more transcendent than any of them.
The "melting pot" notion is cliched but real and by not embracing the larger whole I think we limit ourselves. I am far more "Black" than my Norwegian cousins - this is a great thing. You P6 are far more "white" than your African cousins, and despite the grim, evil, dehumanizing, inexcusable legacy of slavery in America, at this point in time - with slavery 150 years gone, official segregation 50 years gone, civil rights legislation 40 years on the books, and opportunity aavailable to those who would avail themselves of it - I think you are better off than your African cousins as I am vis-a-vis my Norwegian cousins.
I would say taking pride in African-American contributions to the larger American culture is just as valid a source of Maslowian belonging as identifying with the narrower "African-American" culture, and that each of us identifying with this larger culture - to which we have all contributed - might be the best path forward.
Unfortunately, we cannot alter the past, only deal with its legacy as best we can.
Comment 23 posted by P6 on May 11, 2004 12:02 PM:
Eric:
This conversation is turning out better than I thought it might.
P6, I find the notion of different cultures providing different things very interesting and most likely true, but I think it reinforces my point that identifying too strongly with a single "culture" (technically subculture within the larger American culture) is constraining.
You miss the point. Regardless of the fact that American culture is a pastiche of European, American Indian and African culture with significant additions from other European derivatives, it too is a single culture, and therefore limited by its nature.
There will always be those for whom American culture is insufficient, or damaging, or a mere starting point. And primary among them are the people who America will not accept as members.
Again I ask: can you honestly say, to this day, that the USofA acknowledges Black Americans as full members? And if you think so, survey the cultural landscape and tell me how Black Americans will know this.
Unfortunately, we cannot alter the past, only deal with its legacy as best we can.
No doubt. But understand that you and I are dealing with different aspects of that legacy.
What problems does racism cause you, a reasonably well-educated white male from a fairly upper middle class background?
What problems does racism cause me, a 6'2" 185 lb Black male, self-educated, no degree, had to work up from messenger to Assistant VP at a bank, father a farmer, mother a laborer that eventually got a nice safe civil service job?
Feel me?
Check my discussion. I see the past but I'm not living there. I have, by mainstream standards, been a success. I am not someone who is complaining because they couldn't make it.
I would say taking pride in African-American contributions to the larger American culture is just as valid a source of Maslowian belonging as identifying with the narrower "African-American" culture, and that each of us identifying with this larger culture - to which we have all contributed - might be the best path forward.
It would be.
If the mainstream would allow it.
Some things you say anywhere and some things you say in your own space.
During yesterday's Blogcritics conversation Eric suggested giving one's American aspect ascendancy over one's "other" aspects is the best move, and that he truly feels America is past the half-way point to accepting Black folks…that the mainstream would find Black folks acceptable if we stop being Black.
P6, to answer your question: yes, I do think the USA acknowledges Black Americans as full members IF THEY CHOOSE TO BE SO ACKNOWLEDGED, but a part of the bargain is demonstrating an adherence to certain shared values, one of which is that they see themselves as an individual and an American ahead of seeing themselves as Black. It does not appear that you are willing to make this "trade," which has been requested of every other subgroup in America also.
I asked how long that had been the case (resisting the impulse to say I must have missed the notice in last week's mail) and got no answer. Okay, I mark that point as mine.
But he did tell me that the "you" he mentioned was me, as opposed to "you people," because of this
Pronoun trouble. Singular or plural "you"?
Singular: America is a field of operation to me and the culture is a toolkit. As such, I see little sense in identifying with either.
Plural: You can't look at the history of Black folks in the USofA and make any sense of that statement. Black people fought to be allowed to fight for America. And you know why there was no major Black revolution in this country? Because there was an active decision made to pursue legal means, futile as that sounds to me. Look at the motivation of the Harlem Renaissance.
That's simply wrong.
Which brings me to my point.
Black people have never been the ones to make "integration" difficult. Black people only pursued separatism when they became convinced there was no way to gain respect in the USofA…to this day most hold out hope for integration; the separatists are a significant but still small fraction of the communities. The collective has been struggling desperately to do exactly what Eric suggests the mainstream requires. The opposition has flavors that range from subtle to bombastic but is still highly active.
When the Black community had exactly—EXACTLY—the same values as the mainstream we were not accepted. Roughly 50% of the country thinks we don't know how to decide who is our enemy and who is our friend. No way I lambast the crew for not trusting the mainstream, be they liberal or conservative.
I do lambast the community for their belief they understand white folks. If they did, they'd be able to manipulate the situation better.
I don't think I need to link to it again
But it's a wonderful object lesson. Anyone that believes Black people should just get over it should read the thread with a careful eye for evasions, false accusations and denial. And recognize that when you argue that point you will look like Joe.
Tomorrow morning your regularly scheduled excess verbosity will continue as scheduled.
So I got off my last comments at Blogcritics yesterday and OSP today. I got comments and feedback and support, but you know I could just stay on the topic (don't worry, I won't). I read all the trackbacks and such and I have to say that S-Train is to be congratulated in running his place such that he can post something titled I'm A Black Partisan! and have a couple of white folks come back like this:
Why? Why is it wrong to be proud of your racial identity?
In our PC world, it's not wrong for you but it is wrong for me. Racial pride I mean, not ethnic pride like Big Swain. I'm proud of my Polish heritage and I celebrate that.
I cannot walk around and proclaim the awesomeness that is my whiteness - because I'd look like a flipping racist. I'd be called a racist and I'd feel like one.
It doesn't matter one bit that my family historically had NOTHING to do with slavery or the suppression of civil rights felt by blacks in America. My whiteness makes me guilty - on sight.
I've been beat down a few times because of my whiteness and nobody gave a good goddamn that I was the first "American born" person in my entire family. My whiteness alone was proof of my guilt.
It's just different for black folks. Just like it's different for Mexicans or Asians. Your physical appearance is a part of your ethnicity. And you know what? That's okay. I wish it could be different but it's not. We will never erase the sin of slavery in this country nor should we. White skin is a symbol of that evil.
That's Rosemary, The Queen of All Evil by the way.
See? No screams, no hysterics…no lack of indication of her opinion of the situation.
At this point, the absolute worst thing to do is compare atrocities. The trick is to remember that we've all inherited this fucking mess. And we're all trying to figure out how to get through it without getting damaged.
All this race shit has always been about who did what, and when, and if the sins of the father are REALLY passed on to the son, and I am at the point that I look no further than what can practically be achieved in the process of doing what I'm doing right now. That's why my anger at Joseph will eventually fade. I know I can't raise him, I can only pimp-slap him when necessary.
And I can't even say it's his fault that he doesn't know.
Over at Blogcritics, I asked
What problems does racism cause you, a reasonably well-educated white male from a fairly upper middle class background?
What problems does racism cause me, a 6'2" 185 lb Black male, self-educated, no degree, had to work up from messenger to Assistant VP at a bank, father a farmer, mother a laborer that eventually got a nice safe civil service job?
Mere inspection shows we're going to be talking about two sets of issues…but consider what it means that we're going to call those two separate sets of issues by the same name.
It means confusion. It means error. And it means it will probably be a while before folks are up on it enough to sort out words from events.
This time it's folkbum.
My GHOD, when will it end?
LATER: I guess I should have been more obviously joking. No, there's no racists on the other side of that link.
Jason at Negro, Please with a remix of the Joe Taylor Debacle.
To the beat, now. Ya don't stop. Let's rock, rock, rock da house!
Man, 290 hits already. at 11:am.
In a way, I am taking advantage; Sitemeter says my page views per visit have remained constant during this surge, and I got a really flattering email from someone who, I suspect, was on that search. Given that most folks who come in looking for a video of the poor unfortunate look at one page and go, that means people who came and found it interesting here really found it interesting.
And I was already having one of those temporary surges based on referrals from OSP, Blogcritrics and the folks in the "My Heroes" list that blogged about it (to which I have to add Don at Nightcrawler, sorry dude, but not even a Chaos Lord is perfect). It may be largely those who came in by that method who read 5-10 pages at a clip.
Looks like Joe's plan to shame me into silence backfired. But it never works on people who have no self-doubt.
Meanwhile, someone spent five minutes trying to find out "which christian values does Prometheus uphold." I can't picture what inspired such a search, but I can answer it for the sixth reification.
None.
Christians don't own the values.
Now, if the question were "which values do both christian and Prometheus uphold" I'd consider responding in detail.
I'm checking people more than media this week. I'd like to believe the issues we have now are enough, that the news is on the resolution of currently open issues…but the last time I said something like that Mr. Berg got beheaded that day.
Anyway, Mike at Move The Crowd has issues with a post at WizBang.
I'll say right now, anyone who opens with "I'm going to use some racially insensitive language" has to tread carefully. Particularly if they are of the persuasion that is so rarely on the receiving end of it.
Having read Michael's post and Jay Tea's response to it at Move the Crowd, I conclude that Jay Tea was not intending to be offensive to Black folks, but he was generally offensive to folks who work against racism. There was no reason for "little darkies" or "sand niggers" other than to invoke a gut reaction.
Congratulations on a well executed plan.
The real problem with Jay Tea' s post is he perpetuates the Bushista meme "only racists oppose the invasion." This is a race hustler's position…a blatant playing of the race card. Jay wasn't the first, won't be the last, but if the mainstream doesn't see this as race baiting don't ever look to convince minorities that simply pursuing our own interests should be seen as such.