A Mosaic Revival: High-Definition Election 2008 Part II (by Gabriel Salguero)
This is part two of my reflections concerning Election 2008 and Generation X, Y, and next. As I said before, this is an exciting time in the national landscape. A revival is taking place that incorporates thousands of younger evangelicals with pioneers in the faith. This is a broad coalition of Moseses and Joshuas and Deborahs, to use biblical language. In my last posting here concerning the election in kaleidoscope, I received some e-mails, phone calls, and postings that demonstrate the need for this conversation.
The question is what does this Mosaic revival reveal? Simply, that we recognize that to promote real movement it will take a broad coalition across racial/ethnic, gender, generational, and denominational lines. Much has been rumored of the tension between black and brown or Asian and black voters. Other tensions have been pointed about differences between female and male voters or young and elderly voters. We're working for a new day. This revival is pleading for people of good will to change the national conversation screen to high-definition.
Let me be clear about some of the challenges to this mosaic in concrete election 2008 terms:
- Refusing to vote for Senator McCain because of his age (ageism);
- Refusing to vote for Senator Obama because of his race (racism).
- Refusing to vote for Senator Clinton because of her gender (sexism).
- Refusing to vote for Governors Romney or Huckabee because of their religion (sectarianism).
- Voting for them only because of any of these criteria presents its own myopia.
I vote for a candidate based on where they stand on the issues that most closely reflect Jesus' ethic of love of God and creation (this is a very long discussion worth having in another forum). I am hopeful that there is a new and creative conversation surging. In this new conversation, leaders in the Asian, Euro-American, Latino, Native-American, African-American, etc., communities are emphasizing the "ties that bind" and not the walls that separate.
In this new kaleidoscopic way of doing policy perhaps we should think of endorsements in another way. What candidates are endorsing policies that are mindful of this global and U.S. mosaic? In a politics-as-usual model, candidates exploit tensions—perceived or real—among demographics. This really needs to stop. A new kind of conversation seeks creative solutions that take particularity seriously but does away with the politics of animosity. There are signs of hope.
Recently, I've joined an organization called New York Faith and Justice and I've learned something about a new wave of voters. Two of the prominent leaders are an African American Cherokee Chickasaw woman, Lisa Sharon Harper, and a white evangelical man, Peter Heltzel. Lisa and Peter are an example of this emerging mosaic. They welcome my Latino perspective and continually want to be challenged and informed by it. Peter and Lisa are working hard to ensure that issues important to multiple constituencies are at the forefront of our city-wide and national dialogue.
Similarly, I've been working closely with Adam Taylor and Patty Kupfer of Sojourners on immigration reform issues. The conversation between this black man, white woman, and myself are a sign of the mosaic that represents the diversity of the kingdom of God. We don't always agree on everything, but we are committed to mutuality and respect and working on behalf of the beloved community - stated in Revelation 7:9 - "from every tribe, nation, people and language." These are signs of hopefulness that the presidential candidates need to heed. What is critical here is that there is not an attempt to assimilate but rather to keep unity while respecting diversity.
Rev. Gabriel Salguero is the pastor of the Lamb’s Church of the Nazarene in New York City, a Ph.D. candidate at Union Theological Seminary, and the director of the Hispanic Leadership Program at Princeton Theological Seminary. He is also a Sojourners board member.
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Comments
I guess I am an ageist, kidding about that. But I am really tired of old white men running the country.
p
Posted by: Payshun | February 15, 2008 4:06 PM
Payshun wrote "But I am really tired of old white men running the country."
So much for doing "away with the politics of animosity." I'm guessing this was more tongue-in-cheek than serious though.
On a more serious note... I agree we need to stop pitting people of different races and nationalities against each other. Unfortunately, a lot of the blame on this one goes to the very people who support segregating themselves from others because of their race. Whenever people ask for special treatment for themselves because they are a certain race they exacerbate the problem. When colleges set up special housing for people of a certain race, it exacerbates the problem. Whenever you focus on a person's race and say they should think, act, or speak a certain way, and when they don't you label them "inauthentic" you exacerbate the problem.
When you can't see, speak, or write beyond the prism of race you exacerbate the problem.
Posted by: Character Counts | February 15, 2008 4:47 PM
Character,
I don't segregate myself, I go to a white church... I am sorry I don't have the privilege of ignoring race like you do. I have to deal w/ it every week I go. When I hear racist comments or am treated different it has nothing to do w/ me but the very people your comment says nothing about. Why don't you focus on those before trying to give me helpful suggestions. You would then go along way in ending the race thing you have such a huge problem w/.
Oh and it's been some 200+ years of middle aged-old white men running the country. I would think seeing a woman or a black man in office would signify something remarkably different. I guess that's not true for you huh?
p
Posted by: Payshun | February 15, 2008 5:07 PM
I would think seeing a woman or a black man in office would signify something remarkably different. I guess that's not true for you huh?
I would think if color/sexblindness were important, one wouldn't think it's a big deal which person gets the presidency so long as they're qualified.
I guess that's not true for you huh?
Posted by: aaron | February 15, 2008 5:14 PM
A helpful abstract for this thread:
RACISM WITHOUT RACISTS: COLOR-BLIND RACISM AND THE PERSISTENCE OF RACIAL INEQUALITY IN THE UNITED STATES. By Eduardo Bonilla-Silva. Lanham, Boulder, New York, and Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield 2003. Pp. 213.
Abstract: Eduardo Bonilla-Silva examines how whites use color-blindness as a tool to perpetuate racial inequality without themselves sounding racist. He asserts that white America's justifications for the continued second-class status of African Americans stem from a new, post-Civil Rights racial ideology that he calls color-blind racism. Bonilla-Silva argues that color-blind racism, which is founded upon the belief that race no longer matters, is currently the dominant racial ideology in the United States.
This Book Review ratifies Bonilla-Silva's argument through an examination of the recent Supreme Court decisions on affirmative action in higher education, which demonstrably undervalue the persistence of racial inequality in the United States. Through the use of a color-blind ideology, the Justices mask the seriousness of racial inequality in the United States and may be hastening an end to racial progress before its time.
Posted by: Damian | February 15, 2008 5:27 PM
p. what makes you think that whites don't hear racist remarks and are treated different? why don't you focus on the good, common understandings amoung people so you can help end the race thing that you have such a huge problem with? once again i see a lot of integration in politicians, breaucrats, athletics, congregations, pastors, teachers, etc. exactly what is it that you want? do you want the whole world to be like you? doesn't diversity, by definition, mean differences? just because you don't like the way you are being treated doens't mean others feel the same way. maybe i see another plank.
Posted by: jerry | February 15, 2008 5:38 PM
Payshun - Only the first part of my comment was directed at you. I wasn't talking about you when I wrote the rest; I'm sorry you interpreted it that way. I don't have the privilege of ignoring race either, but I try. I didn't mention racist comments because I assumed everyone who posts here disapproved of them. I took it as a given.
I think a woman and a black man as President would be very significant. I just don't feel the need to make comments like you did about "old white men". It doesn't help race relations. It says "this is a win for us and a loss for them".
Posted by: Character Counts | February 15, 2008 6:07 PM
Jerry,
Not be rude but what you see about this issue and how it affects my life means nothing to me. You don't have to deal w/ it. when someone makes racist jokes (ie insisting I was supporting a player because they were black- I cleaned up the language a bit) and continually tease me because I have darker skin then I get insulted by that. But instead of even asking what I went thru you automatically take the side of people who were in the wrong.
What's wrong w/ you? I think that plank you see in my eye is the one sticking out of yours. I am integrated and I do focus on that but that doesn't exclude or ignore the fact that racism against black people still exists. That's all I am saying. Why are you blind to that?
Thank you Damian, great post.
Aaron,
competence is the most important thing but there has never ever been a person that has been different from middle aged-older rich white men. It would be nice to see something different. If you don't understand why then I don't know what to say to you about that. I don't want an incompetent white woman or black man in office. I am sick of incompetence in general.
Blessings.
p
Posted by: Payshun | February 15, 2008 6:16 PM
Sorry about that Character,
I would not have thought you were referring to me except that I saw the word "you" in the second part and since no one else commented I thought that was directed at me.
A win for them, interesting, I always saw my comment as a win for all of us. That's because I take American history seriously and 40 years ago, 100 years ago, 200 years ago there was no way that a non-white male would ever be seriously considered for the most important job in the country.
The founding of this country was designed that way. Only rich white men could rule, make laws... So when I see a woman and a black man (competent and amazing candidates) I can't not see gender or race. I think ignoring that ignoring them completely is dangerous. I think that being nice about the issues of race and gender does our country a really great disservice in dealing w/ it. We have to deal and that means seeing the ugly and evil actions of our ancestors and really dealing w/ them.
That's why I said what I said. I hope that makes sense.
p
Posted by: Payshun | February 15, 2008 7:06 PM
A helpful abstract for this thread:
Are we really talking?
Posted by: aaron | February 15, 2008 8:21 PM
I have a few thoughts here.
There's nothing wrong with supporting a candidate because you want to see the diversity that their background could bring to the office, when it hasn't been there before.
If you're a Christian, there's a difference between deciding to vote for Huckabee or vote for Romney. I'm not saying it would be right to vote for one and not the other, but to refer to this as sectarianism only is too broad. One is sectarianism, and the other- I don't know the word for it- is reigious bias. One rejects a denomination, the other another religion.
I am disturbed by a candidate who believes that modern archeology is wrong and there were ancient Hebrews in North America, or that evolution didn't occur. To me, that speaks of a candidate who denies modern science, and is unwilling to listen to experts. Yet these views are and can be fed by a particular religious outlook. Therefore, in general, I will reject candidates who don't reject these central tenents of some belief systems.
Posted by: Jedidiah | February 15, 2008 10:11 PM
"There's nothing wrong with supporting a candidate because you want to see the diversity that their background could bring to the office, when it hasn't been there before"
Yes I can understand that . But I find it omewhat insulting to Obama to suggest he quaifies more because he is an African American . Not that is what you are saying I think . When I see African Americans holding a liberal accounable on his talking points on a political talk show , I tend to agree with you somewhat . It also gets many liberal African Americans ticked off and some of the most racist comments come out .
If Barak can get us past that , that will be a good thing .
I suppotrted John McCain my Caucus , the only one from my Precinct , but since I am a elected PCO I am an automatic delegate for him .
I am looking forward to a John MmcCain /Obama Presidential campaign . Both have integrity and love America . I believe both have big differences politically , Obama will have to be more specfic , and McCain will have to convince America staying In Iraq is the right thing to do . But it will better for this country if Hillary is left out in my opinion .
I voted for McCain because I believe he is the best candidate so far that convinces me that we will nit get into another Iraq because of aggression or weakness. If Obama wins , I am more linked to him because of Christ , not his race . But the victory of a black man winning is not because he is black , but its because it does not matter if he is . But having a spirtual link and acknowledging that , I can accept a racial link to many also . I don't understand it , but I can live with it . Unless it raises my taxes , ;0)
God Bless, Mick
Posted by: Mick | February 16, 2008 1:58 PM
RACISM WITHOUT RACISTS: COLOR-BLIND RACISM AND THE PERSISTENCE OF RACIAL INEQUALITY IN THE UNITED STATES. By Eduardo Bonilla-Silva. Lanham, Boulder, New York, and Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield 2003. Pp. 213.
Damian, thanks for posting that. I'm thoroughly dumfluxed that some whites can't see the racism in the 'colorblind' rhetoric. It is a complete dismissal of my reality.
It's not a matter of voting for or against someone based solely on race. It's that when 2 candidates equally share my values and equally persuade me that they could be effective as president, I'll take the person of color over the white person. Because the person of color as president gives all black, latino and Asian kids something that I never had growing up: tangible evidence that you could be president one day, or that you could be whatever you aspire to and work to achieve.
When I was growing up, my parents did not truly believe that that was a possibility for me, and even if they had, I don't think that I would have believed it for myself. It raises the whole glass ceiling.
Whether Obama wins or not, our concept of what is possible has changed.
Posted by: nightchi | February 16, 2008 3:51 PM
I wish that Blacks and Latinos weren't so racist. Their gangs are just an indication of the racism seething under their surfaces. Unfortuantely Obama's Church is even racially-nearsighted, having pride in being "Afro-Centric," when it is clear that Africa, from country to country, is just about the most intolerant and violent of places on earth. Setting the tone for what exists in the inner-city is the genocide that is so commonplace on the African continent. Latinos desiring this La Raza agenda isn't very healthy for America's future either. The heatred and violence existing between differing Hispanic ethnic groups is very disheartening. Hopefully both communities can learn from the White community (the white Christian community), that racism is just not justified. Getting to know people is the key to liking them and wishing the best for them as completely equals. It takes work, but is worth it for all in the end. My children do not have a clue that they should NOT like their friends. My children have friends from most ethnic backgrounds.
Posted by: Donny | February 17, 2008 12:49 PM
Gee, Donny, you forgot to mention white racism. And forgot to mention that for several centuries Europe was the most violent continent on the planet, in terms of how it affected the rest of the world.
Donny says "Hopefully both communities can learn from the White community (the white Christian community)"
You mean what remains of it? Most of that "community" headed as far away from communities of color as possible. What should communities of color learn from that?
Posted by: I and I | February 17, 2008 3:14 PM
It's that when 2 candidates equally share my values and equally persuade me that they could be effective as president, I'll take the person of color over the white person.
Racist
Posted by: academicabstractrebuttalinserthere | February 17, 2008 5:27 PM
You mean what remains of it? Most of that "community" headed as far away from communities of color as possible. What should communities of color learn from that?
Groups also tend to self-segregate, is it only bad if whites do it?
"The core message of the research was that, “in the presence of diversity, we hunker down”, he said. “We act like turtles. The effect of diversity is worse than had been imagined. And it’s not just that we don’t trust people who are not like us. In diverse communities, we don’t trust people who do look like us.”
Prof Putnam found trust was lowest in Los Angeles, “the most diverse human habitation in human history”, but his findings also held for rural South Dakota, where “diversity means inviting Swedes to a Norwegians’ picnic”."
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/c4ac4a74-570f-11db-9110-0000779e2340.html?nclick_check=1
But please, continue to follow the academic who shares your views most
Posted by: academicabstractrebuttalinserthere | February 17, 2008 5:33 PM
"I wish that Blacks and Latinos weren't so racist. Their gangs are just an indication of the racism seething under their surfaces."
Talk about racist. It's obvious your knowledge of how to relate to people that are different than you is limited to only people you agree w/.
My Mexican and Latin friends that follow the "La Raza" agenda (silly if I ever heard one) was about empowerment and a cultural celebration not I hate white people. Hell half of them listen to the Smiths... They are just proud of their heritage and it's gifts and blessings. there is nothing wrong w/ that. It's different if you have folks like Marcus Garvey and other prominent Africans denouncing the white race and America but then want their support in getting their agenda across.
"Hopefully both communities can learn from the White community (the white Christian community), that racism is just not justified."
I wish the white community would learn from it's progressive neighbors. I wish they would learn that racism is never justified but then again most whites (and unfortunately I include you in this) are clueless. The white community has not gotten over it's issues. If you doubt that then please check out this website.
http://www.splcenter.org/intel/map/hate.jsp
p
Posted by: payshun | February 17, 2008 8:30 PM
I never though I'd live to see the day that "Obeying God" was defined as taking money from the taxpayers and giving it to the government, so it could promise us "stuff" in return for votes.
Faith, Hope, Charity... Now these are also nothing but corrupt politics, proclaimed in the name of God.
"When the Son of Man returns, will He find faith on the earth?"
Posted by: The Watcher | February 17, 2008 9:28 PM
My Mexican and Latin friends that follow the "La Raza" agenda (silly if I ever heard one) was about empowerment and a cultural celebration not I hate white people.
Payshun, haven't you heard the rumors about the reconquista? It's supposed to be a movement among Mexicans to try and retake the American Southwest, which interestingly enough we took from Mexico during the Mexican War in the 1840s; a war that was opposed by such patriots as Abraham Lincoln and Henry David Thoreau.
The term reconquista comes from the Spanish 800-year reconquest of Iberia from the Moors. Supposedly La Raza is part of this movement, and so allegedly is the influx of illegal immigrants.
Silly for sure--I haven't seen anything on the La Raza Web site that even remotely sounds like this--but maybe that's what Donny is referring to.
D
Posted by: Don | February 17, 2008 9:29 PM
I never though I'd live to see the day that "Obeying God" was defined as taking money from the taxpayers and giving it to the government, so it could promise us "stuff" in return for votes.
Watcher, please show me specifically where Rev Salguero wrote anything like this.
Instead, I read him as supporting 1)voting for candidates that best reflect Christ's love for people and creation, and 2) doing away with attack-dog politics. Nothing about redistribution schemes.
Peace,
Posted by: Don | February 17, 2008 9:36 PM
I'm unaware of ANY political candidate reflecting Christ's love for people and His creation. They're not campaigning to save our souls. They campaigning to empower themselves.
They want to get elected and are making specific claims, promises, and proposals to convince you to vote for them.
So, if you're voting on them reflecting God, you're voting for the wrong thing. None of them will do that. Instead, you need to vote for the things that will make things the best for as many as possible.
Posted by: The Watcher | February 17, 2008 10:00 PM
Mark, I like the new moniker. "The Watcher" sounds ever so mysterious, sorta like "The Voyeur" or "The Peeping Tom."
Posted by: bud duncan | February 17, 2008 11:39 PM
"I wish the white community would learn from it's progressive neighbors. I wish they would learn that racism is never justified but then again most whites (and unfortunately I include you in this) are clueless. The white community has not gotten over it's issues."
Posted by: payshun | February 17, 2008 8:30 PM
///
Payshun,
All over the world, you see immigrants from African and Latin countries flooding the countries developed by white europeans. You see native Americans not rejecting the modern life.
It's a fact.
Why is that I wonder?
The history of violence is spread out quite equally among every civilization and culture (no matter the progressives that try to paint non-white cultures in Ghandi colors).
Archaeology shows is distinctly different view of African and Latin countries and Native American life, then does the Liberal media and the Dewey/Humanist education system we currently find ourselves influenced by.
Still, the people keep coming and staying in the United States of America.
It appears from viewing the earth today, that Blacks . . . excuse me African-Americans, and Latinos/Hispanics need to take the log out of their own cultures and ethnic expressions before casting stones at anyone of lesser skin pigment. I am not ashamed of the progress made by european societies here in the United States. This is the reason EVERYONE wants to live here. And I haven't noticed Farakhan and/or the usual Africa-American complainers, leaving for distant African or Muslim shores.
Europeans made a great country as of 2008. Lately I haven't seen anyone rejecting the modern American life, except the Amish. And even they haven't beat it back to Holland.
There is a reason why people are fleeing other countries. It's not because of white people.
OK? Let us push for peace and non-violence and keep America the country, the way that the people flocking here to live will find it.
Posted by: Donny | February 17, 2008 11:39 PM
Donny: "This is the reason EVERYONE wants to live here."
Sounds like you need to get out more, my brother. I know many, many folk from other countries who have no desire to live in the USA. Indeed, if I were younger and w/o wife and kids, I'd move to another country myself.
Posted by: carl copas | February 17, 2008 11:42 PM
"Europeans made a great country as of 2008."
Off of the back of slave labor, genocide and destruction, but you seem to be ignoring that part. You really don't want me to start showing the evil in white culture do you? You are right, every culutre has darkness and death, murder and betrayal. I could list the genocides in Africa right now, Zimbabwe, The privelege, the brutal history... As bad as things are in hood for many poor people (Latin, white, black, Asian) they are still not as bad as slavery was.
p
Posted by: Payshun | February 18, 2008 1:40 AM
Correction:
I could list the genocides going on in Africa right now beginning w/ Zimbabwe, Rwanda... The privilege, the brutal history of this country is what made it what it was, not the hardworking Europeans that for all intents and purposes spent the first 45-60 years of our country being too lazy to pick their own produce or cotton.
p
Posted by: Payshun | February 18, 2008 1:45 AM
Bud Duncan:
The Watcher can't be Mark. He's way too concise, he uses no profundities like "that's all horse manure," and he doesn't write with all caps.
Peace,
Posted by: Don | February 18, 2008 7:06 AM
Going back to Donny's previous post:
I wish that Blacks and Latinos weren't so racist...Unfortuantely Obama's Church is even racially-nearsighted, having pride in being "Afro-Centric,"... Latinos desiring this La Raza agenda isn't very healthy for America's future either. The heatred and violence existing between differing Hispanic ethnic groups is very disheartening...
The kicker:
Hopefully both communities can learn from the White community (the white Christian community), that racism is just not justified...
And of course,
My children have friends from most ethnic backgrounds.
Donny, your own words condemn you. So do the words of others who have written on this forum who have loudly and repeatedly insisted that they aren't racist.
Please allow me to explain, or rather, let the Scriptures do it:
"Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, 'Let me take the speck out of your eye,' when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye."--Matthew 7:5-7
"Jesus said, 'For judgment I have come into this world, so that the blind will see and those who see will become blind.' Some Pharisees who were with him heard him say this and asked, 'What? Are we blind too?' Jesus said, 'If you were blind, you would not be guilty of sin; but now that you claim you can see, your guilt remains.'"--John 9:39-41
Racism is endemic, and all of us are infected. It's easy to point out the racism in others but refuse to see it in ourselves.
Donny, you need to recognize and confront your own racism before you can accuse others of it. I continually have to do the same myself.
Peace,
Posted by: Don | February 18, 2008 7:21 AM
Don,
You need to face that you have been mentally conditioned by an education system that makes you knee-jerk in response to anything critical of non-white people. Racism is common-place in Black, Latino, Asian, Arabic, Native American etc., etc.. It is the white civilizations 2008 that these people flock to when they want to escape racism, violence and poverty. All I ask is fairness and equality on racial truth.
If we are to use the judgment of Jesus to judge people, then I believe white people circa 2008 have done far better than our darker skinned brothers and sisters in dealing with other "races," looking at the world as of today.
///
From Payshun,
"Europeans made a great country as of 2008," wrote Donny.
P: Off of the back of slave labor, genocide and destruction, but you seem to be ignoring that part.
D: Where is that being ignored prey tell? Certainly NOT in the white community.
P: You really don't want me to start showing the evil in white culture do you?
D: I do that all the time. Much to the chagrin of Beliefnet staff. I start with Liberal and Progressive cause and effect. It is the Christian thing to do to help others. Please Payshun, never allow evil to be ignored. There is REAL slavery every single day in non-White cultures that make the slave trade of the past pale in comparison. Please post your apologia Payshun. Start with William Wilberforce (a white Christian man) and proceed through history up until this morning, right now.
P: You are right, every culutre has darkness and death, murder and betrayal. I could list the genocides in Africa right now, Zimbabwe, The privelege, the brutal history... As bad as things are in hood for many poor people (Latin, white, black, Asian) they are still not as bad as slavery was.
D: Looking at reality 2008, it is not the white cultures (except for secualr/godless europe) that are continuing the racism (and classism) inherent in genocide, slavery and the sex trade. I only ask that "fairness and equality" be given a place in reality. There are many, many, decent voices on this planet. Many, many are (believe it or not) white (and Christian) voices.
Please dear Payshun, allow the truth to guide discussion. This dialogue between Left and Right will bring gain only if we allow truth to shine out.
D
Posted by: Donny | February 18, 2008 7:56 AM
Please dear Donny:
From Paul's instructions to the Galatians 5&6
25 Since we are living by the Spirit, let our behaviour be guided by the Spirit
26 and let us not be conceited or provocative and envious of one another.
1 Brothers, even if one of you is caught doing something wrong, those of you who are spiritual should set that person right in a spirit of gentleness; and watch yourselves that you are not put to the test in the same way.
2 Carry each other's burdens; that is how to keep the law of Christ.
3 Someone who thinks himself important, when he is not, only deceives himself;
4 but everyone is to examine his own achievements, and then he will confine his boasting to his own achievements, not comparing them with anybody else's.
5 Each one has his own load to carry.
Igor
Posted by: Deryll | February 18, 2008 10:37 AM
Thanks to the Bush administration, I've been powerfully struck in recent years by how insignificant a diversity of skin coloration can be as compared with a diversity of thought and perspective. Bush managed to put together a multihued team that thought and marched in lockstep, taking us into a senseless war and neglecting major domestic and international issues like the environment, the Mideast, and healthcare.
I'd signed on to King's "content of our character" thesis while still in grade school. Bush has really helped dramatize the truth of it - I think the only favor he's done the nation. If people don't know by now not to just vote their favorite skin color or gender, I don't know what could possibly teach them.
Paul - Original Faith
Posted by: Paul Maurice Martin | February 18, 2008 10:38 AM
You need to face that you have been mentally conditioned by an education system that makes you knee-jerk in response to anything critical of non-white people.
Donny, I'm laughing at the total silliness of this reply.
I demonstrate from your own words what your own racial attitudes are, and you respond with a blatantly false comment that also, by the way, is a red herring. (We're discussing racial attitudes, not the education system. Besides, I think I'm smart enough to recognize when someone is trying to "mentally condition" me.)
You have only yourself to look to for the mentality behind the words you wrote. Blaming others is only keeping you from facing the ugly realities within yourself.
I don't condemn you for those ugly realities. I have my own ugly realities. We all have them. But God asks us to face them and deal with them. Blaming others will keep you from doing that.
Peace,
Posted by: Don | February 18, 2008 11:30 AM
"Please dear Payshun, allow the truth to guide discussion. This dialogue between Left and Right will bring gain only if we allow truth to shine out."
Donny,
My heart breaks for you, your spirit of denial and fear is palpable. Are you so afraid to see the racism that exists in the Republican party? What about the homophobia? What about...
"D: Where is that being ignored prey tell? Certainly NOT in the white community."
Considering you did not even bring it up, that means you were ignoring it until I brought it up. Not only that but it's ignored everyday in our majority white culture. The details of my family's trek thru the Atlantic, the rapes, the mass executions. They are never discussed in popular culture outside of black history month and even then it's rarely discussed in detail. Hell there has never been a monument erected for the millions dumped in the Atlantic.
But let's talk about the brutality for a little bit.
These people were thrown overboard by the hundreds of millions. Every ship carrying 300 or more "slaves" lost at least 2/3's of their cargo. You know what they did to them? They tied them up in w/ chains to their feet and then thru them overboard, w/ heads bouncing the decks as they were thrown overboard. Over 35,000 ships were sent back and forth from America alone. Imagine the numbers of that for second.
Then on top of that they were branded, many of the women were repeatedly raped, many young women were seduced and raped by their "owners." One of our founding fathers was a rapist like that his name was Thomas Jefferson. He raped and fathered children by Sally Hemmings, his wife's half-sister.
I can keep going on and on about the brutality of the American slave trade and all but I think you get the point. This was done by our fellow conservative Christian men and women throughout our country. The Liberal ones were the abolitionists, like the Quakers, or John Adams. You have never and I mean never brought it up? If anything you have denied it ever happened. Yet you have the gall to point out the sin in the Asian, black and Latin groups. My goodness man. You are clueless.
You are being racist right now and you don't even see it. Until you can see the plank in your own eye you have no business telling the others about theirs. Unlike you I can see the plank, the huge beam in other cultures and as a result talk on them. You seem to know next to nothing about the American slave trade and the brutality that existed in it.
"Looking at reality 2008, it is not the white cultures (except for secualr/godless europe) that are continuing the racism (and classism) inherent in genocide, slavery and the sex trade. I only ask that "fairness and equality" be given a place in reality. There are many, many, decent voices on this planet. Many, many are (believe it or not) white (and Christian) voices."
Well considering it was godly Europe and America that made this thing what it is I can see your point, not. Racism in Christian conservative churches is a problem, a really big problem but then you never notice that. I wonder why?
p
Posted by: Payshun | February 18, 2008 12:43 PM
Correction:
Unlike you I can see the plank in all the communities including my own. I can talk about all the sin in those cultures because I face my own. That's what it means to be reconciled to others, seeing their sin, forgiving it and then loving them and receiving their love on God's terms.
p
Posted by: Payshun | February 18, 2008 12:48 PM
"One of our founding fathers was a rapist like that his name was Thomas Jefferson. He raped and fathered children by Sally Hemmings, his wife's half-sister."
Not that it makes slavery any less atrocious, but this is highly debatable, based on the evidence.
To the broader point, I think the importance people place on diversity in politics depends primarily on whether the candidate the support is representative of that diversity. In other words, people are going to vote for who they are going to vote for, which is fine by me.
"Bush managed to put together a multihued team that thought and marched in lockstep,"
Most cabinets march in lockstep, which is part of why electing a president is important. Barack Obama and John McCain aren't going to stack their cabinets with dissidents either. Again, whether or not one wants a diversity of opinion tends to depend on from which opinion there is divergence.
Posted by: kevin s. | February 18, 2008 2:17 PM
All things being equal, I might vote for Obama based on his race. I would like to see diversity in the WHITEhouse. All things being equal, I might have voted for Clinton in the primary. But I have another, much more important, reason for supporting Obama: his opposition to the Iraq war.
Call me a single-issue voter.
Posted by: neuro_nurse | February 18, 2008 4:17 PM
I personally like to do extensive research on candidates before I vote. I don't go by just whats in the news.
I personally think that more Christians should consider voting for Alan Keys.
He is against Homosexuality (despite his daughter's coming out), he is for religious freedom, and he also wants to restore the morality of this country.
I thought that was what us Christians would have wanted. I wish I would have personally known more about Keyes even the first time that he was running for office.
Alan Keyes Bio and Overview
http://prescandidates2008.blogspot.com/2008/02/alan-l-keyes-republican.html
Posted by: J.A.B.2007 | February 18, 2008 5:26 PM
Actually Kevin it's not.
"That a Jefferson-Hemings relationship could be neither refuted nor substantiated was challenged in 1998 by the results of DNA tests conducted by Dr. Eugene Foster and a team of geneticists. The study - which tested Y-chromosomal DNA samples from male-line descendants of Field Jefferson (Thomas Jefferson's uncle), John Carr (grandfather of Jefferson's Carr nephews), Eston Hemings, and Thomas C. Woodson - indicated a genetic link between the Jefferson and Hemings descendants. The results of the study established that an individual carrying the male Jefferson Y chromosome fathered Eston Hemings (born 1808), the last known child born to Sally Hemings. There were approximately 25 adult male Jeffersons who carried this chromosome living in Virginia at that time, and a few of them are known to have visited Monticello. The study's authors, however, said "the simplest and most probable" conclusion was that Thomas Jefferson had fathered Eston Hemings."
You can read more about that here.
http://www.monticello.org/plantation/hemingscontro/hemings-jefferson_contro.html
That's where I got it from
p
Posted by: payshun | February 18, 2008 5:59 PM
But I have another, much more important, reason for supporting Obama: his opposition to the Iraq war.
I agree with neuro_nurse. My biggest concern about McCain is that he's going to extend the failed policies in Iraq for an indefinite--and very long--time.
But I'd like to hear more from Obama about what he thinks we should do to get ourselves out of Iraq. So far all I've heard him say is that he was opposed to the war from the beginning. Well enough, but what now? If he wants my opinion: an energy policy that drastically reduces our consumption of fossil fuels would go a long way toward meeting that goal.
Peace,
Posted by: Don | February 18, 2008 7:07 PM
Payshun,
Then apparently you stopped at the passage you cite, because the article itself cites differing theories. How can something not be debatable when it is actively being debated?
Posted by: kevin s. | February 18, 2008 7:29 PM
I think the circumstantial evidence is pretty convincing that Jefferson and Sally Hemings had a sexual relationship that resulted in one or more children. But there is no smoking gun, as of yet anyway, that would put the controversy entirely to rest.
A more interesting question to me is the precise nature of the emotional relationship the two had. Payshun's charge of rape by necessity implies that Sally participated involuntarily. How do we know that?
There are a very few cases on historical record that suggest that both master and slave genuinely loved one another. Indeed, men and women being what they are, I'd be surprised if it were otherwise. Some biographers have contended that Hemings and Jefferson had genuine affection for one another. The fact that they seem to have had more than one child might lend some credence to that interpretation.
In saying this, I want to stress that the evidence is monumental and crystal clear: _overwhelmingly_, the vast vast vast majority of time, sexual relations between white masters and slave women were forced, and thus constituted rape.
As Mary Boykin Chesnutt, the wife of a slaveholder put it: "God forgive us, but ours is a monstrous system & wrong & iniquity. Perhaps the rest of the world is as bad. This is only what I see: like the patriarchs of old, our men live all in one house with their wives & their concubines, & the Mulattos one sees in every family exactly resemble the white children-& every lady tells you who is the father of all the Mulatto children in everybody's household, but those in her own, she seems to think drop from the clouds or pretends so to think-."
Posted by: carl copas | February 18, 2008 7:48 PM
Don,
Good point. I really haven't heard any of the candidates talk about a strategy for Iraq - the proverbial turd in the punchbowl.
I'd rather start with a candidate who said that the invasion of Iraq was "stupid" (an opinion I have had since before the invasion, and one that has not changed over time) than those who have supported the war.
I have nothing in particular against Clinton, other than her hawkish stance on Iraq.
Peace - seriously!
Posted by: neuro_nurse | February 18, 2008 8:25 PM
p; get a life besides watching amistad. you are so wrought with hate it scares me. what do you think of bush's attack on malaria and aids in africa?
where are the black milliionaires protesting the modern slavery in africa? what about the african blacks that are promoting slavery in africa for $$$$ today? comon payshun, get into the 21st century. you wanna talk whose bad today? lets talk pimping, drugs, gansta rap, gangbangers, prisons, rape, bastard children, unemployment. you can play the history card but you live in 2008. and you have no answers except to blame whitey for all things bad.
Posted by: jerry | February 18, 2008 9:34 PM
Hey Mick,
I'm not sure if we're on the same page or not. Blacks and Latinos are distinct subcultures in America, and women have a distinct outlook, salvo reverentia, and therefore there are aspects that they can bring to the table that we have missed out on by not having someone from those groups in leadership. Therefore, that would not be my only reason for voting for someone, certainly, but it would be a contributing factor.
Posted by: Jedidiah | February 18, 2008 10:28 PM
Theories of ethnic supremacy (I will not use the word "racial" in deference to the idea that there is genetically only one "race" in the world, homo sapien) in the United States were concocted and perpetrated by the white ruling class to justify, perpetrate, and extend the slave trade and the institution of chattel slavery that existed for over 240 years, a time that predated the founding of the United States of America. These theories were cemented into the fabric of society by practice in our economic, social, and religious institutions. Interracial marriage was outlawed in Virginia (that close to D.C.?) until the Loving case was settled by the Supreme Court in 1967. We are talking about recent history. (One small example.) The "racism" that is talked about here that manifests itself in ethnic minority (number wise) communities is a reaction, a correction, if you will, to these centuries of the most vile theory ever posited by humans, that is, that any ethnic group is by nature superior to another. As Christians, it should make us just weep and broken to think that such a system ever existed or that it sustains itself in so many ways today in the USA. We need to carry the good news of Christ's reconciliation to everyone while being experts on that history and what it has done to this nation. Barack Obama is of multi ethnic heritage and you better believe it excites me to think that someone could sit in the White House who understands and has been exposed to the cultural diversity that we so desire as
Christians. Does he get "POINTS" for this.........yea, you bet he does!!!! Not only that, he is a Christian and a Harvard Law School grad (oh yea....Michelle is too?) And..and...and...he is a family man...a young man...a great speaker...let me be honest with you...I have never in 36 years voted for a Republican or Democrat for President because neither party nor candidate had the insight, the experience, the knowlege, the policies or the commitment to change this nation. I will vote for Obama big time this election and pray that he will be the one to put this nation on the right general track, away from war, the worship of power, reactionary nationalism, and the status quo. I might be wrong, but I'm ready to try and tired of waiting...God bless
Posted by: PKman | February 18, 2008 10:58 PM
Kevin,
You are right. It is debatable but it would seem clear that he at least fathered one child. But the reason I call Jefferson a rapist is because the relationship (if one can really call it that) may have started when she was 13 or 14 years old. I really have a hard time believing a thirteen year old slave has the maturity or ability to say no to her "master." Even if she had said yes was that consensual? It's disgusting to think about, but then our history in this country is sometimes disgusting to look at.
p
Posted by: Payshun | February 19, 2008 12:23 AM
I will vote for Obama big time this election and pray that he will be the one to put this nation on the right general track, away from war, the worship of power, reactionary nationalism, and the status quo. I might be wrong, but I'm ready to try and tired of waiting...God bless
I'm with you on the goals, PKman. I'm not totally sure Obama--or any President--can bring about real "change," because change has to come from the bottom up, not from the top down. But I'm certainly leaning in his direction.
Thanks, PK for your comments.
Peace,
Posted by: Don | February 19, 2008 6:38 AM
Don, I endorse your point 100% that real, fundamental change must come from the bottom up...we know that without exception, every time, if enough heat is applied that the water will boil..and move! I hope and pray that we as Christians are ready to apply the heat to ANY candidate or future president, the Congress, and any elected official, as the "conscience of the state" on matters that affect the nation, and especially the "least of these.." peace
Posted by: PKman | February 19, 2008 11:42 AM
That's what I like about Obama, his message and goal is to empower us to change the world. We have not heard that message in decades, at least not w/ some sincerity from a politician.
p
Posted by: Payshun | February 19, 2008 1:36 PM
Lisa is a friend of mine, tell her hi for me.
p
Posted by: Payshun | February 19, 2008 1:38 PM
Being "colorblind" is not the answer because race is of such importance in the USA stemming from our history. We are a long way from recovering from the effects of the past, and a simple colorblindness functions practically as ignoring that reality.
People of color are faced with that reality every day. I am not a person of color, and if I wasn't married to a person of color it might be easy for me to not live in awareness of that reality.
If you look around with open eyes, you can see evidence of the reality all around. Myself, when I get off the subway going to work I walk on Woodrow Wilson Plaza. Now I know that Woodrow Wilson was a vicious racist who set back the process of recovery from slavery so far that we didn't get back to the point where we were before his Presidency for generations after him.
Now people will say he wasn't honored because of that. But in reality that was his deepest effect on the country, but it was ignored. This Plaza was only named during the Clinton Administration, not so long ago. And the white people who named it were largely clueless. Just one small example illustrating the continuing problem which aggravates every morning.
Posted by: Bill Samuel | February 21, 2008 9:20 PM
Post a Comment
Are you aware of our Rules of Conduct?