A Long Overdue Apology For Slavery

I am glad to see that the House of Representatives seems to be moving in the direction to have the US government formally apologize for the tragic stain of slavery in this country. Of course, this is not without great controversy. Some people think since slavery is in the past, that no one today did anything wrong, so how can they apologize. Others are afraid that legally admitting to such a wrong will open the doors to reparations and potential lawsuits leading to such.

I think neither point matters. At the end of the day, our government, at one time, fully took part in and benefited from the enslavement of an entire ethnic group. It is arguably the worst act our country has ever committed and one that still has an impact on "race" relations to this day. We apologized for, and paid reparations for, locking up Japanese Americans in internment camps. And we have, to some degree, tried to make up for what was done to Native Americans. So I don't see why the government shouldn't be on record for admitting a great wrong that was committed on the backs of Black people.

Now don't get me wrong. I am totally against reparations for the descendants of slaves. For one, I think by the time you define who should get it, which would include many "white"people because we may be surprised at how many whites have Blacks in their family tree, it would go to almost everyone in the country. And what about Mixed people, would they get partial reparations?

But the real reason I am against reparations is the fact that handing people a check won't do much for changing their lives. If anything should be done, it should be to guarantee that the money was invested in inner-city schools, in jobs programs, in health care for Blacks and others. These efforts would be far more meaningful and far more long-lasting than handing out checks.

But regardless of this issue, acknowledging a great wrong is a basic and important step. Will such a proclamation change my life or anybody else's? No. But what it will do is far more important. It says to me and every other American, that Africans and their descendants (of all stripes) are not crazy in thinking that slavery had a profound impact, and still does, on all of our psyches. And that alone, to me, is incredibly meaningful. And just maybe it is a step towards finally getting beyond the wrong. We even try to teach this basic principle to our children, that apologizing is important when you have done something wrong.

Shouldn't our government be held to the same standard? No one alive today may be a slave in this country, and no American today may be a slave owner. But that does not change the fact of history and the fact that our government, from then to now, has never acknowledged that what was done was terribly wrong. Apologies do matter. Even when it is as overdue as this.

"Black In America" Not Worth It

Well, I finally caught the CNN series "Black In America." And I have to say I was very disappointed, even bothered by Soledad Obrien's piece, particularly considering she is bi-cultural herself (that's her on the left with her kids).

I just don't think the series did anything to shed new light on the subject. All of the issues covered have been done before. Don't get me wrong, I'm still glad they did it. It's just that the promise of the program, especially with the way they publicized it, was so high. And maybe that's my fault. I expected too much.

But beyond that expectation, the greatest problem I had was that it was so one-sided. I don't think it really gave a fair or balanced since of what it is like to be "Black in America" as the tag for the series goes. All too often it focused on the view that the experiences of poverty, job troubles, housing, health care, etc., were totally unique to Blacks. And in almost all cases I kept saying to myself, but the problem or example they were giving impacted, and was felt by, others in almost the same way.

But of course, like in my last blog entry, the thing that bothered me the most were the times she covered what she called "inter-racial" relationships (and by the way her use of the word "race" over and over was particularly appalling to me, hammering the idea that we are totally distinct). Besides the part in the clip I referenced in my previous entry, much to my horror, I learned she had more negatives on these cross cultural unions. In one case, she focused on a young man, the product of a white father and black mother, and pretty much focused on his being not fully accepted in either world. And on another occasion she was talking to a father who had two sons in "inter-racial" relationships and she was quizzing him about that, insinuating a problem. She even said to him "many people will be angry about that," as if that should factor in.

Soledad, what gives? Maybe she wanted to go a different direction with that stuff and the whole piece, but was pressured by her bosses, who knows. But at best the piece was a reminder of the work still to be done. At worst, though, the series could do more to make it look like Blacks are altogether different and set apart than any other ethnic group, which certainly doesn't reflect my experiences as "Black in America." We certainly have issues to be dealt with, but so do all groups, and I certainly think we have far more in common than pieces like this choose to indicate.

CNN's "Black In America"

I haven't yet watched CNN's 'Black In America" series, but I am planning to catch up on it. And though I'm thrilled that they have done it, I do wonder how many non-blacks watched it. Do many non-blacks care to watch something like this? I hope so. If they do, maybe it will do more than increase CNN's black viewership.

But I saw a piece today online that made me look at one part of the documentary, the segment on Mixed couples. When I pulled the clip I was hoping it was going to be positive, but in the end, sadly, I felt exactly the same frustration as the writer of the piece that got my attention. The CNN piece only focused on the negative side of these relationships, mainly one couple's problem and coflict over how to identify their kids. That was the focus of the piece. Nothing positive about the kids. It focused on whether to call the kids black or something else. Granted, that is an issue, but there are other aspects of being Mixed, or black, if that is the direction a Mixed person or couple chooses to go.

I tell myself that maybe this was only a teaser of the issue and more will come, more that will highlight the positives of being Mixed and the impact Mixed people have had on the Black community, as well as the broader population. I hope I am not fooling myself.

Here is the response I read. Remarkably, it was written by the 16 year old Mixed daughter of actress Lyn Whitfield.

Mixed in America
Grace Gibson (16-year-old daughter of Lynn Whitfield)

Although I found this segment of “Black in America” to be highly informative for the general public, I was disappointed that the interviews in the section on what it is like to be biracial in America seemed to focus only on the more negative aspects. With the eyes of the world now on Barack Obama, I had hoped for a more balanced discussion on what a positive symbol a mixed race person can project.

Obama’s candidacy embodies change and hope for so many in this country of all generations, genders, races and cultures. His message of bringing us all together as Americans is enhanced by his mixed heritage. The biracial person personifies the breaking down of racial barriers that so many fought and died for in the civil rights movement. It is what Dr. Martin Luther King stood for and what his legacy of equality imparts to us today. So one should feel nothing but pride to be mixed in America.

If parents of biracial children are too concerned about what race their children identify and associate with, the only outcome will be confusion. They should rear their children to have enough self-esteem and self-confidence to be their own persons — encouraging them to be strong children who can grow up to be strong biracial adults.

There should be no need for them to say “I am black” or “I am white” because they are neither, yet they are both. Trying to force a choice is often done just to accommodate the people around them. Why should it be so difficult to understand that a person can be and take pride in two races, ethnically and culturally? Those who cannot accept this are perpetuating the kind of ignorance that would only resegregate society by taking away a positive symbol of integration, the mixed child, and restricting him or her to an either-or status.

In a world where a biracial man may well become the next President of the United States, all that a parent should be trying to instill in a child is pride in his or her race or races.

I am proud to be a child born to two loving, talented, creative people – a mother and father who happened to be of African-American and English descent, respectively. I do not feel confused at all nor do I have an identity crisis. I do not feel lost in society nor rejected by any race because I am all races in one.

I am the melting pot, and in our global society, soon all the children of the world will be a mixture of races as well. So why should we try to pick and choose what we want and don’t want our children to be? Why can’t we just accept our common humanity and try to refocus our energies on more pressing matters such as Hurricane Dolly in Texas, infected children in flooded Burmese streets, earthquake victims in China, AIDS patients in Sub-Saharan Africa or those here in Washington, D.C.?

As the world confronts these and other serious challenges to survival, why add more complications by trying to reduce a living symbol of racial harmony to a checked-box identity?

To see the original CNN piece that sparked this go to this link.

Mixed Couples Must Be Rebelling Against Something

The title of this piece seems to indicate the view that some people do have about mixed couples. Whether it is they are rebelling against their parents, they hate their own ethnicity, or whatever, it is always something other than the couple simple loves one another. At least that is how some see it.

There is an article in the news section to the right on this page that takes it to the next level. In The National Review, someone is even writing that Obama must have communist leanings since he is from mixed parents. Oh my.

Check out the story here or at the link on the side if it is still there when you read this.

"Race" Is Not Real

Here is a quote from a great piece in yesterday's San Francisco Chronicle:

The debate over what to call Obama - and the growing recognition of mixed-race Americans - is also a reminder that there's no such thing as racial purity and, indeed, that "biologically, race is a fiction," said sociologist Jorge Chapa, the director of the Center on Democracy in a Multiracial Society at the University of Illinois.

As you may know, I have long said that the first thing all of us need to do is get past the usage of the term "race." I really think it is the root of our problem. "Race" gives the impression that what separates us is biological and beyond superficial things like skin color, hair texture, etc. We do represent different cultures and ethnicities, but that difference is not seen as as big a divide as the belief that we altogether are different species as the concept of race would have us believe. I propose instead of bi-racial or multi-racial, we say bi-ethnic or bi-cultural, or multi-ethnic and multi-cultural. Or even mixed.

It is far more accurate and in time I believe will make the barrier to getting beyond "race" seem a lot less formidable.

Here is a link to that San Francisco Chronicle article on the prominence of bi-cultural people. Unfortunately as good as the piece is, the author does use the term "mixed-race." Oh well. progress comes in small steps sometimes.

The Word No One Should Ever Use

The latest thing to make the news from Jesse Jackson's mic slip is that supposedly he used the "N" word during this well-publicized rant as well. Something along the lines of "Barack is telling niggers how to behave." Oh. My. God.

This is worse because Jackson is on record as being opposed to blacks using this word, asking that comedians and rappers refrain from its usage. But apparently he uses it.

Let me go on record as saying, I know all the arguments that by us using the word we take its power away and the term of endearment argument as relates to the usage of the word's close kin "nigga." But I don't buy it. I think it is stupid under any condition to call each other a word that was, and is still used, to denigrate us. And I think there is no way to keep using the word and somehow not deep inside, internalize its root meaning, its real intent.

Whoopie Goldberg apparently also thinks it is o.k. to use the word, as I saw a clip from "The View" today that indicates she used it several times during the show, on purpose, for shock and to make a point, that she too thinks that we now "own" the word and it is less meaningful.

Just stupid. No matter how much we use it on ourselves it doesn't change what it means to the racist who throws it at us in an attempt to bring us down, like a homeless woman did at me a few weeks ago on the street.

And our usage of the word only confuses matters. Because no matter how we spin it, it is indeed a double standard to be outraged when somebody else says it, but to think it is cute when a black person says it.

I don't think so.

Good Video On Myths of Being Mixed

I came across this video from "Addicted To Race," a site and organization that also has the goal of promoting a less "racial" focus in our society. It makes some great points. Check it out. My only problem with it, is that they seem to buy into the notion that there is such a thing as "race" when it comes to defining people. I don't. I think that concept is the basis of our problem and from my perspective changing our language is a critical first step. But nevertheless, this is worth watching.

Are Blacks Fair Game For Satire?

At first blush, this seems like an easy question to answer. Shouldn't we, and other minorities, be treated equally? Isn't that what the struggle for equality has been all about?

Well, the answer is not so easy and clear-cut. Actually I think the root of the major blow-up this week over the controversial New Yorker cover depicting the Obama's as America-hating, secret terrorists is that the whites who run the magazine simply don't understand that you can't satirize minorities and women in the same way that you do white men. It is a fact, albeit an ironic and unfortunate one, that is lost on the cover artist and many on the left who in their liberal righteousness and intellectually-based thinking don't seem to understand. Sure, in theory the Obama's and any minority, should be fair game for such high-minded satire. But here is where intellect-based liberalism blinds so many to plain old common sense.

To satirize the Obama's the way The New Yorker did, and then to defend it as what they've always done, as they say, look at how they've skewered the current President Bush and other whites, is to miss the boat entirely. Barack and Michelle Obama have incredibly and deeply intense cultural, racial and even religious bigotry leveled at them. It is a part of their daily life as well as their political campaign and impacts them and everyone that is in the same demographic in a way that no political satire of George Bush ever could.

Satires of people in power, both currently and historically, do not have the same impact, potential and real, that it does on people who historically have been the brunt of very real physical and emotional suffering. When you satire George Bush all white people are not implicated. That has never been part of the language of satire in this country. It is clear that satire about one white man is just that.

But thanks to the history of racism in this country, it is foolish not to realize that a caricature of a Black woman and man (as Barack is perceived and considers himself to be) is also a caricature of every person that looks like them. Equally as important to understanding the broadness of minority satire is understanding that the implied humor or wittiness that is generally inherent in satire is simply impossible when the root of the subject being satirized is based on something so hurtful and a very real reality for a culture of people. Racism and bigotry are not intellectual discussions for Blacks. Easy to laugh and chuckle at such cerebral satire when your life is not impacted by the depiction. Because at the end of the day and at the end of this campaign season, Black men and women, not just Michelle and Barack, will still have to wake up everyday and navigate a world where these images are not a joke but a real perception of who they are.

And that's just not funny.

The Politics of Race

This is somewhat off topic from the normal focus of this blog, but I couldn't resist.

Yesterday the story got out about Rev. Jesse Jackson's slip on the open mic. Ignoring the part about castrating Obama, since that is just the way some people talk, as apparently Jackson does, the bigger issue is what he was so angry about.

Jackson apparently is upset because he believes that Obama talks down to Black people about personal responsibility. What's interesting about this whole thing is that it shows that there is a clear shift in the role "race" will play on the national stage.

Jackson represents a different way and a different time. Which, by the way, doesn't mean that I think we don't still need hard civil-rights leaders like Jackson or Al Sharpton. I am glad they are out there and on my and the Black community's side.

But Obama does represent a changing of the guard to a more race transcending way of doing things. And I think at the end of the day, it is hard for people of Jackson's era to accept the passing of the torch, even though getting to this point is what they have spent their lives dedicated to. Believe me, I understand that it must be tough for Jackson. To be both excited that the way he paved has paid off, but to also know that this young guy, Obama, is now the one every one will look to for the lead on the Black community.

So in a way it was sad to see what happened yesterday. But I think it is just part of the process, albeit a clumsy part due to Jackson's gaffe, of the changing of the guard. Obama's ascendancy does not and will not solve "racial' strife but it does indicate that times are indeed changing. It should not be surprising that it will take a while for the transition to be accepted by all, and no one ever said it would be smooth and without incident. No major cultural shift ever is. And if you haven't recognized it yet, we are definitely going through a major cultural shift.

The Funny Side of "No More Race"

My wife, who is a proud Mexican-American woman, is living proof though of what life might be like for those who fall into an unidentifiable ethnic look. I, and most people, have no problem identifying her as Hispanic, but we are surprised at how often she gets mistaken for some other ethnic group.

I kid you not, people have labeled her Mixed (Black and White), Persian, Jewish, Armenian, White, Thai, Spanish, Mexican, and who knows what else. That's what people have expressed at different times so who knows what people thought who didn't say anything.

Dianna gets a kick out of it. Hey, it allows her to blend when she feels the need I guess, so she can use it to her advantage. Though, generally she is quick to point out her Mexican roots. Makes me think how interesting that will be for people when the day comes when mixing creates such interesting blends that it will indeed be hard many times to identify what a person is.

Don't get me wrong, there is beauty in the uniqueness that different cultures offer in terms of skin tone and features. And I would never want to see that go away completely. But imagine the bigot who can't decide whether to discriminate because he or she just can't decide what you are.

Interesting.

Can We Talk Our Way Out Of Bigotry?

I was thinking the other day about the focus of this blog (well I guess I think about it everyday to be honest), and an interesting thought hit me.

Is it possible to get beyond a "race" focus by focusing so much attention on it? Is it at all possible, like some argue, that by thinking about race or racism all the time, we risk making it more of a big deal than it is? To see it where it is not?

My blog is titled "No More Race" because I would like to see our society and world get to the point some day, even if it is long, long time from now, where we no longer define each other and our relationships by what color our skin is or what ethnic group we belong to. And yet I write about race almost every day.

Obviously I know the base belief that the only way to rid ourselves of the racism disease is to point out its usage and its effect on our society. And that is ultimately the reason I do believe it is important for those of us who write on his subject, or are activists on this subject, to speak out whenever we can. As in medicine, you have to target the problem to get rid of the problem.

But I do believe I and others have to be careful to not see a problem where there is none. And to also draw attention as much to positives in this area as to negatives. Which is why in this blog I try to focus more on examples showing where Mixed relationships and people are moving forward and making a difference than I do on examples of ugly discrimination against them. I do believe that more can be done to move us forward by focusing on positives than negatives.

But it is an interesting irony is it not, that the goal is to focus on racism to get rid of racism. Maybe it is better to look at it as shining a light since we all know that people tend to behave more as they should when their is light on them than otherwise.

Is The Mixed Child Internal Conflict Avoidable?

My wife and I are both reading Barack Obama's first book, "Dreams From My Father." It is very clear reading it that Obama experienced great internal conflict growing up part Black and part White. Frankly I was surprised at just how much turmoil he went through trying to figure out his place, just where he fit in in our still polarized society and world.

I have read or heard of other Mixed people growing up not knowing where they fit in, of feeling caught between two worlds. This is generally true when the mix is White and Black, which most people unfortunately consider to be polar opposites. Not having grown up with that I cannot really know what that is like. But I have also heard of some who say they never really had many problems with their status. So who knows, maybe it is a factor of where you grow up and how your parents handle it.

Obviously it is my hope that our two kids do not struggle with their identity or feel some sense of ethnic isolation. As I have said before, in an effort to try to make this less of an issue, we chose to move to Los Angeles from our native Texas and our home in the midwest specifically to make sure that they would at least grow up in a city that had many ethnic groups and where ethnic mixing was not so uncommon.

But I am not naive enough to think that this will inoculate them from racism. We just wanted to give them a chance of at least seeing more people that looked like them and realizing that they were not oddities like they might be in some other places. But I suspect that as they get older the time will come when indeed they are challenged to "fit in" to one group, to pick a side. And maybe they will be conflicted. I do think to a small degree being that they are mixed with two "minorities", Black and Mexican, that it will be less of an issue than if they were Black and White. But still there are certainly Blacks and Mexicans who will challenge their identity.

As a parent, all I can do is hope we have provided them the tools and the self-esteem to deal with the natural identity issues that any teenager goes through, their Mixed status being an added "bonus." Already I get some indication that they see themselves as the best of all worlds, something to be proud of for being Mixed, since we have always pointed out to them all the famous and successful Mixed people there are in the world.

So when the conflict comes, if it does at all, right now I feel confident that these two will do just fine. And if not, I hope at least, my wife and I can help them steer their way through it.

Which Group Is More Accepting of Mixed Relationships?

My wife posed an interesting question yesterday? We were talking about yesterday's blog about the Indian father having his black daughter-in-law killed since he couldn't accept her into the family while the woman's family had no problem accepting her Indian husband. We tied that to the situation in our family where my family has no issues with my wife being a different ethnicity from me, yet her Mexican Mom and has made it clear she does have issues with Blacks. This made my wife wonder why is that Blacks seem more accepting of interracial relationships and children than do whites and others? Or, she wondered, was that an accurate assessment.

My answer to her, though I couldn't say I had any empirical evidence to support my opinion, only anecdotal, was that while she and we shouldn't be fooled, there were plenty of blacks who had very harsh opinions about mixed ethnicity couplings, it was indeed my experience that Blacks were more likely to accept these relationships over all. At least in my experience.

I think this is true because Blacks have long accepted the notion that to be Black means so many things. We come in so many shades and hues, hair textures, body types, you name it. And we also have long known that our ancestry in America was mixed with the blood of Native Americans, Whites, Hispanics, you name it. It is not uncommon at all for Black families to have at least one Mixed relationship in their extended family.

Now increasingly this is also true of all groups, thankfully. But I think it is just something Blacks have had to accept much sooner in our history. The idea of "racial" or ethnic purity is just not as important in our culture. At least to most. So here's to hoping on this, other groups catch up to Blacks on this one.

Hatred Is Not Just a Black and White Thing

A story out of Atlanta was reported in the news yesterday (link below) about an Indian (as in from India) who was convicted of murder for hiring a hit man to brutally murder his son's wife, who was also the mother of his grandchild since they had just had a baby, simply because she was black.

Yep.

He did it because of the "shame" on his family because his son had married the woman.

Apparently the Indian man's son knew his family would have issues with the marriage, due to their acceptance of India's strict caste system where lightness and darkness of skin color makes a huge difference, and had tried to keep it completely hidden from the family. But clearly they found out.

Just goes to show that racism is certainly not just something between blacks and whites and not just an American thing. Indeed it could be argued that nobody does discrimination better than India did due to that centuries old and deeply ingrained and enforced caste system. Just a reminder of how much still remains to be done on a global scale.

Oh by the way apparently the murderer's son has done the family right this time, he remarried - an Indian girl this time and he has no contact with his own baby who is being raised by his former wife's parents in Atlanta.

Here is a link to the story:

http://abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/story?id=5237459&page=1