I am a loyal listener to Citizen Radio, which is a more or less political, mostly comedic, progressive podcast. I do agree with most things they say, as a progressively-minded person, but I do also take issue with some stuff. For example, they say everyone should stop smoking for political, financial, and health reasons, and I'm a smoker, yes, but they are right. I think they're not focusing on the right issue in this aspect. However, I think the issue is very complicated, obviously with the history of advertising and they way the tobacco companies function, but people should have the choice to be a cigarette smoker if they choose without the government or society looking down on them for that choice. But that's just because I like being able to choose my actions in a country that prides itself on freedom.
The main thing I take issue with, though, is that they are the kind of White progressives that are racist against White people. I'm not saying that White people haven't really fucked with minorities in serious ways that have carried over to today's landscape. I'm also not saying that I'm not privileged simply for being White, because I am. But I do think that the blanket statements of saying all White people are essentially evil is very offensive. I am very not racist, am very socially and politically aware, but the fact that I am White does not make me an asshole. Though, their language implies that it does.
But this is a problem with a lot of progressives that I have dealt with. I felt it for a while in high school, too. It goes along with a blanket hatred for living in the United States and being a United States citizen and fantasizing about moving to a better place without even wanting to make this place better. Those other places that you want to move depended on their citizens to make that place what it is. The United States deserves that from us, as well.
It's almost as if these White people that hate White people are jealous that a lot of "minorities" have had a rough time of it, and they haven't, and they feel that that makes their experiences less valid. I mean, one of the things the hosts basically bragged about for the majority of the time I've listened to the show is that they were homeless and lived in their car for a while, as if that made what they have to say more respected. It wasn't until one of their listeners emailed in concerned that someone they loved was considering being homeless that it actually came out that they were not really homeless, they only slept in their car once or twice the whole time (a year or more), they mostly stayed at friends' houses, and that it isn't something that they would really recommend. Progressives, a lot of the time, value hardships. I guess that's a thing in US culture, though. We always root for the underdog, and being the underdog and coming out of it is something to respect.
Last night I was listening to Friday's episode of Citizen Radio, "A minor meltdown, followed my Domes.org's Heather McGhee", where they had a guest talking about affirmation action. Heather McGhee, the guest, basically said that one of the reasons affirmative action is important, or the most important, is because it provides a diverse college experience for people going to college. Jamie, one of the hosts, excitedly said, "You don't want to be around the table with, like, the bosses, and like, some giant corporation and that's when you learn that's not appropriate for a White person to quote the Chris Rock difference between White people and n-word bit." But, would anyone do that? Diversity is obviously something that is very important, but it shouldn't be the reason a person gains experience or prestige. In fact, I would find that pretty insulting (which is addressed in the 30 Rock episode "Lee Marvin vs. Derek Jeter"). The issue isn't race, and people who don't want affirmative action don't want all races or ethnicities to be literally seen the same. No. Diversity is super important, but we're looking at the issue from the wrong side. The issue is CLASS. Economic class. Period.
The thing is, minorities do tend to come from poorer neighborhoods, and those neighborhoods don't have as good schools as richer neighborhoods. Look at No Child Left Behind. Public schools that do well on their tests get more money and schools that don't get less. Before NCLB, the rich schools probably were better funded because of the rich neighborhoods they existed in, and vise verse. It would make sense if the schools that were not doing as well got more money because they would be able to afford better facilities, more and better teachers and IAs, more up to date textbooks, more and better college prep courses, and better extracurricular activities that would benefit the students. These students are the ones that need this because it's more likely that their parents won't have the time or educational background to enforce educational achievements or the money to pay for private tutoring, whereas in rich neighborhoods their parents are more likely to have the time and educational background and money to devote to their child's education. They are less likely to have to have three jobs in order to house and feed their kids, you know.
But this is what we should be focusing on. I agree, diversity is important. Yes, that was one of the best parts of my going to New Mexico State University. Yes, if you're from a poor neighborhood, you should be provided with more scholarship opportunities, but even then, if university is so important, it should be free. I'm sure a lot of people would agree with that at this point; that college has become so important that it should become a public and private situation in the same way as public and private schools function, at least initially. Everyone should have the opportunity to go to college, anyway. However, my experience trying to find an undergraduate medical internship should not have been so hard simply because I'm White. I can't help my background just as much as anyone else. If we want the playing field to be even, we need to start with public elementary, middle, and high schools, not college. The mindset of affirmative action is inherently racist, whether it benefits minorities or puts them down, because it depends solely on the person's race/ethnicity.
The opportunity to go to a good school should start at public schools, evening out the competitive edge rich people have, whether they are Which or Asian or Black or Hispanic or Whatever.
Update: The Citizen Radio hosts addressed this issue by basically saying that the institutional racism by people of minorities has been a problem for so long that Affirmative Action still needs to happen. Ok, that makes sense, except for the fact that it is illegal to not hire someone for being a certain race/ethnicity. It is totally legal, though, to hire someone because they're of a minority. It's also legal to not hire someone of a certain culture, because those people represent your company, and if they don't have the correct appearance or style of language they can not be hired. Those kinds of things are like tattoos and piercings and a style of language, all of which are more common amongst people who feel disinfrancised for whatever reason... usually because they are of a lower class.
Allison, the other host, says, "I'm confused as to why it's an either or thing. Why can't we give a leg up, if you will, to both poor people and Black people who happen to be overwhelmingly, uh, [systematically oppressed (Jamie)] poor as well, though. I just don't see why we have to have the Suffering Olympics and help one group without... you know, I think..." And then she gets cut off by Jamie and they start talking about Pell Grants. (Where, might I point out, they started talking about how the benefit of Pell Grants was that it was focused on poor people, regardless of race, and that it needs to be better funded now. This seems a little hypocritical to me, if race is such an important issue.)
The thing is, Allison, it is not an either or thing. If Affirmative Action was aimed and giving poor communities in general a leg up, race and ethnicity would never be an issue. Yeah, there would still be racists, but having a different kind of racism does nothing to help the actual issue.
Then Jamie says, "One of the reasons I tend to put race a little above class is because at the same time poor people of all colors were being fucked, I mean, you gotta remember that Black people weren't allowed in the same college, I mean, pretty recently. You know, Black people, like, there was segregated schools, there was segregated everything." Notice how it's all in the past tense? Sounds like our host here has a bit of White guilt himself. Seriously, I think that's what defending Affirmative Action is about, the reason it was put into place in the first place, especially when his co-host says this:
"And this is a great way to keep the 99% fighting. Because we are fighting over crumbs were as if we tax the 1% at a slightly higher rate there would be enough funds for everyone to go to college! But! If the poor White are too busy fighting the poor people of color then there's never a collision, there's never organization, there's never direct action." I agree completely, Allison! Affirmative Action is a way to keep people of lower classes fighting against each other over something as stupid as race and ethnicity! Poor people of all races and elasticities should be standing together as a way to tell those in power that what is happening to them and their communities is not ok.
I was talking to my father, who is a scientist for the government, about this, and he was complaining that because of Affirmative Action so many people get raises because they are "Hispanic" (remember, I live in New Mexico where the majority of the minorities is "Hispanic"). That's probably true, but the thing is, those people are scinetists for the government, where everyone has at least a B.S. Their getting a raise based solely on their ethnicity is unfair because at that point, isn't everyone on equal footing? They don't really need a leg up on White people, do they? And wouldn't it be more satisfying to get a raise based on how hard you work or the quality of that work apposed to a government requirement for more minorities in managerial positions?
As sort of an aside, I read an ethnography called In Search of Respect: Selling Crack in El Barrio, by Phillippe Bourgois. Basically, Bourgois pointed out that the best choice for the people in this neighborhood is to sell crack because not only do they have respect in their community as a crack dealer, but they also stop using when they sell. There was a section of the book talking about when people tried to go straight, that is, getting a job that is legitimate legally; when the did, they had little to no respect in their jobs, were talked down to by their employers on a regular basis, and had no opportunity to move up in the company because they did not have the correct representation of what the company wanted. These people were minorities, obviously, but they also were not Black, they were Mexican or Puerto Rican (I don't remember), and were put down for how they were and how they spoke and how they acted. These are the issues that need to be addressed - socioeconomic issues. If these people weren't raised in a culture or selling crack and understood that there is a way to gain respect without it, and actually had the opportunity, means, and motivation from those around them to follow through with this alternative, they wouldn't have had the go-to of selling crack. And their public education was step one. It's not a race thing. We should send money to these schools because there are Latinos there. We should send money to these schools because they don't have any. (Also, fixing the whole War on Drugs thing would be nice, but that's a separate issue.)
I also think I should point out that, after high school, I do not have "White guilt." Yes, a lot of White people were assholes in the past, but I had nothing to do with that. So, no, I don't feel guilty for something I didn't do. Sorry to disappoint.
No comments:
Post a Comment