What Needs to Change to Produce the Change We Need?

Ever since Aram Goudsouzian visited our class, I have been stuck on the concept of reframing the Civil Rights Movement and complicating the popular narrative in order to make sense of the current moment and ultimately help us provoke substantial change, and ultimately achieve social justice. Dr. Goudsouzian’s lecture also left me with questions about the best way to bring about change.

The “old civil rights history” often begins with the legal triumphs (typically, Brown v. Board of Education), then discusses a series of nonviolent protests and ends with MLK, Jr.’s I Had A Dream Speech (of course, with the federal government as an ally the entire time). Some versions of this history include a sliver of the Black Power Movement, but it is emphasized that the loud, rowdy and outspoken black power activists, ‘did not represent the Civil Rights Movement.’ The master narrative is set in the south, seeing as issues of racial justice and equality were considered ‘southern problems.’ Of course, this is a superficial and very problematic narrative.

The first issue with this narrow perspective--whether intentional or not--is that it casts people of color as a monolith. It suggests that essentially all people of color were on the same page about how equity should be achieved, with only a small group of people who used violence and aggression to provoke change. Secondly, the familiar narrative leaves out entire groups of people, such as women (especially women of color), who were often times more involved than men in the movement. Of course, with the exclusion of these groups, women and others are erased from the history, and not seen as important figures--allowing sexism and misogynistic views to prevail. Thirdly, and perhaps most importantly, this thinking causes us to view the Civil Rights Movement as a thing of the past. In doing so, we fail to recognize the lasting effects and larger institutional and social implications of the movement. This explains the bashing of Black Lives Matter and other modern-day movements--people fail to recognize that these protests and marches are simply a continuation of previous work being done, not some wild, out-of-nowhere thing. By learning and understanding historical context and creating a fuller framework that does not exclude critical information, we can better understand this particular moment. What is going on today is not at all random, and if people really want peace and quiet, it is critical that they understand what folks are fighting for, how long they have been fighting for it and why they are fighting for in this particular way.

I am at a constant battle with myself about how to produce change. While I recognize that due to deeply rooted institutional oppression, and systems that work to keep power structures and dynamics in place, substantial change has only been made when people take matters into their own hands--coming together, and making themselves seen and heard. That realization has driven me to participate in and help organize protests. However, I also see the value in trying to create legislation and share a dialogue with those in currently in control. I guess my question is, ‘Should change attempt to be created within or outside of ‘the system?’ I recognize that historically, change ‘within the system’ has not worked, and that is why protesting has been necessary. So then I wonder if protesting is the only solution? As Dr. McKinney says frequently, ‘There is no compromise when it comes to freedom.’

I think the solution takes a complex series of choices and actions--What do y’all think those are? Or do you think there is one more simple solution? Comment below!

WC of Blog Post: 609

Pledged: Annie Jaffee

On white people and the n-word

“I think the experience of being a hip-hop fan and not being able to use the word ‘[     ]’ is actually very insightful. It’ll give you just a little peek into what it’s like to be black”

These are the words of author Ta Nehisi Coates at a lecture he was giving to university students, when one girl in the audience asked how to address her friends using the n-word when singing along to Lil Uzi Vert. I entirely agree with Coates’ assessment: if you are really a white fan of hip-hop, you need to confront how your skin color adds some interesting context and meaning to your music consumption, and you need to reckon with this meaning. If you are a white fan of hip-hop and you use the n-word when you sing along —stop now! It’s not too late! To use the word is to caste yourself voluntarily into the role of white oppressor.
Let's break this down: the historical context of the n-word is that it was invented and given meaning by whites who participated in arguably the most evil and vast iteration of slavery that the world has ever seen. It was and is a tool of oppression. The historical context of blacks using the word has a range of meaning, but since the legal end of slavery it can be reasonably generalized down to ironic use that takes the word’s original power away. These contexts are not the same, and as Coates points out, many ethnic and gender groups use derogatory language within their group ironically to accomplish different meanings. When this is the case, personal relationships between people who belong to that group and the fact that a shared element of identity is at play can change the overall meaning of what is said, overriding historical or outside contexts and meanings of the same terms.
In this vein, Black use of the n-word in hip-hop functions as reclamation, taking power away from the word by re-appropriating it into a variety of different meanings but ultimately affirming black life. Whites do not have access to this meaning because of their historical context with the n-word, which is basically the trump card of historical contexts. Until blacks are truly equal to whites in the United States, how many black friends you have will continue to be dwarfed by ongoing and historical implications.
Continuing on the hunt for white justification, I stumbled upon YouTuber @chescaleigh’s video, “The N-word ‘double standard.’” In it, she brings up how some whites attempt to argue that a double standard is at play concerning the n-word. The “logic” @chescaaleigh is railing against says that blacks shouldn’t say it if they don’t want other people to say it, and that the word has changed meaning to mean “stupid” (I can’t even make this up). First of all, I think calling political incorrectness of whites saying the n-word a “double-standard” is totally oblivious to the mountain of privilege whites sit atop, and is akin to reaching down to the black mountain of struggle and plucking the microscopic condolence of “being able to use the n-word” from it because “it’s not fair.” Just stop. Second, to ask blacks to stop using it if they don’t want other people to use it assumes that all black people use the word, and is ignorant of the disparate meanings the word takes on when used by different groups. Finally, the word has not changed meanings to mean “stupid.” It may be used that way by some people in some conttemporary contexts, but whites do not have access to that meaning. Understand that the meaning of words is different depending on who is saying them, understand hip-hop.
    To appreciate hip-hop is to appreciate aspects of the black experience. In this way, the understanding of the black experience that not being able to use the n-word gives is really a gift, a better window into the world of being black that is the focus of the music.

Master Narrative in Horror

          We are a little under a month removed the Halloween season that is known for its scary horror films. Horror is one of my favorite genres because I love being on the edge of my seat and imagine what I would do if I were placed in the weird predicaments the characters find themselves in. The problem that lies in this genre though is that it marginalizes a big part of its audience, black people. The representation of black people in horror is poor and troublesome, if represented at all. The running joke amongst the black community is there is no need to go see horror films because the one black person is going to die first. Complex magazine did a study to show that this is not always true, in their study of fifty horror films the black character only died first ten percent of the time although that killed a preconceived notion of the horror genre in a small sample size, it does not address the numerous problems that are present[1]. The mortality rate of black characters is extremely high for the small amount of representation they have. The roles of black characters often play up stereotypes of being comedic relief with very little background given in their back stories outside of being cordial with their white companions in the film. The more we have talked in class, the more I have come to the realization that this is a lot like the master narrative except it is taking place on a cinema screen. Most horror films are from the perspective of bland characters as we learn their background the black character is sprinkled in just enough to not forget about his presence with his comedic relief until his untimely death. The black character is deemed unimportant to the ultimate success of the white lone survivor much like the master narrative and was a grand martyr ultimately leading to the demise of the killer.

            The only time to my knowledge that the minority makes it to the end of a horror film are in Wayans Brothers spoofs or when the film has a black director. Get Out, a film by Jordan Peele, continued this trend of letting the black character live while amending the common practice of his contemporaries of using the black character as screen candy to add a little color to the screen. Peele flips the script on Hollywood by utilizing Chris, the leading black character, by giving him a story arc, shows emotion, and is hardly ever used for comedic relief in this slow burn horror discussing racial dynamics in interracial relationships in America. It became the highest grossing film this year. This would be the opposite of the master narrative, the black man reclaiming his stake in a world that has marginalized him since the genre’s inception.

---

[1] Barone, Matt. “Fact Check: Do Black Characters Always Die First in Horror Movies?” Complex, Complex, 20 Oct. 2016, www.complex.com/pop-culture/2013/10/black-characters-horror-movies/.

Word Count: 494 words

"What about White Identity Extremists?" The FBI "Black Extremist Groups" Report.

Recently, the FBI issued the report “Black Identity Extremists Likely Motivated to Target Law Enforcement Officers” in an attempt to target groups of “violent blacks.” In the report multiple “black extremist groups” are listed and are put on watch by the FBI. However, the report fails to identify any white extremist groups that may also have the potential to act on violence toward the police. This systematic decision to target “black identity extremists” continues the trend over the last century of fabricating a violent black identity. This FBI report harkens back to times when people like Ell Persons were lynched because the white community and law enforcement assumed blacks to be responsible for violence. Similarly, just as law enforcement used to allow (and even partake in) violence towards blacks simply “running crowd control,” this report ignores and may potentially enable white extremist groups to continue acts of violence.

In response to the report, Attorney General Jeff Sessions was asked about his own knowledge and connection to the report. In one moment regarding “violent blacks,” while Sessions claims, “there are groups that do have an extraordinary commitment to their racial ideology,” Congress Woman Karen Bass quickly responds “are you aware of white organizations that do this as well?” As Sessions answers, it is comical, but also chilling, that he is unable to firmly assert that organizations like the KKK and Neo-Nazis are white identity extremists with violent capabilities. What is especially unsettling is that in the wake of Neo-Nazi present violence in Charlottesville, blacks are still being targeted white real and present extremist groups still exist in the US. In the same interview, Sessions is asked whether he considers Black Lives Matter to be a “violent extremist movement.” He similarly wavers at the question (as the one previously mentioned) but ultimately chooses not to express his beliefs on the movement.

This brought one question to mind: If government officials are unable to investigate the true nature of a social or political movement, how can they justifiably target people involved with these protests? Although Black Lives Matter is not specifically mentioned in the report, targeting groups where motivations are simply understood seems to violate their right to freedom of speech. Under this recent report, blacks are still targeted by extremist groups and law enforcement. If blacks are to receive true equal protection, federal attempts must be made to shift focus toward white extremist groups rather than away from these recorded and observed sources of violence.

WC: 413

“Congress Woman Bass vs Jeff Sessions.” c-Span.org, C-Span, 14 Nov. 2017, www.c-span.org/video/?c4691627/congress-woman-bass-vs-jeff-sessions.

Should We Do Away with the term Owner?

The word owner normally comes with the connotation that one person has possession of another thing. Golden State Warriors player Draymond Green recently brought up the point that the professional sports should do away with the term owner and replace it with the term chairman or something of the sort because “ to be owned by someone sets a bad precedent to start. It sets the wrong tone. It gives one the wrong mindset.” These comments I thought at the time were fake deep, but as time and more news comes out on the mindset of some of these owners starts to come across the news ticker every night I came to see he was on to something. Dallas Mavericks owner Mark Cuban came out within twenty four hours to say that Green owed the NBA an apology because he was trying to equate owning equity in a company to the ownership of people and that was just plain wrong, but was he? Since 2008 owners from the NBA’s Donald Sterling to the NFL’s Bob McNair have been called out for their racial ideologies and have suffered varying degrees of punishment for their stances. Cuban has a point in his rant, yes, for most of these billionaires its fulfilling a dream by owning their own professional sports teams and they do whatever they can for the guys on the their teams. The problem that Green is pointing out though is that most professional sports are minority dominated while over 97 percent of the teams are owned and governed by white men. The racialism of the pro sports world is no secret with these white men sitting atop with their pockets overflowing with money. The leeway of the black quarterback in the NFL is often smaller than that of his white counterpart and the same can be said of black coaches in regardless of sport. I cannot in my right mind make the comparison to slavery as these world class athletes make millions of dollars to play schoolyard games, but if they don’t perform to the standards of what the “owner” envisions himself paying for they are kicked off their “owners” property. That term owner holds a negative connotation in the anals of American history. I think both parties are right in a way. Yes, a lot of these owners will do anything for the communities in which there teams are located and for the guys on the teams in which they watch from a luxury suite every night. I would also have to ask “What’s in a name?” why even associate with a word that has such a negative past with the ancestry of a majority of your employees when you could hold the same power without it. It will not be the end of the world if the owners of pro franchises no longer own that title, but maybe just think about it for your employees.

Word Count: 487

Choose a Side: The Ever-Present Battle of Light skins vs. Dark skins

Thanksgiving break for many is a time a joy and happiness. For some of us it is a time to reconnect with family and friends that we haven’t seen all year. Going back to Atlanta for Thanksgiving brought back a lot of emotions and memories.  Visiting my old high school with my friends brought back a lot of memories and social lessons that dominated my school’s atmosphere. One of the main social lesson that I gained from school was the effect of skin tone. For me, high school served as a daily reminder of the effects that colorism has on the black community. Not a day went by where it wasn’t “light skin this” and “dark skin that” and the ever-present debate, both verbal and non-verbal, of whether it was better to be light skin or dark skin. Saying things like “stop acting like such a light skin” or “stop acting so dark skin” filled the halls and side conversations of students. Being constantly reminded of your social position of being either light, dark, or in the middle. This debate occurred daily, and some memories serve me where this debate was physically facilitated by teachers inside the classrooms on several occasions. This battle of light skin vs. dark skin was so rooted in every aspect of my high school’s life, much like it is in many black communities, that you could always since the divide. Whether it was something such as during a class competition the teacher would ask “How do you guys want to be split up”. Instead of saying the usual “boys vs. girls” or “left side vs. right side” the most common response would be “light skin vs. dark skin”. Even though a lot of people were friends with a lot of people from different skin tones their still existed this underlining aggression and colorism.  This type of environment fostered many problems that many in the black community encounter daily. To be light skin is to not be black enough and to be dark skin is to be too black. This tension stems from generation and generations of white society’s perception of beauty. To be black is to be not beautiful and the closer to white that you were, the more beautiful you were. This dynamic had caused continuous resentment in the black community between Black people and lighter skin and darker skin. The lighter skin that you had the more accepting you would be into white society, so much that many could pass as white in order to escape the realities of living as a Black person in America. While one side viewed this as a kind of social advantage, while the other side viewed is a social disadvantage. This constant misunderstanding of views increases this type of tension because no one wants to talk about it. This a battle that many people refuse to acknowledge and talk about in a constructive way. Colorism in the black community is a real issue and wants people to realize that, we can start having these conversations.

WC:508

Racism and Self-Awareness

About a month ago in Shelbyville, Tennessee, white nationalists and neo-Nazis gathered to stage what became known as a “White Lives Matter” rally. While unified under one title, the marchers were far from unified in their goals or beliefs. Some, who donned the regalia of the Nazi SS and drew Hitler mustaches on their faces, believed in a vast and powerful Jewish conspiracy that was manipulating and undermining American life. Others, who hurled homophobic slurs at counter-protesters, wanted to reclaim a nation that they perceived as stolen by LGBT folks and their liberal sympathizers. Still more sought to express their disdain for the “browning” of America and goal of returning the nation to a place of codified racial hierarchy.

Despite the diversity of their equally disgusting ideologies, a common current ran through the demonstration as a whole; a fear and hatred of the Other. A particularly telling exchange comes between NPR correspondent and host, David Greene, and his interviewee who was participating in the rally, Jessica Adkins. Green opens by asking Adkins what her beliefs, goals, and motives are. After expressing contempt for what she referred to as the “LGBT stuff”, Adkins described her fear of multiculturalism. “As far as multiculturalism -you know, every commercial you see on TV, it shows that multiculturalism. Why? Why is that? What - are they trying to paint a picture (laughter)”? Greene pushed her further and asked her what the distinction between a dislike of multiculturalism and racism is. “It’s totally different...I mean, you don't have to - I mean, like I said, the League of the South is not out to destroy another race. They are out to preserve our race. What's wrong with that? I'm not embarrassed to be white. I'm proud of what my ancestors made me and I'm proud of what my ancestors did because they fought for my state, my homeland. You know, they created me (laughter). I mean, there's nothing wrong with that. There's no problem whatsoever with being proud to be white”.

There is something profoundly disturbing about this exchange. It is disconcerting to see someone with these kinds of beliefs lack the self-awareness to at least acknowledge that they hold prejudicial views. But to do so while walking lockstep with actual Nazis betrays a certain disregard for the truth or, at the very least, a cognitive dissonance. This presents a unique challenge to anyone who considers themselves an ally in the struggle for minority rights, especially the rights of African Americans. Part of combating white supremacy is calling out overtly racist acts and sentiments when they arise. But when the person perpetrating said act does not even acknowledge their prejudice, educating about the evils of racism becomes that much more difficult. Given the increased visibility of white supremacist groups throughout the past year, I believe that this will be one of the marquee challenges concerning race in America that our generation must overcome.

WC: 491

Pledged: Nick DeMaris

Sources Cited:

Greene, David. “In Shelbyville, Tennessee, ‘Proud to Be White’ and ‘Hate is not the Solution”. NPR, October 30, 2017. https://www.npr.org/2017/10/30/560767446/in-shelbyville-tenn-proud-to-be-white-and-hate-is-not-the-solution

English or Englishes?

In contemplating different aspects of what defines each and every one of us, I started thinking about language and the role it plays in making us who we are.  Not only language, but also the ways that language is spoken, manipulated, and used.  It is a means through which our thoughts, emotions, ideas, memories can be communicated; a means through which we connect as human beings, a common ground.  It can be a comfort, it can be an annoyance, it can be too much, and it can be not enough.  Language can be beautiful.  However, we live in a country where there is a particular culture that is in power, dictating various ways we interact with society and each other.  One of these ways is the language we use.  This culture of power commands the use of one particular way of speaking, presenting oneself, communicating with others, regardless of who you are, how you grew up, and the culture in which you live.  This culture demands the usage of “formal” English, ignoring the existence of all the other englishes that exist in this country, including black English, or Ebonics that is a part of the culture of some African American citizens.  There has been some talk about the “validity” of black English, mostly about its place in education I think.  Do we correct students when they use Black English or no?  If so, when?  If not, why?

            On one hand of the argument, you have this undeniable system in which the black students, and all citizens, live that requires a particular way of speaking for access to certain communities such as academic communities.  On the other hand, any person ought to have the right to participate in their own culture’s language, especially in school when students are learning about themselves in this world and how to express themselves in this world.  So how do we balance these two seemingly opposed realities?  How can we expose the existence of “formal English” –  teaching students who might use black English how to engage in it and the necessity of knowing it in this country – without devaluing black English in their eyes?  Honestly, I don’t really know the answer to that question.  It would take a lot of humility from our educators to be able to be real with students about how this country views their culture.  It would take a lot of tact from educators to be able to free students’ voices and their ability to express themselves in any kind of way – within their own culture and the culture that dominates the country.  More applicably, what would it look like for citizens who are in the culture that has power – whether having gained access through birth or education or some other way – to trouble the rigid standards and homogenous expectations that hold command in this country?  I think if this mastering kind of culture is going to be broken down, it would more than likely have to happen “from within,” so how can we fight against the status quo of “formal English” and open up our country to all englishes so that future students, future immigrants, future citizens don’t have to feel burdened by normalized forms of English? 

WC: 536

Normalizing White Supremacy

The New York Times recently published Richard’s Fausset’s article, A Voice of Hate in America’s Heartland, a piece that tells the story and thought process of Nazi sympathizer, Tony Hovater. While this article is not wrong for acknowledging the existence of Nazi thought, it is at fault for the tone of normalcy and acceptance used to convey the views and beliefs of a neo-Nazi. Fausset starts by talking about Hovater as a newly married man with an ordinary life. Hovater is almost portrayed as a victim who sometimes struggles to “identify as a far-right extremist” but has found comfort and acceptance since the election of President Trump.[1] The journalist goes on to describe Hovater’s rationale, his likes and dislikes, and his forms of involvement with the radical right as if they are accomplishments to be proud of. This portrayal of Hovater expands beyond the story of one man and normalizes the existence of the alt right movement. That’s not to say that the very real presence of Nazism should be ignored, but it should be addressed in a way that challenges the oppressor and condemns the beliefs that threaten the lives of so many.      

I found this article very difficult to read as it profiles someone with radical and dangerous beliefs as being ordinary and curious while failing to address the larger issue of white nationalism. It denounces the historical implications of Nazism and white supremacy and fails to condemn a belief system that openly targets non-Christians and non-whites. According to this article, Hovater is just an ordinary man unsatisfied with the government, looking for ways to improve white America. It normalizes Nazism and white supremacy and makes their thought process appear moral and acceptable. Writing about Hovater and modern Nazism with relaxed judgement, blinded by the detrimental implications of his radical beliefs, makes it seem as though white nationalism, white supremacy, and fascism are acceptable solutions to America’s problems. This article is not wrong for telling the story of a Nazi, it is wrong for failing to challenge and question the oppressor and ignores the violence and dangers of this movement with a complete disregard for the people who are put in danger by such beliefs. It overshadows the extremism Hovater’s endangering views of non-whites and non-Christians with descriptions of an everyday life and to normalize such thinking is to accept it.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/25/us/ohio-hovater-white-nationalist.html

 WC: 405

Pledge: Olivia Holmes

---

[1] Fausset, A Voice of Hate in America’s Heartland

Halloween in Baltimore

             Just after Halloween this past year, the Baltimore Sun, the local news paper, posted a story about students attending Baltimore private schools, and their choices of costumes. These pictures were taken from snapchat, and then posted on Facebook by a former class mate of mine, and the pictures of the current students were wearing jumpsuits. In one of the pictures, it was of two kids wearing regular jumpsuits with the caption saying “n------ broke out”. In the other picture at a non related high school, there was a picture of the back of a student wearing a jumpsuit, on which was written “Freddie Gray”. Weeks after this happened, stories are still coming out about the incident from the Baltimore Sun, and I was lucky enough to talk to my friend who called out these students on Facebook and wrote to the schools and local news sources. His original Facebook post got so much attention and several thousand shares. But what happened to the post was really suppressing.

            It was not suppressing at all that my friend received plenty of backlash from other friends and members of the school. A lot of people wanted to know why he publicly called the students out, after all, they weren’t the ones who made the caption over snapchat, in fact, all they did was dress up as members of the hit T.V. show, Orange is the New Black. Regardless of whether what this man posted on Facebook was right or wrong, Facebook saw how much attention that it was getting and removed the post from Facebook, and tried to act like it never happened. They also suspended his Facebook account and wrongly silenced him from sharing the truth. This is a major issue regarding freedom of speech, and I was upset that a major company like Facebook can get away with something like that.

            The schools responded the best that they could have to a really obscured situation like this. They sent emails out to all of the students, alumni, parents, and news sources to try and correct this incident. Still, in November, there are rallies against this kid of racist nature organized by the faculty and staff. This brings up so many questions that go a lot further then “what do you do with the kids who are involved”. I personally think that it was right to call out these kids who were involved, not to shame them or get them in trouble, but to further on the conversations and make the naive realized that racism is still very much a part of this country, even in Baltimore city where I grew up, which is predominantly black and liberal. It is our job to further these conversations in our communities. I feel as if the school needs to better educate kids on decision making, and realizing that some people might not see the situation as others do. I’m glad that the schools are now publicly standing up against the students involved and are showing the community their potential for change.  

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/education/bs-md-gilman-roland-park-rally-20171107-story.html

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/baltimore-city/bs-md-halloween-costumes-20171030-story.html