Decolonization
The colonial system, which was initially organized through violent measures of oppression and exploitation of subjugated people, affords Fanon’s (1963) notion of violent decolonization to be exceedingly germane. Decolonization is nothing short of the reversal of colonization; it sets out to change the order of the world (i.e., the colonial system) (Fanon, 1963). In the very first sentence of The Wretched of the Earth, Fanon (1963) boldly states that “decolonization is always a violent event” (p. 1). Understanding the context in which decolonization takes place, coupled with a comprehension of its nature as a reversal process, it should be considered as a logical and natural impetus to violence. The logic of violent decolonization process is made more apparent when one considers that one cannot disorganize “a society, however primitive it may be, with such an agenda if you are not determined from the very start to smash every obstacle encountered” (p. 3). Violence used toward efforts of decolonization is instrumental violence in the fact that it operates in a means-end continuum; meaning that it is used to achieve a particular goal that has been premeditated (Roberts, 2004). In line with this simple but effective strategy, Fanon (1963) argues that the “wretched of the earth” have the most logical plan of attack against hegemony focusing on bread and land. He suggests the goal of acquiring ‘bread and land’ is what the people find the most rewarding and effective working model (p. 14). At the essence of Fanon’s framework is the simple idea of oppressed populations reversing control and using the resources to benefit themselves thus freeing themselves of exploitation. In the process of altering their relationship with the ‘bread and land,’ they are no longer solely labor, but they are capitalists. Fanon’s claim is that this is done most effectively and expeditiously through violence.
This focus on “bread and land” emphasizes the pragmatism that instrumental violence achieves in a strictly decolonial sense. The pragmatism of decolonial violence is most evident in the direct attempt to thwart hegemonic power. This violence is instrumental in the fact the colonial system represents the means-end continuum in which this violence operates. After a discussion of the drastic juxtaposition between the colonizer’s habitat and the living situation of the colonized, he says “the gaze that the colonized subject casts at the colonist’s sector is a look of lust, a look of envy” (Fanon, 1963, p. 5). Fanon continues by suggesting that this envy leads the subjugated populations to concentrate on possessing items that the colonist owns; even sleeping with the colonist’s wife. However, the lust does not end at material items or the sexual conquest of the colonist’s women, it is about removing hegemony from locations of power and assuming those positions (Fanon, 1963). As result of decolonial violence, the relationship between the “bread and land” and the oppressed population that acts as solely labor is substantially and significantly altered. The oppressed are no longer merely labor, but have the potential to become masters of the “bread and land” they produce and toil. Consequently, at the moment power is assumed through violence, the populations of chattel, niggers, and slaves are blessed with the opportunity to become human beings, thus reaching the brink of liberation.
Tuesday, December 30, 2008
Friday, November 7, 2008
Reaction on Race
Greetings GoodPeople,
I send you this message today after much contemplation and observation. The United States of America has done something that I NEVER thought I would live to see. I say this because my current contemplation and observation is a direct result of the election of Senator Barack Obama as President of the United States of America. I, for one, thought this acheivement was near impossible. [Because I was wrong, there is tremendous lesson in this event.] As I write this letter to you, the trees outside my apartment are decorated with bright autumn reds, oranges, and yellows...a natural sign of CHANGE. Like the trees, I and my country, are moving through a change as well.
I study Human Communication (Rhetoric), Culture, Politics, Race, and Power. I've also learned a substantial amount about Mass Media in the year 2008. I currently instruct an Introductory course on Mass Media at Loyola College in Maryland. My students submit four "reaction" papers during the period of a semester. These papers serve multiple functions, but above all, it allows them the freedom of expression. They receive the opportunity argue, extend, discredit, or agree with any material they feel is pertinent to material discussed in class. Though these assignments are usually submitted to ME, in the spirit of CHANGE, I am submitting a "reaction" paper to THEM (and anyone else in the world who reads these words).
This "reaction" paper is submitted in response to our inter-racial/inter-cultural discussions on Thursday, October 30th and Thursday, November 7th. My thoughts are as follows:
October 30th
Students within the Mass Media communication course I instruct at Loyola College in Maryland presented PetriDish to a group of media/cultural practitioners of whom I met during my tenure at Morgan State University. PetriDish is a blogspot that the class is constructing as a Final Semester Project. Its general bend is one of culture; more specifically the culture of Baltimore City, Maryland. For those who may not know, Loyola College is predominantly White and Morgan State University if predominantly Black. (These instituions are approximately 2 miles from each other.)
That initial meeting (October 30th) was, to my chagrin, an incomplete and unbalanced dialogue on race and culture...which also seemed to lack a clear structure or goal. As one who has conducted my share of inter-racial conversations on race, I DID notice some familiar patterns. My general assessments are as follows: 1.) Blacks speak with much more intensity and fervor on issues of race; 2.) Whites listen with more intensity and fervor on issues of race.
I was already familiar with these aformentioned observations, so consequently, we had to hold another meeting in hopes of gaining a greater understanding of such a pervasive yet elusive issue (race may very well be the ultimate paradox).
November 7th
Yesterday, November 7th, we came back together to "finish" our discussion on race and culture. Believing it beneficial to introduce a theoretical construct that could "guide" the conversation, we began our conversation familiarinzing ourselves with scholarly notions of Black Rage (Gladney, 1995; Henderson, 1996; West, 1994) and White Guilt (Lewis, 2006; McCarthy, 1998; Steele, 2006). After gaining an understanding of these two notions, and more importantly, understanding how they "cooperatively" act as impediments to "Buberian" dialogue between races....we seemed more able to move in a progressive direction on the subject. I observed in this particular meeting that my two earlier observations can be challenged due to my 1.)observation of Whites speaking with more fervor and intensity about their observations and worldview, and 2.) witnessing Blacks listen with a bit more interest and curiosity regarding Whitness. I also witnessed and participated in Blacks and Whites disagreeing on key/critical issues INTRAracially...which I believe takes a large dose of courage and fortitude; considering our racial history.
Important Notes:
1.) Participants in these conversations were between the ages of 18-30 years. At 30 years, I was the oldest in the room.
2.) I don't subscribe to the sentiment often heard in the Mass Media that purports notions that the youth have little or NO problem with race. I do believe, however, if we are diligent and honest with our approaches to race we can make significant positive changes.
3.) I believe we are all aware that these conversations aren't the most comfortable, so "Kudos" to all those that were present and active in the conversation. I have no doubt you're a BETTER person for it.
Unresolved Questions
1.) Was intra-continental African slavery of the same type as American chattel slavery; in reference to humanity and brutality, of course?
2.) Is the term "oppression" over-used by Blacks as an excuse for non-performance OR are there active/contemporary mechanisms of oppresion at work in society which constrain Black freedoms?
During the time I've taken to submit this blog, I've watched the first press conference held by President-elect Barack Obama. I must say, I have the distinct feeling America, as a nation, made the correct choice...and I have little doubt we'll all be the better for it. The sun is now setting on the wonderful array of Autumn colors outside my window. Just as the autumn leaves and the setting sun have shown me today, CHANGE is natural...CHANGE is good.
Stay tuned for video uploads of our discussion....and feel free to leave your commentary!
I send you this message today after much contemplation and observation. The United States of America has done something that I NEVER thought I would live to see. I say this because my current contemplation and observation is a direct result of the election of Senator Barack Obama as President of the United States of America. I, for one, thought this acheivement was near impossible. [Because I was wrong, there is tremendous lesson in this event.] As I write this letter to you, the trees outside my apartment are decorated with bright autumn reds, oranges, and yellows...a natural sign of CHANGE. Like the trees, I and my country, are moving through a change as well.
I study Human Communication (Rhetoric), Culture, Politics, Race, and Power. I've also learned a substantial amount about Mass Media in the year 2008. I currently instruct an Introductory course on Mass Media at Loyola College in Maryland. My students submit four "reaction" papers during the period of a semester. These papers serve multiple functions, but above all, it allows them the freedom of expression. They receive the opportunity argue, extend, discredit, or agree with any material they feel is pertinent to material discussed in class. Though these assignments are usually submitted to ME, in the spirit of CHANGE, I am submitting a "reaction" paper to THEM (and anyone else in the world who reads these words).
This "reaction" paper is submitted in response to our inter-racial/inter-cultural discussions on Thursday, October 30th and Thursday, November 7th. My thoughts are as follows:
October 30th
Students within the Mass Media communication course I instruct at Loyola College in Maryland presented PetriDish to a group of media/cultural practitioners of whom I met during my tenure at Morgan State University. PetriDish is a blogspot that the class is constructing as a Final Semester Project. Its general bend is one of culture; more specifically the culture of Baltimore City, Maryland. For those who may not know, Loyola College is predominantly White and Morgan State University if predominantly Black. (These instituions are approximately 2 miles from each other.)
That initial meeting (October 30th) was, to my chagrin, an incomplete and unbalanced dialogue on race and culture...which also seemed to lack a clear structure or goal. As one who has conducted my share of inter-racial conversations on race, I DID notice some familiar patterns. My general assessments are as follows: 1.) Blacks speak with much more intensity and fervor on issues of race; 2.) Whites listen with more intensity and fervor on issues of race.
I was already familiar with these aformentioned observations, so consequently, we had to hold another meeting in hopes of gaining a greater understanding of such a pervasive yet elusive issue (race may very well be the ultimate paradox).
November 7th
Yesterday, November 7th, we came back together to "finish" our discussion on race and culture. Believing it beneficial to introduce a theoretical construct that could "guide" the conversation, we began our conversation familiarinzing ourselves with scholarly notions of Black Rage (Gladney, 1995; Henderson, 1996; West, 1994) and White Guilt (Lewis, 2006; McCarthy, 1998; Steele, 2006). After gaining an understanding of these two notions, and more importantly, understanding how they "cooperatively" act as impediments to "Buberian" dialogue between races....we seemed more able to move in a progressive direction on the subject. I observed in this particular meeting that my two earlier observations can be challenged due to my 1.)observation of Whites speaking with more fervor and intensity about their observations and worldview, and 2.) witnessing Blacks listen with a bit more interest and curiosity regarding Whitness. I also witnessed and participated in Blacks and Whites disagreeing on key/critical issues INTRAracially...which I believe takes a large dose of courage and fortitude; considering our racial history.
Important Notes:
1.) Participants in these conversations were between the ages of 18-30 years. At 30 years, I was the oldest in the room.
2.) I don't subscribe to the sentiment often heard in the Mass Media that purports notions that the youth have little or NO problem with race. I do believe, however, if we are diligent and honest with our approaches to race we can make significant positive changes.
3.) I believe we are all aware that these conversations aren't the most comfortable, so "Kudos" to all those that were present and active in the conversation. I have no doubt you're a BETTER person for it.
Unresolved Questions
1.) Was intra-continental African slavery of the same type as American chattel slavery; in reference to humanity and brutality, of course?
2.) Is the term "oppression" over-used by Blacks as an excuse for non-performance OR are there active/contemporary mechanisms of oppresion at work in society which constrain Black freedoms?
During the time I've taken to submit this blog, I've watched the first press conference held by President-elect Barack Obama. I must say, I have the distinct feeling America, as a nation, made the correct choice...and I have little doubt we'll all be the better for it. The sun is now setting on the wonderful array of Autumn colors outside my window. Just as the autumn leaves and the setting sun have shown me today, CHANGE is natural...CHANGE is good.
Stay tuned for video uploads of our discussion....and feel free to leave your commentary!
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
Poltics of Violence
This latest mention of an assassination attempt on presidential hopeful Barack Obama brings us to a grand total of three. [One during the primaries (Florida); one during DNC convention (Denver); and now, a week until election day (Tennessee).] No one likes talking about these particular issues, but everyone understands these particular issues. All it takes is a light reading of Thomas Hobbes to understand that violence has intense, dare I say essential, political function and utility.
Without substantial knowledge of the African-American historical condition, rhetorical rants of possessing weapons as defense against government munitions may appear pretentious, irrational, and simply unnecessary. But, one must consider the history of colonization and the violence meted out by the dominant power. Fanon
(1963) reminds us that the initial confrontation between colonizer and colonized “was colored by violence…[and] continued at the point of bayonet and under canon fire.” In essence, colonization is an intrusive occupation. In the DeadPrez song “Propaganda,” Stic.man is able to discuss the intrusive occupation of the government in a contemporary and futuristic sense when he states:
I don't want no computer chip in my arm
I don't wanna die by a nuclear bomb
I say we all rush the Pentagon, pull out guns
And grab the intercom. (DeadPrez, 2000g)
Stic.man is aggressively resisting the way in which the government is assuming an Orwellian “Big Brother” position in relation to the masses. Through resisting a computer chip in his arm, the rapper is refusing futuristic governmental intrusion of privacy through hyper-intelligent monitoring. Speaking in terms of technological advancements in instruments of war, which are always profitable for the rich, Stic.man also expresses his disapproval of being a casualty of rich people’s war games in that he does not want to die by a nuclear bomb. After highlighting the problems, the rapper/rhetor offers his solution; which happens to a violent usurping of the Pentagon. Stic.man calls for his audience to take control of the Pentagon through the use of force as illustrated through guns. Once inside, the intercom becomes his object of desire so he can them assume a rhetorical takeover and possibly change the minds of citizens.
So, like the parties involved in Senator Obama's assassination attempts, DeadPrez understands the value of addressing violence toward governmental agencies at the highest levels. Unlike the assassination fanatics, DeadPrez opts to exercise this violence RHETORICALLY and not in ACTUALITY.
Let me know how you feel...
Without substantial knowledge of the African-American historical condition, rhetorical rants of possessing weapons as defense against government munitions may appear pretentious, irrational, and simply unnecessary. But, one must consider the history of colonization and the violence meted out by the dominant power. Fanon
(1963) reminds us that the initial confrontation between colonizer and colonized “was colored by violence…[and] continued at the point of bayonet and under canon fire.” In essence, colonization is an intrusive occupation. In the DeadPrez song “Propaganda,” Stic.man is able to discuss the intrusive occupation of the government in a contemporary and futuristic sense when he states:
I don't want no computer chip in my arm
I don't wanna die by a nuclear bomb
I say we all rush the Pentagon, pull out guns
And grab the intercom. (DeadPrez, 2000g)
Stic.man is aggressively resisting the way in which the government is assuming an Orwellian “Big Brother” position in relation to the masses. Through resisting a computer chip in his arm, the rapper is refusing futuristic governmental intrusion of privacy through hyper-intelligent monitoring. Speaking in terms of technological advancements in instruments of war, which are always profitable for the rich, Stic.man also expresses his disapproval of being a casualty of rich people’s war games in that he does not want to die by a nuclear bomb. After highlighting the problems, the rapper/rhetor offers his solution; which happens to a violent usurping of the Pentagon. Stic.man calls for his audience to take control of the Pentagon through the use of force as illustrated through guns. Once inside, the intercom becomes his object of desire so he can them assume a rhetorical takeover and possibly change the minds of citizens.
So, like the parties involved in Senator Obama's assassination attempts, DeadPrez understands the value of addressing violence toward governmental agencies at the highest levels. Unlike the assassination fanatics, DeadPrez opts to exercise this violence RHETORICALLY and not in ACTUALITY.
Let me know how you feel...
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
Monday, October 13, 2008
Friday, September 26, 2008
Pre-Debate Commentary
Hello GoodPeople,
I can't wait for tonight's debate....I don't think there was ever a doubt that it WOULD take place. I honestly don't know what Senator McCain was thinking...but I believe he's hurt himself by "suspending" the his campaign. (His vice-presidential pick is slowly unraveling...but we'll save commentary on her for a later post.)
Before we see these two men engage in contest tonight....let's view an international (European) perspective on the candidacy of Senator Barack Obama.
I see this international perspective as important because FOREIGN POLICY, thanks to George Bush and a band of greedy Republican power-players, have caused serious damage to U.S. moral authority in the world. America NEEDS a leader whom the world can respect, and see has vastly different from the disrepectful "bully" approach that we have illustrated for eight years. It's time to wake up "red" America...COWBOY DIPLOMACY IS OVER. You got rich...quit complaining..
The following clip is a good example of WHY we should continue with this debate...note that Barack Obama is focused on COMMUNICATING to the American people. He seems to be focused on providing the American people with a clear choice on presidential policy differences...
I'll have more commentary after the debate...
I can't wait for tonight's debate....I don't think there was ever a doubt that it WOULD take place. I honestly don't know what Senator McCain was thinking...but I believe he's hurt himself by "suspending" the his campaign. (His vice-presidential pick is slowly unraveling...but we'll save commentary on her for a later post.)
Before we see these two men engage in contest tonight....let's view an international (European) perspective on the candidacy of Senator Barack Obama.
I see this international perspective as important because FOREIGN POLICY, thanks to George Bush and a band of greedy Republican power-players, have caused serious damage to U.S. moral authority in the world. America NEEDS a leader whom the world can respect, and see has vastly different from the disrepectful "bully" approach that we have illustrated for eight years. It's time to wake up "red" America...COWBOY DIPLOMACY IS OVER. You got rich...quit complaining..
The following clip is a good example of WHY we should continue with this debate...note that Barack Obama is focused on COMMUNICATING to the American people. He seems to be focused on providing the American people with a clear choice on presidential policy differences...
I'll have more commentary after the debate...
Wednesday, September 17, 2008
Wednesday, September 10, 2008
Semiotic Battles!
Now that BOTH parties are rallying around the theme of CHANGE, I've often wondered how McCain is going to effectively battle Obama AFTER appropriating a message that Obama has been preaching for a year and a half. Talk about imitation being the highest form of flattery....
As a communications professor, who is in the middle of teaching a course on the fundamentals of mass media, I'll inject a bit of "academic objectivity" here. Robert Greenwald (and BravenView films) have constructed a collage of media clips in the video production above. In doing so, they have SELECTIVELY chosen particular clips and organized them in a manner which reinforces a particular position. Let's see how the producers at Fox News "play the game." Watch below:
Is one symbolic argument more logically sound than the other? Is the content of one production more relevant than the other? What are your feelings? Please comment.
Thursday, September 4, 2008
O' Say Can WHO See?
Let's begin with the topic of CHANGE.
I noticed a phenomenon during the early portions of the Democratic primary. A young man by the name of Barack Obama introduced himself as an agent of CHANGE. He kept this topic as a recurring thesis in his stump speeches; and he also placed the word on his campaign placards. This one word became the goal, motto, direction, and purpose that he ran on. THEN Hillary Clinton adopted CHANGE and put a "little twist" on it by coupling it with experience. (Which, by the way, begin to signal the disorganization of her campaign.) Then you begin to hear more and more of the Democratic candidates squabble about who could be best to bring about CHANGE. Now, I see the Republicans are doing the SAME THING. Which baffles me, because, once they begin talking about CHANGE, they come close to admitting that what they have done for eight years is so messed up that it needs to be CHANGED. In short, I think it's very important to note that CHANGE has become so attractive that everyone has decided to adopt it. Why?...because this is what the American people have said they want: CHANGE. ...and Barack Obama, in his judgement and experience, knew it from the beginning.
Small note on Abraham Lincoln and American Slavery:
Over the course of the last two days, several Republican speakers mentioned that THEIR party (the Republican Party) ended slavery. This mention, just like their appropriation of CHANGE, is pure pandering. Let me explain something to the voters of America. The constituents of the Republican party that ended slavery are the same demographic of people who constitute the contemporary Democratic party. The "political ancestors" of the people we saw in the ExCel center over the last couple days belonged to the "Dixiecrats," "Yellow Dog" democrats...the members of the Solid South...those who wanted slavery...fought Reconstruction...and I don't think is much of a leap, supported the terrorists activity of the Ku Klux Klan upon other (black) Americans. With FDRoosevelt's Public Works Programs enacted, the demographics of the two major parties started to shift (1933-1945). Which is why a lot of Blacks, some other ethnic groups, and liberals belong to the Democratic party and fiscal and social conservatives are now Republicans. So, for those that didn't know this bit of U.S. History, now you do...don't be fooled by the petty pander. THEIR party was the party of Herbert Hoover...but they didn't mention that last night. Remember the "Hoover Pockets" of the Great Depression? I think it would be a wonderful American fashion statement to bring back now..."Bush pockets."
The Dissenters in the audience:
Not even the chants of "USA" could drown out the dissenters against the War last night. By the way, one dissenter wore a shirt that read VETERANS AGAINST THE WAR. This, I understand, as quite a "trump card." ...and I forget the number right now, but Obama has GROSSLY out-raised McCain among troops in Iraq. So, as much as the RNC attempted to "decorate" war and military service through their video productions, let us not forget, THIS IS AN UNPOPULAR WAR. And the issue of the "surge" is so laughable to me, I won't discuss it. Okay, one sentence (question) on the surge: Are you seriously going to use a "surge" (that's a couple months old) to speak about a 5-6 year poorly managed war?
I think it's important to note that DNC didn't have any vocal dissenters. And was the case, despite the fact that they didn't come off as intimdating, sarcastic, or condescening. And by my count, the Republicans had FOUR vocal dissenters last night...and ONE the night before.
McCain's speech:
"We're all Americans....and that's an association that means more to me, than any other." And the audience roars?!?!! How do you clap so enthusiastically as a result of this "cooperative rhetoric" when you've been so enthusiastic about the "divisive rhetoric" (Palin, Romney, Giuliani)?
There were parts of the speech where McCain was laying blame on his party...but he kinda muddled that...then he said BOTH parties messed things up....but, WE lost their trust. It was so muddled, I don't even know how to talk about. But, I will say, as a "scrutinizer of men," I believe John McCain is a decent guy. I like him better than a lot other people he's surrounding by. ...and I believe there were parts of his speech that were muddled because he has to pander to different elements within his party...and he's trying his best to do that...and "stick to his guns." Yet, in still, I applaud him for seeming courageous enough to tackle the task. In short, I saw this as him attempting to honorable...but he's surrounded by a den of wolves! Tough task.
I noticed a phenomenon during the early portions of the Democratic primary. A young man by the name of Barack Obama introduced himself as an agent of CHANGE. He kept this topic as a recurring thesis in his stump speeches; and he also placed the word on his campaign placards. This one word became the goal, motto, direction, and purpose that he ran on. THEN Hillary Clinton adopted CHANGE and put a "little twist" on it by coupling it with experience. (Which, by the way, begin to signal the disorganization of her campaign.) Then you begin to hear more and more of the Democratic candidates squabble about who could be best to bring about CHANGE. Now, I see the Republicans are doing the SAME THING. Which baffles me, because, once they begin talking about CHANGE, they come close to admitting that what they have done for eight years is so messed up that it needs to be CHANGED. In short, I think it's very important to note that CHANGE has become so attractive that everyone has decided to adopt it. Why?...because this is what the American people have said they want: CHANGE. ...and Barack Obama, in his judgement and experience, knew it from the beginning.
Small note on Abraham Lincoln and American Slavery:
Over the course of the last two days, several Republican speakers mentioned that THEIR party (the Republican Party) ended slavery. This mention, just like their appropriation of CHANGE, is pure pandering. Let me explain something to the voters of America. The constituents of the Republican party that ended slavery are the same demographic of people who constitute the contemporary Democratic party. The "political ancestors" of the people we saw in the ExCel center over the last couple days belonged to the "Dixiecrats," "Yellow Dog" democrats...the members of the Solid South...those who wanted slavery...fought Reconstruction...and I don't think is much of a leap, supported the terrorists activity of the Ku Klux Klan upon other (black) Americans. With FDRoosevelt's Public Works Programs enacted, the demographics of the two major parties started to shift (1933-1945). Which is why a lot of Blacks, some other ethnic groups, and liberals belong to the Democratic party and fiscal and social conservatives are now Republicans. So, for those that didn't know this bit of U.S. History, now you do...don't be fooled by the petty pander. THEIR party was the party of Herbert Hoover...but they didn't mention that last night. Remember the "Hoover Pockets" of the Great Depression? I think it would be a wonderful American fashion statement to bring back now..."Bush pockets."
The Dissenters in the audience:
Not even the chants of "USA" could drown out the dissenters against the War last night. By the way, one dissenter wore a shirt that read VETERANS AGAINST THE WAR. This, I understand, as quite a "trump card." ...and I forget the number right now, but Obama has GROSSLY out-raised McCain among troops in Iraq. So, as much as the RNC attempted to "decorate" war and military service through their video productions, let us not forget, THIS IS AN UNPOPULAR WAR. And the issue of the "surge" is so laughable to me, I won't discuss it. Okay, one sentence (question) on the surge: Are you seriously going to use a "surge" (that's a couple months old) to speak about a 5-6 year poorly managed war?
I think it's important to note that DNC didn't have any vocal dissenters. And was the case, despite the fact that they didn't come off as intimdating, sarcastic, or condescening. And by my count, the Republicans had FOUR vocal dissenters last night...and ONE the night before.
McCain's speech:
"We're all Americans....and that's an association that means more to me, than any other." And the audience roars?!?!! How do you clap so enthusiastically as a result of this "cooperative rhetoric" when you've been so enthusiastic about the "divisive rhetoric" (Palin, Romney, Giuliani)?
There were parts of the speech where McCain was laying blame on his party...but he kinda muddled that...then he said BOTH parties messed things up....but, WE lost their trust. It was so muddled, I don't even know how to talk about. But, I will say, as a "scrutinizer of men," I believe John McCain is a decent guy. I like him better than a lot other people he's surrounding by. ...and I believe there were parts of his speech that were muddled because he has to pander to different elements within his party...and he's trying his best to do that...and "stick to his guns." Yet, in still, I applaud him for seeming courageous enough to tackle the task. In short, I saw this as him attempting to honorable...but he's surrounded by a den of wolves! Tough task.
Wednesday, September 3, 2008
Obama Speaks Well, But.....
Hello America,
This is The GoodDoctor reporting once....and I have shifted my attention that of the Republicans this week. As we know, their convention got off to a slow start due to Hurricane Gustav. (It seems that God answered their prayers to rain out Obama's speech one week too late.) But, now it seems they are "ready to go on the attack!"
...and what's the favorite attack line this political season? Barack Obama speaks well...but it takes more than speech to be a president. Now, this particular attack irked me when Clinton used it in the primary, and I am still somewhat puzzled by it. What else to politicians do during campaigns besides speak? Everyone who is vying for the White House is speaking. And if we are honest, American history shows that most of their words are LIES anyway. It seems to me that because Bararck Obama speaks better than his adversaries, that now speaking (rhetoric) has now become some sort of malformation. SPEAKING IS WHAT IS REQUIRED AT THIS STAGE OF THE GAME. ...and by the way, Obama's rhetoric seems to be borrowed by several Republican speakers. I've just listened to Romney and Huckabee talk about CHANGE in their speeches at the RNC.
All the speakers tonight (9/3/08) mentioned Democrats wanted to raise OUR taxes. Okay, the Democrats are running on taxing corporations that have not shared wealth, and lowering taxing on the middle-class. So, is the middle-class THE AMERICAN PEOPLE or the the corporations? Listening to the Republicans...and considering their POLICIES you would have to assume that CORPORATIONS ARE AMERICA.
Now, to Rudy Giuliani...he was utterly DISRESPECTFUL. His sarcasm intolerable. If anything was made present tonight, it was that the Democratic ticket has A LOT MORE CLASS. He laughed...he snickered...he poked fun at Obama's role as a community organizer. Rudy, honestly, YOUR PRESIDENT has driven middle-America into the shape that it is in now! Who can be more incompetent than GEORGE BUSH? One point out of many mis-leading points.... "We're the party that ended slavery." Rudy, the constiuents of your contemporary Republican party were in the Democratic party during the Republican initiatives. They were called "Yellow Dog Democrats" of the Solid South. Rudy, you should know this history. So, I'm assuming you're being "slick."
My opinion of Sarah Palin is now that she is ready for the taking. It's time to take out the "guns" because she's a "Hockey Mom," and by her own words, their "pitbulls with lipstick." Alaska gets more federal assistance than any other state in the nation. So, Alaska is a WELFARE state. I wonder why Mississippi, Maryland, Georgia, Alabama, or the Carolinas don't get that much Federal assistance? Something worth thinking about.
I would also say that the Democrats should put their gloves on...because it is going to take a fight to beat these Republicans. When did CHANGE become the goal that the parties share? Obama has been talking about CHANGE from the beginning. Did you all consult with him on sharing this task, Sarah?
As I assumed, it's going to be a VERY INTERESTING political season. Bring it On.
This is The GoodDoctor reporting once....and I have shifted my attention that of the Republicans this week. As we know, their convention got off to a slow start due to Hurricane Gustav. (It seems that God answered their prayers to rain out Obama's speech one week too late.) But, now it seems they are "ready to go on the attack!"
...and what's the favorite attack line this political season? Barack Obama speaks well...but it takes more than speech to be a president. Now, this particular attack irked me when Clinton used it in the primary, and I am still somewhat puzzled by it. What else to politicians do during campaigns besides speak? Everyone who is vying for the White House is speaking. And if we are honest, American history shows that most of their words are LIES anyway. It seems to me that because Bararck Obama speaks better than his adversaries, that now speaking (rhetoric) has now become some sort of malformation. SPEAKING IS WHAT IS REQUIRED AT THIS STAGE OF THE GAME. ...and by the way, Obama's rhetoric seems to be borrowed by several Republican speakers. I've just listened to Romney and Huckabee talk about CHANGE in their speeches at the RNC.
All the speakers tonight (9/3/08) mentioned Democrats wanted to raise OUR taxes. Okay, the Democrats are running on taxing corporations that have not shared wealth, and lowering taxing on the middle-class. So, is the middle-class THE AMERICAN PEOPLE or the the corporations? Listening to the Republicans...and considering their POLICIES you would have to assume that CORPORATIONS ARE AMERICA.
Now, to Rudy Giuliani...he was utterly DISRESPECTFUL. His sarcasm intolerable. If anything was made present tonight, it was that the Democratic ticket has A LOT MORE CLASS. He laughed...he snickered...he poked fun at Obama's role as a community organizer. Rudy, honestly, YOUR PRESIDENT has driven middle-America into the shape that it is in now! Who can be more incompetent than GEORGE BUSH? One point out of many mis-leading points.... "We're the party that ended slavery." Rudy, the constiuents of your contemporary Republican party were in the Democratic party during the Republican initiatives. They were called "Yellow Dog Democrats" of the Solid South. Rudy, you should know this history. So, I'm assuming you're being "slick."
My opinion of Sarah Palin is now that she is ready for the taking. It's time to take out the "guns" because she's a "Hockey Mom," and by her own words, their "pitbulls with lipstick." Alaska gets more federal assistance than any other state in the nation. So, Alaska is a WELFARE state. I wonder why Mississippi, Maryland, Georgia, Alabama, or the Carolinas don't get that much Federal assistance? Something worth thinking about.
I would also say that the Democrats should put their gloves on...because it is going to take a fight to beat these Republicans. When did CHANGE become the goal that the parties share? Obama has been talking about CHANGE from the beginning. Did you all consult with him on sharing this task, Sarah?
As I assumed, it's going to be a VERY INTERESTING political season. Bring it On.
Wednesday, August 27, 2008
Assume the Position...
The speeches of Day Three's DNC were good. Bill Clinton, and Joe Biden, and John Kerry did well at setting the stage for Barack Obama. But, it's time for some "fighting words." As a registered Independent, who has consistently voted Democrat in presidential elections (voted for Ralph Nader in '04), I grow weary of Democratic candidates taking the high road...especially when more aggressive speech is appropriate.
People are hurting! ...and we have been hurting for the last eight years. I moved to Washington, D.C. in the Fall of 2001 (at the age of 23) to pursue graduate education in the Nation's Capital. The attacks of September 11th occured one month after I moved to the city. From that time until now, I have lived on meager income...and struggled with poverty. Of course, most of that time I was in graduate school...but in the two years since I finished my graduate education, decent salaries and healthcare have still been hard to come by.
Now, consider this, I have more education than most people on the job market, and yet I've endured (and am still enduring) tough times in the job market. I can only imagine what those with less than me are experiencing. It truly baffles me. Truly. What is a person supposed to do to survive? ...and that's a particularly sad question, because aren't we supposed to be more concerned with THRIVING? But, instead, we concentrating on SURVIVING. ...and it goes beyond John McCain's housing lapse. Because you know that Bush and Cheney...and all the other cronies have made just as much money over the last eight years through manipulating the system to their favor. It is a tragic situation...that continually breeds frustration, distrust in government, animosity, and apathy among the masses.
These feelings are very real to the majority of Americans. So, Democrats, SAY THAT...and you don't have to be so polite about expressing this sentiment, either. You do not want "regular folk" to miss your point. Trust me, if you can connect with Americans on these real issues...then the White House will be yours. Make it plain! We have been duped by Bush-McCain Republicans...we have manipulated by color-coded terror alerts...we have been misled into supporting wars of "profit for the few"...we have been prostituted...we have been lied to...we have been abused....we have been incarcerated...we have been cheated out of the wealth that America has gained. Make it plain! Make it plain! Make it plain!
Barack, assume the position of the warrior...and we will fight to get you to the White House...and keep you there! Assume the position of the triumphant Muhammad Ali poster that hangs behind your Senate office desk! Assume the position of the President who will aggressively shape America into the country that is SHOULD be instead of the place that it is. We have too hungry to accpet anything less.
God Bless....
People are hurting! ...and we have been hurting for the last eight years. I moved to Washington, D.C. in the Fall of 2001 (at the age of 23) to pursue graduate education in the Nation's Capital. The attacks of September 11th occured one month after I moved to the city. From that time until now, I have lived on meager income...and struggled with poverty. Of course, most of that time I was in graduate school...but in the two years since I finished my graduate education, decent salaries and healthcare have still been hard to come by.
Now, consider this, I have more education than most people on the job market, and yet I've endured (and am still enduring) tough times in the job market. I can only imagine what those with less than me are experiencing. It truly baffles me. Truly. What is a person supposed to do to survive? ...and that's a particularly sad question, because aren't we supposed to be more concerned with THRIVING? But, instead, we concentrating on SURVIVING. ...and it goes beyond John McCain's housing lapse. Because you know that Bush and Cheney...and all the other cronies have made just as much money over the last eight years through manipulating the system to their favor. It is a tragic situation...that continually breeds frustration, distrust in government, animosity, and apathy among the masses.
These feelings are very real to the majority of Americans. So, Democrats, SAY THAT...and you don't have to be so polite about expressing this sentiment, either. You do not want "regular folk" to miss your point. Trust me, if you can connect with Americans on these real issues...then the White House will be yours. Make it plain! We have been duped by Bush-McCain Republicans...we have manipulated by color-coded terror alerts...we have been misled into supporting wars of "profit for the few"...we have been prostituted...we have been lied to...we have been abused....we have been incarcerated...we have been cheated out of the wealth that America has gained. Make it plain! Make it plain! Make it plain!
Barack, assume the position of the warrior...and we will fight to get you to the White House...and keep you there! Assume the position of the triumphant Muhammad Ali poster that hangs behind your Senate office desk! Assume the position of the President who will aggressively shape America into the country that is SHOULD be instead of the place that it is. We have too hungry to accpet anything less.
God Bless....
Hill & Bill: The Clinton Factor
People like Hillary Clinton!
This is obvious based on crowd reaction during her speech last night, and the reaction of the punditry as well. I both enjoyed and appreciated the fact that it was a TACTICALLY sound speech. She illustrated a sincere disengagement from the politics of the McCain campaign; she was clear about her unwillingness to be used as a pawn by the McCain campaign to draw votes away from Senator Obama. Her acknowledgement of the hard work of her campaigners, her acknowledgement of Susan B. Anthony (and the Seneca Falls Convention), and her reference to Harriet Tubman, signaled a Senator who understood her contribution to American History. ...and at the same time, she expressed her unwavering support for Senator Barack Obama. This was the magic of Hillary Clinton's address!
People like Bill Clinton!
Yes, Bill is still a favorite among the electorate. He is still regarded as one of the better presidents of the late 20th century. ...and yes, Black people still like Bill. As an African American, myself, I did not feel betrayed by Bill during primary season. I feel that he was victimized by the mass media....hungry for a dramatic story. His linking Obama's campaign to that of Jesse Jackson's campaign in South Carolina was not racist...and I believe the media played racism up. Honestly, I don't remember what his remarks were...but I know that as I watched them, I didn't feel anything racially disparging was being said.
Now, are there some pride issues at play between the former President and the newcomer (Barack Obama). I'm sure it might be. I heard two radio pundits suggest that some "Alpha Male" issues were at play. I believe this to be true. But, Bill Clinton will prove himself to be an even more stellar public figure if he is able to tap into that charisma...and deliever the speech no one believes he can. Personally, I enjoy his speech making abilities more than I enjoy Hillary's...so if he can conjure up the 1990s swagger that coaxed the American people into falling in love with him....he'll not only do the Democratic party a favor...but the Clinton legacy a favor as well. Sure, it tough....and pride will have to be put to the side...but it is achieveable. ...and I believe he can do it.
This is obvious based on crowd reaction during her speech last night, and the reaction of the punditry as well. I both enjoyed and appreciated the fact that it was a TACTICALLY sound speech. She illustrated a sincere disengagement from the politics of the McCain campaign; she was clear about her unwillingness to be used as a pawn by the McCain campaign to draw votes away from Senator Obama. Her acknowledgement of the hard work of her campaigners, her acknowledgement of Susan B. Anthony (and the Seneca Falls Convention), and her reference to Harriet Tubman, signaled a Senator who understood her contribution to American History. ...and at the same time, she expressed her unwavering support for Senator Barack Obama. This was the magic of Hillary Clinton's address!
People like Bill Clinton!
Yes, Bill is still a favorite among the electorate. He is still regarded as one of the better presidents of the late 20th century. ...and yes, Black people still like Bill. As an African American, myself, I did not feel betrayed by Bill during primary season. I feel that he was victimized by the mass media....hungry for a dramatic story. His linking Obama's campaign to that of Jesse Jackson's campaign in South Carolina was not racist...and I believe the media played racism up. Honestly, I don't remember what his remarks were...but I know that as I watched them, I didn't feel anything racially disparging was being said.
Now, are there some pride issues at play between the former President and the newcomer (Barack Obama). I'm sure it might be. I heard two radio pundits suggest that some "Alpha Male" issues were at play. I believe this to be true. But, Bill Clinton will prove himself to be an even more stellar public figure if he is able to tap into that charisma...and deliever the speech no one believes he can. Personally, I enjoy his speech making abilities more than I enjoy Hillary's...so if he can conjure up the 1990s swagger that coaxed the American people into falling in love with him....he'll not only do the Democratic party a favor...but the Clinton legacy a favor as well. Sure, it tough....and pride will have to be put to the side...but it is achieveable. ...and I believe he can do it.
Monday, August 25, 2008
Sunday, August 24, 2008
DNC Convention Time!
Okay GoodPeople,
It's time to get this party started! ...and by the way, let's have fun...it's a joyous occasion, regardless of what the Republicans and the critics have to say.
The Number #1 reason to celebrate with absolute fervor is that this convention will be of historical magnitude! Senator Barack Obama, who has already made history in a number of ways, will address yet another arena-sized audience who is eager to hear more about a "different type of politics." No matter how the Republicans try to spin his ability to draw large crowds as a weakness...please "party-goers" rest asssured that if John McCain was able to do so, he would! ...and besides what do the large crowds symbolize? An intelligent person would beyond Obama's oratory...and find that Americans are actually hungry for sincerity and relief from the "trickle-down" economic policies of the wealthy.
The Number #2 reason to party all night long is to witness the maturity and commitment of Senator Hilary Rodham Clinton. I believe that Senator Clinton will illustrate a strong and sincere commitment to the policies of the Obama Administration. I do not believe she is as involved with factions like "PUMA" (Party Unification My Ass) as the media might lead you to believe. During the primary season, Senator Obama pledged that she would be instrumental in his Healthcare Adminstration and I believe that there are other avenues for her to participate with dignity and comfort.
Reason #3: Joe Biden is the perfect co-host! He provides the perfect compliment to Barack Obama. He is seasoned, experienced with insider-politics, and a bit more unadulterated in his rhetoric. What you have in the leadership of Obama & Biden is a dialectical tension. As a rhetorical scholar, I understand that some of the best things are created from dialectics; rhetoric/language being one of them. Obama does not have a "yes-man" in Biden nor does he have a philosophical twin. (That in itself is quite refreshing when you consider the Bush/Cheney team and all of its cronies.) In Obama/Biden you have two men who will be honest with each other, and America, in the way in which they govern this country.
I'm looking forward to 1.) Michelle Obama's speech, 2.) Hillary and Bill's speeches, 3.) and, of course, Barack Obama's address (Thursday). I'll be providing commentary on a whole hosts of issues (media coverage, race, economics, "change", global perspectives, elitism).
Stay tuned....
It's time to get this party started! ...and by the way, let's have fun...it's a joyous occasion, regardless of what the Republicans and the critics have to say.
The Number #1 reason to celebrate with absolute fervor is that this convention will be of historical magnitude! Senator Barack Obama, who has already made history in a number of ways, will address yet another arena-sized audience who is eager to hear more about a "different type of politics." No matter how the Republicans try to spin his ability to draw large crowds as a weakness...please "party-goers" rest asssured that if John McCain was able to do so, he would! ...and besides what do the large crowds symbolize? An intelligent person would beyond Obama's oratory...and find that Americans are actually hungry for sincerity and relief from the "trickle-down" economic policies of the wealthy.
The Number #2 reason to party all night long is to witness the maturity and commitment of Senator Hilary Rodham Clinton. I believe that Senator Clinton will illustrate a strong and sincere commitment to the policies of the Obama Administration. I do not believe she is as involved with factions like "PUMA" (Party Unification My Ass) as the media might lead you to believe. During the primary season, Senator Obama pledged that she would be instrumental in his Healthcare Adminstration and I believe that there are other avenues for her to participate with dignity and comfort.
Reason #3: Joe Biden is the perfect co-host! He provides the perfect compliment to Barack Obama. He is seasoned, experienced with insider-politics, and a bit more unadulterated in his rhetoric. What you have in the leadership of Obama & Biden is a dialectical tension. As a rhetorical scholar, I understand that some of the best things are created from dialectics; rhetoric/language being one of them. Obama does not have a "yes-man" in Biden nor does he have a philosophical twin. (That in itself is quite refreshing when you consider the Bush/Cheney team and all of its cronies.) In Obama/Biden you have two men who will be honest with each other, and America, in the way in which they govern this country.
I'm looking forward to 1.) Michelle Obama's speech, 2.) Hillary and Bill's speeches, 3.) and, of course, Barack Obama's address (Thursday). I'll be providing commentary on a whole hosts of issues (media coverage, race, economics, "change", global perspectives, elitism).
Stay tuned....
Saturday, August 23, 2008
Joe Biden! Obama Knows What He's Doing...
Joe Biden provides Barack Obama with utility that not many in the U.S. Senate could! (1) He will give Obama the constituency that Clinton owned during the primary season; (2) Biden can also provide the pragmatic information that Obama will need to affect change; and my most favorite, (3) Obama is operating in accordance to the Laws of Power. Please go back and examine Law #45 (Preach the need for change, but never reform too much at once.)
I must admit, before the marriage scandal, I was a guy that was all for John Edwards as Veep. But, you know, I think I like this combination much better.
Chris Matthews relays my feelings about Obama the best...
I must admit, before the marriage scandal, I was a guy that was all for John Edwards as Veep. But, you know, I think I like this combination much better.
Chris Matthews relays my feelings about Obama the best...
Friday, August 22, 2008
Eltism won't Work, John...
Well, let's see what new Republican "attack" strategy against Barack Obama will be. Because obviously, the one Clinton used, "elitism," will not work well for McCain. The McCain "house problem" has seemed to put a dent in his attempts to paint Obama as an elitist. My assumption is that he (or his surrogates) will have to come a bit closer to the Conservative tradition and utilize some "Jerome Corsi, Bill O'Reilly, Shawn Hannity" type methods. This is what I suspect will happen before the campaign is over. I'd put money on that.
Saturday, August 16, 2008
SaddleBack Civil Forum
Because of the nature of this forum, I want to be a Civil as I can possibly be in my commentary.
Like the CNN correspondents that provided analysis post-forum, I believe there were stark differences between the ways in which the candidates handled the questions and presented themselves. Unlike the CNN correspondents, I do not believe John McCain did as well as Bararck Obama.
One of the centerpieces of Christianity is humility. In my understanding of Christianity, Jesus Christ was a noble, strong, virtuous, and authorative in His tone. But, one of Christ's central assets was his consistent humility. To a very large degree, His entire life and struggle with Man was based on exercising humility even when a more arrogant approach could have saved Him much psychological pain, spirtual pain, physical pain, and hearthache. Tonight, Barack Obama showed humility. His conversation was directed at Pastor Rick Warren. He answered these questions with trepidation and intelliegence. He came across as a man who exercises self-reflexivity.
A major network pundit failed to mention this, but with all the fuss about Obama's religious affiliation, he quoted Matthew's version of the gospel by referring to assisting "the least of these." McCain offered no biblical references the entire evening. Of much lesser importance to me (but seemed to cause a major stir earlier this year), Obama wore his flagpin...McCain did not.
When John McCain took the stage, I felt as if I was listening to yet another stump speech. McCain just seemed a bit more self-righteous. As a viewer, I felt like I was in a church during Obama's hour. I felt like I was in a political arena during McCain's hour.
Like the CNN correspondents that provided analysis post-forum, I believe there were stark differences between the ways in which the candidates handled the questions and presented themselves. Unlike the CNN correspondents, I do not believe John McCain did as well as Bararck Obama.
One of the centerpieces of Christianity is humility. In my understanding of Christianity, Jesus Christ was a noble, strong, virtuous, and authorative in His tone. But, one of Christ's central assets was his consistent humility. To a very large degree, His entire life and struggle with Man was based on exercising humility even when a more arrogant approach could have saved Him much psychological pain, spirtual pain, physical pain, and hearthache. Tonight, Barack Obama showed humility. His conversation was directed at Pastor Rick Warren. He answered these questions with trepidation and intelliegence. He came across as a man who exercises self-reflexivity.
A major network pundit failed to mention this, but with all the fuss about Obama's religious affiliation, he quoted Matthew's version of the gospel by referring to assisting "the least of these." McCain offered no biblical references the entire evening. Of much lesser importance to me (but seemed to cause a major stir earlier this year), Obama wore his flagpin...McCain did not.
When John McCain took the stage, I felt as if I was listening to yet another stump speech. McCain just seemed a bit more self-righteous. As a viewer, I felt like I was in a church during Obama's hour. I felt like I was in a political arena during McCain's hour.
Monday, August 4, 2008
Good Day, World!
Greetings.....
This is my very first blog...and I must say...."I am happy to be here." I am looking forward to expressing my opinions on a range of issues that I excite me on both personal and professional levels. I believe it is important for fellow bloggers to know my emotional state at this particular point in time. I am mad. I am upset. I am sincerely disgruntle about the state of affairs in the world at a macro-level. These national and global affairs are affecting me in an uniquely negative fashion at a micro-level....and have been doing so...in an intense way for the last eight years.
I can not be EXACTLY sure that the policies of George W. Bush have a large part to do with my day-to-day stresses...but I believe there's a strong possibility this might be the case. I guess this would be a good time to inform everyone that I'm a political-type of guy. ...and it's not that I long to be a politician, but I DO believe Sun Tzu, Bob Marley, and Tupac Shakur were on to something when they declared, "It's all political." Almost everything is political. The argument can be made that politics rules the world. Murray Edelman (1988) would most likely inform me that George Bush is just spectacle, figurehead, scapegoat... Cool... no problem... That actually makes me feel better about railing against him and his conservative agenda. I don't know about you guys...but I'm a fan of Barack Obama...and I can't wait for him to get into the White House. The World wants change...and American NEEDS change. ...and Barack's just the man for the job.
...but there will also be plenty of time for those discussions as well...
Because this is my first blog, it is also a good time to inform you all that I'm a representative of the ghettoGEEKS movement. In due time, you will have access to that blogspot through this one. ghettoGEEKS is a collection of erudites who believe in viewing society through veritas. Notice that I did not say through "rose-colored lenses," "conservative lenses," "liberal lenses," or any other bullshit label that "doctors of spin" would like to utilize. ghettoGEEKS is a collection of individuals who understand oppression from a first-hand point of view. These individuals did not go to school and pick up literature that explains oppression and "ghettoization." These are individuals who have such a robust experience with the "ghetto" that they can write books on the topic. In the same instance, they also understand, through first-hand experience, facets and experiences of the academy. They are simulataneously "the intelligentsia." They understand the rigors of formal education, and the responsibility, discipline, and creativity that allows one to acheive success within systems of education ranging from high schools to universities. We are the epitome of "organic intellectuals."
That's all for now....please stay tuned for wonderful ideas, discussions, arguments, etc. I look forward to sharing with you all.
Peace.
This is my very first blog...and I must say...."I am happy to be here." I am looking forward to expressing my opinions on a range of issues that I excite me on both personal and professional levels. I believe it is important for fellow bloggers to know my emotional state at this particular point in time. I am mad. I am upset. I am sincerely disgruntle about the state of affairs in the world at a macro-level. These national and global affairs are affecting me in an uniquely negative fashion at a micro-level....and have been doing so...in an intense way for the last eight years.
I can not be EXACTLY sure that the policies of George W. Bush have a large part to do with my day-to-day stresses...but I believe there's a strong possibility this might be the case. I guess this would be a good time to inform everyone that I'm a political-type of guy. ...and it's not that I long to be a politician, but I DO believe Sun Tzu, Bob Marley, and Tupac Shakur were on to something when they declared, "It's all political." Almost everything is political. The argument can be made that politics rules the world. Murray Edelman (1988) would most likely inform me that George Bush is just spectacle, figurehead, scapegoat... Cool... no problem... That actually makes me feel better about railing against him and his conservative agenda. I don't know about you guys...but I'm a fan of Barack Obama...and I can't wait for him to get into the White House. The World wants change...and American NEEDS change. ...and Barack's just the man for the job.
...but there will also be plenty of time for those discussions as well...
Because this is my first blog, it is also a good time to inform you all that I'm a representative of the ghettoGEEKS movement. In due time, you will have access to that blogspot through this one. ghettoGEEKS is a collection of erudites who believe in viewing society through veritas. Notice that I did not say through "rose-colored lenses," "conservative lenses," "liberal lenses," or any other bullshit label that "doctors of spin" would like to utilize. ghettoGEEKS is a collection of individuals who understand oppression from a first-hand point of view. These individuals did not go to school and pick up literature that explains oppression and "ghettoization." These are individuals who have such a robust experience with the "ghetto" that they can write books on the topic. In the same instance, they also understand, through first-hand experience, facets and experiences of the academy. They are simulataneously "the intelligentsia." They understand the rigors of formal education, and the responsibility, discipline, and creativity that allows one to acheive success within systems of education ranging from high schools to universities. We are the epitome of "organic intellectuals."
That's all for now....please stay tuned for wonderful ideas, discussions, arguments, etc. I look forward to sharing with you all.
Peace.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)