Ethnically Speaking by Larry Meeks

I don't agree with Larry quite as much as I usually do. Let's hit a few of the points he made:

- Compulsory service: Isn't this a lot like just bringing back the draft, in peacetime no less? I think our experience with that back in the late 60s/early 70s showed that it didn't work out so well. The last thing our military needs, is millions of people who would not have chosen to be there. Inducting them into a civilian work program would be just as problematic (maybe worse) - the people would wind up getting tasked on some federal boondoggle. (Hello, AmeriCorps, anyone?) Federal projects of any kind always seem to run behind schedule, over budget, and are rife with fraud, waste, and abuse. It would only be worse with an army of amateurs who've been involuntarily put to work on it. I understand what Larry is trying to say, but it's a very communist-sounding idea ("we're all in this together") and it would be a disaster. Bad idea.

- "Once you have served, risked your life and lived with people of all ethnicities, differences become secondary." Yes, but you can't force people into that. That would aggravate racial tension, not lessen it.

- "Our country is a family, and when we pray and work together, we will have fewer problems." Yes. Absolutely. Once again, however, that has to be voluntary, not compulsory.

-"The best way to unite the world and to stop countries from shooting each other is to invite a few green men from another planet." What the hell...? Huh?

" If they were to land on Earth, we would quickly unite against the common enemy." Yes, and would go right back to fighting among themselves as soon as the invader was defeated. I happen to think that old "enemy of my enemy is my friend" bit is pure hogwash. More often than not, the allies turn on each other as soon as their common foe is vanquished. (The US and the Soviets right after World War II ended, anyone?)

-"The other element that is needed for good relations is for the people at the top to set the example." Yes, but if you're looking to the government and its officials for moral leadership, you're in for a big disappointment. Most of our politicians are greedy, self-interested crumbs with little regard for how they're perceived on Main Street or by young people...except at election time, of course.

-" If you have been reading this column for any length of time, you know I am very critical of the current administration's behavior in this area." Yes, and rightfully so. The administration has been completely atrocious and appalling in this area. Not just Obama himself; his appointees like Atty Gen Eric Holder calling us a "nation of cowards" was completely unacceptable.

-"The president needs to watch his words and stop acting like a community organizer. His supporters need to stop falsely accusing people of being racist. The attorney general must be replaced. His decisions display a very biased attitude that is infuriating people who believe in equal treatment under the law." YES, YES, YES, and YES again. But then, if Obama supporters stopped calling other people "racist," what would they have left? It's not like many of the policies their president supports, can be defended on principle or cost savings.

Having been raised an Army brat, I can honestly tell you that military service does not necessarily succeed in opening everyone's mind with regards to race, ethnicity and culture.

I've known several former service people who were prejudiced before they went into the military and were still so after they got out. Some people are not willing to let go of preconceived ideas even when presented with evidence to the contrary.

I think Creators Syndicate needs to hire a writer on race relations with an alternate point of view. By alternate, I mean an opinion of somebody who is NOT so obsessed with attacking President Obama that they spin every letter into an anti-Obama rant based on half-truths and intense bias.

I can't believe somebody gets paid to spread such ridiculous propaganda under the guise of "race relations."

I think one thing that would go a long way to fixing race relations would be to outlaw the creation of race-specific organizations and events.

For instance, why does there need to be a Miss <minority group> (College Name) pageant? Or a Miss <minority group> America pageant? Why does there need to be a <minority group> Caucus?

And if all these groups get to have their own little special things, why is there such an outcry when a group establishes a scholarship for white males? I saw on the news the other day about student in college in Texas that had established a group to provide scholarships to white males. The news had him on to debate with a black woman that was completely up in arms over the situation. The thing is, having that scholarship for white males does not take anything away from that woman - at all. It did not make it so she was no longer able to avail herself of the programs that catered to her needs.

If one special program is allowed, they should all be allowed. If they don't like that, then shut them all down.

@Johanna: Why? You want someone who will reinforce your progressive views on race relations and encourage victimhood...instead of challenging those views, and encouraging minorities to take responsibility for themselves and their lives the way Meeks does? For shame. There are plenty of other sites on the web that will give you that, if you don't like what's in the offering here.

@ Lisa in OK. Sounds good to me. This nonsense should have stopped thirty years ago at the latest.

I'm not sure I agree with bringing back the draft, but I agree with the mandatory community service. In Vermont there are schools that require community service as part of their school's curriculum. Others make you do community service if you want to be on the sports teams.

In NYC, where I live, there should be a requirement of community service in order to get a scholarship to the public colleges. The city should also require minors to do community service if they want to get a driver's license before age 18.

Re: Matt

No. I meant what I typed. Don't put words in my mouth and then try to shame me. At the very least, try to direct your sanctimonious attitude at reality instead of the imaginary progressives you've constructed in your head.

I use to enjoy reading this column. But, not anymore do I enjoy it. Larry has become very racist-VERY racist!

I used to be a loud progressive until I grew up and I speak for myself. I've seen plenty of progressives' version of race relations deviated towards encouraging victimhood. Larry actually discourages this. And Ann, calling him a racist is just projecting your views on him. Very telling.

@Johanna: I don't have to put words in your mouth. I can quote yours: "By alternate, I mean an opinion of somebody who is NOT so obsessed with attacking President Obama that they spin every letter into an anti-Obama rant based on half-truths and intense bias. I can't believe somebody gets paid to spread such ridiculous propaganda under the guise of 'race relations.'"

I don't have to imagine unhinged progressives. I can read them right here on good ol' Creators.com....

@Ann Powell: Racist? How so? Among other things, Meeks said that the Obama administration needs to quit calling its detractors racist. That isn't hateful or bigoted; that's good advice. We're not going to get anywhere with this sort of "leadership" coming from our president and his immediate subordinates. I can scarcely imagine the outrage, had Bush spent all of his time referring to his critics and political opposition as hate-mongers...instead of explaining why their ideas were wrong and presenting alternatives.

You seem to have the same problem Johanna does. Why don't you move along, and let the rest of us enjoy Meeks' sage perspective in peace? I honestly am at a loss to understand why these angry race-baiting types want to hang around here and throw mud at someone who's got a sincere interest in solving our nation's ethnic difficulties.

I'm sure Geoffrey will be along any minute to add his two cents. Good thing I stopped reading his replies.

WOW. Seriously?
As a career soldier, I'm not too fond of compulsory military service, either, as it would only depress wages and undermine a professional military class. And in the context of Meek's opinion, I'm with LibraryKat. The military is a cross-refernce of society as a whole; therefore you're going to have the same hood rats, racists, jackasses and screw-ups that you'll find elsewhere. And Matt, there's a saying that the [Army] will only ask you to do two things: enlist and reenlist. What comes in between is Uncle Sam's will. So yes, you can be forced to do a lot of stuff in the military.
For Lisa in OK, here's the thing: the reason why you have your ______ history month, your Miss____ America Pageants, and your (insert ethnically-themed media here) is that without them, those interests would never be known beyond the periphery. You also have to account that for years upon years, people who were not WASPs were locked out of those avenues (and FYI, many if not most of America's HBCUs were founded by WHITES), so the only way they could be see was for them to do it themselves. And be honest: ABC, CBS, NBC, Forbes, Money, Newsweek...if you wanted a White__________, there you go. That's not saying that any of them are inherently racist; it's a reflection that white America's collective dominance is understood.
Which leads me to The Former Majority Association for Equality. Nice premise, bad execution. Let me state clearly that I have absolutely no problem with this group. like the Boy Scouts, GLAAD, the Council of Conservative Citizens or the KKK, they are a private group, and as such can endow any funds to whomever they want. It's no different (so much) than the Thurgood Marshall Scholarship Fund. Where they go wrong, however, is their insinuation thatwhite males are the minority in this country. Bullshit. Whites still dominate the population in nearly every state. And even when they become a numerical minority in about 50 years, there's more than enough empirical and anecdotal evidence to assume that they will remain the POLITICAL and ECONOMIC majority well into the century. As far as college is concerned, many states (including mine) offer minority presence grants to aid people from underrepresented groups (i.e. Hispanic students get it if they attend any state school, blacks would get it at majority-white colleges, whites would get it at HBCUs--and they take it in spades!). Southern schools routinely give preferential treatment to rural and Appalachian applicants in both admissions and scholarships. Groups like 4-H also grant aid, and the majority of the recipients (just happen to be--not saying it's racist, it's just that way) are white. So if you look hard enough and with some dilligence, there's no reason that whites can't get race-based aid.
BTW, the group's founder is an OIF veteran. Which qualifies him for the GI Bill. The very thing that built the modern middle class. Which means HE'S GOT FINANCIAL AID. And since many schools offer increased benefits to certain military personnel (guardsmen and reservists, ROTC scholarship winners, disabled veterans) taking advantage of any of them puts him far ahead of many of his peers to begin with. So I think that they are well-meaning but misguided, and perhaps bordering on intellectual dishonesty. I understand that these are trying times for some, but it's really that way for all. increased competition for diminished resources will do that to people. it's all a natural part of having a free society, and you can't expect to skate by anymore just because you are (or used to be) a member of the priviliged class.
(And here's what kills me: whenever we have a talk about why there exists a this or that, it's always in the context of BLACK PEOPLE. WHY? everybody has something to say about BET--not TV ONE, but just BLACK entertainment Television, everybody has a problem with Black Enterprise or a Miss Black Swashbuckling Grapecrusher Pageant, but you will say little to nothing about any other group's entities. Jewish youth centers? Cool. Telemundo and Univision? Cool. Hispanic Business Journal? Cool. Asian Heritage Magazine? Cool Indian casinos? Cool. But American Legacy magazine? Separatist. WTF, people? How come it's gravy that everybody else can do their own thing but we cant?)
As for the president, if nobody's all that happy then he can't be doing too bad of a job. You may disagree and that's fine. No need to elaborate as to why. I do feel that we are a nation of whiners, and that everybody wants to call out everyone else's concerns as grievance politics and special interests, without acknowledging their own. As for me, I stopped blaming other people for the shortcomings in my life a long time ago, and the quality of my life has been better ever since. I am no victim, and I have no tolerance for a victim or entitlement attitude. You can't always bitch and moan because somebody else got a good deal and you didn't. Sometimes certain things just aren't for you.
Lastly, I doubt that Meeks is a racist or an Uncle Tom, just very disconnected from the average struggles of black people. I say that because often I get the same accusation. Where you stand depends on where you sit. And I think that his prose speaks to the people he is most comfortable with. Which makes for a nice gig, perhaps, but serves little use to his subject matter, because you can't reach the people you want to change if you won't engage them. Have this man go on a speaking tour in the hood and maybe he'd gain traction.

Oh, and by the way, I'm sending the FMAA twenty bucks to their scholarship.

Lisa, you do realize that most of the "black" organizations and events were created in response to the whites-only versions that dominated at the time, do you not? Miss Black America was created when blacks weren't permitted to compete in the Miss America contest, and black colleges were created because most U.S. colleges wouldn't admit blacks.

Now every historically black college and university admits students of all races. Some are now mostly white. And the UNCF College Fund provides scholarships to white students who attend these schools.

I agree that many of these organizations should be dismantled now that we have access to the mainstream ones, but please don't tell me there is no longer a need for the NAACP.

I am very light skinned, and I have heard some truly horrifying examples of racism from whites who don't realize I am African American. Heck, I once had a prospective employer come right out and assure me that he didn't hire or sell to "n****rs" so that was one thing I wouldn't have to worry about if I took the job.

And, of course, sadly, I have also witnessed horrifying examples of black racism against whites. When I lived in DC during the 1968 riots, I was beaten up almost every day by kids who thought I was white.

When we all realize that the amount of melanin in our skin, the shape of our eyes, the texture of our skin, and the continent from which our ancestors hailed mean absolutely nothing when you are trying to take the measure of a person, we will all be so much better off.

I understand why all of those organizations and events were created and I don't have a problem with them. The problem comes in when the reverse is not allowed.
For instance, what would happen if someone created a Miss White America pageant? Or a Miss White <college name> pageant? And what if the winner of the Miss America pageant is black and the winner of the Miss Black America pageant is black? Now what do we do?? (step one: throw your hands up in the air and scream).
I'm not talking about just black and white. There are the same issues with every ethnic group in America today. It seems that everybody hates everybody else and it all stems from what color they are. I hear people, in the same sentence, say that there needs to be an end to racism and separation and then follow up by yelling "viva la raza!!". Uhhhhhh . . . how come they can yell that but if white people yelled something about white pride, they are reviled, spit on and worse?
Yes, I realize that 99% of America's history is "white" but the people that are yelling for walls to come down and separation to end are the same people that are involved in the creation/management of organizations that keep people separated. The thing is, inequality is inequality, no matter when it happens. If what happened to "minorities" in the past happens to "majorities" now, is that going to make it equal? Is that going to balance everything out? Will everything be ok when we see white men imprisoned, beaten and killed since we are women, black, native american, hispanic, or whatever? When does it end?
Racism (and so many other "isms") will never completely go away, but we can take some definite steps to make sure it can't be used as a weapon against us.
I guess my main point is everyone needs to either face the challenge of ending racism and separation and start with doing away with ALL separating organizations and events - OR - continue with the different organizations and events and don't worry, think, or comment about what other groups are doing.

Shoot. This comment box must be paragraphist. I forgot to reformat after I got a "captcha" error.

Lisa, I'm not sure if you're trying but not really getting it, or you got it but still want to have it both ways.
You have to understand, just because certain groups and media were established primarily for a target audience doesn't mean they are necessarily EXCLUSIVE to those groups. As Carla correctly noted, HBCUs were established (many by whites, it must be said again) to educate those African Americans who by law and custom were barred from other schools, but whites and members of other races are just as free to attend as blacks. Some examples: former NC Governor Mike Easley is an alum of NC Central's law school, and the late Christa McAuliffe (space shuttle Challenger) earned a master's from Bowie State. Fayetteville (NC) State enjoys a large white population for a black college, and Bluefield State University in W. Virginia is now predominately white.
I don't understand the mindset that something that's rooted in a certain group translates into "For them only." If i want to get a better understanding of the socioeconomic study of native Americans, I'm not going to Vanderbilt before I look at historically indigenous UNC-Pembroke first. HBCUs have long boasted white scholars, athletes, etc.; Hampton University had a WHITE pageant winner a few years back, and Morehouse had a white valedictorian. The golf and baseball teams of most HBCUs are white. Yeah, a few people complained about it, but so what? They earned it fair and square.
So if a white group wants to create a Miss White _____ pageant, as a private organization it's their right. However, I would say that they--and you--overstate your point. This nation is saturated in white culture. What is considered 'Southern Heritage" OMITS the contributions of blacks, Cubans, Mexicans, and Native Americans. Whites themselves divide themselves ethnically, whether they clain Scots-Irish, German, Nordic, or Itailian heritage, and so on. Quite a few I know lived white their whole lives until it came time to apply for minority scholarships, when that one drop of Guatemalan blood came in handy. Even when whites become a numerical minority, they will still command the majority of options and opportunities that are still kept at arm's length to other people. When you have banned women of color for a century, it's kinda hard to feel left out of a Miss Vietnamese America pageant that only existed for some 20 years. You almost never hear about the issues and interests of Laotian women, Apalachian children, or Hmong men, and if not for the media that focuses them, groups like black and Hispanic small businessmen, or concern themselves with the plight of disabled veterans, few people would know and appreciate that such people exist. Again, rest easy. The collective dominance of White America is well understood. White influence will never completely go away.
Do you feel that the VFW is divisive? How about the NRA? Maybe the AARP or NOW? I don't own a gun, I'm still under 50, and I'm not a woman (I'm a vet of a foreign war, but the VFW ain't my speed), but I know someone who is. Most members of these groups are white, but that in itself isn't a bar to my inclusion. Am I not to care about women's interests because I'm a man? Should I not concern myself with elder abuse or the so-called "death panel" debate because I'm still young and healthy? There are lots of entities out there which appeal or are concerned with many different types of people; they can't be all things to all people, and they shouldn't be.
Personally, I don't get caught up in what other people have, because life to me isn't a zero-sum equation. Their gain doesn't mean my loss. So, I vehemently disagree with your assumption that doing away from all the things that differentiate ourselves from one another will make all the -isms go away. I think to support that is rather unfair, because it reinforces the premise that 'white is right,' which automatically invalidates the contributions, aspirations, and concerns of everyone else. Your last paragraphs, though, are quite telling. I get the sense that you are afraid that every dark person in the world is going to foist some sort of racial payback for all the crap their people had endured. Using South Africa as an example, I find that stance laughable. I don't know what fair is, and I won't pretend to claim that everything in the world is. Nobody is trying to take anything away from you; they simply want to get out as much of this nation as they put in. But if the things you don't like go away, at some point the powers that be will find issue with many of the things that are important to YOU, and want to do away with them as well.

Therren,

You and I are arguing on the same side. I took issue with the woman I talked about being featured on the news, completely up in arms about a scholarship for white males. I stated the same thing you did: "Nobody is trying to take anything away from you (her);"



Furthermore, you mention a lot of different groups that may very well be mostly white, but VFW DOESN'T stand for Veteran services For Whites. It stands for Veterans of Foreign Wars - No color or ethnicity denoted. NRA, AARP or NOW . . . The topic is race relations, not gender or age relations.



You pointed out several "black" colleges, including Hampton University. Merely having a population that is predominantly black does not make it a "black" college. Hampton University has been inclusive from the start. There has never been a [public] statement or indication that other ethnic groups were not allowed to attend. If the colleges had been named something like "Central University for <ethnic group> People", that would be different and indicate a serious problem.



Carla stated: "I agree that many of these organizations should be dismantled now that we have access to the mainstream ones[...]" and then followed up with [...] "but please don't tell me there is no longer a need for the NAACP." There most certainly is a need for the NAACP - it's a perfect example of what we need in this country - the name not withstanding.




You also mention several tv channels and publications - BET, Telemundo and Univision, Hispanic Business Journal, Asian Heritage Magazine - These don't actually count in this discussion because I can choose what magazines to purchase/read or what channels I turn my television to.



I cannot, however, apply for and expect to receive a scholarship from the Hispanic Scholarship Fund. Why? Because I do not possess a drop of Hispanic blood - but I have no problem with Hispanic people applying for and receiving scholarships based on their heritage. However, the problem comes in if this same group pitches a fit about a scholarship program for a different ethnic group. (I keep using the word "scholarship" because that is the issue that was discussed on the news program but my intention is for all race-specific benefits to be included).



My point remains: If one group can have a race-specific benefit/event/organization, then ALL groups should be afforded that same right - without complaint, without controversy and without the threat of a lawsuit by some other group to shut them down.



With your last few sentences, it seems as though you are trying to paint me as some scared little racist white woman quivering in a dark corner of her house because the brown devils are loose and running in the street.



You apparently seem to think that I "just can't understand what it's like" because I'm white. Well, you are right. I DON'T know what it is like to be denied service or education because of my heritage. I DO know what it is like to be denied because of my gender or my age or my financial background - but not because of the color of my skin - well, that I know of, anyway. I've been told "no" without any explanation many times in my life . . . However, I recognize right from wrong 10 times out of 10 - I'm interested in what is right and equality is what is right for, and should be demanded from - EVERYONE.

Let me start this from where we do agree...private groups endowing whatever they want to whomever they wish, however they feel the need doesn't necessarily take away from everyone else not applicable to that entity or the group it comes from. Hopefully, everyone else reading this thread will see that, too.
That said, I think you misunderstood my point when I mentioned groups like the VFW. The racial compunent is really just a side note; what's important to take from it is that regardless if it's based on race, gender, sexual orientation, or political special interest, none of these groups are inherently discriminatory towards anyone who is outside that particular spectrum, and shouldn't be seen as such. In that vein, I feel that if it's perfectly acceptable to have such groups further their own interests, than the same can be said for the Daughters of the Confederacy (more on them later) and the National Council of La Raza.
As for black colleges, here you are misrepresenting MY point, and yet you underscore it so well. HBCUs are just that: historically black. Not exclusively, not necessarily predominately, but institutions that have a legacy of educationg African Americans when other colleges wouldn't. If other people would see it that way, instead of incorrectly assuming that they are separatist or 'for blacks only,' then it would be another non-issue we can move on from. And you're right: there is no loner a need or justification to have a Central ______ for Negroes, so I don't see why any white person would be offended by a school's existence. We all know that brigham Young is a Mormon school, but that doesn't mean nonbelievers are barred from attending. We know that Bob Jones University is a (right-wing) Baptist school, but they can't legally bar people either. And so it goes for HBCUs.
I'm not sure what you got from Carla's staement, but if the FMAA can be pro-white (I guess) and not anti-everyone else, then so can The NAACP (as obsolete as the term is--people stopped being 'colored' in this country a long time ago). I don't think she meant to be duplicitous with her opinion; she probably was trying to say that some groups have merit and purpose, while others don't (like, say, the phony-ass New Black Panthers). Maybe I'm wrong, and I don't like to speak for other people, so Carla, if you're out there, I'd love to hear your elaboration.
Here's what I don't get: you can choose what media you want to support, right? Then how come youu can't support whatever groups you'd like? I don't see why you can't support whatever (white) groups you want, like the FMAA or the Council of Conservative Citizens (in spite of their dubious history); nobody is crying racist about people joining the Sons of Confederate Veterans. And again, there are plenty of groups and organizations that cater primarily for, but not exclusive to, whites, and they are pretty much left alone.
And again, white kids get plenty of race-based financial aid and set-asides. to state again what I posted before: "many states (including mine) offer minority presence grants to aid people from underrepresented groups (i.e. Hispanic students get it if they attend any state school, blacks would get it at majority-white colleges, whites would get it at HBCUs--and they take it in spades!). Southern schools routinely give preferential treatment to rural and Appalachian [read: white] applicants in both admissions and scholarships. Groups like 4-H also grant aid, and the majority of the recipients (just happen to be--not saying it's racist, it's just that way) are white. [As an aside, these programs aren't closed to blacks or anyone else, it's just that it appears that many blacks tend to urban and not agriculturally inclined, so the access to these programs isn't there, and they simply don't apply. Again, nothing racist, butthere's your advantage if you want to take it.] So if you look hard enough and with some dilligence, there's no reason [why] whites can't get race-based aid."
I can't apply for Hispanic scholarships, either. I can't apply for women's scholarships, or any aid programs for low-income people. Ditto for subsidies and set-asides for teachers, firefighters and cops. Ok, big deal. These programs are either funded by private money, or if it's through taxpayer money, then (as a firm believer in taxes) I feel that having so is for the public good. I may not immediately benefit from them, but as a member of society, I do. People are always going to pitch a fit about something either they can't have or what they think belongs only to them. Boo freaking hoo.
Your point is noted and, to an extent, agreed upon, but it's not unfair that such things should fall under scrutiny every now and then. The sad and unfortunate fact about America is that it was built as much on subjugation as it claims to be about freedom. And from that subjugation sprang forth the entities you disfavor today.
I appreciate that you take great umbrage with my last few paragraphs. However, I never implied that you are a racist, or harbor any racist tendencies, or run amok in racial paranoia. I only know of you from what you've written in these blogs. I feel that you're a rational, level-headed person who sees the same things I do, but come away with different interpretations of what they are. Like I said before, we live in uncertain times, and as more people gain access to increasingly limited resources, there's always going to be a sense of insecurity that derives from having enjoyed a certain social position that's now being threatened.
Lots of whites, whether they admit this or not (don't be offended, many blacks are, too), know that they've benefitted from race (or racism), and now that the passive racism that once sustained them is going away, they fear being lost in the shuffle of racial parity. That is completely understandable. But diminishing what differentiates us will only increase our separation, because without acknowledging the existence of those outside the mainstream, the latter will increasingly lose out to the majority, which will decrease parity, and you'll end up with a few haves and a whole bunch of have-nots. Again, this is not an exclusively white phenomenom, though I believe because they are the majority, and thus enjoyed the highest levels of access and advancement, they are the ones hit the hardest, and until things level out, perhaps they'll always be. Remember, the face of this recesion is the middle-class white family, not the urban poor. The most coveted group in the last election was the working-class white males of the industrial north and the rural south, not blacks (and we'll never be), Hispanics or independents. These are people who are starting to find out that they can't get away with just doing the same old things their parents could 30 years ago, and for perhaps the first time in their lives, they honestly have to COMPETE. Let's just assume some of them don't like that too much, and leave it there.
So no, I don't see you as a racist, much less as someone cowering in a safe room, with cameras fixed in on every toddler wearing Rockawear hoodies and braids. If anything, I see you in silent solidarity with people like the various Tea Party organizations. Which is cool with me. People like you keep people like me honest, and I appreciate that more than you'll ever know. But you're by no means under siege. No more than 'brothas' are by the cops (though to address your statement about putting more whites in jail, FBI stats have long stated that while blacks are disproportionately incarcerated as compared to whites, the raw numbers--what we should be looking at--are roughly the same). Not while you, for the most part, still hold the cards. Not while parents fight school boards to have Caesar Chavez and Henry Berry Lowery added to their children's curricula. Not while the Daughters of the Confederacy can erect monuments to their dead in places that were neither Confederate nor state. And not while HBCUs can field practically all-white teams.
Beacuse America has never been a true meritocracy, fairness and equality are relative myths. We're TRYING to get there, but sometimes that means people are going to lose out (can't expect the fatted calves to be happy about the return of every prodigal son, but that's what they were meant for). Either you keep up with the changes or you make your way over to something else. That's the new reality. I think that some people do want to have it both ways. They want to appear nonracial, and yet maintain all the priviliges of race. And whether you claim the Tea-Party-America-is-a-slave-to-China rhetoric, or the black-man's-whitey-is-still-keeping-me-down line, it's still victimization, and it's still evidence of one's inability to compete in a complex, multicultural society.

Therren,

I will say, at this point, we are agreed. Some of the things you mention (like the Daughters of the Conferacy monument situation) make absolutely no sense to me and I do wonder how things like that even got started in the first place.


Obviously, there is no possible way to know all the ramifications of making even one small change in the way things currently work. I'm not the most logical person on the planet, (although I do try . . . ) but even I know that change simply for the sake of change never actually fixes anything.

I guess the biggest point of irritation for me is the instigation of tremendous upheaval only to have it settle back down with nothing actually resolved - I see this happen time after time with society in general, in my workplace, in politics - everywhere. Most of the people in charge don't know anything more than you or I do - they don't have any answers and any "solutions" they come up with just seems to create more problems. Now, with all these "solutions" in play, it gives the appearance of society run amok with no structure and apparently no common ground or common goal.


Now, I'm going to put on my Rocawear jacket (with blue and white embroidery and a snap pocket on the back) and head home :)

LOL!!!
Believe me, I'm frustrated at that, too. I mean, I get that most people just want to be heard, but a) you have to be willing to listen to other people as well, and b) you ought to have something to say before you become one more screaming voice in a free-for-all.
I don't know if people want solutions to their problems or they just want to bitch. Doing the right thing is easy; it's living with the consequences of those actions that suck for a lot of us (I tell my kids all the time, medicine isn't supposed to taste good). And real, lasting change takes a tremendous amount of energy, sacfrifice, and patience. Not a lot of us have a large amount of either.
I'm cool with the DOC. Not in the sense of "tolerance," mind you, but in acceptance. I may not agree with their viewpoint or their activities (I mean, putting up a monument in MONTANA? C'mon, man!), but if that's how they roll, it's no skin off my nose.
Anyway, I really think we agre more than these posts let on. Race relations is a dynamic, ever-evolving construct, and we as a society have to always be able to adapt to those changes. It's hard for us because we haven't seen this much change in over a generation. And a bad economy doesn't help things, either. So we end up doing the natural thing and circle our wagons, suspicious at any opportunity we see someone else taking advantage of while we can't.
I do understand what a lot of whites seem to be going through, even if I can never appreciate it as intimately. But when I was younger, and thought I was owed/entitled to/played the victim, I read somewhere that chickens are know to fight to the death over one grain of corn until they realized that there was enough feed for all of them. From that day, I learned to believe in an America where there is enough out there for me, even if I have to venture outside my comfort zone to get it. Sometimes, it's really things that simple that can change your whole life.
So, I wish you all the blessings the Lord may grant you (and then some), and my sincerest apologies for writing three novels on this post (I'm taking two classes right now, so I'm in term paper mode). Take care.

Wow! I hadn't been back to read subsequent postings until now, and I am impressed and reassured by the thoughtful exchange between Lisa and Therren.

Obviously, you two are not part of the problem.

@Carla,
I may not be the problem, but my proofreading definitely is. LOL!
Be well.