The Collective American Psyche Cannot Understand “Equal” Rights

For the past few months I have been making cultural comments. At this time, I would like to shift focus to American life and how it nurtures and perpetuates bullying. Almost every week we see a young person who has committed suicide because of bullying. I feel that collectively, we are all responsible for those precious lives that were lost. In many ways, the American way of life is liberating. We live in a competitive, supposedly meritocratic society where anybody with dreams, gumption, smarts, and a will to succeed can –well – succeed. That is the dream that America sells its own people as well as the millions who come here every year. In reality, America is driven by a race/sex-based economic system that thrives on exploitation of others at some level. To paraphrase Ishmael Reed, if the motto for Britain is the “sun never sets on the British empire,” in America that motto should be “there’s a sucker born every minute.” Historically, America was built by rebel forces and simultaneous exploitation. The Founding Fathers decried the tyranny of British colonialism while holding Black slaves at home. As Washington crossed the Delaware, some slave prepared for a long day in the fields building the country with manual labor. Following slavery, almost 100 years of Jim Crowism, exclusionary immigration policies, and heavy-handed militaristic tactics with Native Americans, America’s economic system remained meritocratic for some –mainly white men –and oppressive for others –everybody who wasn’t a white man. To date, this unevenness in our wealth distribution as well as our very skewed notion of who should participate equally in our government and economy block any deeper understanding we should have of Civil Rights and equality. In Thomas Jefferson’s Notes, he was very afraid that one day the tides would change and God would punish white people by one day making them the slaves and Africans the masters. I can safely say that during the presidential election, that fear still lingers and was made manifest by the proliferation of disrespectful and violent rhetoric aimed toward this president. I have never in my life witnessed so much disrespect towards the office of the presidency. The white supremacists have come out of the woodwork, and they are armed and dangerous. But I could feel this brewing ever since the 1990s with the arguments over affirmative action. In Americans’ haste to label, fight, and exploit, we boiled affirmative action down to a struggle of hierarchy, and the media stoked that fire. Some media personalities outright said that affirmative action would give minorities –especially Black people –unfair advantages over qualified white people. And when Obama got elected, personalities like Glen Beck and Rush Limbaugh all but stated that Thomas Jefferson’s worst nightmare had come true! They accused civil rights activists of being reverse racists, and declared that President Obama would seek vengeance for the slaves using the office of the presidency. I have often wondered why Americans simply do not understand the notion of civil rights and equality –especially in a land that boasts of itself as a land of opportunity for all. It is because we cannot think outside of competitiveness and exploitation. The notion that one group simply wants to be on equal footing with the other and not on top does not register in our collective psyche. For instance, most feminists have never requested that women rule the country or that women be in charge of every job. Feminists simply say that if a woman lifts 50 pounds and a man lifts 50 pounds, the woman should be paid the same amount of money and given the same opportunities for advancement. After all, 50 pounds of cotton and 50 pounds of lead weigh the same. However, most conservative men have looked upon this demand for equal pay for equal work as an infringement upon male authority. Here’s another example: African Americans who fought for Civil Rights have never asked that African Americans be given a free pass for committing crime. We’ve only asked that the punishment be meted out equally. Why are Black men frequently given harsher sentences than their white counterparts for the very same crime? African Americans have also never asked that underqualified students be given college admittance and scholarships for subpar work. We’ve asked that qualified students’ application should be reviewed and not immediately thrown in the paper shredder because of the color of their skin.

When it is written out, the notion of equality doesn’t seem too difficult. It almost seems absurd that people have marched, died, and protested for the right to be treated fairly in the land of opportunity. But until Americans understand that not everything in life can be about competitiveness and exploitation, we’ll continue going around and around in a never-ending psychological boxing match for something as decent, simple and grand as equal opportunity.

Words DO Mean Something

Words mean everything to me. They have to, I'm attempting a Ph.D. in English. And even though some may call me melodramatic, the recent shooting of a United States Congresswoman should prove that there's something behind my bombast.

I'm not trying to be too cold here, but Saturday's shooting was no surprise to me. With today's gun rhetoric and political labeling, I'm only surprised that it didn't happen sooner. I'm not playing the blame game here. As a student of history, violence can come from the Left and the Right. Indeed, there was a time in this counry when most of the violence came from the Left via war protests and bombings.

However, with 95% of talk radio time being consumed by the Right, it is safe to say that most of the gun talk and revolutionary rhetoric comes from the Right. Just listen to the hate-filled speech of Rush Limbaugh and the gun play of Palin. To some, what they say is just red meat for the base. To them, I personally believe that their talk is just a way to make $12 million in one quarter. To some psychopathic fringe elements, their words are God-sent gifts. Their words give them a way to dehumanize people who don't agree with them. Crosshairs on a map become real political targets. People become enemies. Enemies that must be snuffed out by any violent means necessary.

Ironically, Right-Wing Conservatives play down the importance of words. Some even advocate the eradication of English departments across America; afterall, we don't DO anything productive for our societies. We only deal with the words of dead men and the bitter ones of living minorities. Thereby, we poison the minds of the youth of America, with words.

What then, after this horrible tragedy has occurred, do we call the hate-filled, fear-inducing rhetoric of someone like Glenn Beck? Even more dangerous, gun lobbyists, with words, successfully lobbied Congress to let the assault weapons bans to expire. What words, following this horrific act, will convince our conservative public servants to place a stricter ban on assault weapons that could more than likely harm or kill them?

Uninformed in an Age of Information

What's going on in Israel? What about Brazil? What goes on in Brazil on a day-to-day basis? As far as the healthcare bill is concerned, is the one recently passed only a starting point for improvements? Will there be more amendments? What about the relatively weak financial reform bill? Will it be strengthened as the months pass? What is the President doing daily to stop the Gulf Spill? Have the families of the 11 TransOcean explosion been financially compensated?

I don't know. I haven't heard. I watch at least two hours of news and two hours of news commentary every day, and I don't know. Headlines from the Washington Post are inboxed to every day. My homepage is MSN.com, and CNN.com is bookmarked. With all of this, I still don't know. Could it be possible that even in the age of information, when people want to know everything about everything, the most informed of us are still uninformed? What does this say about the state of our media, and the types of information we crave most?

I'll give one example. For the past two weeks, straight news and liberal/conservative news commentators have criticized President Obama for now "showing enough emotion" concerning the Gulf Oil Spill. Hours have spent on this with talking heads analyzing the man's every facial expression and comment. However, we don't know how much money fishermen stand to receive. What kinds of cleaners have been used to clean the wildlife? What is actually in that dispersant? What happened to the less-harmful dispersant? Is it still in Texas? What are the plans to replenish the wetlands that are being choked off by the oil? What would the military do if they were involved? What could they do that BP is not doing if they don't have the equipment? We don't know any of these things because our media has been wasting time asking why the 6'0+ Black man who runs a country that many see as a white man's country hadn't blown his top or started crying. We already know the damn answer to that. If you are reading this post, and you don't know, see Jonathan Capehart's June 8 column at washingtonpost.com. I'm more into action, not posturing. Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck, and Rush Limbaugh can show emotions. Would we want them in charge of this catastrophe?

Don't buy my implication that our national media is keeping us ignorant of important policy while focusing on mind-numbing fluff? Remember the year of Bennifer? That very public affair of Ben Affleck and Jennifer Lopez? While our news and our minds were following the couple around as they made out in public and purchased a gun permit, our country was embroilled in two foreign wars. Servicemen and women were dying daily, and we couldn't get enough of what the powercouple -two individual adults with their own lives and damn it, their own prerogatives -garnered more of our attention and news space than two wars.

By now I know you want to ask, "Why should we even care about what goes on in those other countries?" I'm glad you asked. Our national deficit is reaching epic proportions, and Republicans are correct to be concerned -lest America become Greece. Spending has to stop at some point. Something needs to be cut. I find it strange, though, that none of these Republican (or Democratic) lawmakers ever speak of reducing American aid to Israel. And I'm not saying this because of any political standpoint I have concerning Israel and Palestine. As pointed out earlier, I don't know enough about the on-going conflict to make a judgment call one way or the other. I say this because Israel receives tens of billions of dollars of American aid, and America gets what in return? While Republicans focus on cutting social welfare funding and education here at home, what of Israel and our lack of return for the investments we have there? What social welfare programs are American citizens bankrolling in Israel? What benefit does giving tens of billions of dollars hold for the average American citizen? Why does America continue to give Israel aid when the country deliberately disrespects our leader?

Why should we care about Brazil? Well, it has one of the biggest and fastest-growing economies in the world, and it is almost independent of OPEC. What does that mean for us? Well, nothing right now. Brazil relies mainly on ethanol for fuel. Their government offered to import to the United States some of its very cheaply-made ethanol (the abundance of sugar cane in Brazil makes ethanol production there much cheaper than ethanol made here in the United States from corn). Unfortunately, our then President Bush, in all of his wisdom, placed a 100% tarrif on this fuel, according to the History International Channel, while his MMS office issued more and more drilling permits. You make the connections between Brazil, Bush, and our current crisis. I don't need to spell it out.

Even in this age, most younger citizens, who are part of the soundbyte generation, remain uninformed. With cuts to our education in favor of more foreign aid to our "allies" and millitary spending, the American populace will be even less informed that what we are now. And a population of uninformed taxpayers become....What? I'm too afraid to finish the thought.

Barack Obama, Political Chess Master II (Special Commentary)

Last night, I watched as this historic healthcare reform passed. There was much drama and action. The procedure itself has the making of a very good movie: the Tea Party members spitting on members of Congress and calling them racial/sexual epithets, Jessie Jackson Jr. having to bang that gabble and raise his voice to call for order during a very heated verbal exchange, John Boehner invoking scripture trying to shame a few more Democrats away from the "Yes" box. I tell you. I was on the edge of my seat.

The highlight came when a cool President Obama, standing in front of a very emotional and passionate Vice President Biden said, "This is what change looks like." As cool and as calm as expect any Black man to be, he looked square into the eyes of his political adversaries and he said in so many words, "Checkmate."
I bubbled over with laughter. My eyes brimmed with tears as I remembered the Lion of the Senate, a rich man who devoted almost his entire career to attaining healthcare for those less fortunate than himself. Then, I became uncontrollably angry because the public option/expansion of Medicaid for everyone is not in this bill. Why in the Hell would they take out such a huge victory for the American people? I mean, it's such a big bill that includes....

Then, exactly ten minutes after Barack Obama declared "checkmate," I realized that I don't know what is in this bill. Yes, I am a political junkie who watches at least four hours of political commentary every day, and I don't know what the heck is in this bill. I know if I don't know what's in it, all of those fanatics out there yelling about socialized medicine don't know, either.
So far, the coverage of this historic change has not been on the specifics of this bill. We saw the sausage making process, but not the ingredients of the links. Media focus has been on the strategy of the game, the coaches' game plays on each side, rather than what was happening on the field. Who wins? Who loses? Who's going to suffer at the polls? Who's going to benefit? What's Obama going to do next? How have the Republicans been so effective at controlling the message? What message? Aside from scaring the hell out of folks about death panels and "socialized medicine," there hasn't been a message.

So, the public option is out, but what's in? I don't know. The opposers of the bill don't know. This factor, including the ramping up of the rhetoric of fear and the constant referral to this bill as "Obama care", further affirms my view that this whole ordeal has been more about fear of what this Black man, leader of the free world, can do than about policy-making. Inciting violence against Barack Obama and the Democrats smacks of the jealous jouissance of Southern lynch picnics. What was that dark day in America's history all about? Power play dynamics and phallic authority. Just listen to Rush Limbaugh...you don't have to take my word for it.

Sadly, our public discourse is stil informed by white supremacy and jealous sexual projections. Sadly, those people who were out there spitting on lawmakers and taunting them probably need that help the most. Sadly, those people out there probably cannot even define the very words that very rich, white men like Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh told them to use. Sadly, Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh know exactly what they are doing. Sadly, those folks do not know that they are being used in a powerful class war and a fear of redistribution of wealth and elitism. They are no better than those young, poor white boys who died in the Civil War to enrich the pockets of wealthy plantation overlords, a class they could never belong to. Sadly, those people and their children will also benefit the most from the passage of such a bill, in spite of their manifest hatred.

So, even though President Obama cannot directly say it to his adversaries, I will. Check mate. "On to the next one" in the words of Jay-Z.

Some advice for all political pundits -liberal and conservatives - get used to a new, cooler style of leadership. We are dealing with a very calculated political genius, not someone prone to egotistical, masculine posture. There's actually some substance behind his exterior, and nobody can rush him. He's the chess master. You don't rush a chess master before he makes his move. He must study the board from every angle. He must study his opponent's peices from every angle, anticipate his move, and be prepared to counter it. That takes more than posturing. That takes brains. And brains is what we have back in the White House after an eight year vacuum.

What is the Government For?

Here's my blog. It is a series of questions that I had after listening to Republicans talk about big government and getting tired of listening to Rush Limbaugh all weekend long. I think, if Republicans want to start over, they should be answering these questions instead of listening and apologizing to a psychopath.
1. What is government for? Is it to be a chaperone for big businesses, issuing forth golden parachutes, and allowing them to take jobs overseas with the tax cuts given them by the federal government? Is government strictly an imperialistic millitary machine that imposes the culture of America on Third World countries whenever we need raw materials and cheap labor to fund our capitalistic ventures? What is government for?
2. What is socialism? Is it socialism or welfare when power is placed back in the hand of the laborer? What is it called when corporations and the ushers of capitalism strip power away from the hands of workers/consumers that must make and consume their products? Why isn't it socialism or welfare when the government gives individuals (corporations are often taxed as "individuals") taxpayer dollars to go out and buy themselves luxury planes and trips to expensive spas? Why aren't these people labeled "welfare queens and kings?" Aren't they, too, living irresponsibly, jeapordizing the jobs and futures of others, and then asking for a handout from the government? I ask again, what is government for?
3. Does government exist solely to help friends of the government become very wealthy from the deaths of our soldiers by passing out no-bid contracts to inept millitary contractors? Is it there to place the lives of our precious soldiers at stake to enrich people whose children will probably never see the battle field? What is government for?

Somebody, answer this for me. Rush Limbaugh and his party has not answered it, even though they are quite deft at telling a starving population what government is not for.