What does it say when conservative black voters, and especially religious conservatives among the black community, refuse to or at least have trouble supporting a black presidential candidate? Are you really having to decide between race politics and your religious values? If Barrack Obama doesn't represent the specific issues of parts of the black community while being a black man talking about poverty issues, than what issues are those conservatives who have a problem voting for him identifying as essential to their racial identity? Is it the same question of 'is he black enough?' or does this go beyond that and identify a deep problem in the identity of the African American communities and their disowning other portions of the community?
While being black doesn't equal being poor and living in urban areas, there are enough people who do that we can say there are historically black neighborhoods and that poverty and violence is still an issue identified by many community leaders as very present in their communities. How does addressing these issues in a progressive way, or at least trying to speak to people affected by poverty equal not being an issue to be addressed by the black community?
I don't think this is necessarily about race politics per se. I think that the important part to remember is that his struggle as a person of color coming from a working class background represents many of the issues and struggles of disenfranchised people all over our society. We, the disenfranchised, are desparate for some hope of progressive change, or at least to have our voices heard over the continual rhetoric of conservative white Christian politics we've suffered through for too many years. More than any other president in modern political history, Barrack Obama has the potential to create drastic change in the discourse of US politics, and in how we view ourselves.
Unless it turns out that he has some secret camp where he sends people to be put to death, I'm voting for him and I'm not ashamed. Yes, I'm voting for him because he's a black man, not because it will add color to an otherwise white-washed White House, but because of his experience in an ethnic class and social class that puts him in a different place than other politicians like Alan Keys, and I'm going to vote for him because he brings those experiences with him into his progressive politics, politics that give the potential for real in our civilization, and not just a new name on an old face.
Tuesday, June 17, 2008
BARRACK OBAMA/COURTING THE BLACK VOTE....
Posted by
Raven Night
at
12:59 AM
0
comments
Labels: Barrack Obama, democratic party, politics, Race Politics, US election
Saturday, December 1, 2007
Michigan to Not Be Represented at Democratic National Convention...
I feel as though in a representative government, any infringement on the rightful representation of a group of people's voice is an infringement on their basic constitutional rights. Despite there needing to be organization and policy for the sake of making that representation more effective, delegating over the rights of a group when allowing others freedoms is against the fundamental principles of the exercise of free speech and a representative government.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071201/ap_on_el_pr/primary_scramble
Posted by
Raven Night
at
12:28 PM
0
comments
Labels: democratic national convention, democratic party, DNC, election 2008, free speech, party politics, policy, politics, representation representative government
Saturday, October 13, 2007
Rich Libral Monster...
St. Paul Minnesota is going to be the home of the 2008 Republican National Convention, in the Excell Center looking over the Historic Riverfront. The problem, though, is where are the republicans going to stay? Where are they going to eat? Where are they going to spend their money? Minnesota, and especially the Twin Cities are strongly liberal. The large younger population in Minneapolis means that that city tends to be more progressive. The St. Paul population is different. There are a lot of families, young and old, and many long-time residents. It is also a city that has made a mission out of preserving its more historic areas.
Over the past decades, however, this has meant that the projects, funding, and interest of the city was distributed among its different neighborhoods, and since there are several colleges with long histories in St. Paul, it is not hard to see why. However, this has meant that the downtown area which boasted numerous shops and dining during the sixties and seventies has shriveled up to a single Macy's which is chugging along until it's lease is up and then there'll be one more empty building downtown. In fact, there is one building already that is completely empty, it's owner having left it to stand, the street level boarded up, for almost a decade. The building isn't small either, but a dozen stories. This is the city that the republicans are coming to.
When the convention was first announced, the mayor defended the situation by saying it should attract $150 million in revenue, despite what money would be required to prepare for it. That was a few years ago. Now, however, looking at less than a year away, it is scary to think what will happen when they come. Where are those millions going to come from?
This diatribe has a point, though. The catalyst for this situation is what I will call a rabid form of self-satisfying, self-righteous, and self-glorifying liberalism on the part of upper middle class and upper class long-time citizens of this area. They'll create projects of affordable housing in neighborhoods with little crime and good schools, as long as it isn't in their neighborhood. As long as they can rely on those working class and poor people not to cross the street that marks the edge of the secluded wealthy houses than it is an act of a good old liberal. They want to preserve the historic nature of Victoria Crossing, an area with small shops and a collection of bars and restaurants which guarantees two things: night life and consistent business, though the area has benefited from their inclusion of a Bonfire Grill, a J-Crew, and a Pottery Barn.
All of this is completely overshadows the importance of a downtown filled with offices where the only places that survive do so because of their lunch crowd. The most successful shop, it seems, is the tiny candy and popcorn store which is busy at all hours and open three or four hours after everything else except bars shut down. There is little nightlife, and what of it there is scratches and claws a living out in spite of no help from the city.
Still, the good old liberals go on in their self-satisfying way, helping those poor, the blacks, the Hmong, and the Latinos, as long as it isn't bringing them into to their neighborhood, or into the schools where their children attend.
Posted by
Raven Night
at
8:03 PM
0
comments
Labels: city government, city planning, economic justice, economy, liberal politics, liberalism, Minnesota, MN, political action, politics, Republican National Convention, St. Paul
Wednesday, October 10, 2007
Racism, Sexism, and Homophobia: the fine art of oppression
A professor at Columbia found a noose on the door of a colleague and friend, a woman who teaches about racism in the graduate school of education. One student reacted in the article by saying that she's not surprised because racism is still very active in the world. I have mixed feelings about that, especially given the anti-gay political support coming from black churches and religious leaders, but I suppose in some people's minds the oppression of gays isn't nearly as bad as the oppression of black people, but they probably never saw the pictures of the bloody fence where Andrew Shepherd hung and bled all night in the freezing cold, badly beaten and asking for his mother.
She's right in one way, though, racism is alive and well, so is sexism, homophobia and other forms of oppression. While self-identified Christians complain about being oppressed by our modern secular society, they should think about a few issues first:
1 - They have yet to pass the Equal Rights Amendment to the Constitution, it hasn't even passed one house of Congress, and that is a bill that was worked over and over again so that it simply prevented the discrimination of groups recognized as oppressed minorities. That list, funny enough, didn't include gay people. It managed to become an Act of Congress, but doesn't carry enough support to be added to our most defining document.
2 - It isn't at all shocking that nooses were placed on the tree outside Jena High School, a horribly painful symbolism for black students, but one acceptable enough for the students responsible to only receive a suspension. It also wasn't shocking that the resultant escalation of tension and violence occurred that ended up playing out in the case of the 'Jena Six'.
3 - When public figures like Don Imus and Rush Limbaugh are able to use their platforms to spew long diatribes of hurtful, painful, and hateful words to a mass appeal with few repercussions. The Imus case is only one example among the many shock-jocks and political pundits who are arrogant enough to think they should get on the radio and convince the masses that their ignorant and self-righteous beliefs are gospel truth. Rush Limbaugh still has a huge fan base that is willing to overlook his drug abuse and perjury because they are entertained by his vicious comments which include denigrating mothers of active duty military members who want their children to come home.
I think the more devastating problem is the more subtle forms of discrimination that can be as unnoticeable as the spell check on my firefox program. If you type in the words, Christian, Buddhist, or Muslim, and don't capitalize it, they activate the spell check signal. If you type pagan, a recognized form of religious worship, it doesn't.
I've experienced the subtler forms of discrimination at work, not getting rehired after a brief time off from work. While I had some issues with lateness and some with appropriate office conversation, the vast majority of issues that I had as an employee could be directly or indirectly linked to one or both of two things: being a gay man, and being bipolar. The being gay part didn't happen in overt homophobia, but instead by people who were uncomfortable with some of my conversations. I refrained, at least most of the time, from anything graphically sexual, yet there were still complaints to the managers. Once, during a review, my manager actually said, "and you need to cool it with the 'gay stuff'" Well, sorry, that's my world. It might not be everything of my world, but it is at least a big part. I don't want to have to sit through a long conversation in the break room about engagements, wedding planning, honeymoons, babies, nieces and nephews or anything of the trappings of an obviously heterocentric society, yet I can't speak about topics that relate directly to my life without making people feel uncomfortable. If that is an issue with the 'team' I worked with and I make noticeable improvements on being more careful with what I say and around whom, then that shouldn't be a further issue. If I have to adapt myself so significantly to my work environment until I feel uncomfortable, or if I feel like, which I did, the managers were allowing others to speak in a way that I was uncomfortable with but which were about heterosexual sex topics, that is harassment.
In the end it doesn't really matter if your employer has an nondiscrimination policy, unless there is an obvious and overt form of harassment or assault, there isn't safety for people of a minority at world or in the world, not really.
Posted by
Raven Night
at
6:41 PM
0
comments
Labels: Columbia University, homophobia, oppression, politics, racism, sexism