Three of the top headlines this week connected … because of their racial disconnection. That fact makes the point better than anything I can say. Like that will stop me.
Sandra – Supreme Court upholds affirmative action
Say what you want – ‘It was a partial decision. They struck down the undergrad admittance process. We won!’
Doesn’t matter. The Court upheld the necessity and importance of affirmative action programs.
Better still, whether stated or not, they acknowledged the existence of white privilege. Why else uphold? Duh.
So AOL conducted a poll – a high majority of subscribers felt the Supreme Court decision was wrong.
Surprised? Not even an ounce.
And the respondents’ answers probably broke closely along racial lines.
A better question would have been – “Why shouldn’t affirmative actions programs be eliminated?”
Of course that’s doesn’t fit the yes/no poll question profile, but the answers would have been a lot more interesting because it requires thinking. And doesn’t anyone understand that until you can prove your opponent’s position, you cannot win your own? Second rule of law. First – never ask your client if they are guilty!
So instead we heard over and over and over and over … “People should not receive advantage points because of their race. Everyone should be treated equally.”
Like that happens in America, or many other places.
We’re a world of haves and have-nots.
I stopped arguing for affirmative action years ago. It’s a losing argument. Like most racial topics. Homosexuality is a close second which is another commentary.
My response to stupid questions – no it’s not always STFU or even a more stupid answer.
I have two, depending on my mood and whom I’m talking to …
#1 – “But if you really think race should not count, you wouldn’t be so hell bent on eliminating mine for the continued and expected benefit of yours.” The fact they can’t understand what is said so they can retort is so exasperating, they generally drop the argument. “Don’t advertise your defects.” Grandma.
#2 – “I agree (no one should receive advantage points because of their race).” Now that really throws people because they don’t expect you to agree. Which gives me time to walk away. Pause. Turn back and loudly say, “Guess you’re mad you gotta keep passin’ (for white). I got your back.” If I really want to be pissy I say ‘your mama’s gotta keep passin.’ Yes, I will go there.
Can’t believe no one has said a word about this decision to me? Another hmmm.
So I’m stuck mulling my own response.
First – shock – I knew the Court would overturn completely.
Why? I’m jaded – stopped expecting good news a long time ago.
Affirmative action has taken such hits in recent years, why should this be different.
- Because, let’s put it out there, it’s hard to trust that nine white people are going to do right by anyone except nine other white folks. Justice is not blind. It’s actually quite green … and white. And I hate that I believe AND feel that. And I hate that others …
Second reaction – vindication.
Wait a minute –
No part of me should ever feel vindicated from another’s validation.
In fact, no part of me should shout – “See I’m just as good as you. The Supreme Court said so.”
No part of me should now hold her head higher and prouder cuz I’m equal, or did they say unequal? Hmm.
No part of me should shout silent prayers – “Kinda free at last, kinda free at last. Thank God almighty. Kinda free at last.”
No part of me, not even a miniscule, should automatically begin defining who I am by what I believe or know someone else to believe or know.
This is bondage that no law or court can absolve.
Lester – This chicken house is permanently closed
Lester Maddox, the segregationist and former governor of Georgia died two days after the first black mayor of Atlanta.
First reaction – “Guess he felt he could go now.” Maynard was truly a thorn in his side.
The news acknowledged his infamy – he closed his chicken house restaurant so he would never have to serve blacks.
The news acknowledged his accomplishments – increased public school funding and his open-door policy, giving ordinary citizens access to him through a weekly meet and greet.
The news also acknowledged his racial contradictions – he appointed the first black member to the Board of Pardons and Paroles. He named 38 blacks to local draft boards – more than all previous governors, combined. Furthermore, two years after his last state campaign he formed a nightclub routine with Bobby Lee Fears, one of his former restaurant kitchen workers, and even appeared on Laugh-In.
But I don’t care about his contradictions. The former seem politically expedient. The latter – I have no logical explanation.
Closing your restaurant so you don’t have to serve blacks, or gays, or whomever you don’t cotton to …
That’s personal. Deep personal. Way past skin-deep.
But look at the real world. Then and today.
How many people of color know, I mean really know, what they would call a totally empathetic, definitely sympathetic, really gets it white person? Not talking about the folks you think you know cuz of tv or news sound bites. Name five? Four? …
Flip it. How many non-black people know a black person who they feel they can say anything around without being thought racist? Or who doesn’t automatically assume any response given must be centered around race because you’re white? Three? Two?
Can a person change? Heck I’m not the same person I was yesterday.
Can you trust it?
Do you want to?
Can you agree we need to learn to?
The chicken house door is closed. Let’s find another restaurant around the corner.
Maynard
I don’t have a cute title. Don’t even want one.
I can’t explain it. It probably won’t mean the same to you.
I can’t explain it to myself.
I just know at this moment I know how it feels when a dementor kisses a wizard (Harry Potter) – there’s a hole.
We weren’t the best of friends. He probably couldn’t remember my name.
But it still hurts.
If I listed his peers. At their death. Albeit sad, but it doesn’t grate the same way. Like acrylic fingers on a chalkboard.
Maynard Jackson was one of the classy ones. Bet there wasn’t a FUBU in his closet.
But who cares. He was for us, because of us when it didn’t cost a dime … to anyone but him.
That smile … What a smile.
And fuhn (fine for the unlearned). Dag fuhn.
65 is too young.
Heck 15 is too young, but that’s when he entered Morehouse. A Morehouse man – should have known.
35 is too young, but Atlantans knew right stuff – they elected him mayor. For two terms. Eight years later they gave him another term.
50’s are too old – to start another career. But he did. And parlayed his securities firm into one of the tops in the nation – skip the color.
But 65 …
This one hurts. So much I’m ready to get on a plane and make my proper goodbye. I’m holding myself back cuz it seems silly. Spending all that money to say goodbye to someone …
I’ve always said I don’t want a funeral – “No one is looking down on me in death, when I didn’t allow it during life.” Another truth, and y’all wonder it too – wonder if no one shows up? Wonder if no one shows up, not because they’re expected to, but because they cared … that you or I made a difference. I do not want my tombstone to apologize like Ralph Abernathy’s – “I tried.” I want to know. That I did. Make a difference. And Ralph, you did. Wish we’d let him know that. Wish he’d let us tell him.
So maybe that explains part of the hurt. Maynard made a difference. And it was tangible. Even the intangible was tangible – visibly.
God he was something. And you knew it. And felt it. Even if you didn’t know he’d walked into a room. Big men do wear soft shoes.
Maynard.
The hole left is big, because of the girth … of his heart, his intellect, his compassion, his … the brother was fun, fuhn, and could kick some … booty.
Maynard.
Smiled on us. Big time.
Don’t know who touches you like that. But if you’ve never had one, pray you get one … and become one.
Living is not always in vain.
Maynard.
A little softer now.
Maynard.
Real quiet now.
Maynard.
Bye.
StockBoySF Ricorun, I agree with David on this. I’d like to agree with you (and to be honest this is a quietson I struggle with so I may end up with your same position maybe not today or tomorrow .). But to throw out why I agree with David .It’s the people who elect the public officials, not the party’s leadership. If the GOP leadership (and same goes for Dems) has a choice between supporting a popular female candidate over a less popular male candidate, the GOP leadership will support that woman candidate over the man. My point being that the GOP doesn’t have to be women friendly to have women guvs, senators, etc. To be sure if a woman is strong and has the qualifications then the GOP will support and respect her. But that doesn’t mean the GOP supports women as a whole. I think the GOP is male-centric . The GOP’s first choice is to put a man in a position and see how he does. Whereas with women in the GOP I think the attitude is, She’s proven herself so we can support her for this position. Another way to look at the argument is why are there so many Log Cabin Republicans (the gay/lesbian Republican group)? Clearly the Dems are much more favorable to gay and lesbian issues than the Republicans. Why any gay or lesbian would actually support the Republicans is beyond me. After all if you’re straight, would you support a party that believes you should not marry the man (or woman) of your choice? Would you support a party that believes it is legal for you to be fired if you are straight? Would you support a party that believes a landlord can evict you from your home because you’re straight? Probably not and these are the Republican positions when it comes to gays and lesbians. I don’t think anyone can even begin to call the GOP gay-friendly . I think the same holds true for women in the Republican Party. The Dems have more women-friendly policies than the Republicans do, yet there is something that attracts gays and lesbians and women (and others such as blacks who are in a similar position) to the Republican Party.Many people believe that Republicans are fiscally responsible (though they’re only fiscally responsible if it hurts their enemies- if it means gains for themselves, then suddenly they become irrationally fiscally irresponsible). Gays and lesbians, women and others are drawn to the Republican Party for a multitude of reasons. Just because there are gays and lesbians and women, etc. in the party doesn’t mean that the GOP values them. The GOP will only consider them worthy once they have proven themselves. Whereas with white men, the GOP puts them in positions without those white men having to prove themselves beforehand. I speak generally here because for every rule there is an exception.So Ricorun while I’d like to have the same position as you on this issue, I find it hard to get myself there, try as I might.
I see a lot of interesting articles on your website.
You have to spend a lot of time writing, i know how to save you a lot of
time, there is a tool that creates unique, SEO friendly articles in couple of
minutes, just search in google – laranita’s free content source