Supreme Court Decision: Racism Over

Hurray, there’s no more racism in the South.  Surely this will come as a relief to southerners.  But that’s America for you, one day you’re struggling to survive oppression and the next day someone tells you that’s not what you’re doing.  Just like when we won the Iraq War in 1991 under Bush.  Then again under Bush Jr. in 2003.  And then we won it again under Obama.  If we win the war three more times we get the seventh one free.

So, the voting rights act was gutted by the Supreme Court today for those who have not heard.  Not a surprise really.  I’ll even say that I get the argument against the act.  No one who has the vaguest clue what it was like in the South those few decades ago can have any illusion that things aren’t a lot better now.  However, better though they may be, fixed they are not. And, if the last election proved anything, the system is at risk.  The Republican Party is split in its strategy.  Pander to minorities or simply try to squeeze growing numbers of people out onto the periphery.

Racism (and in the larger picture bigotry/discrimination in general) is a tough subject to even bring up, much less deal with in any substantive way.  Old white people are in denial, young white people (like all young people) are narcissists and only give it lip service, and each minority group is often an island unto themselves fighting for their own unique rights.  The funny part about all the old, establishment white men in this country who are afraid and distrustful of minorities, and especially immigrants, is that many of them are from European ethnicities that were once discriminated against as well.  Part of the problem is that there are no ethnic backgrounds on the Earth that don’t come with the weight of history attached.  So, while being Anglo-Saxon in America was once (and may well still be) the best seat in the melting pot, had that same person ended up in France instead, they would have been one more dirty Englishman stranded out of country with questionable loyalties to a foreign crown.

I see racism as a symptom of an underlying condition in humankind.  Racism is what a nation generates against newcomers, outsiders, interlopers and infidels.  It’s as simple as majority versus minority.  In each nation, it’s somebody different.  However, the racism that rarely gets addressed isn’t national.  It’s endemic to humanity.  It crosses all borders and all languages.  It’s fear of the unknown.  Just because you’re in a minority yourself, doesn’t mean you don’t discriminate against other peoples.  Bigotry and discrimination are rampant and widespread.

I don’t know how it is for other people, but I’ve found that once you’ve known a person long enough, any person, you find out that there’s whole groups out there that they don’t like.  It might not be so strong that they’ve never liked anyone from that group, but they judge those people immediately and it can take a lot to break through that.  Genetic discrimination is only one form of that.

My mom grew up with racism.  It was part of her family and her environment.  They weren’t the violent brand of racists.  They wouldn’t hurt a person because they weren’t white.  But they believed strongly that the only way everyone could get along was if they all stayed separate.  My grandmother told my mom that she should never be mean to the black kids at school, but that she should never touch them.  Don’t touch things they touched.  When they came by trick or treating on Halloween, she would give them candy and then wash anything they touched and her hands with bleach.  She said that they were unclean and carried diseases.  It wasn’t their fault, but it was the way of things.

My grandfather would have denied being a racist.  He would pay people compliments like “He’s really smart for a black man.”  A lack of general awareness in his statement.  Later on he would become good friends with our black neighbor, who occasionally called him on his ingrained bullshit.  He even laughed it off when he found out my grandfather regularly referred to him, his white wife and their daughter as pepper, salt and cinnamon.  Was he still a racist when he died?  I can’t honestly say.  It was part of his programming, but had his brain made workarounds to accommodate his new view?  Doesn’t really matter.  When he died he had a whole stash of child porn and torture films of women, so racism was the least of his demons.  The neighbors still worship him.  They don’t know his dark side and he was the friendliest neighbor you could ever have.  So much that you could ignore the cracks creeping up the facade.

My mom thinks that her mom’s brain would have burst had she known that in school she shared an ice cream cone with the black girl in her class.  I wonder where that difference comes from.  One kid grows up in a racist home and learns to hate what their parents hate.  Another kid knows from the start that their parents are wrong.

So, you’ve got these two racists living in a house with no exterior walls in the back woods, insulation hanging out in the weather.  A bunch of Welsh-Irish, dirt poor, blue-collar, unwashed social rejects with 30 cats who a lot of people looked down on for being poor and uneducated with no sense of style or fashion.  My grandfather never completed school.  I think it was the 6th grade where he dropped out so he can spend more time smoking, drinking and standing on his motorcycle as he raced down hills.  Sitting on their nicotine stained couch, staring out the holes in the wall and judging black people because of the way they talked and acted and lived and looked.  Sometimes striking the mirror is the only way to get back at it for showing your reflection.

Nowadays the Republican Party deals with near constant accusations of being racist.  It’s simultaneously well-deserved and unfair.  Republican stereotypes, like any stereotype, are founded on a kernel of truth, but they aren’t a homogenous group.  Tons of Republicans are just old fashioned fiscal conservatives who don’t like Obama because he’s nothing like Bush.  He hasn’t spent anywhere near as much money as Bush or started as many wars.  The problem for the Republicans is that they’ve got wolves in really crappy looking sheep costumes.  It’s a great haven for racists because it’s primarily white and it’s opposition is minority heavy.

It’s a similar problem to the Catholic Church.  What kind of guys want a career where they can never get married or have sex with women and spend lots of time around little boys?  Also, all the emphasis on pain, sacrifice, shame and guilt probably isn’t helping much either.  That doesn’t mean all Republicans are racists or all priests are child molesters, but it’s kind of hard to dismiss the criticism when it’s a constant bombardment of scandals.

Not liking Obama doesn’t make you a racist.  While many might disagree with this, I do think assuming Obama is a secret Muslim terrorist sympathizer is racist.  Clinton never got accused of that and bin Laden got away under his watch.  Bush and family were pals with the bin Ladens and Osama was under his nose the entire time basically.  Why not more accusations from the right that he was hiding him?  I don’t believe he was in the least, but I make the case that if anyone looks like he was working with al-Qaeda from a crazy conspiracy theory POV it would be Bush.  If Obama’s Muslim, he has a weird way of vaporizing his comrades in arms every chance he gets.

Again, plenty of people don’t like Obama for legitimate reasons.  But I have seen hordes of racists pouring out of the crevices of fading history to make a final stand here against the tyranny of “reverse racism.”  One of the more racist terms I’ve ever heard.  It would seem to imply that being white is like the default.  That’s the factory setting.  Then people had to go and get all these custom skin colors and mess with God’s plan for a master race.  It does sort of make sense.  After all, Jesus was white at a time and place where there were no other white people, or so I’ve been told by the stained glass advertisements in churches.

In the end, their accusations fall flat.  This whole “I’m just a rich white man living in a black man’s world” sounds pathetic as soon as it’s out of their pampered mouths.  On the other hand, classism may well be replacing racism as the primary form of discrimination in America.  Kanye West accused Bush of being racist during Katrina by saying that he didn’t care about black people.  I don’t think Bush cares about poor people.  It’s the color in your wallet, not on your skin that matters to him and his cronies.

Discrimination is a survival mechanism.  It’s so you can recognize the people you know from the people you don’t and if we were still roaming around in the woods fighting direwolves, bears the size of tanks and tribes of other humans, it wouldn’t hurt to kill any strangers you come across.  The more different from you they look, the more different they probably were.  But any applicability of visual discrimination to human society is long gone.  So, you have to pick:  Ancient tribal factionalism versus not having to waste time and energy on trivial divisions?  Old World or New World?

In the end though, it doesn’t matter how people are discriminating against others.  I’ve seen people get judged by a lot of criteria.  Black vs. white, nerd vs. jock, straight vs. gay, rich vs. poor, skinny vs. fat, and so on and so forth.   Just about everybody has been excluded based on criteria they couldn’t control.  Just about everybody has excluded another for something they couldn’t control.  Luckily, for most, it’s only exclusion.

When we lived in San Diego and I was still a kid, two rival gangs staged a race war on our front lawn, the street and a few of the neighbor’s lawns.  A Latino gang versus a black gang with tire irons and baseball bats and any blunt object they could find.  They beat each other to death while everyone watched.  Thankfully, they were respectful enough to restrict themselves to melee weapons as a hail of gunfire could easily have killed a number of families.  That’s half the reason we left San Diego.  The other half being that when we called 911 they told us they would send a squad car “whenever one became available.”  Our respect and trust of the woefully short arm of the law eroded a little that night.

Afterward, Latinos would say that the problem was the black gangs moving in.  African-Americans would say it was the Latino gangs that were the problem.  Old people thought it was the inborn evil of the new generation.  Young people said it was the old authorities hogging the riches of the world and leaving too many people disenfranchised.  White people saw enough blame to go around to all the colors of the rainbow.  Personally, I think the problem in our city was people.  You can’t trust them.  Savages one and all.

We segregate our love and our hate and our understanding in the same way we draw lines on maps and pretend they were always there.  Indelible lines on the world and in our neighborhoods and in our blood.  And we all do it for the same reasons.

Part of it is fear of the unknown, but that’s more of a criteria for selection, not the underlying cause.  I think the underlying cause is a need to hate.  We have to struggle against something.  Finding purpose in life can be hard to do.  Countless religions and philosophies, careers and paths of education, places to live and things to do.  It’s far easier to define ourselves as being the opposition to another force.  It allows us to find purpose and an outlet for our animal aggression at the same time.  We’re pre-programmed to struggle.

It also can’t be denied that in any country in the world (historically going back forever) the powers that be promote cultural segregation, xenophobia and paranoia as a means to stay in power.  The poor and powerless are too busy fearing and killing each other all over the world to see that the only real threat are the fearmongers themselves.  Rwanda is a classic example of that tactic as used by the Colonial powers in Africa.  Take two ethnicities you want to control, raise one up, telling them they’re better than the other and make them hold the other down until they come to hate their supposed betters.

So, how do we bridge the gulf between us?  Easy.  Learn to hate everyone equally.  If it’s too implausible to believe everyone has good in them, it’s gotta be easy to see everyone has evil in them.  We’re naturally inclined to believe the worst in one another.  Admitting your species has a problem is the first step.  Otherwise, you’ll just end up another pawn in their game.


About fanaticalhypocrite

I'm your average agnostic Irish Catholic Welsh Jew born in rural West Virginia as the mildly autistic son of a motorcycle riding nurse and an unemployed, ex-military, atheist theology major (likes there's any other kind.) Just another tragically disconnected member of the bitter American proletariat living in the twilight of U.S. world dominance. I'm a medical transcriptionist by day ("They're going to fire me tomorrow" has been my motto for 11 years), a security guard/campground host/lost & found department/problem solver/bouncer/bookkeeper understudy 24/7/365, and a nerdy wannabe writer by night. And also day. My life is basically a non-linear blender full of random activities. And now I run a blog because... why not? It's not like I was using my precious time to cure disease or end world hunger. Might as well tell a bunch of strangers about why [insert anything here] really pisses me off.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

9 Responses to Supreme Court Decision: Racism Over

  1. Sabura says:

    Yep, ridiculous false correlation. The fact that the Voting Rights Act has *worked* doesn’t mean that there’s no longer racism, just that it has done its job well and so should obviously remain in place to continue to do so. As a member of a multiracial family (black stepfather, biracial sister, Native American ex-husband, etc.), I can tell John Roberts, et al., and my factually challenged governor that racial discrimination is indeed still alive and kicking.

  2. Yeah, they are doing that a lot these days. I’ve seen the same argument made for the repeal of worker and consumer protections. Why should we still have such tight regulation when corporations are our friends now? Some people seem to forget that with worker’s rights, separation of church and state, environmentalism and racism, we made these rules for very good reasons.

    I hadn’t heard that quote from your governor. That’s hilariously ignorant. How can our politicians be so naive (let’s hope it’s naivete at least)?

    The Supreme Court has been a bigger and bigger disappointment these past few years.

    • Sabura says:

      I wish I was far enough away from her to find Jan Brewer’s ignorance even slightly amusing, but my proximity to her results in her nearly every word and deed causing me no less than rage and disgust at this point.

      The unanswerability and lifetime appointments of the Supreme Court have bugged me since my high school days. Just another overreach “check and balance” put into place by the Founding Fathers to keep more power out of the hands of the scary hoi polloi. And which can result in one party’s influence (Republican at this time, obviously) extending way past their majority in the legislative and executive branches of government. We obviously need some kind of system to determine the constitutionality of issues like DOMA and Prop. 8 (good on them for those rulings, at least), but the current SCOTUS system is basically undemocratic and irreversibly flawed by its very nature.

      • Yeah, the Supreme Court is a growing problem. I’m not a big fan of unelected positions in the government to begin with, but lifetime appointment? That was an insanely bad idea. You’re right, no matter what side is in power, it’s the last supreme justices picked who get to decide how the law will be used. Sadly, there seems to be little interest in changing the system drastically.

        • Sabura says:

          The First Congress really messed up by not considering how much life expectancies might increase over time, which has resulted our current justices having on average about 20-30 more years’ ability to serve than they would have had back in the 1790s. Abolishing the lifetime tenure would be one major step towards decent reform, but like you say, there seems to be no real interest in changing the system. I believe the SCOTUS to be the worst flaw in an otherwise pretty good governmental framework. I don’t expect to see any change to it in my lifetime, but hopefully future generations will take up reforming it sooner rather than later. I don’t think it can go on as it is indefinitely.

  3. Sabura says:

    Thought you might appreciate this, especially the 8 recent examples at the bottom that Ginsburg cited:

    Someone on the PB at MT Stars has posted a link to examples of the “literacy” tests that were used to disenfranchise black voters in the past, which I found both educational and incredibly depressing. I easily imagined myself as one of the people who had somehow made it past the gauntlet of sheriffs and deputies that harrassed any who attempted to register, only to then be hit with one of those tests and given just 10 minutes to deal with the ambiguous trickery involved. It made me want to cry, but it also gave me an increased level of empathy regarding Dr. King and the voting rights movement in terms of the motivations involved for so many, after having been not simply denied their rights but also definitely degraded during that process more than I had known.

    • Yeah, I saw that post. It’s astounding that these sort of tests were used. Considering how many state requests to change their voting system were denied in the last 10 years because it violated the act, I think it’s crazy to repeal it when it was demonstrably active yet in preventing voter disenfranchisement.

      I would definitely agree with term limits for Justices mentioned in the other article you linked.

    • elaine says:

      Hi Sabura. I was the someone who posted the “literacy” test. It was quite alarming. If you agree, please place an invisible “x” over the first “a” in the shortest or longest word in the sentence above. Best regards. Poster formerly known as doe. : )

      • Sabura says:

        Would that be an uppercase “X” or a lowercase “x”? Oh, that’s right, you can’t tell me, and it will still be the opposite of whatever I choose.

        Thanks for the link to the article, elaine (I was even inspired to post it on my WordPress blog). I had no idea what those tests entailed before that, with all that trickery involved. It still amazes me to consider how short a time ago all that really was.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s