| Author |
Message |
    
Nels
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Nels
Post Number: 124
Registered: 07-2005
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, October 14, 2005 - 12:52 am: | 
|
Politics, healthcare, war, unemployment, poverty and many other worthy subjects should be at the forefront of today’s crumbling social infrastructure in the United States; a place perhaps incorrectly referred to as America. By default, it is America. In retrospect, it’s a chalice of clashing, intemperate and conflicting ideologies.
A black man and a white man are given options by a higher authority of some order.
To the black man - The Higher Authority: “I will change you into a white man if you give me your first born child. An opt-in proposition.
To the white man - The Higher Authority: “I will change you into a black man if you do not give me your first born child. An opt-out proposition.
A tough decision?
Chances are, the black man may hold firm, perhaps rejecting the temptation. Thus, one less (black) man defects to the other side. Not. Does he surmise, or in abstract, see the benefit of the challenge of remaining comfortable in his skin? A true testament to the resilience of the “pro-black” mantra? For certain, he realizes that there is some benefit to black affinity. Is this assumption qualified because he has no other choice or options at his disposal? His mind can’t be read, so where does his allegiance reside?
Chances are, the white man may give in to temptation for fear that if he becomes black, then he will be subject to the overt and institutional racism that white America (i.e., his own kind) has systematically leveled against people of color, and in particular, those whom they want to identify, brand and pigeon hole as black. Reasonable? Hardly. Actionable? Likely. Are whites the only guilty party in this scenario? No. Also, other non-black non-whites have taken advantage of “blackness”, and have used its “crutching” characteristic as a devise tool to oppress blacks and alienate blacks from their own blackness. How tragic, but questionable.
True? Maybe not, but more than likely, so.
In America (and the more self-identified and hyphenated micro America’s) - statistically, race and skin color are still the leading causes of divisiveness and injustice. Neither politics, war, corruption or anything else (short of the bubonic plague) qualifies as a key catalyst of a professed attack on self-image and self-esteem. Race and skin color are also some of the major culprits of intra-racial conflict and disorder. Race by itself might actually be subject only to a given interpretation - and may in fact be subjective in the minds of its codifiers. However skin color is objective, and it is by far the most advancing and dominant phenotype that precedes the immediate presence of any individual, irrespective of whether it is actually seen or not, or whether it is cast with meaning.
For lack of a more appropriate and accurate identifier - many segments of (black) America seem to be caught up in their own color spectrum from a perspective of dominance, disdain and pity. In a black America that is increasingly diluting itself through inter-racial, inter-ethnic and inter-cultural integration and assimilation, a broad constituency of (so-called) blacks of mixed backgrounds has emerged in force over the last sixty years. The rub - true (and honest) Self-Identifying Blacks (SIBs) and “authentic” SIBs (as in ethnicity, culture, race and perhaps skin color) still harbor so much hate and distrust of this newer (“subject-to-interpretation”) mixed element - that no viable harmony exists nor may be possible between the two factions.
What insecurity keeps the native-thinking SIBs from accepting the fact that they themselves may have no other playable options of racial, ethnic and cultural affiliation and personal affinity? Though not clear, one might think it evident that a particular segment of black America is hell-bent on trying to force that mixed element to disown its own ancestry and heritage in order to benefit another strain of blackness. For the sake of a lesser argument, is that position buttressed by any edict? The absurdity of that position may lie in the context in which it is sought; advantage. Social, political and economic advantage, that is. Blackness by itself is a waste of energy and focus, thus it needs the leaching ability of distrust and non-conformity to sustain its supporters.
What is the weak truss here? Hypocrisy? The ODR is a double-edged sword, and a sharp one at that. It might appear that the pro-black and perhaps the pro-African-American segments for the absence of a colorist theme, have adopted a rigid standard of intolerance. Even more worrisome, pro-movement foreigners (of the black persuasion) who have come to America have disingenuously championed a forced acceptance and inclusion of pro-black affinity on that mixed element. Thus, a polarization of opinions has now usurped any legitimate claim to “blackness”. Some might simply say, “send those pimple-headed bastards back to their degenerate third-world conclaves”. Others might say, “force those sorry-ass sons-of-bitches to conform to a broad-brush ideology of a true melting pot”, wherever it may exist and prosper.
Absolutely no segment of so-called black America has an obligation of any kind to accept a forced affinity and purposed inclusion into any racial, ethnic or cultural identity or class, especially when the intention of that segment’s detractors is driven by a hardened, despising and nonsensical purview which is tantamount to a dictatorial stature. The “black” mixed element constituency views the efforts of its emerging adversaries as further evidence of the very divisiveness that those adversaries themselves are aligning against. Their view is, if you’re “black”, then so be it. If you’re black and something else, then so be it. Basically, whatever you are, you have an intrinsic right to your own self-determination without being harassed by the fodder of asinine-thinking blackness-trodden zealots.
The blacker half of the coin has no clothes. It has no valid or accelerated argument with which to coerce, bludgeon and trample the mixed element of the other side. Some might say that their agenda is dubious, while others might simply dismiss it as a failing and unimpressive effort to maintain a status quo that no longer exists and that condition is, “all-inclusive blackness”. Sometimes it appears that blackness has become a cheapened commodity, routine raped and pillaged by villagers whose minds have been mongrelized by ineptitude and incapacity. This is much worse than “the blind leading the blind”. With such a voracious appetite for misdirected rhetoric against many non-black constituencies as a whole, this pro-black faction runs the risk of becoming an irrelevant and undependable player in the quest for acceptable “blackness”.
Identifiable Mixed-Raced Persons, Mulattos, Quadroons, Octoroons and others who hail from an impure black perspective, are born with the ability to leverage their evident diversity. Their individual perspective of blackness is only qualified by the ODR, an arbitrary white-mandated standard, and its supporters as well. Adversely, blackness has become a highly manipulative and introspective condition that is embraced when it’s needed and shunned when its not. In the context of the different perspectives that any rational observer of this fact may have, the broad utilization and abuse of blackness by both the SIB and mixed constituencies for their own purposes only serves to confirm that blackness itself is not an asset, but it is a tool.
The “Groids” are on the loose. Negroids, that is; that broad brush of affinity that encompasses more than thirty some odd million souls, whether consciously or not. There is no escaping one’s ancestry, regardless of one’s race or class. It’s the interpretation and manipulation of that ancestry that causes the friction that exists today within the black community today, less any inferred neutrality.
An informed notation, explore inverted paradigms on the relationship of blackness (and whiteness) as they diverge. In the interim, the deferred solution to a very intricate puzzle may actually be to “keep your blackness to yourself”. Looking at the intent of those who champion blackness as a tool rather than as a frame of mind may help dispel any myths regarding who is black and who isn’t. From that perspective, the political implications are enormous.
Alternative retrospect:
[CFP: Whiteness & Double Consciousness (1/12/01; ALA, 5/24/01-5/27/01)] (“http://www.csudh.edu/dearhabermas/dubois.htm”)
[The End of Blackness?]
(“http://www.harvardmagazine.com/on-line/050446.html”)
|
Cynique
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Cynique
Post Number: 2777
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, October 14, 2005 - 05:46 pm: |
|
What I find interesting about all of this verbalization is that rather than being exclusively theorhetical, it is also organic. It allows one to read between the lines of the human condition and encourages thinking outside the racial box. Forget about black and white and in-between. Forget about statistics and studies and polls. Think variables. Think rugged individualism, that independence of spirit that spawned the movers and shakers of this country. In this day and age what is to keep a person from distancing himself from the group, and doing his own thing, something that is not that difficult to do once he declares his declaration of independence? And what is the incentive to not do this? Once people abandon their herd mentality and pursue a course of self-interest, they are able to move forward, no matter what their skin color. Will they make the top? Probably not. But how many do? What complicates the picture is when everyone aspires to the pinnacle of success. But at some point, reality has to be given its due. Every black woman ain't gonna be Oprah or every black man Barak Obama, but in the best case scenario many can and do earn a 6-figure salary, drive a Lexus, and live in beautiful homes in toney neighborhoods. How bad is it to settle for gold instead of platinum? Or silver for that matter. What's wrong with being pragmatic when being altruistic leaves you unfulfilled because all of the charity in the world will not save the poor from reproducing themselves, and all the reprimanding in the world is not going to bring cohesiveness to the black race. Yes, this mentality embodies being ruthless and rootless and, in a different world, this course of action would be called what it is:greed. But Utopia is has long since become the domain of the tooth fairy. |
Yukio
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Yukio
Post Number: 826
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, October 14, 2005 - 06:15 pm: |
|
Nels: You are prolific, to say the least...I will read it this time w/o comment! |
Cynique
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Cynique
Post Number: 2778
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, October 14, 2005 - 07:34 pm: |
|
Oh, come on now, Yukio. How could you not repond to Nels' provocative post? And you know, of course, that I'm kickin myself for forgetting to put you on my list of "cool" people who prefer to discuss ideas rather than personalities. LOL |
Yukio
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Yukio
Post Number: 827
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, October 14, 2005 - 07:40 pm: |
|
Where is this list of "cool" people who prefer to discuss ideas rather than personalities? Thats ok! No harm. We are ol friends, who sometimes, should I say often, disagree...lmao!
I will read and respond to Mr. Nels soon. |
Yukio
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Yukio
Post Number: 828
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, October 14, 2005 - 08:29 pm: |
|
Hmmm....this piece seems like an explication of a variable of Nels's other thread, Black Identity. Humorously, to me at least, much of it also embodies the dialogue in his Gene Pool thread as well. This piece seems contextualized within a binary opposition that doesn't quite fit( though I need to get a handle on this ODR for a better understanding).
So Nels, What or who is ODR?
An informed notation, explore inverted paradigms on the relationship of blackness (and whiteness) as they diverge.
What does this sentence mean? |
Nels
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Nels
Post Number: 125
Registered: 07-2005
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, October 14, 2005 - 09:56 pm: |
|
Yukio --
The thread extends a few components from prior writings, but not many. In acuality, it doesn't embody the Gene Pool thread, but does address some similiar subject matter. As far as contextualized, yes, it utilizes that vehicle to allow the reader to step away from the dialogue to get a broader perspective. As far as the ODR, that is the "One Drop Rule" (i.e., 1/32nd), which is the reason why all of this skin color shit is an issue in America in the first place. I'm quite surprised that you've never heard of it, especially considering your articulation on this board. And, as far as the last sentence, it refers to the black-white paradigm in reverse; i.e., how the add-on articles (links) address blackness in relation to whiteness. In any case, I'll be looking forward to reviewing your next stellar literary work - right here. 
|
Yukio
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Yukio
Post Number: 829
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, October 14, 2005 - 11:05 pm: |
|
Nels: Thanks. Yes, I know the "One Drop Rule." I didn't realize that it was a common acronym. I must reread your piece as well as the articles. |
Nels
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Nels
Post Number: 126
Registered: 07-2005
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, October 14, 2005 - 11:15 pm: |
|
Yukio --
By the way, what type of subject matter do you consider really interesting? I've noticed that you've mentioned politics, or at least its relative absence on this board. I just haven't written about it because many people don't like to get into the details of the many vertical areas that comprise that all-encompassing subject. You know, if anything can start a serious fight, politics trumps nigger any day.
|
Tonya
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Tonya
Post Number: 583
Registered: 07-2005
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, October 15, 2005 - 12:46 am: |
|
Why is it that the lighter side of the coin cares so much about what the darker side does while the darker side don't give a shit what the lighter side does as long as it goes home?
Tonya |
Nels
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Nels
Post Number: 127
Registered: 07-2005
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, October 15, 2005 - 02:56 am: |
|
Tonya --
Actually, the darker side gives a lot more than a "real" shit about the lighter side, because the lighter side is constantly trying to thwart the darker side's efforts to make the lighter side converge.
"as long as it goes home"
If one were to look into the (homes) of the darker side, one might find the lighter side trying to reconciliate and maintain its perceived and practiced advantage in the prevailing social norm that straddles both factions. More than naught, the darker side continues to welcome the lighter side into its black condition, only to utilize and abuse the lighter side for prestige, envy and accomplishment.
|
Yukio
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Yukio
Post Number: 831
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, October 15, 2005 - 04:39 am: |
|
Nels: Most of what you've posted has been interesting, except the jigga and beyonce genetics thread...lmao! I don't recall stating the absence of politics. As the exchange between Tonya and I demonstrates, I believe anytime we address power dynamics we are discussing politics. So, this thread is about politics, clearly, as I see it, illustrative by your conceptualization of the SIB's blackness as a tool.
You state:"The absurdity of that position may lie in the context in which it is sought; advantage. Social, political and economic advantage, that is. Blackness by itself is a waste of energy and focus, thus it needs the leaching ability of distrust and non-conformity to sustain its supporters."
I would categorize this thread and the black identity thread under the rubric, Identity Politics.
I think your anaysis is too neat. I would add that there is a group of folk, like myself, who believe in blackness but who are not "hell-bent on trying to force that mixed element to disown its own ancestry and heritage in order to benefit another strain of blackness."
Instead, I like want these mixed folk to (a) understand that I'm interested in racism not whether they want to consider themselve black or not; (b) that their preference to politicize their genetic make-up often masks the discussion of racism, for it is also a tool to depoliticize the integrity of a discussion of the presence of racism; (c) to encourage them to understand the consequences of (b) and to be sophisticated enough to advocate their own agenda and see it for what it is and what it is not; and (d) be honest enough to explain presuming that they do see (b) that in no way are they stating that their objectives does not preclude the present and significance of racism.
Also, I see blackness as a tool and frame of mind. As I see, white supremacy is all about colonizes a black frame of mind. And when I say black, I mean it in all of its diversity. I don't believe in an authentic blackness. I think most black groups have their own socalled authentic black culture, embedded in language, cuisine, and other cultural artifacts and expressions, and traditions. White supremacy, by its definition, attempts to make all non-white culture inferior.
Thus, as I see it, this frame of mind is also a tool for advantage, as you state. But NOT for "Social, political and economic advantage." It is to ensure that my children and their children have a culture that has value and maintains its integrity and lives. |
Yukio
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Yukio
Post Number: 833
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, October 15, 2005 - 11:07 am: |
|
Also, I would like people, regardless of complexion and socalled ancestry, to consider my alphabet soup as well. Considering Dickerson's simplification of blackness, many folk, like herself, believe that "Blackness has been shrugged off by the force of events." These folk represent various hues of phenotypical blackness and various ethnicities and nationalities. Thus, rather than blackness being used a tool by either socalled SIBs or mixed ancestry folk, it's socalled absence or even it Declining Significance, WJW theorized, is also used as a tool to focus on class issues and implement a 21st c. version of BTW's Protestant Work Ethic. This particular analysis can be illustrated by the conversation between Bill Cosby and Michael E. Dyson, between economist Thomas Sowell and historian Winston James. |
Tonya
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Tonya
Post Number: 586
Registered: 07-2005
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, October 15, 2005 - 12:40 pm: |
|
Nels:
Actually, the darker side gives a lot more than a "real" shit about the lighter side, because the lighter side is constantly trying to thwart the darker side's efforts to make the lighter side converge.
Tonya:
Break it down for me, Nels. And while you're at it, break this down, too:
If one were to look into the (homes) of the darker side, one might find the lighter side trying to reconciliate and maintain its perceived and practiced advantage in the prevailing social norm that straddles both factions. More than naught, the darker side continues to welcome the lighter side into its black condition, only to utilize and abuse the lighter side for prestige, envy and accomplishment.
I'd appreciate it. Thanks.
Tonya
|
Nels
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Nels
Post Number: 128
Registered: 07-2005
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, October 15, 2005 - 01:28 pm: |
|
Tonya --
The lighter side routinely resists the darker side’s efforts to force the lighter side into (and to remain in) the general populace of the darker side. In other words, the lighter side resents any effort to “force” it to affiliate (or converge) with the darker side.
---
The lighter side is always protecting the intrinsic social advantage of its skin color phenotype.
Homes refers to heart, world and (in abstract) abode. These are several elements that are critical in defining a person’s domain, feelings, security and comfort zone and level.
The darker side is quite receptive to the overtures of the lighter side. It routinely professes an affinity for the lighter side when it is not in the purview of a general audience, such as in the public, or in a public domain. In other words, what happens behind closed doors, stays behind closed doors, or at least we are led to believe so. Unfortunately, this isn't quite true, because the darker side is the first within its faction to trumpet its hidden relationships with the lighter side, in confidence or not.
For example: Many non-light skinned people harbor hostility toward light/lighter-skinned persons in public (forums and situations). But when an opportunity arises to make (for instance) a social, political, economic or sexual gain, non-light skinned people will, have and continue to seize on that opportunity with zeal.
|
Nels
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Nels
Post Number: 129
Registered: 07-2005
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, October 15, 2005 - 01:37 pm: |
|
Yukio --
Your responses are well noted and taken.
As far as the (politics) aspect of my message, I was referring to what seemed as a disappointment that the political animal was not addressed at a more granular level.
I understand your approach. If everyone could get past the inherent one-sided benefit of racial classification, then the playing field would be much more level. |
Yukio
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Yukio
Post Number: 835
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, October 15, 2005 - 02:18 pm: |
|
Nels: The playing field would be more level and people could embrace their own culture without others arguring (Sowell) that you are culturally disfunktional. Sowell and D'Nesh D'souza (The End of Racism) look at socalled "blackness" not from the ODR perspective but a cultural.
D'Souza even has a chapter in his What's So Great about America entitled: The Reparations Fallacy: What African-Americans Owe America |
Yukio
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Yukio
Post Number: 836
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, October 15, 2005 - 02:26 pm: |
|
Actually, I'm interested in power, which is, for me at least, at the heart of politics. I believe that we can see power flowing through ideology and discourse. My exchange with Tonya was quite enlightening, to say the least. I wonder if her conceptualization of power represents a large population of thinkers....
|
Nels
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Nels
Post Number: 130
Registered: 07-2005
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, October 15, 2005 - 04:09 pm: |
|
Yukio --
"Actually, I'm interested in power"
Very interesting assessment. However, my interest is in "control". Power without control is virtually useless, and forces one to overcompensate to make up for that lack of control. Control provides a mechanism for precision delivery, and that level of preciseness is exactly what is required in order to navigate the perilous intricacies of a divided society. |
Nels
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Nels
Post Number: 131
Registered: 07-2005
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, October 15, 2005 - 04:13 pm: |
|
Yukio --
"not from the ODR perspective but a cultural"
I believe that however flawed, the ODR provides the medium for the embodiment of "separateness", and that's the fundamental weak link in unifying any approach that is adopted by more than one group. |
Yukio
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Yukio
Post Number: 837
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, October 15, 2005 - 06:21 pm: |
|
Interesting, I don't think that this color issue has manifested as a significant barrier to black struggles as advocates of the work ethnic/ culturalists and especially the Debra Dickersonites and William Julius Wilsons. These streams, including the question of color, have always been part of African American's political history, but the work ethnic-ites, as represented by the uplift movements, particularly the National Urban League social reform movement, and the integrationist, represented by the black communist on the left and the civil right's leadership right of the left, though liberal, have had greater influence. I don't think this has changed. These color struck folk, including the anti-light skinned people and the pro-light skinned people, and the socalled biracialites are ruses, strategems, etc...part of the important, though uninformed popular cultural mainstream. They don't have any real power, except as tools/instruments. The integrationists and the culturalists have greater power than the colorists of both persuations....my thoughts, only! |
Tonya
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Tonya
Post Number: 593
Registered: 07-2005
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, October 15, 2005 - 07:24 pm: |
|
Nels,
Are you saying that the darkskinned people are trying to jump the lightskinned people's hump (sex them, love them, live off them, depend and rely on them)?
Sorry for being so crude but that's kind of what I meant when I asked you to break it down. Anyway, if you don't post back I'll assune the answer is yes.
Tonya |
Nels
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Nels
Post Number: 133
Registered: 07-2005
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, October 15, 2005 - 08:50 pm: |
|
Tonya --
Your response is fine. The positive benefits of being light-skinned are not for the light-skinned alone. Darker-skinned blacks have boldly taken advantage of the color factor to achieve their own goals, however just or unjust they may be, and much to the chagrin of the casual observer.
"sex them, love them, live off them, depend and rely on them"
In the context of your reply, no they don't just execute in that fashion. What they do is leverage each of those particular situations and many more, to achieve an advantage of their own. Sex and love, yes. Live off of them, no - but live off of the benefits of establishing and maintaining a relationship with them, yes. Rely on them, maybe - but only in the context of manipulation, and not dependence.
Let me give you a selective example of the utilization component to which I refer, and not the (benefit), which is a whole other matter unto itself:
The community that I live in is multiracial, multiethnic and multicultural. Every so many weeks, I see a very dark-skinned elderly black man in the neighborhood, at the grocery store and the like - going (parading) around with what appears to be his extremely light-skinned/mixed-raced grandson in a stroller. Yes, he is proud, but for what reason? He owes no explanation. Having had him personally speak with me, his mannerisms and message seem to convey that he is looking for approval. Approval of what? Some might even think that he is announcing his status. Status of what?
That’s the conflicting aspect of such a narrow assumption that could be made by anyone, however erroneous that assumption might be. A challenger might ask, for what reason does he beam with pride? Would this gentleman be so effusive in his display of his grandchild if that child were of his own skin complexion, facial characteristics and the like? I’ve also seen this gentleman go out of his way to make sure that whites that he encounters know that this is “his” grandson, to the point of it becoming a subtle spectacle.
Yes, the entire subject shouldn’t even be worthy of discussion at all, except for the fact that the color condition exists.
|
Nels
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Nels
Post Number: 134
Registered: 07-2005
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, October 15, 2005 - 08:57 pm: |
|
Yukio --
"I don't think that this color issue has manifested as a significant barrier to black struggles"
However valid, the color issue in of itself is a terrible distraction, which dilutes the real message that we're all trying to convey. Like it or not, it is a tangible barrier, and one that cannot be easily overcome in a society that places a value on its very existence. |
Yukio
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Yukio
Post Number: 838
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, October 15, 2005 - 09:06 pm: |
|
Nels:
No doubt. It is an issue and a tangible barrier. I wish it, however, brought about a serious assessment of the problem, which is white supremacy, as expressed through aesthetics, epistemology, and political and economic systems. |
Tonya
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Tonya
Post Number: 595
Registered: 07-2005
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, October 16, 2005 - 04:42 am: |
|
Bravo!!! Nels, I agree with you 100%. Although I believe light/mixed people are more responsible for what you described, the darkskinned ones shoulders ALL of the blame. All of it is sick and repulsive.
Tonya
|
Kola_boof
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Kola_boof
Post Number: 643
Registered: 02-2005
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, October 16, 2005 - 07:12 am: |
|
Exactly, Tonya.
So called Lightskinned/Mixed People "reiterate" White Supremacy by being an imitation of White Phenotypes.
Their form of "beauty/looks" reinforces WHITE beauty/looks....backing up the statement by Whites that blacks should CONFORM to the standard set by whites.
Light/Mixed people claim blackness, shout black and marry black---but whether they want to or not, they end up benefitting WHITE SOCIETY far more than black, because they keep making the erroneous claim--"I'm just as black as you are"---and each new generation, changing the face of what is black.
While Malcolm X is one of my greatest influences and was one of the greatest KINGS and leaders of the Black Race---anytime; anywhere......he still wasn't as "authentically" black as Clarence Thomas---one of our biggest sell out traitors.
In America, just like in Africa, the light skinned people work as a "buffer race" that keeps the Blacks from attending to the "tangible" issues and realities of Actual Blackness.
Lightness and true Blackness being two different experiences, no matter how much "racism" gives them a common denominator.
****
Yukio says there's no "authentic black" people.
But like so many Africans, I totally disagree.
Anyone of any color can be "African"---but not everyone is "black".
And blackness is not a "culture"---it's a PHENOTYPE.
The moment two blacks come into one another's presence---they are bonded by it.
Just as when a light Ethiopian comes into the presence of Ghanians and Nigerians and immediately----feels their DISTRUST and issues forth his own displeasure at being in the company of blacks that are vastly more authentic---which is what he DOESN'T want to be.
Too much "mixing" separates us---making it impossible for us to TRULY be "at ease".
The lighter color catches favoritism and all the spoils of White Supremacy--causing a never ending RESENTMENT and a lack of trust by the Authentic Blacks.
Especially among the "Wombbearers"---the darkest skinned black females are virtually made INVISIBLE by White Supremacy's admonition that "darkness" is masculine/"lightness" is feminine.
And notice---a great many light skinned women ALSO believe in this equation.
They just don't understand WHY dark women wouldn't like them.....so WE MUST JEALOUS is the only explanation they can come up with.
The fact that their yellow skin BREEDS INJUSTICE in our lives----never enters their innocent minds. They're just prettier and we're just jealous---that's how they see it.
Even tribes in Africa that Yukio claims are "light brown"...have SOME "admixture" dating back thousands of years ago....blood that is NOT indigenous.
Lightskinned people are an "extraction" of Black people....just like Vanilla Extract is an extraction of Real Vanilla.
And especially the light skinned North African and the light skinned Black American....are NOT "light" by natural occurence, but BY DESIGN.
I have learned to STOP debating this with lightskinned/mixed people......and just focus on the DARK SKINNED masses and to curtail my relations to their sensibility as much as possible.
It's truly the DARK ONES that have to change course and establish new standards and new ideals.
We'll be MUCH STRONGER once we let go of the baggage and confusion. We really don't need people who aren't us anymore.
|
Yukio
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Yukio
Post Number: 843
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: 
Votes: 1 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, October 16, 2005 - 11:33 am: |
|
Kola: We've been through this before, so I must be careful to appreciate your distinction between African and black.
At any rate, your entire post talks about how color and socalled mixing induce certain kinds of conflict, etc...My point has been always been it is not phenotype or skin in and of itself. It is what the phenotype and socalled mixing MEAN to people, which causes them to have more feelings and actions....It is historical conflict NOT phenotype, which MAY signifies certain beliefs. |
Cynique
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Cynique
Post Number: 2781
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, October 16, 2005 - 12:05 pm: |
|
So now what? Now that the situation had been condensed into words, should the solution be poured down people's throats and the problem digested? Or will the cure be worst than the "illness." What if thoughts don't become things? What if all of the projections are wrong? What if the world continues to turn and, in the process people become different, creating a familiar situation where reached goals lose their relevancy and, thus, their expediency? What if an asteroid hits the earth? Oops! Party over, outta time. To a time-worn ol philosopher like me, we are all just grains of sand on the desert where the terrain is shaped by random winds. zzzzzzzzzzzzz. |
Tonya
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Tonya
Post Number: 596
Registered: 07-2005
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, October 16, 2005 - 12:35 pm: |
|
Kola,
I don't blame you for not debating this issue with light/mixed people. I never completely understood why you did it in the past. They're EXACTLY like white people when it comes to this subject; which, by the way, is part of why others don't trust them. Debating them is a total waste of time. I agree, we need to focus on ourselves -- take a page out of their book.
Tonya |
Yukio
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Yukio
Post Number: 844
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, October 16, 2005 - 12:44 pm: |
|
Cyn: what do u mean by "thoughs don't become things"? |
Cynique
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Cynique
Post Number: 2783
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, October 16, 2005 - 12:48 pm: |
|
No, Konya, you should never debate with any opponent because they won't reinforce your biased views and tell you what you want to hear. They'll burst your balloon! (And who needs the "trust" of myopic people like you?) |
Cynique
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Cynique
Post Number: 2784
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, October 16, 2005 - 12:55 pm: |
|
Well, Yukio, thoughts don't become things is just another version of projections not coming into reality. (Don't pay any attention to me. I'm just being Cynique.) |
Yukio
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Yukio
Post Number: 845
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, October 16, 2005 - 01:49 pm: |
|
Cyn: Gotcha!
Kola: On certain days, I am mistaken for a ghanian. I have a broad nose, full lips. Maybe Cuba Gooding Jr.'s complexion...am I light skinned?
Lets address your examples:
Just as when a light Ethiopian comes into the presence of Ghanians and Nigerians and immediately----feels their DISTRUST and issues forth his own displeasure at being in the company of blacks that are vastly more authentic---which is what he DOESN'T want to be.
Too much "mixing" separates us---making it impossible for us to TRULY be "at ease".
The lighter color catches favoritism and all the spoils of White Supremacy--causing a never ending RESENTMENT and a lack of trust by the Authentic Blacks.
What can we say about this example? Is this about beliefs or color or both? Are you making projections? Historically speaking, you can legitimately make the generalization that the light Ethiopian “DOESN'T want to” black. Why not? Because black signifies inferiority and backwardness, etc… Thus, the issue is what the phenotype means, right?
If this is the case, we must identify who sets the rules of meanings. You have already identified the culprit, both in terms of implementing certain standards of beauty and distributing the favoritism…White Supremacy! So the question is, whether or not one accepts the white supremacists’ epistemology, for if we have access to alternative knowledges we can muster our own thoughts and beliefs. Clearly, many light skinned and black, as you define, accept the white supremacist model. Similarly, there are light skinned and dark skinned people who DO NOT. They see dark skin and see beauty! They see various complexions within the black spectrum and see beauty!
Now, should I want to be dark? And should I consider my self inauthentic? You answer.
Looking at this issue from a US perspective, I believe most folk embrace the range rather than a light or a dark complexion. The nature of the ODR (Nels you have a convert), though it has created intra-color issues, it especially pushed black folk of various shades into the category black. Thus, AA tend to view these issues from the stand point of not color per se, but ideology. One of the most radical black people was the founder of the African Blood Brotherhood, Cyril Briggs, of St. Kitts. He was very light skinned and often mistaken for a white person. He was a Pan Africanist, one of the progenitors of the New Negro movement during WWI. As historian Winston James states: “At age seventy-four he was still fighting over his Negro credentials. Writing to a close friend, Harry Haywood, he complained bitterly about the malicious gossip of a mutual friend of theirs, a black woman, who
Recently tried to sell a girl on the notion that my light skin would make it impossible for me to feel like a Negro and to resent the treatment accorded out people. The gal knew better, since going out often with me, she had ample reason to know how sensitive I am on the question, how angrily I resent any expression or hint of white chauvinism, how I pilloried a white waitress, for example, who in handing us a menu introduced herself as “Miss Julie.” After previously having introduced herself at a white table as Julies
The ABB, according to James, “structured itself along military lines, aiming at black self-defense and black upliftment. It was in fact born during the Red Summer of 1919.” In other words, in interpersonal situations he defended black people and in political organization he defended black people. Not a white man but as a black man. His skin was the result of white supremacy, perhaps, but his politics were those of a black radical!
At any rate, there seems to be some illogical points, as I see, so I seek clarification to determine if this is the case:
Yukio says there's no "authentic black" people.
But like so many Africans, I totally disagree.
Anyone of any color can be "African"---but not everyone is "black".
And blackness is not a "culture"---it's a PHENOTYPE.
You address who is black not who is authentically black. You make a distinction between color/phenotype, on the one hand, and continental identity, since according to you “any color can be ‘African’.” So are you saying to be black is to be authentic? Or, which is what I think you are suggesting, you conceptualize an authentic black person as a black (color) continental Africans w/o mixing? If it is only color then the very dark skin African Americans and West Indians would be authentically black, though someone in their family may have white bleed that has yet to resurface.
|
Rustang
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Rustang
Post Number: 171
Registered: 04-2005
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, October 16, 2005 - 07:40 pm: |
|
Interesting discussion.In any discussion of the manifold branches which stem from the taproot of racism, which this one is, it is important to make an accurate assessment of what one is up against if the conclussions are to have any chance of real-world application.Change with purpose can only occur when a significant number of people have both the motivation and the capability to bring about the desired change.In this case, many of the people involved gain personal advantage from the status quo so the motivation is therefore lacking.The people which find the status quo too objectionable to accept are , by and large, lacking the capability.What I mean by that is that the only ones that find a system unacceptable are generally the down-trodden, and, having been trodden down, they lack the requisite resources and opportunity to act in a manner that actually benefits their cause.It is very difficult to motivate a person who's struggle at the time is how to avoid getting their lights cut off to expend time and resources for a cause that does not show promise of facilitating his primary personal crusade of the day, which is maintaining a flow of electrical current in his home.
It is also important to note that 'black culture' is an illusion.No such thing exists in the real world and everyone is aware of that,yet they still incorporate that fallacy into everything.To demonstrate this point, when one says 'black culture' do they mean the one in Atlanta or the one in L.A. or in Philidelphia or Meridian Miss.? Each is very, very different from each of the rest.When we decide which best represents black culture in general, we then have to decide which of the various social strata we will use as 'typical', for there are wide divergences in the culture of the same community in different economic brackets.A lower-middle class black man from Detroit has as much in common with a guy from Pluto as he does with a poverty level guy from Panama City Florida.White folks don't like any one of those three guys, and that's about it.I'm not sure that our guy from florida and our guy from michigan could even talk to each other without a translator.These are things that everyone knows, yet they continue to speak of black culture as if it actually exists.The only common thread is the impact of racism.
Yukio has also alluded to how 'authenticity' is equally illussory.And we still consider this to be a worthwhile quality, this authenticity.It seems that my illusion of authenticity is contingient upon my fealty to a fictitious culture.
Why in the world would I want to live in this dream and insist on handing this spectre to my children? |
Nels
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Nels
Post Number: 138
Registered: 07-2005
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, October 16, 2005 - 07:49 pm: |
|
Tonya --
Re: light/mixed people
"They're EXACTLY like white people when it comes to this subject; which, by the way, is part of why others don't trust them."
Untrue. Your statement appears to imply that the ideologies and perspectives of both sides have been successfully condensed into a one-sided argument. In fact, if they were "exactly" like white people (on this "subject"), then none of us would be having this discussion. Remember, not all of any one group of people is of a single persuasion. |
Yukio
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Yukio
Post Number: 850
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, October 16, 2005 - 09:08 pm: |
|
Rustang: Interesting comments. I disagree. If there is no "black culture" then culture doesn't exist, according to your argument. Excuse my simplification. You argue that there is not an identifiable "black culture" that binds all blacks together. In other words, for you it seems, culture exists when it is unified and identifiable by those who belong to that group, basically speaking.
Now, one major problem, as you state, is how does one identify a group in order to attach a culture to it. I will leave this for another discussion.
For now, lets assume that blacks constitute a group, like Italians or British.
Ok. If you assess any culture, be it Italian and/or British, you will find that geographically what is understood as "British culture" is NOT evenly shared and practiced by all who identify themselves as British. In other words, your example is representative of all groups in general.
Now, I have several points.(1) I would say there are many black cultures, first of all. We can talk about a ethnic cultures, island cultures, and national cultures, even a continental culture. I'm assuming that we are talking about African Americans, or better yet US African Americans.
I disagree with the argument that people who identify themselves as black only share a history of racism. In other words, blackness=oppression. Black folks, although oppressed, experiences included resistance to white supremacy, but also, like all oppressed groups, the creation of semi-autonomous communities and institutions that established a life that was embedded in values that were different though related to white societies. In other words, blacks had/have an experience shaped by, but not exclusive to racism. This overall experience contributed to an African American national culture.
I believe culture is produced by a shared history that contributes to the creation of bonds based upon geographical space, cuisine, language, institutions, etc...
I also believe that there are national cultures, where there also exist regional differnences, such as your Detroit and Panama City Florida case.
FInally, I believe that African American culture, for the most part (There was of course slavery in the North and blacks created their own culture there as well, see Shane White Stylin' African American expressive culture from its beginnings to the zoot suit), originated in the SOuth. As people moved to the West, MId-West and East they brought their culture with them(See Kimberley Phillips's AlabamaNorth: African American Migrants, Community, and Working-Class Activism in Cleveland). In most cases, blacks reproduced those cultures. Simultaneously, those southern cultures adapted to the new conditions and morphed BUT still retain much of the integrity of the Southern culture. Again, this is a general position. So, it is possible that the three individuals may be different in terms of class and language, but they share a southern baptist culture, cuisine similar with regional differences, and they may share certain sayings and proverbs that a particular to their base southern culture.
Now, there are several problems with this analysis. For example, how does one differentiate black southerness from white southerness. Another, aren't there differences among black southerners, etc....These all can be addressed but I think my argument could still hold water.
Another idea, is that as blacks have gained a greater ability to assimilate and economically stable, they have lost some of their socalled "black culture." And that because of the differences in cultures and the many generations out of the south and even jim crow, that "black culture" is becoming obsolete,so that it is either dead or dying....something, like roman and greek culture to be studied in world civ.....who knows; just thoughts brother, and I welcome and anticipate your sage response! |
Rustang
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Rustang
Post Number: 173
Registered: 04-2005
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, October 17, 2005 - 09:29 am: |
|
To Yukio:I wasn't saying that culture does not exist.Any culture that actually exists will have a variety of common threads.Take for example hip hop culture.There are several identifying features shared by the practitioners other than CDs in the glove box of their car.They dress a certain way, they have a language all their own, a value system pertaining to behavior, etc. The hip hoppers of Oakland will be very similar to the hip hoppers of Philidelphia, east coast/west coast thing notwithstanding, independent of race.This is simply not the case with any realistic attempt to classify a black culture.The cause is very simple.The 'melting pot' principle began to have a noticable impact with the advent of rapid transportation of people and information in the 19th century.Things like the transcontinental railroad and the pony express made it possible for people to communicate at great distance at a ridiculously rapid pace as compared to the early 19th century.Then innovations such as radio,television,telephone and now the internet have made large volume communication almost instantaneous.I live in Houston.If you take two white people that were born and raised here in Houston,one them 25 years old and the other 50, you would never guess in a million years that these two people were from the same place.Entirely different accent, values, mode of dress,etc..The black community has been a little slower to start exhibiting this unification of culture for primarily two reasons.One, there has been little on the tv that black kids could really indentify with and, two, the remnants of racism.The single most important element of any culture is language.That is why conquerors eradicate the language of the conquered.That is why the French have been so tremendously resistant to incorporating english words into their language.They are the only non-english speaking country in europe that has their own word for 'computer'.In another thirty or forty years 'black culture' will come up in conversation about as often as alchemy. |
Yukio
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Yukio
Post Number: 853
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, October 17, 2005 - 12:20 pm: |
|
Clarification. I never said that you argued that culture doesn't exist. I stated that the logic of your statement suggests that cultures don't exist.
The basic ingredient of culture for you is that something is shared by people who constitute the cultural group. And your argument is that "The only common thread is the impact of racism."
I'm not sure how you define racism, but I will use Nels definition:
Culture is simply a highly adaptive and fluid state of behavior, thinking, recognition and perception - period. It implies nothing, it’s not determined by nature, and instead of evolving - it is reactive. Meaning? Culture “exists” in parallel with life itself - and it “responds” to whatever environment in which it is practiced, observed and propogated.
As I tried to state in the previous post, African American culture is/was the product of black life, in which racism was only a component. As I stated, we created institutions, values, beliefs systems etc...I believe that culture is quite flexible or as Nels states "highly adaptive and fluid state of behavior, thinking, recognition and perception." Consequently, movement and technology have contributed to what Leroi Jones, aka Amiri Baraka, calls the "changing same." Technology, labor systems, the political economy of the space, socalled race relations, etc....have changed African Americanculture...this is true, but it is still African American culture. A national culture with regional differences.
1)Lets use your example: hip hop is a subculture of African American culture, first of all, so that there could be no hip without black culture.
Hip hop is a recent component of US African American-Caribbean music, which is a component of black expressive culture. Again, the changing same...Scholars have linked hip hop to all of African American music, including jazz, blues, spirtuals, etc...
2)In addition, your analysis of hip hop of Oakland and Philadelphia is correct, but it masks the differences. Hip hop is hip hop, but WC hip hop and EC hip hop is different, from the flow to who they sample, from the language, and the dress. The language and the cultural icons are idiomatically different. This is also true of the South and the MidWest, very different but the same. Some reasons why things are similar is because folk borrowed alot from the EC, until the WC started with their own sound (this was the same with blues and Jazz); in addition, music videos using the most popular production teams and cross regional collaborations have created greater unity, but if you go to the respective place most, if not all, will still have their own local interpretation of hip hop.
Again, you can see this with food, songs, etc....they change but its still African American culture.
|
Negrological
Newbie Poster
Username: Negrological
Post Number: 8
Registered: 09-2005
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, October 17, 2005 - 02:34 pm: |
|
Fascinating discussion.
What exactly does ‘Black Culture’ mean??? I don’t think this question can be answered in a way that encapsulates all Black people. |
Yukio
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Yukio
Post Number: 856
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, October 17, 2005 - 03:18 pm: |
|
Negrological: You are correct! First we have to address what culture is:
As I stated above, I think Nels's is apt:
Culture is simply a highly adaptive and fluid state of behavior, thinking, recognition and perception - period. It implies nothing, it’s not determined by nature, and instead of evolving - it is reactive ( I don't completely agree with the reactive descriptor). Meaning? Culture “exists” in parallel with life itself - and it “responds” to whatever environment in which it is practiced, observed and propogated.
The socalled "black" part is only an adjective, that in this country is suppose to represent African Americans. Of course, there must be agreement on what constitutes a socalled black people (I lean more to a soco-historical understanding of blackness rather than the biological version). We need to go beyond US notions of socalled race, if we do so then we can deconstruct "black" and talk about various "black cultures." If we think of "black cultures" this way, we can talk about continental black cultures and new world black cultures. Therefore, black doesn't equate to African Americans but many black cultures! Even in particular national spaces, the confluence of several "black cultures" produce a national black culture, such as hip-hop, which was created by African Americans and Afro-Caribbeans.
|
Rustang
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Rustang
Post Number: 174
Registered: 04-2005
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, October 17, 2005 - 06:34 pm: |
|
It seems that what we have here is an issue of semantics.I think that once we agree on definitions of terms the seeming disagreement would vanish in the haze.We could use "A highly adaptive and fluid state of behavior, thinking, recognition and perception" as a definition of "culture".The only problem would be that we could also use that as the review of an off-broadway play, the objective of combat training, Zen enlightenment and a couple of dozen other things that I can come up with off the top of my head.It implies nothing because it says nothing.If I wrote that definition down on a piece of paper, went to a major university and randomly asked a hundred different people what this is the definition of,I would be confident of two things.One, I would get at least eighty different answers, and two, not one person would say "Culture".It lacks clarity and precision.When I say "culture" what I mean, essentially, is "The traditional beliefs, characteristics and social mores of a given group of racially, geographically or ethnically linked people." This is a bit more useful.African American individuals can, for the most part, trace their history back a couple of centuries and it ends there.The language that we speak is english, not an african dialect, and we have been becoming more and more anglicized as time went by.The Amish have a far more distinct and pristine culture than AAs,and the little that remains, which we cling to so tenaciously, will evaporate entirely in a very short period of time in the historical perspective.The only reason that any shred of it remains to this day is racism.Nothing will unify a people so much as common hardship and a common oppressor.Racism, while abhorrant, has made us what we are.It goes back to that Spartan principle of "Don't kick the same ass too often.You'll make a warrior out of a farmer." Racism still runs rampant, but the young racists don't hate us with the depth or intensity of the older ones.It decreases with each generation, and when it ceases to exist, so will what we call black culture.Our children will then be just as anglicized as any white guy that traces his heritage back to Scotland a couple of centuries ago.I don't know if this is a good thing or bad, but, in my opinion, it's coming just as surely as the tide, and there isn't a damn thing that anyone can do to stop it.But, I could be wrong.It would not be the first time, or most likely not the last, either. |
Cynique
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Cynique
Post Number: 2790
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, October 17, 2005 - 11:54 pm: |
|
Everything you said certainly resonated with me, Rustang. You made some salient points! |
Yukio
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Yukio
Post Number: 860
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, October 18, 2005 - 12:04 am: |
|
Well, I guess it is semantics. You must have misread the first post. Much of your definition was already mentioned there. I stated, "Black folks, although oppressed, experiences included resistance to white supremacy, but also, like all oppressed groups, the creation of semi-autonomous communities and institutions that established a life that was embedded in values that were different though related to white societies."
So there is not disagreement when you state culture comprises, "beliefs, characteristics and social mores of a given group of racially, geographically or ethnically linked people."
Your conceptualization of culture seems both static and at the same time teleological. It is static, on the one hand, because your definition lacks movement, which is what Nels definition provides. At the same time, your definition is teleological in that culture for you seems to move in one unwavering design. From African to Anglo. The fact of the matter is there is no authentic culture and all cultures comprise the ingredients of others as they start to come unto their own. If you think about the constant movement of certain ethnic groups in Africa, you will see that over the centuries various groups mix, share culture, and recreate culture; this is evident in the languages, values, etc...that are both different but similar.
The difference between us is that I focus on (a) that blacks created a culture in tension with but not exclusive of racism; and (b), I don't believe black people want to be assimilated. In other words, black people value their culture even though racism, a major part of the US experience but not the sole and most significant factor, is less visible and but subtle; and (c) I believe that African American culture will change, but it will last even as the people die; culture is about values and practices...these values are evident in our freedom movements, for we have made this country as democratic as it is(certainly not perfect but our movement has brough it closer); our expressive culture--spirtuals, blues, jazz, and now hip hop--we also live. Most honest whites will tell u that jazz is black music; that hip hop is black music; that blues is black music; and you are correct all of this music emanated with black musicians attempts to express their humanity with a racist society...but humanity is greater than and beyond racism. Your analysis denies black folk and culture their humanity and limit them to reactionary people whose entire lifes was nothing but a response to racism....we made love, made music, enjoyed our own view, values, etc...
|
Rustang
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Rustang
Post Number: 175
Registered: 04-2005
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, October 18, 2005 - 09:30 am: |
|
And the gap narrows more and more as we clarify what terms mean.I don't apply a single conceptualization which is at the same time static and teleological.There is an important distinction to be drawn between what culture is and what cultures do.You are correct in your assessment that all cultures incorporate elements of all other cultures they come in contact with.This is one of the things that cultures do.You say that blacks created a culture in tension with but not exclusive of racism, to which I would reply that racism is why enclaves of blacks existed in the first place.Had there been no racism and people were truly colorblind there would have been no isolation of the black populace into what could only be called ghettos and a culture would never have developed.Everything that happened was a direct result of their being isolated into a community of their own.As far as whether or not blacks want to be assimilated, I don't see that as having any relevence to whether or not they will be assimilated, but I suspect that on this, like many other points, some do, some don't.We also agree that AA culture will change, it is merely the form this change will take that we seem to be at variance with each other.Most honest whites would indeed say that jazz is black music.They would also qualify as being exceedingly ignorant to make such a statement.It would be far more accurate to say that jazz was developed primarily by black musicians.The instruments that jazz is (and was then ) played on are of european design.Pianos, guitars,trumpets,etc...European (white dude)instruments.The theoretical skeleton of jazz forms is european.A symphony consists of four movements.Usually, one is in the key of the tonic, one is in the key of the relative minor, one is in the kay of the dominant and the last resolves to the key of the tonic.Early jazz was a variant of either movements one or two.The flatted fifth or flatted seventh device so frequently employed in jazz was developed in ancient greece.It is important to remember that those three niggers named Louis (Armstrong, Freeman and Jordan)never heard a lick of african music in their lives.The droning 'no third' rhythym figure of traditional delta blues is straight-up Celtic.The process of being anglicized began quite a while ago.
We did indeed make love, make music,etc..and great things were accomplished, but had we not been driven to ghettos and endured the harshest conditions imaginable as a direct result of racism, none of those things would have happened.Hard times make hard people.Physically, mentally and spiritually.
I understand that I have a rather simplistic way of viewing things (and am not offended when this is pointed out to me )but I just prefer clear over the ambiguous and the precise over the vague. |
Cynique
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Cynique
Post Number: 2792
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, October 18, 2005 - 10:37 am: |
|
Speaking of semantics, I recently referred to myself as a iconoclast. Correction. I am more of a polemicist. You, Rustang, are an iconoclast in the true sense of the word! With all due respect to Yuko's admirable learnedness, I, too, like things clarified by being simplified. Of course simplifying things is not necessarily synonymous with being correct but it does keep an opinion from being misunderstood. And in this case, I understand what you're saying, and I agree with it. |
Yukio
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Yukio
Post Number: 862
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, October 18, 2005 - 01:47 pm: |
|
Cyn: gotcha. I agree.
Rustang: Gotcha!
I still see static and teleology.
Teleology, as I understand it, is when a phenomena is perceived as following a designed trajectory or path based on the cause of the phenomena. Like any design, if you know the beginning you also know the end a priori:
Had there been no racism and people were truly colorblind there would have been no isolation of the black populace into what could only be called ghettos and a culture would never have developed.
This removes historical agency and contingency. This is why I characterize your understanding of culture as static. In other words, the root of the problem can tell you unproblematically what the end will be. For you this means Anglicization. Put another way, regardless of what black folk thought, think, did and do, they will be anglicized. This is why, it seems, that you state:
As far as whether or not blacks want to be assimilated, I don't see that as having any relevence to whether or not they will be assimilated.
The nature of being dominated means that you will take on some of the cultural values, etc.. of the dominating country. If the subaltern groups builds its own culture, it can choose its own path. This means that some folk will choose to continue the values, traditions, and rituals that constitute African American culturec(This very site, as I understand, is an attempt to provide a literary and intellectual exchange based upon the desire to read and think about books by and about people of African descent...this is site, therefore, is about cultural retention!). So that although it is anglicized, it doesn't mean that it will become Anglo. Consequently, black musicians used European instruments, but they made African American music...not African nor Anglo.
Again, for you it seems, either or....a path to anglicization. African American culture doesn't have its own path and logic; it is on a destined route to Anglicziation.
Finally, European culture is also Africanized and African Americanized. White musicians, white authors, etc... who participate in African, Caribbean, and various cultures throughout the African Diaspora are learning about in internalizing our values. Culture lives.... |
Rustang
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Rustang
Post Number: 176
Registered: 04-2005
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, October 18, 2005 - 06:29 pm: |
|
And we arrive at the same page.My views on what it seems is actually happening in the interaction between black and white culture could actually be best described by the relationship between the earth and the moon.The earth's gravitational action on the moon is readily apparent.Gravitationally locked in orbit.One side constantly facing the earth.What is also readilly apparent, if one looks just a bit more closely, is the moons effect on the earth.The tides.A slight wobble in the earth's rotational axis leaning towards the moon.An actual bump on the dry land as tidal forces are in play there also.The anglicized culture that does eventually swallow us up entirely will not be the european culture of the most seriously caucasian, limiest limey on the planet of days gone by.We shall leave our mark on it as well.The jazz, blues, rock and roll,etc...is not african,it is not european, it isn't black or white.It is american.That's why we have Jimi Hendrix, Charley Pride, Stevie Ray Vaughn,M&M, Tiger Woods, Larry Bird, etc...These are the products of american culture.The assimilation isn't unilateral.It's just that there are so many of them in comparison to us.And yes,I do believe that with a sufficiently accurate and detailed understanding of all relevent factors concerning the beginning, the end can be foreseen.The trick is to know the difference between what you see and what you're really looking at. |
Yukio
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Yukio
Post Number: 865
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, October 18, 2005 - 06:55 pm: |
|
Rustang. I hear ya but I disagree, respectfully. You look backwards and see patterns. This is known as presentism. Your way prohibits contingency. I look backwards and forwards. I look backwards and I see patterns. I also look forwards, historians have enabled us to understand to some degree how historical actors viewed their society, and I see how different choices could have brought about different results. |
Rustang
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Rustang
Post Number: 177
Registered: 04-2005
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, October 18, 2005 - 07:24 pm: |
|
Yukio,I hear ya,but I respectfully agree.It is true that I look backwards for patterns and trends.The reason that I do that is to enable me to look forward and project the possible outcomes of the various viable choices, and form an 'on the fly' estimate of the likelihood of society's different courses of action based on how they've been acting under similar circumstances.That sounds very similar to what you do. |
Yukio
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Yukio
Post Number: 866
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, October 18, 2005 - 08:23 pm: |
|
Rustang, my elder, what u do is not quite what I do, but you did say similar. I see patterns, but I also see choices. I try to look forward with faith in the possiblity of change. I, for example, try to look forward like a protagonist in story, making the best choices that I can and hopign that life will pan out as I wish. You, on the other hand, from above, can see the story like the author, the patterns, paths, which were designed to follow a very particular course. This my friend, is teleological...this is how the Enligtenment thinkers perceived the world, and how of their nephew Karl Marx understood the class struggle. So far, he has been wrong.... |
Rustang
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Rustang
Post Number: 178
Registered: 04-2005
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, October 18, 2005 - 11:21 pm: |
|
Yeah, faith is not something I possess in great quantity, but, as long as I see brothers and sisters thinking things through and arriving at reasonable conclussions attaching only the degree of certainty that is warranted by the evidence available, asking questions and listening to the answers and then thinking those through, to accept or reject in whole or part, I will always experience a very high degree of hope. |
Yukio
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Yukio
Post Number: 867
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, October 19, 2005 - 12:36 am: |
|
well, we will do our best! |
Cynique
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Cynique
Post Number: 2815
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, October 19, 2005 - 12:55 am: |
|
Why is it you 2 can have such a civil discussion and end up respecting each other's opinions and most of the time when I disagree with someone, I get called a bunch of names and even have pictures posted to emphasize the contempt my favorite adversary has for me. Hummm. I think I'm hangin out with the wrong people. I'll have to upgrade. LOL |
Kola_boof
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Kola_boof
Post Number: 680
Registered: 02-2005
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, October 19, 2005 - 01:16 am: |
|
No Cynique.
EVERYONE HERE has witnessed me try to befriend and give you olive branches all the time.
And you kick me right in the teeth every time....
YOU are the one who keeps shit going.
Even in a conversation with others, where I haven't said anything---you take cheap shots at me and bring up my name.
So don't play that bullshit.
|
Yukio
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Yukio
Post Number: 868
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, October 19, 2005 - 02:59 am: |
|
Cynique: I've never called you anything condescending, unless elder or sister fit the bill.
Kola: I have also never called you anything condescending...only ABM, unfortunately, and West_Africa, jokingly, have been called something besides what they call themselve...lmao! |
Kola_boof
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Kola_boof
Post Number: 682
Registered: 02-2005
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, October 19, 2005 - 03:48 am: |
|
Well, Yukio, that's because you've always had a crush on me.
I had one on you, too.
|
Cynique
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Cynique
Post Number: 2818
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, October 19, 2005 - 09:31 am: |
|
Oh put a sock in it Kola. I'm not complaining about not getting along with you. I was just making an observation which I followed with an "LOL." Obviously I'm not interested in being your friend. And get real. Every opening you get, you bring my name into it and go into your name-calling spiel. Just like you just did during the exchange I was having with blaklioness. But who cares? I love having the ability to make people mad. |
Cynique
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Cynique
Post Number: 2819
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, October 19, 2005 - 09:46 am: |
|
Yukio, you're one of the people on this board, who I have no problem conversing with because you may attack my argument, but not me, as opposed to somebody like Chris Hayden who can never just disagree with a person but apparently feels the need to insult them in the process. But, no biggie. Luv ya! |
Yukio
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Yukio
Post Number: 869
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, October 19, 2005 - 01:00 pm: |
|
Oh really, that's an interesting claim, Kola. You had a crush on me when you thought I was a woman or recently as a man? This should elicit some interesting conversation...lmao! |
Kola_boof
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Kola_boof
Post Number: 685
Registered: 02-2005
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, October 19, 2005 - 03:56 pm: |
|
No, YUKIO.
I had a crush on you when you were a man and started emailing me.
I'm a terrible sucker for "intellectual" men.
The school jocks and rappers never could get as far with me as the nerdy guy with glasses on (although I did lose my virginity to a rapper----and he was High Yellow!, I just remembered)----but I always liked the real thinking/deconstructing/analytical type guy....provided he was somewhat "solid" and exuded the masculine dominance and chase-me quality that I prefer in men.
And don't remember how upset I used to get when you wouldn't "reply/acknowledge me" on the board?
But anyway.
It wasn't a SERIOUS crush. Not like the one that almost destroyed ABM and I.
I guess ABM's never coming back.
And just when he left---YOU arrive back.
|
Yukio
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Yukio
Post Number: 870
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, October 20, 2005 - 04:54 pm: |
|
thats interesting...who would have thunk that u had a crush on a yellow non-black, though African American, man who you have never met or seen? At least we know that you are concerned about with the person's internal beauty! |
Kola_boof
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Kola_boof
Post Number: 691
Registered: 02-2005
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, October 20, 2005 - 05:19 pm: |
|
If you're the color of Terence Howard with West African features and African hair (as you described)---then I would consider that BLACK Yukio.
I know. It's very confusing.
It's The Rock and Vin Diesel and Rosario Dawson types that we don't consider black.
The "hair" and tribal features play an even bigger factor than color, sometimes.
But I get crushes on non-black men.
Like Peter Jennings and Phil Donahue. Dr. Phil.
And if EVERYBODY ELSE wasn't interracially dating---I might be doing it and fighting for people's right to do it.
My only problem came after I realized that it was a serious threat to my children and my people---because of the OUTRAGEOUS numbers in the black community and the reasons behind those numbers.
But I'm not against it.
I'm not as archetypical as people would think. Not in the least.
Now the high yellow Georgetown boy, Truce Harding, who took my virginity was my English tutor and he was also a rapper and much older than me. He was a brainiac.
|
Rustang
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Rustang
Post Number: 182
Registered: 04-2005
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, October 20, 2005 - 06:00 pm: |
|
One thing that I never really did understand, Kola, is how inter-racial procreation could be a threat of any sort to anyone already living.Your children's gene sequences are already set.There is nothing that could happen to change them into white folks.Inter-racial dating and marriage is one of the logical consequences of the easing of racial tension.I just don't see how in the world we can reach a place where all people respect the intrinsic worth of all others without having interracial couples being a commonplace occurance.If race is no impediment to what you do for a living, how much you make or where you live then it won't be a factor in the decision of who you live with either.It's pretty much got to be both or neither. |
Yukio
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Yukio
Post Number: 871
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, October 20, 2005 - 08:15 pm: |
|
Well Kola, it is not confusing to me. I've actually had this conversation with a few continental Africans, and your answer is familiar.
Rustang, I would suspect that interracial procreation is a threat to people who identify themselves as "black" because (a) the socalled "mixed" folk could potentially shift issues of race from racism to identity politics; (b) historically speaking, socalled mixed folk have been representations of black beauty (problem #2) that have been based on white notions of beauty (problem #1). Consequently, dark skinned folk have been deemed unattractive and ugly....these same features based on color and features are also used a references of intellect, criminality, and morality.
I don't see what reaching "a place where all people respect the intrinsic worth of all others" has necessarily to do with "interracial couples being a commonplace occurance."
Within the realm of power relations, which for me is life, socalled interracial folk are pawns and actors in a political struggle, as Nels's threads have identified. One's genetic make-up does not give them any real understanding of the contemporary political situation. Some mixed folk are often the most racist people, as well as blind. Part of the problem is, I believe, people don't realize that racism is embedded in institutions and culture. Thus, the fact that a white person doesn't ever call me a nigger (interpersonal racism) doesn't mean that racism doesn't exist. My style of dress, the language I use, and my gait, are symbols that are read and interepreted by society...depending upon whose in power, certain symbols (anglicized) have more power.
|
Kola_boof
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Kola_boof
Post Number: 697
Registered: 02-2005
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, October 20, 2005 - 08:25 pm: |
|
Rustang,
Yukio broke it down really well for me.
But as African mother....who sees the JACKSON family on television with 20 grandchildren and only 3 are "brown"------I'm no fool. I see what is being promoted.
Countless images of Black Men holding up White or Damned Near White babies.
The message is that my children should EVENTUALLY not exist at all.
It pisses me off how people like you ignore that fact.
How you forget that NORTH AFRICA (where I am from) has been totally and completely devastated and bastardized by the promotion of this White Supremacist "LOVE" and "Natural Order". WIPED OUT so that Europe wouldn't "border" their greatest and most threatening enemy---black skin.
It is a THREAT when the MEDIA and BLACK MEN join forces to give the same exact message----that Black children aren't NECESSARY in order for the human race to carry on.
Or that Biracial people are just the same as my children. They are not!!! They are not mine.
I am not a nigger. I want my black babies and I want them black.
|
Cynique
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Cynique
Post Number: 2841
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, October 21, 2005 - 12:38 am: |
|
What's the difference between you and a mixed mother who puts the future of her children first and foremost, Kola Boof? Why do you think the world owes you any more than it owes any other mother? Why do you think you are so special? The only thing special about you is that you think you're special. You may not be a nigger, but you are just another self-absorbed female who believes everybody should makes your wishes their priority. And why would your sons be destroyed if they married light women? Would light women be destroyed if they married your sons? What you need to do is to leave America and relocate in an African country where you won't be confronted with what you perceive as a problem. |
Kola_boof
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Kola_boof
Post Number: 699
Registered: 02-2005
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, October 21, 2005 - 12:50 am: |
|
Who said my sons shouldn't marry LIGHT women?
I am totally baffled by your bullshit post.
|
Kola_boof
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Kola_boof
Post Number: 701
Registered: 02-2005
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, October 21, 2005 - 01:16 am: |
|
No, Cynique---what you need to do is MAKE ME relocate to an African country.
You corn pone boot-lick'n Why-N-ch,
fuck you!
I wish the fuck you would come preaching that plantation bullshit to me.
What kind of woman doesn't put her babies first and fight for them to have EVERYTHING they can have?
What kind of BITCH with black skin wants her babies to look like a White man?
|
Cynique
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Cynique
Post Number: 2842
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, October 21, 2005 - 01:18 am: |
|
I dont think that it's unreasonable to assume that you wouldn't want your sons to compromise your principles by marrying light/mixed women who would dilute your grandchildren and contribute to the extinction of black skin. Of course considering that you talk out of both sides of your mouth, your response should come as no surprise to me. And frankly, my dear I don't give a damn. |
Cynique
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Cynique
Post Number: 2843
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, October 21, 2005 - 01:28 am: |
|
Oops! I did it again. I made Kola lose her cool. What'd you do? Re-read my first post and suddenly decide you really weren't baffled by what I wrote after all. You're a joke. And name-calling is the only defense you can ever muster against me. Africa calls you home. Kooooola we're here for you. Come baaaaack. LOL and good night. |
Yukio
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Yukio
Post Number: 872
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, October 21, 2005 - 02:51 am: |
|
what has happened here? |
Cynique
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Cynique
Post Number: 2845
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, October 21, 2005 - 10:19 am: |
|
Well, Yukio, I would think that YOU could figure out this familiar scenario. It just an ever-vigilant Cynique keeping in check the breast-beating Kola and her ongoing crusade to bend the world to her will. |
Yukio
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Yukio
Post Number: 873
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, October 22, 2005 - 12:21 am: |
|
yes, I do know...but damn! |
Kola_boof
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Kola_boof
Post Number: 714
Registered: 02-2005
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, October 22, 2005 - 12:48 am: |
|
Care to expand on that, Yukio?
|
Yukio
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Yukio
Post Number: 874
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, October 22, 2005 - 11:07 am: |
|
Sure:
"yes, I do know"
This scenario is quite familiar!
"But damn" Don't yall get tired of using fowl language? |
Cynique
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Cynique
Post Number: 2853
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, October 22, 2005 - 11:36 am: |
|
Yukio, do you mean "fowl" language in that we were 2 hens going at it, or "foul" lanaguage as in profanity? If it's the latter, I didn't curse Kola out. She did the name calling. |
Yukio
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Yukio
Post Number: 877
Registered: 01-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, October 22, 2005 - 05:56 pm: |
|
Cynique, you are quite clever...I meant foul language. Hmmmmm.....bother of you have used profanity as a weapon...to hurt. I know that I'm get conservative in my late age...lmao! |
|
Email This Page