We can talk race without being racist.
A) The President of the United States remains personally
popular despite repeated polls showing that the majority of voters disagree with
several of his policies and priorities.
B) Democrats love him, Republicans hate him.
C) Now that Catholics have gone 50-50, Democrat-Republican,
only Jews and Blacks remain solidly Democratic, at 80-90%.
D) Independents (generally described as White and middle
class) have turned against his policies but share in admiring the man.The common thread in all this is race.
Even those who disagree with or detest this President's policies admire him
because he has not allowed being Black to prevent him from becoming President.
And, another thing:
All this concern about what to call brown- or black-skinned people:
A letter writer in the Oakland Press points out that we have: the United
Negro College Fund . . . the National Association for the Advancement of
Colored People . . . the National Association of Black
Social Workers -- to which I add the Congressional Black Caucus. Are all
those terms, comfortably used by dark-skinned people themselves, made
inappropriate by the newest "African-American"? --
01 Feb 2010
24 Nov 09
A time of transition?
At one level, the incoming 45th City Commission will immediately
have to address serious issues at its first official meeting, December 21. From
another viewpoint, it will be several months before Royal Oak feels anything but superficial
impact from the election. The one returnee and two newbies on CITCOM will
need time to establish working relationships with their fellow commissioners and
with city Staff. There are matters of
substance and of style for city hall watchers to monitor. Substance includes making the final
decision about the Emagine project. Style deals with how and to what
degree the just-elected commissioners will affect the tone of CITCOM meetings.The effects, if any, of
personnel replacements on the Zoning Board of Appeals and the Downtown
Development Authority will take a while to develop. The overall mood in
City Hall will inevitably change, but it's too soon to know what
direction that change will take.
In that context and beginning this holiday week,
here is some of what residents are talking about and about which I'll be having
many conversations during the transition.
§
Arts, Beats & Eats in Royal Oak?
No way! was my gut-level reaction. Very similar, I imagine, to that of those
who have been opposing the Emagine theater/bowling alley project. But, to be
true to my principle of waiting for the facts before passing judgment . . .
§ Downtown drinkin' and dancin'
Except for occasional negative impact on adjacent neighborhoods, the only measurable
effect on residents of a dynamic downtown has been the rise in the value of their homes. Even during
these hard economic times, we're better off than in most surrounding
communities. Sampling my fellow fuddy-duddies, I find very few of them ever come
downtown, so they are unaffected by an atmosphere and behavior they seemingly deplore.
True, it appears unlikely that we will see a return of thriving traditional
retail. Most of us who frequently visit downtown go to eat -- or to dine (which
means to have a glass of wine with dinner) as the mood strikes us. So, it is
hard to empathize with amorphous charges that Royal Oak is harmed
morally by its 40-some alcohol-serving venues. Just one example. The Pronto!
block is adjacent to the First Methodist Church. That block contains -- in
addition to a delightful Corner Store -- a successful restaurant and bar.
Complaints are close to non-existent about beer bottles or bad behavior
affecting the church.
§ The anti-development mindset
For the same reason that I label myself "pro-alcohol," I say I am
"pro-development" -- exaggerating to make a point. When I heard of the possible
redevelopment at two corners of Woodward and Thirteen Mile I was (1) irritated
by the thought that Northwood Shopping Center, where we shop frequently, would
be converted for Beaumont's benefit and (2) pleased to hear that Kroger's and
Office Depot were likely to move across the street as part of the new
development. Having acknowledged my gut-level reaction, I waited to learn
details if the required planning-development process moved forward.
So it was disappointing to hear many of the gut-level
anti-development folk proclaiming that I could very well do my Kroger's shopping
a couple of miles away (Emagine opponents tell us driving to Birmingham for a
movie is no
big deal) and find a replacement for Office Depot somewhere. At no point
did they suggest they were willing to withhold judgment until they learned the
details. Yes, feelings, emotions, predispositions must be taken into
consideration. In decades of management consulting, I instructed clients that it
is as much an error to unthinkingly dismiss emotions as it is to unthinkingly
permit feelings to dominate when making decisions.
§ The distrust of government
A dominant factor in the anti-development mindset is the suspicion that money is
involved improperly in any dialogue between business owners and elected or appointed city
officials. Certainly at the national level, questionable or suspicious financial
transactions are evident. Closer to home, it is hard not so become uneasy when
one learns, say, that Karmanos moved his company to Detroit for unclear
advantages, gave Kilpatrick a job down in Florida, and is among those who
"loaned" Kilpatrick money somewhere during the Detroit scandal.
In Royal Oak, the fight about the proposed liquor license moratorium brought
charges from one side or the other that almost every elected official had
received money from this or that bar owner or their legal representatives.
It is in these kinds of debates that the civic/political attacks go personal, and
attacking integrity replaces challenging judgments.
We will always have the the chronically
suspicious and the naive and the show-me-the-proof observers of events.
Pragmatists will judge the accusations one-by-one.
Forget English as the "official"
language
Think, instead, of a "common"
language
That distinction between "official" and
"common" is necessary as we discuss this issue, because most countries haven't
thought it necessary to declare their common language "official." In Japan, they
speak and write Japanese. In Italy, Italian. In Germany, German. In Argentina, Spanish. In
Brazil, Portuguese. Official documents in such countries are also only in the
common language.
Let's look at what happens when countries go multilingual.
- In Belgium, there is a movement to split the country
into a Dutch-speaking north and a French-speaking south. The French-speakers
hope that after such a division, France would annex/absorb the southern
province.
- As it is, because Brussels is the headquarters of the
European Union, English has become the dominant language, so much so that
"nine in ten jobseekers cannot read and write in French and Dutch," according
to one report.
- Germany, among the first countries decades ago to
welcome foreign workers, now demands that migrants from poor countries joining
spouses already in the country must pass a language test before arrival.
- In nearby multicultural Canada, where French is
mandated on the majority English-speakers, Quebec is forever complaining about
discrimination and threatening to secede.
- In much of Africa, tribal languages in the same
country (whose geographical borders for the most part were established by
European colonial powers) identify social and political friends and enemies.
- In India, English has become the official language
to facilitate communication among that country's countless ethnic and
cultural groupings.
- China, to deal with its hundreds of languages and
dialects, has adopted Mandarin as its official language.
- Kurds in Turkey want to undercut
the use of the Turkish language in official business and contend,
"Multilingualism means democracy." Not really. Democracy calls for
consensus. Insistence on multilingualism
reflects a separatist mindset.
And you wonder why Americans of many ancestries want
English to be named our common/official language?
Judge individuals, not
groups, but --
Stereotypes exist
because group generalizations are based on fact
All the following generalizations are true:
- Italians are more emotionally demonstrative,
boisterous, than the English.
- In running-competition, Blacks win nearly everything, Whites
win a little, and Asians win almost nothing.
- White males go bald more frequently than men
of other races.
- The Islamic world, once a center of scientific
learning, is currently resistant to modernity.
- American Jews and African Americans are the
only remaining ethnic voting blocs, defined as more than 80% for one party.
- Blond, white-skinned Scandinavians have not
contributed much to Western civilizations.
- Blacks have not been as successful as other
ethnic groups to develop and succeed in small business.
- The skin of Blacks and of Asians wrinkles less
that the skin of Whites.
Of course, not all Italians are
boisterous . . . Not every Black can run fast . . . Some pretty important
scientists and writers have come from Scandinavia. . . Detroit, alone, has successful Black entrepreneurs.
. . . Some Whites grow old without
their skin wrinkling . . .There are conservative Blacks and Republican
Jews.
One is justified in deriding bigots and opposing haters
who pretend to believe that a stereotype applies to every individual
in the group about which a generalization is made. But it must be a fear of
being labeled politically incorrect to deny that stereotypes are generally
valid, because they are for the most part factual. The fact that I am an
only child does not invalidate the generalization that Catholic Italian families
have more children than WASP families.
True, an individual Black, White, Korean may be a doctor/lawyer/minister/cop/criminal/chemist/musician/mathematician. Yet, although not everyone who
drives a Harley and wears a black leather jacket is a member of Hell's Angels, it is
understandable and not discriminatory when a neighborhood -- Asian, Black,
or White -- pays more than casual attention if someone in a black leather jacket drives a Harley down
their generally quiet street. Then, treats him as an individual.
I had occasion several years ago in another
context to write:
For no thoughtful reason that I can think of
-- except perhaps that many turn-of-the-century Catholic immigrants came to
resent what they perceived as Irish domination of American Catholicism -- my
strongest ethnic dislike is of the Irish. But I never meet "the
Irish." I meet and interact with individual Irishmen, whom I come to like
or dislike, to respect or not, depending on their individual behavior.
I believe most people are able to make that
distinction between the one and the many.
Reasonable people, Martin Luther King was among
them, hope the time will come when a person is judged not by the color of her
skin but by her individual character. So, in Black History Month 2006, I share the hope
of those Blacks who long for the day when no one will feel a need to so
designate the month of February. -- March 2006
|
Criticizing FJVT
alking Race without being
Racist Stereotypes
exist because group generalizations are based on fact
America
needs a common language, "official" or not
The 45th CITCOM:
a time of transition
Pages in this Folder
Why Versagi Voice
and why I call it a "vanity website"
Editorial Snippets
FJV-at-Random
Versagi-at-Large
brief thoughts about . . . everything
Criticism of FJV
Life's Little Experiences
Cartoon from WWII
|