Wednesday, May 30, 2012

Repression or suppression

I have lived in San Francisco for 20 years. I have seen two movies about the Zodiac killer, but I have never heard a word until now about the Zebra killers. A Black on White murder spree in the mid 70's, stretching over 179 days, with 16 White deaths and 10 White people wounded. All in this city.

If the races had been reversed, we'd have a parade every year and we'd all know about it.

The race "rules" in America are complete BS.


Anonymous said...

And yet, really, liberal anti-racism activists didn't condemn the president's white mother for raising him in accord with the criteria of her own 'race' and 'class.' They didn't even condemn the president when he considers himself lucky in "Dreams From My Father" to have had such parenting from his mother.

That is, our liberals seem to have been colonized by the ever tricky white capitalist patriarchy into not perceiving that the president's value system perpetuates stuff that shouldn't be perpetuated.

And, really, his mother ought to have known better. She was an anthropologist, train'd in the insights that prove both that all cultures are equally valuable in terms of preparation of children for excellence as knowledge workers (lawyers, doctors, engineers, designers, scientists, lawyers, accountants, lawyers, etc) and that all cultures are so richly various and vibrant that generalizations are impossible.

In "The AudaCity of Hope," the president maintains only that it's unjust to expect POCs to assimilate to the 'external' markers of "the dominant white culture" (p. 279).

External markers such as "speech patterns" [presumably accent, but not a sound grasp of the grammar and vocabulary of English as used by the knowledge work institutions],

"dress" [although perhaps hillbilly clothing and beards or white goths' cosmetics and piercings will be as little welcome to mainstream white employers as the clothing etc of blacks who imitate the gangsters of their population group],

and "demeanor" [does the president really mean that anti-racism activists can expect white Americans to consider demeanour irrelevant? Could I go to China or Iran or Bolivia and make no effort to assimilate in terms of 'demeanour'? I feel if I did so I should be deem'd an "ugly American" to be tolerated only if I have a lot of money to spend.

In fact, I think if I imply'd that blacks are likely to differ from generic whites in speech patterns, clothing and demeanour, I would be condemn'd as a racist, since I would be arguing that differences in language and 'demeanour' (body language, facial expression, tone of voice) mean blacks are basically unemployable by businesses who deal with white, Asian, etc clientele.

If the 'externals' of black and white "cultures" are so different, hiring a black receptionist for a white office building would be as reckless a business decision as a firm in Sweden hiring an Italian to arrange scheduling plus giving the Italian multiculturalism permission to maintain his own culture's sense of time tables and punctuality.

Anonymous said...

If we dismiss the absurd theory that one may reasonably expect validation of different language use and demeanour, then we arrive at the reasonable expectation that all citizens will be expected to "conform" to the 'internal' and 'external' expectations of the knowledge work institutions and businesses that constitute the American oikoumene.

If a "whigger" expect'd to be hired to answer telephones using the language and demeanour he has pick'd up from Chris Rock comedy sketches and fancies is authentic African American speech patterns, employment counsellors would insist that he do some serious "conformity" and 'internalization" of the dominant culture.

All very well to have special programmes to bring citizens of deprived population groups up to speed in terms of language and demeanour and work habits. (America is more punctual than Italy, but less punctual than Japan or Sweden, say. But one does "minorities" no favours to imply that they can talk like Boss Hogg or whomever and expect "nondiscriminatory hiring."

I suppose a quick-talking impatient-sounding Yankee wouldn't be hired as a receptionist in some areas of the South. But our ideologues aren't implying that Yankee 'demeanour' has a right to validation in Louisiana.

P.S. I wonder really whether it is true that all "black Americans" are in solidarity with the poor. It may be true that 'middle-class' blacks don't refer to black gang members as "predators" or to those on welfare as "underclass" (p. 302). But maybe there are terms of opprobrium used among blacks for such groups. ...

The president excels in the 'demeanour' and 'speech patterns' and 'dress' of the "dominant white culture" and has succeeded very well. I don't say that he hasn't encounter'd and had to overcome great prejudices against African-Americans even despite his language, dress and demeanour. But I do wonder why he would pretend there is or ought to be or could be a 'relativism' in such things.

Employers are trying to run a business -- provide a good or service and generate a profit. Anti-racism activists, whose salaries are pay'd by the capitalist Man, seem to imply that the agenda for white economics should be to hire persons who inherit victimization credits from ancestors. ... I suppose an M.Div. nowadays is for the undoing of Christian religion.

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...