Racism on the Bachelor Has Been Obvious for Years

 

I have only been a casual watcher of the Bachelor. I watch mainly to see how materialistic the contestants are. One thing that has always stood out was the lack of Black men. At least now I know that I have not been the only one who has noticed. Nathaniel Claybrooks and Christopher Johnson, two prospective contestants, brought a lawsuit last week, charging that the show is in fact racist.

One reason that I always assumed that this was an issue is the lack of Black men who are financially wealthy & single. For those who may not be aware of the constant theme of the show - it's basically about a group of 1-2 dozen barbie doll women (often gold diggers of a variety of races) who compete for the affection of a rich or well-to-do white guy (much like the dating scene in America....except it's just a microcosm of that larger scene). Perhaps the producers had trouble filling slots with Black men because it was hard to find enough who met the shows financial requirements. But then the lack of Black men in the lead role as "Bachelor" ended up being a reoccurring theme year after year.... surely after 10 years they could have found a well-to-do Black guy. So after a while it became clear that this could not have been the only issue.

I believe the real issue has more to do with the uncomfortable topic of interracial relationships. The producers of the show probably don't want to see an interracial pairing. They also don't want a situation where racism pops up during production. They are afraid of a situation where non-black female contestants have an unfavorable reaction or may reject a Black Bachelor because of racial differences. They want to avoid a real "Guess Who's Coming To Dinner 2.0" played out in front of a national TV audience, with a rawness that no one will expect. That's one fear... Another fear may be that an interracial pairing may come up that may turn out to be successful (or successful based on silly scripted reality show standards...as successful as those pairings can really be). The most likely scenario would be Black men being rejected in the ugliest ways imaginable.

These fears are backed up in the OKCupid report that came out a few years ago pointing out the role or racial prejudice in online dating. I also talked about my experiences with this problem in the commentary "White Men Only". This is how I know...that the plaintiffs in this case are on to something. One of the last ways to really reveal racism is through the dating scene. All of the pretending to love everyone B.S. washes away...and people are exposed for what they really are. Whatever racist feelings that people have buried within themselves are often brought to the surface through the context of dating. The producers at ABC are aware of this...and they are scared to death. I also imagine that a Black male lead probably wouldn't bring the high ratings...for the same reasons.

The network probably wants to avoid the public backlash from either scenario. But I think having a Black lead and exposing these racist feelings within the contestants would finally shed light on one of the last bastions of blatant racism in this Country. People don't know how common this is... but racism in dating is huge, even when we have more Americans than ever saying that they are more comfortable with interracial relationships. Non-Black families bullying their daughters not to bring home a Black guy is an issue in households across the Country. It's a behind closed doors discussion that probably takes place in more households than anyone wants to admit. It is especially big in Asian-American families. Bringing home an Asian man is ok. Bringing home a white man is almost encouraged and seen as a sign of "success". Even an Hispanic or East Indian may be fine. But bringing home a Black man usually falls within "unforgivable....you will be disowned by the family" territory.

Unfortunately this case may be hard to win. The case may hinge on the right of a private business (a network and TV show) to exercise a certain level of discrimination or preference to fit the theme of its programming. Networks have a right to show programming that they believe viewers would like to see and that would maximize (within reason) its ability to gain good ratings and earn money through advertising. Unlike a case where public accommodations are involved, there is no inherent legal right to appear on a television program owned by a private business. On the other hand, the show is billed as a reality program...and the lack of diversity with the lead characters is not a reflection of reality in this Country -- I think this may be a legitimate point by the plaintiffs.

Of course I hope the plaintiffs win.

Mother Thrown in Jail for Sending Kids to Better School

Hopes for her own teaching career may have been maliciously ruined in the process. This is one of the strangest cases that I have ever seen. It highlights the growing cast system in America that I often mention here.

A Conversation With Dr. Henry Louis Gates Jr.

Hear an extensive interview with Dr. Henry Louis Gates Jr. (A Must Listen).

Direct Audio Link

The topics cover race, Obama's otherness being used against him as a weapon by the Republican Tea Party, post-racial America, anthropology, genealogy...etc.

Great discussion. A couple of Tea Partiers even call in....resulting in some interesting exchanges.

Bethany Storro Acid Attack Story a Big Lie. Blamed Black Woman

Remember Bethany Storro, the Washington woman who reported that a Black woman threw acid on her? Well, she lied. The truth just came out this afternoon. Apparently she threw acid on herself.... and I guess creating a mythical Black suspect made the case more believable. It must have, because the national media jumped all over her story. Basic and obvious questions weren't asked. The suspect information seemed to lend more credibility to her phony story.

This story highlights two issues for me. Number one...would be the issue of Race - particularly the continued use of Blacks and Black images by non-Blacks to, in a way, authenticate reports of crime. The way that this continues to go on is troubling... in fact, this kind of nonsense seems to have picked up since the infamous Charles Stuart case in Boston which nearly tore that city apart. (look it up... I get a headache thinking about that one). And of course there was also the Susan Smith case several years later...which was almost just as bad. There have been a number of lesser known examples over the years. Like the bride who lied about being kidnapped a few years ago.... saying that she was taken by Hispanics. When the truth was revealed, it turned out that she simply ran away because she couldn't handle getting married. Just recently there was the story of a Philly cop who reported that he had been shot by a mythical Black suspect. The truth later revealed that the officer, Robert Ralston, shot himself. There are other smaller examples of this that happen all the time that no one hears about.

The other issue that this story highlights is the sloppy work of today's news media. Good old fashioned journalism and caution have been thrown out of the window. Professional journalism is basically dead today (although there are a few exceptions). Everyone is in a rush to get the story out, and they are forgetting to ask important and basic questions. But this wasn't even a breaking news type of event per se, where there was a mad dash to get something out. At least that's not necessarily how the story was presented. It was one of those... "feel sorry for this poor lady" stories that the big networks seemed to have gotten themselves caught up in. But there still should have been a basic attempt to do a little digging. Skepticism is an important & basic part of good reporting. There were plenty of red flags in this case. With just a little follow-up reporters may have noticed the doubt on the part of the investigators sooner, and held off for a few days before running with the story. That requires good journalism and good intuition on the part of reporters... something lacking in today's media culture where everything is happening so fast...and the news has become so profit driven.



Also see report from ABC national news.

The story made no sense to me from the start... for one, there was no logical motive. The media seemed to gloss over this fact. Also... where were the witnesses in and around all of the businesses in downtown Vancouver Washington? Apparently no one saw a suspect fleeing the scene. No witnesses at all? Typically in a situation like this, where would be surveillance, or a number of witnesses. Often, an attacker in this situation doesn't actually get very far from the scene. Everyone has a cell phone today and they take pictures of everything. But no one seemed to be able to verify this woman's story. No suspects anywhere...and there was nothing out of the ordinary before the incident.

But the report of a mythical Black suspect was just too hard for the media to ignore. That was all the verification that the world needed. This kind of nonsense is getting old.

And i'm still at a loss when it comes to a motive. Why would an attractive woman pour acid on herself? Was she this desperate for attention? (Now that I think about it... she did seem to enjoy all the attention that the media was giving her). Clearly there are some mental issues involved. Tragic!

Related Story

Woman Claims Black Obama Supporter Attacked Her

Yes, Race Does Matter

I have mentioned the okcupid report before on this blog.... I even overshared about my own experiences with racial barriers (outright discrimination) in horrible world of dating- this was before I even knew about this report. See the post "White Men Only". The report validated my own experiences...and let me know that I wasn't crazy.

Going through the actual report from the original site was eye opening. Take a look for yourself.

The data on Black women was very interesting and raised a whole set of other questions about race, dating, Black women, etc.

Overall...the picture for Black men wasn't very good. I'm pretty much screwed (and not in the good way of course).

What if the Tea Party Were Black?

Blogger, Professor, & author Christopher Chambers discusses the Tea Party on the RT network.

(I got distracted by Alyona Minkovski - Hawt!)



Dr. Errington Thompson covered this today as well.

Current Topics On Race

How we talk about race has changed considerably over the years, but as the following sample of stories illustrates, our conversations about race are generally bad and still involve reactionary politicians (I'm talking about you Steve King).

Dylan Matthews says race affects American's support of welfare programs. That's been painfully obvious since the 1930s. Conservatives deny this charge, but as a commenter rightly says, "they're just putting their heads in the sand." Read Ira Katznelson's When Affirmative Action Was White to get a full picture.

Devona Walker picks up on a Republican's ridiculous raghead comments in South Carolina.

An unintended consequence of high black male incarceration rates is the high number of unwed, black females.

In the partisan sense, Obama may have made life more difficult for black candidates by activating white voters motivated by racial animus.

Alabama Teacher Gives Interesting Math Lesson

Just read for yourselves.

I think I have Tea Party fatigue, racist/bigot fatigue, and politics fatigue. 2 & 1/2 more years of this s---?

Black Kids Still Showing Bias Towards White or Light Skin

CNN project basically rehashes the famous doll test.

Why do we always seem to see the same results?

Police Officer Shoots Himself, Tries to Blame Black Suspect

Philadelphia police officer Robert Ralston reported last month that he had been shot by an unidentified Black man (how convenient). But his story slowly began to unravel. Luckily with today's forensic technology and with good investigative work, the truth usually comes out in these cases. It turns out that Ralston made up the whole story. Fortunately no one was hurt during the manhunt for the suspect who didn't exist.

I was immediately reminded about Susan Smith who drowned her children in 1994, and then blamed it on a Black man. I was also reminded of a case that was worse than the Susan Smith debacle - the case of Charles Stuart, who murdered his pregnant wife in Boston back in 1989, and blamed a Black man (remember that?). That case almost ripped Boston apart. There have been other lesser known examples of this over the years, but these are the two incidents that always come to mind for me because they are seared into my brain.

Blacks and The Racial Litmus Test

It didn't take long for Black bloggers to show their ignorance once the photo of Sandra Bullock and her adopted son emerged this week....and I knew it wouldn't take long. As soon as I saw the photo I knew that certain people from the so-called "Black Community" would have something stupid to say. (No I won't link to their sites). But at least one suggested Bullock's adoption attempt was a possible publicity stunt. Another mentioned that special sensitivity training should be required for Whites... you know... gatekeeper nonsense. Basically, some just seemed annoyed that a Black baby had been adopted by a White woman.

Apparently the adoption isn't final.... but she is continuing with the process.
I'm all for it.

I lived in an abusive home from a toddler until I was about 11 years old. My bio mother (egg donor) was neglectful and was consumed by a world of alcohol, drugs and men. I wasn't at the top of the priority list. What kept me alive was my grandmother.... who was the only responsible adult in my life at the time. She basically raised me. And even then, I came close to death a couple of times. It was my father who saved me once and for all in the Winter of 1984, removing me from a St. Louis ghetto. Before that, I would have loved the idea of someone (ANYONE QUALIFIED) adopting me.... no matter what race they were.

Blacks (at least some of them) are being hypocrites on this.... ignorant hypocrites to be exact. If Black women were not having children out of wedlock at such high rates....or having children that they could not care for, then there wouldn't be such a big need for trans-racial adoption in the first place. But they don't want to talk about that. They also don't want to mention the fact that Black children are over-represented in Foster care systems across the Country. The fact is.... there are not enough Blacks stepping up to take care of their own children. Nor are there enough (qualified) Blacks stepping up to adopt Black children once they are in the social services system. But rather than wrestle with reality... (at least some) Blacks would rather criticize those who are willing and able to adopt.

I'm tired of the Black litmus tests. They annoy me to no end.

I'm tired of the color based litmus tests for relationships, adoptions, Supreme Court justices, Congressional districts, and the rest. Don't get me wrong... I love it when an African American reaches high office or achieves an important milestone... but is it necessary for Blacks to create a racial test for every situation?

When Racism Masquerades as Something Else

(The following is an excellent commentary from the Philadelphia Inquirer. Carlos Dews puts into focus the current political climate, particularly the Tea Party...calling it what it really is. Dews' commentary is supported by facts from The University of Washington).

Don't let the virulent hatred of Obama's presidency - veiled in "policy differences" - fool you. Just ask someone raised around bigotry.

By Carlos Dews

[Dews is an author, a professor of English literature, and chairman of the Department of English Language and Literature at John Cabot University in Rome]

'The nigger show."

I first heard this expression used to describe the Obama administration during a visit to my hometown in East Texas during the early summer of 2009. I understood what the epithet meant: Our minds are made up, the president lacks legitimacy, and there is nothing he can do that we will support. I was not surprised to hear such a phrase.

I grew up in the 1960s during the ragged end of the Jim Crow era, where many of the books in my school library were stamped Colored School, meaning they had been brought to the white school when the town was forced to integrate the public school system. I recall my parents had instructed me, before my first day of elementary school, not to sit in a chair where a black child had sat. And I remember my sister joked that her yearbook, when it appeared at the end of her first year of integrated high school, was in "black and white."

The outward signs of racism of my home state have now disappeared, but racial hatred remains. My father and his friends still use the word nigger to refer to all black people, and the people of my hometown don't hesitate to spout their racist rhetoric to my face, assuming I agree with them. I hold my tongue for the sake of having continued access to this kind of truth. I learned long ago how not to accept the hatred I was being taught and how to survive not having done so. More recently, I realized that I also learned another lesson: how to recognize racism when it masquerades as something else.

More than 40 years after my first experiences with racism, I am thousands of miles away in Rome, but surrounded by ghosts. Last year, I received a grant from the National Endowment for the Arts for a community program called the Big Read, which sponsors activities to encourage communities to come together to read and discuss a single book. I chose Harper Lee's To Kill a Mockingbird, in part because I thought that some of the most salient issues in the novel - racism, classism, xenophobia, the Jim Crow era - were perhaps relevant to an increasingly diverse, contemporary Italy.

That there is racism in Italy is obvious to anyone who pays attention to current affairs. In fact, during the first week of the Big Read Rome, a story in one of Italy's national newspapers detailed the experience of a Nigerian woman being called sporca nera (essentially, dirty nigger) by two women she asked to stop smoking on a Roman bus.

But I never imagined that consideration of the novel would prove so relevant to a country that had just elected its first black president.

Ironically, until the election of Barack Obama, my discussions of racism in the United States seemed historical. I felt that with the passage of the civil rights legislation of the mid-1960s, the country had turned a corner, that the slow evaporation of overt racism was perhaps inevitable. Now, my personal experience of Southern racism feels current and all too familiar. A news story about the Big Read that appeared in La Repubblica on Sept. 20 (unaware that my grant was awarded during the Bush administration), presciently brought Rome, Obama, To Kill a Mockingbird, and racism together in its headline: "Obama brings antiracist book to Rome."

Jimmy Carter was lambasted for having recently explained that the vehemence with which many Americans resist Obama's presidency is an expression of racism. Carter was accused of fanning the flames of racial misunderstanding by labeling as "racist" what on the surface could be perceived as legitimate policy differences. Like Carter, as a white Southern man, I can see beyond the seemingly legitimate rhetoric to discern what is festering behind much of the opposition to Obama and to his administration's policy initiatives. I also have access, via the racist world from which I came, direct confirmation of the racial hatred toward Obama.

The veiled racism I sense in the United States today is couched, in public discourse at least, in terms that allow for plausible deniability of racist intent. And those who resist any policy initiative from the Obama administration engage in a scorched-earth policy that reminds me of the self-centered white flight, the abandonment of public schools, and the proliferation of private schools, that followed the 1954 Brown v. Board of Education decision to desegregate public schools. The very people, like my own rural, working-class family back in East Texas, who stand to gain from the efforts of the Obama administration and the Democratic Congress are, because of their racism, willing to oppose policies that would benefit them the most. Their racism outweighs their own self-interest.

Unfortunately, racists in the United States have learned one valuable lesson since the 1960s: They cannot express their racism directly. In public, they must veil their racial hatred behind policy differences. This obfuscation makes direct confrontation difficult. Anyone pointing out their racist motivations runs the risk of unfairly playing "the race card." But I know what members of my family mean when they say - as so many said during the town hall meetings in August - that they "want their country back." They want it back, safely, in the hands of someone like them, a white person. They feel that a black man has no right to be the president of their country.

During a phone conversation a few weeks after Obama's election, my father lamented that he and my mother might have to stop visiting the casinos in Shreveport, La.: Given Obama's election, "the niggers are already walking around like they own the place. They won't even give up their seats for white women anymore. I don't know what we're going to do with 'em."

My students often ask me how I managed to avoid accepting the lesson in racism offered by my family. From the time I was 4 or 5 years old - roughly the same age as Scout Finch, the narrator of To Kill a Mockingbird - I recall knowing that I didn't agree with racism. More important, my paternal grandmother provided me with the encouragement that I could ignore what I was being taught. She provided me with the courage to resist.

My grandmother hoped that my father and his father represented the last generations of the type of Southern man that had shaped her life - virulently racist, prone to violence, proud of their ignorance, and self-defeatingly stubborn. It was a type of Southern man that she hoped and prayed I could avoid becoming.

However, my father and his father were not the last of their kind; their racial hatred has been passed on. My grandmother, if she were alive, would recognize the same tendencies among many of the people who shout down politicians and bring guns to public rallies. She would also see how the only change they have made is to replace overt racist epithets with more euphemistic language.

Rather than seeing my home state and its racist attitudes, slowly, over time, pulled in the direction of more acceptance, the country as a whole has become more like the South, the racial or cultural equivalent of what is called the Walmartization of American retail.

It might be easy to see literature as impotent in the face of the persistence and adaptability of racism. But I continue to believe in the transformative potential of literature and its ability to provide an alternative view of the world. And for children who are not lucky enough to have grandmothers like mine, I believe that books like To Kill a Mockingbird can provide inoculation against the virus that is racism.

by Carlos Dews, author, a professor of English literature, and chairman of the Department of English Language and Literature at John Cabot University in Rome.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This article originally appeared in the December 2009 issue of Aspenia, the Italian journal published by the Aspen Foundation Italy.

The Teabaggers' Race Conundrum

----Pete Souza

Reprinted with permission of zizi2

THE TEABAGGERS' RACE CONUNDRUM

I have been mulling the stark difference between Wingnuts attitude towards Obama the Presidential candidate, versus Obama the duly elected President who has to govern. What sharply turned on their hate switch? Why was he tolerable enough to be elected but needs to be delegitimized when he starts to govern?

The racial conundrum lies in the fact that wingnuts actually thought that the be all and end all of President Obama's run was to fulfill the symbolic racial goal of "being the first African American President." They thought that candidate Obama's ultimate goal was realized on election night.

In fact during that much ballyhooed dinner at George Will's house just before the inauguration, Krauthammer, Kristol, Peggy Noonan all came away claiming to have been impressed by Obama's "deep thought and eloquence." See, they were still thinking of him as an anthropological specimen/curiosity that had exhibited signs of intelligence. They believed he would be content to maintain the token favored negro status.

But if they had listened to him during the campaign they would have realized he had no such intention. When Steve Kroft asked candidate Obama about the racial significance of his nomination the day after the Denver DNC convention, Obama quipped that he was sure African Americans "understood" the significance, but he himself did not see a need to fixate on it, and neither was that his mission. He intended to do things. These folks should have listened then, and there is nothing that he has been doing since he entered the White House that he did not spelled out clearly before hand.

So now from neo-cons down to teabaggers are "shocked! shocked!" that Pres. Obama intends to enact his agenda that he shouted out to us over and over during a two-year campaign? What is he saying and doing now that he did not say back in January 2009 to garner 83% national approval ratings? What did he do on the day he signed the Health Insurance Law on March 23, 2010 to bring him down into the mid-forties approval that he did not say he intended in May 2009 to garner 65% approval for healthcare reform?

Certainly the vitriol we see now began with Palin's rallies, and increasingly the corporate media by not pushing back, enabled the public to become numb to the hate. When I compare today's "meh" shrug of the media to the pundits amplifying the public outcry over Palin's statements that candidate Obama was "someone who sees America not as you and I do" and who "pals around with terrorists," a great deal has changed in the public square.

So ironically, the wingnut apoplexy is precisely over the fact that Pres. Obama refuses to be tragically bound by "race." He is usurping the default normative sense of legitimacy of a "white" president. How dare he? As someone simply put it Obama is guilty of thinking he is President or something. Strange indeed!

aleth then asks the following:

EDIT: QUESTION: Do you think it goes back to the very nature or racist mindset that we are not smart? That is, they have internalized all of their racial bias and superiority to the point they cannot delineate between the real world and the imagined fantasy in their head of who the other is?

zizi2responds:

CONTINUED INSIDE POST

Read more »

Tea Party Leader Mark Williams Compares the Election of Barack Obama to 9/11 and AIDS

But i'm sure he meant well. Just another innocent comment.

Of course hate/race is one of the core issues driving the Tea Party (as I have pointed out here numerous times..... see a nice Jack & Jill politics post from April of last year). It's ridiculous to continue arguing about that fact. What annoys me is that not enough of these jackasses are willing to admit it. I would just like to see them own up to it.

They are using the Tea Party as a cover for what's really bothering them. They claim that they are concerned about big government, government overreach/limited government, government spending, etc...and that these are their main/core concerns above all else. But if that were the case, then why were they silent during the Bush years, when there was massive government overreach...overreach that was so bad that it had to be corrected a number of times by the courts, and when spending and deficits went through the roof? This argument from the Tea Party folks just doesn't work. It makes no sense. Racial animus and xenophobia plays a much larger role in this Republican Conservative movement than what many people, especially supporters of the Tea Party, care to admit.

Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour Also Ignored Slavery in His Confederate Heritage Proclamation

They Are Yearning for the Days of the Old Confederacy

After he defended Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell for omitting slavery from his States Confederate remembrance, it turns out that Haley Barbour made the same glaring omission in his State's proclamation. He seemed to go out of his way to purposely leave out any mention of slavery. I suspect they may be doing this to rile up their supporters. Both Governors may be interested in running for President or VP in 2012. This may be red meat for the Conservative Tea Party base.

Yes, there are definitely more important concerns that we should be focused on... and Republicans would probably love it if we were distracted by Barbour's antics. However, these reports, along with the other comments and activities by the Right point to a certain kind of state of mind that I believe should be illuminated. I think it says a lot about how they view the world, what they believe in, and who they really are. Eugene Robinson points this out very nicely in his commentary on the subject.

These kinds of political antics are taking place at the same time that we are hearing reports about segregation in Mississippi schools. Post racial my ass. I'm not even sure what year this is. I had to check the calender, not sure if I had slipped back in time into some other decade. But the calender says 2010. Notice the overriding pattern? There is a larger context to all of this. It pisses me off when apologists for the radical Right discuss these matters in a vacuum.... in separate little pieces, ignoring patterns and the larger context. Facts tell us one thing, but some in the mainstream corporate media suggest that we should ignore what is right in front of our faces. They want us to believe that the sky is pink, and that the earth is flat....that what we are seeing is just a figment of our imagination. It's not just the wider context of current events that they seem to ignore, they also love to ignore historical context, as Eugene Robinson pointed out.

What's even more annoying than all the talk about the loony Tea Party, the radical Right, and their romanticizing of the Confederacy, is the fact that thickheaded American voters are going to put these jackasses into office, certainly at the State and Congressional levels, in November of this year and in 2012, despite these reports, and despite solid recent history that shows their policies failing. This whole thing (the Right's activities over the past decade and their use of propaganda, especially since 2007) says more about the deficiencies of Progressives and their complete lack of an effective media infrastructure, than it says about how crazy the Right is. If you can't effectively mount a defense against such incredibly crazy propaganda and effectively educate the American public (which is in desperate need of good information and deprogramming).... then to me, this may be the more pressing issue. It points to an emergency within the Progressive movement in this Country. If there is no effort to fix it and fix it soon- with a complete revamping of Progressive strategy, infrastructure... and with policies like the Fairness Doctrine - then this Country is going to be in serious trouble. Progressives & Democrats are certainly going to pay a price.

I'm losing more faith in this Country and the World with each passing day.

Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell Forgot About Slavery in Proclamation of Confederate History Month

I don't think he actually forgot. There is a tradition by some on the Right to leave slavery out as a core reason for the Civil War simply because they don't hold the view that Slavery was very important.

Nikki Giovanni gets to the point....


McDonnell knew exactly what he was doing. It wasn't an innocent mistake. It was classic Southern Strategy stuff. But when he started to notice a backlash... he tried to make amends.
Unfortunately, I don't see this as having much of an impact nationally. Stupid voters will still vote overwhelmingly Republican in the next two major election cycles, no matter what. If anything, this dust up makes McDonnell look like a more appealing candidate for White Conservatives if he has any national political ambitions. But stories like this do serve to show the mindset of those on the Right who are in leadership.

Like I mentioned on my Republican media page a year ago (see sidebar) there is this desire by some on the Right to re-establish some sort of new Confederacy in this Country... if not a physical one... definitely an ideological one.

Nice Huffpost commentary

New University of Washington Survey Shows that Race Is Influence for Many Tea Party Supporters

Results from a University of Washington Survey on the Tea Party Movement shows that Race isn't the non-factor that some in the mainstream media have been suggesting.

"The tea party is not just about politics and size of government. The data suggests it may also be about race,"said Christopher Parker, a UW assistant professor of political science who directed the survey.

It found that those who are racially resentful, who believe the U.S. government has done too much to support blacks, are 36 percent more likely to support the tea party than those who are not.

Indeed, strong support for the tea party movement results in a 45 percent decline in support for health care reform compared with those who oppose the tea party. "While it's clear that the tea party in one sense is about limited government, it's also clear from the data that people who want limited government don't want certain services for certain kinds of people. Those services include health care," Parker said.

He directed the Multi-State Survey of Race and Politics, a broad look at race relations and politics in contemporary America. The survey reached 1,015 residents of Nevada, Michigan, Missouri, Ohio, North Carolina, Georgia and California. All were battleground states in the 2008 presidential election with the exception of California, which was included in the survey to represent the West Coast. See summary of report.

I have believed from the beginning that race was part of the health care debate. Many who didn't support Health Care reform held their position partly because they believed that the provisions of reform would disproportionately benefit the poor in this Country.... and by extension (since a large proportion of the poor are minorities) would benefit Blacks and Hispanics. To many whites, especially whites in the South, this was just unacceptable.

The information coming out now appears to support what I had believed all along.

This also backs up the argument I made last year about the role racial prejudice was playing in the Republican's anti-Obama campaign (of which the Tea Party plays a central role). Also see post from the Daily Kos. James Carville of all people tried to suggest that race was not an issue behind the anti-Obama campaign. The Carville report has since been shot down repeatedly by other surveys, reports and commentaries. The report was nonsense from the beginning.

Urban Students Failing Because of Racial Oppression?

How much tax money is Arne Duncan going to waste on his Civil Rights adventure? The money that he is about to waste would be better spent creating jobs.

I'm sorry, I just don't buy Duncan's latest PR push to show that he is working to improve education in urban schools. He recently announced that he would launch dozens of Civil Rights investigations, targeting schools across the Country, suggesting that urban students aren't succeeding because their civil rights are being violated. Oh Please!!! I can't drink that Koolaid. Am I the only one who smells bullshit whenever Arne Duncan's name is mentioned? I have been skeptical about this guy ever since Obama appointed him to the post of Education Secretary. He's a Chicago crony. There were certainly better candidates for the job in my opinion. And Chicago's public schools aren't in the best of shape in case anyone hasn't noticed.

It just seems to me that Duncan is playing to the Black urban political elite with this move. He wants to go along with the same old narrative from 20 years ago. But that narrative is out of date. Sure, there are likely some cases of civil rights violations in urban schools that may be uncovered. I don't want to diminish that problem at all. There is probably an even bigger danger of civil rights violations in predominantly white suburban schools against minority students. Hispanics and others may face issues because they speak English as a second language. There may also be cases of students being steered away from certain programs. I can recall guidance counselors refusing to let me into some of the classes I wanted to get into when I first moved to rural/suburban Texas 20 years ago. To this day I don't quite understand what the rationale was. But I still received a decent education because it was a good public school system. However, I believe that these kinds of cases are probably few and far between. Certainly this is not the driving force behind failing students and failing urban schools, particularly those in Black communities. I believe that most students aren't getting into more challenging courses because they don't have the grades...they haven't shown that they can handle the work... not because they are Black. It's interesting how this point is avoided.

Duncan is using the convenient issue of race as a scapegoat, while ignoring the elephant in the room - Urban Culture/Black Culture/Hip Hop Culture and the failure of parents. Urban social norms have a much bigger impact on educational outcomes. Yes, some urban schools have mediocre teachers... that's because good teachers don't want to work in warzones or in environments where their careers are threatened in systems that tie job security to student performance. If I were a teacher in that situation I would probably choose to leave as well...for a better school in the burbs. So let's talk about the elephant in the room. Some students just don't want to learn. Is that the fault of the teacher? Some students don't have parents that are engaged and involved in their educations. Is that the teachers fault? Some students come from broken, dysfunctional families where they don't get the support that they need. Is that the fault of the teacher? Some students follow a Black Hip Hop culture that does not embrace or value education. Is that the fault of the teacher? Of course not.

Now I don't want to suggest that there are no good teachers in struggling urban public schools. You will find some of the most dedicated teachers in troubled schools (another reason not to fire them or threaten careers based merely on student test scores). The fact is, in many of these schools, certain groups of students aren't there to learn. They are there to pass time. Culture and other social factors are the biggest variables in the mix, yet they are the variables that schools have the least influence over.

Who wants to work in an environment where there is always a question about personal safety? I wouldn't do it...especially when there is no hazardous duty pay. I wouldn't teach in these schools even if the job paid more money than wealthier white suburban public or private schools. I would rather have peace of mind. You get the occasional Columbine situation in the white burbs, but most violence still takes place in urban schools. Teachers in urban schools have to deal with fights on a weekly basis. Some...on an almost daily basis. Some of these schools function more like penal institutions...with magnetometers at the doors and movements severely restricted in the hallways. And teachers are dealing with a level of disruptive, belligerent, disrespectful, and violent behavior that has never really been seen before....not like it is today. Urban youth today have almost no respect for any kind of authority. So just as a matter of course, many of these schools are out of control. I can post the youtube videos of Black "students" wreaking havoc, fighting in classrooms and teachers either being assaulted or having no way to control them.

And to aggravate the problems, you have school systems, court systems, and States that don't back up teachers who have to deal with belligerent and violent students (many of them are urban terrorists...period). Instead of supporting teachers who are trying to deal with this kind of madness everyday by giving them all of the tools and authority they need, school systems often punish them. School boards are also of no use. And the teachers not only have to deal with out of control prison inmates in training...and the possible violence from them, they also have to deal with the ignorant parents & relatives who often threaten violence. And who does the school board, the courts, and the State side with? Often with the ignorant parents....not because the parent is right...but because they see it as easier to throw teachers under the bus to avoid having to deal with parents and students who are out of control or who might cause problems for board members or administrators. It's a completely crazy system. I am constantly running across crazy stories in St. Louis regarding belligerent & violent students and their out of control parents....and most of the problems are in schools that are predominantly Black. It's the same nonsense in every big city urban school district across the Country... Baltimore, Chicago, Detroit, L.A., Atlanta, D.C., Philadelphia, Cleveland...you name it.

You could fill many of these urban schools with the best computers, the best teachers in the World, the best books, the best technology, and the healthiest food and I would argue that there wouldn't be much improvement academically a year later. Not as long as the other variables remain unchanged. In order for students to achieve in these schools, there would need to be a cultural paradigm shift among Blacks in this Country (and to some extent with Hispanics). Remember Steve Perry from CNN's Black In America Series? He was the Principal of Capital Preparatory Magnet School in Hartford Connecticut. Remember what he said about minority parents and their support of the students at his school? He admitted that parental support was almost non-existent.

This isn't about students not having access to education....that's a bunch of bull. And this PR move is really a slap in the face to all those who fought in the 1950's for desegregation of public schools.... those were the real battles regarding civil rights. Students today have all sorts of opportunities.

Please take a look at the Rap on Culture report that I posted a couple of years ago. (be sure to click on the pdf). The report, by PolicyBridge, looked at the impact of culture on educational outcomes. Others, like Dr. John U. Ogbu, a professor at UC Berkley, also looked at the issue of how cultural/social differences impact educational outcomes for Black students.

It's not about whether these students are capable of learning or not. We know that with the proper tools and the proper support, minority students can learn. The Harlem Children's Zone, Capital Preparatory Magnet School in Connecticut, Urban Prep Academy for Young Men in Chicago, and stories from students like Steven Stafford all tell us that urban students have the ability to learn no matter what their circumstances are. It all comes down to the will to learn... the willingness to study and work hard, support from parents and teachers, and ultimately the degree to which Blacks value education.

Why are we wasting money on investigations when we know what the major issues are regarding minorities in urban schools? This issue has been studied backwards, forwards and sideways for the last 30 years. If Duncan wants to help urban students, he could start by telling Black/minority parents to turn off the damn television. But I guess that wouldn't be politically correct. He knows that the Black urban political elite - the constituency that he feels he has to keep happy- wouldn't like that very much at all.

_________

Additional Report from NPR

Author Heidi Durrow Talks Race and Identity On NPR

Hear an interview with Heidi Durrow from NPR's All Things Considered. She was discussing her book The Girl Who Fell From The Sky, winner of the Bellwether Prize for Fiction. It's a story about human tragedy and the struggles related to race and racial identity (something that I wrestle with and can therefore relate to). Durrow creatively uses fiction to address serious social issues. She was able to highlight & challenge false ideas about what it means to be Black and what it means to be White in American society, even though the point of the story was to paint a picture of life for a mixed girl.
She doesn't accept the label of Tragic Mulatto for this story because it has so much more to say than that. In fact, it could be seen as the opposite of the Tragic Mulatto, because in the end..... well.. to find out what happens you will have to buy the book.

The book has subtle (maybe not so subtle) reflections of Durrow's own life interwoven throughout the plot, although she once vehemently stated that it's not really about her. However, if you have been listening to Durrow over the years (via her radio program) or have been following her blogs, you can pick up the similarities.

Reviews and Commentaries on the book:

Abagond Blog

Blogcritics

Washington Post

Miami Herald

Christian Science Monitor

Book Named a Top 10 Debut Release for 2010 by Publishers Weekly.

“[An] insightful family saga of the toxicity of racism and the forging of the self . . . Durrow brings piercing authenticity to this provocative tale, winner of the Bellwether Prize for Fiction.”
—Booklist [starred review]

“[A] breathless telling of a tale we’ve never heard before. Haunting and lovely, pitch-perfect.”
—Barbara Kingsolver, author and founder of the Bellwether Prize

“The Girl Who Fell from the Sky can actually fly ... Its energy comes from its vividly realized characters, from how they perceive one another. Durrow has a terrific ear for dialogue, an ability to summon a wealth of hopes and fears in a single line.”
—New York Times Book Review

“Rachel’s voice resonated . . . in much the same way as did that of the young protagonist of The House on Mango Street. There’s an achingly honest quality to it; both wise and naive.”
—Shannon Rhodes, NPR

“Echoes of the early Toni Morrison, resonances with Langston Hughes. . . . A stunning debut.”
—George Hutchinson, author of In Search of Nella Larson

“That rare thing: a post-postmodern novel with heart that weaves a circle of stories about race and self-discovery into a tense and sometimes terrifying whole.”
—Ms. Magazine

“Taut prose, a controversial conclusion and the thoughtful reflection on racism and racial identity resonate . . . as the story succeeds as both a modern coming-of-age and relevant social commentary. ”
-Publishers Weekly

You can read more about Heidi Durrow and the book by visiting one of her many blogs or websites. Her main websites are HeidiDurrow.com, and Lightskinnededgirl.typepad.com. You can also find her on a weekly internet radio program called Mixed Chicks Chat (see links on our sidebar).

Olbermann's Special Comment on Teabaggers and Race

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy