Showing posts with label racist. Show all posts
Showing posts with label racist. Show all posts

Friday, 6 August 2010

Is Saying 'Black Power' a Racist Statement?

Q. "Recently, in New York City, a transit worker put a 'Black Power' sign up in his booth at the train station. He was asked to take it down by a White man. When he refused the man took a picture of it and then called the media which jumped on it. I have very mixed feelings about this but I want to hear what you think first. Do you think posting a 'Black Power' sign on Martin Luther King Day denotes racism? I can't speak for anywhere else but the phrase 'Black Power' in New York was developed by us for us.  It had nothing to do with putting White people or anyone else down."


A. The key question here is: Would you feel happy and comfortable with someone who suddenly puts up a poster saying 'White Power'? If you wouldn't, then it is about mutual respect. Empowering phrases like 'Black Power' served a purpose IN THEIR OWN TIME. The problem with many Black people who might feel impotent about their life and progress is that they are not moving on in life, not evolving from one time or experience to another. They feel they have little to be joyful about so they still use tired old slogans, which exclude others; still live in the past and are seeking scapegoats for their situation, when times have moved on. They put emphasis on words, when something more tangible is needed to improve their life and perspective. We need to be more inclusive of others now, to stop the blame and take responsibility for ourselves. That's the only way to self-empowerment and true power. As to the sign being put up on Martin Luther King Day, it does the great man a disservice. Dr King did not preach division, or simply extolling ourselves. Far from it, he taught unity and co-existing together. Genuine equality, that was his dream. Not one person above another.

We cannot be demanding respect if we give none. We cannot want to be treated fairly if we are still being exclusive of others and unfair to them purely because of their colour. At the heart of respect is sensitivity. If we have none towards the feelings of others, how can we genuinely expect our sensitivities to be respected and appreciated? We do not gain self-esteem and power by putting others down, otherwise we too are dragged down by it. That phrase might have suited the past when we wished to make a point to racists and to encourage our self-belief in some awful situations. But it is quite inappropriate now, especially if we have White friends and colleagues and want to build bridges.

You are right that 'Black Power' emerged initially, from a sea of racism, as a great motivator to remind us of our talent and potential, but it is increasingly being used as a kind of superior one-upmanship against White peers. My question is, why do we STILL need to keep saying it? Aren't we convinced yet of our own power and worth? Power is subtle and pervasive. If we have to point it out, we haven't got it! Do we feel so inferior to others that we have to keep reminding ourself how 'powerful' we are, when no other culture behaves in that way? They simply get on with it and prove their worth in their creativity, innovation and their wealth. Meanwhile, we merely keep shouting words, yet living double standards in our behaviour. We are still calling each other 'niggas', our women 'hoes' and 'bitches, still using violence against one another at every turn, still being a nation of single mothers while our children are deprived of balanced parentage, and too many of our men are incarcerated in prison instead of educating themselves to take advantage of their revolutionary world and its opportunities.

Is that all the 'power' we can actually muster as a community?


Engaging in Positive Action
We develop esteem and genuine power through SELF-LOVE, high personal standards and kindness and compassion towards others. When we no longer feel the need to shout 'Black Power', to feel superior or treat others in a mean way to uplift ourself, we will be truly powerful. No one will have to tell us then. That's when we would have matured and evolved because we would have finally laid down the past and freed ourselves from its limiting and caustic effects.

We need to stop talking and start doing. Start engaging one another in positive action, in love instead of hate, because words are pointless without the actions to match. Then I might begin to believe that, collectively, we truly have 'Black Power'. We will not only be saying it then, but the quality of our life, the achievements within it, and the love we give out will be ample evidence of it. Oprah Winfrey has "Black Power" and it is not only about her money. Her influence is pervasive across American life - the universal reference point for making things happen. She makes people's careers just by engaging them. I regard myself as a very powerful Black woman too because I love who I am, I have no wish to be anyone else and am neither above nor beneath anyone. Being successful in my own small way, there is no place for blame in my vocabulary, only love. I sincerely believe I can make a difference to the lives of others, every single day, even with a simple smile. I don't need to shout about having 'Black Power'. I just prefer to demonstrate it in my actions. When you believe it, it becomes a natural part of your life. There is nothing further to prove, except to utilise the opportunities, the rewards and the enormous potential available.

In answer to your question, in my opinion, 'Black Power', would be deemed as racist now because it implies superiority over other colours and cultures. Regardless of its value to Black people, if a White person pointedly said similar in our presence, we would be offended. That does not improve understanding and tolerance or bring us any closer together. The last words go to Dr. King:

"Hatred paralyzes life; love releases it. Hatred confuses life; love harmonizes it. Hatred darkens life; love illuminates it....Love is the only force capable of transforming an enemy into a friend."

Friday, 30 July 2010

Will the Coalition be Reforming the British Honours System?

Now that the new Coalition government seems to be sweeping the country with their reforms of one kind or another, will they also be tackling the last vestige of white supremacy while they are at it? The last insult to a multicultural society?

Last June, the usual crop of public honours recipients was announced in London. The Queen's Birthday and New Years' Honours Lists "reflect and pay tribute to outstanding achievement and service right across the community" says the blurb, but often one wonders which community it's dealing with because the people who do receive the very top honours are seldom the ones who would be recognised by the general community.

The awards system, which still carries the obnoxious tag of 'Empire', and glory in its colonial legacy and traditions, is still alive and well when it should have been pensioned off years ago. With whiffs of honours for sale, it is about time this particular heritage is retired gracefully and something more reflective of modern society and true merit introduced in its place. Britain prides itself on its equal opportunities and diverse multicultural society, yet, just casting a glance at the Knights and Dames honours, as in every past year, men outnumber women by nearly 3 to 1 and very few minorities achieve the very highest ranks like Commanders of Knights. From the spread of honours, one can assume that men are more deserving than women and Whites more deserving than Blacks. Nothing that has lasted so many years can still serve a different society today in an efficient way, and in the same form, when we have advanced in amazing ways and with constantly changing perspectives.

I mean, a lady running her business successfully for over 50 years gets a mere OBE. Yet still active in her nineties! What on earth does she have to do to get the CBE or Damehood? Another 50 years?

I would scrap this outdated and exclusive honours system if I were David Cameron. It is getting really tired and irrelevant now in the way they are still awarded on class lines and still refer to that great 'Empire' which has an invisible location to the British public. Where exactly do we find this British Empire? Perhaps if we stopped hanging on to the past and looked to our future we would be even greater than before. To award a member of a minority group with a reminder of a discriminatory, racist and repressive colonial regime is disrespectful and offensive in this global age.

We are now desperate for an inclusive MODERN awards system that one does not have to pay money for, which will apply right across the board to everyone in our multicultural society; one which will reflect the national pride we should feel for Britain TODAY, not yesterday. An award system to help bind the country together as one in a spirit of achievement and togetherness, not keep people artificially apart and stuck in yesteryear! Is that the best we can do now to recognise our people?

These awards are an anachronism in today's technological 21st century world. The quicker that is realised and acted upon, the more the credibility of the British honours system will be restored and the more reflective of its multicultural society it will gradually become.

Tuesday, 4 September 2007

Do we really need a Black History Month?



As one who has spent the last 14 years promoting multiculturalism from the rooftops in the UK, through the only book on the subject and two annual national diversity awards, I have been pretty saddened this year to hear government ministers and others trumpeting that 'multiculturalism isn't working' or we 'cannot celebrate diversity because it encourages difference' and keeps us separate. But both statements are based upon ignorance and fear which does not really help a diverse community to move forward together.

There is nothing wrong with celebrating diversity or encouraging multiculturalism. What has been terribly wrong is a marked absence of respect on both sides of the cultural divide which makes appreciation difficult. The word 'respect' is glibly shouted by everyone in times of crisis, but it seems to be only in connection with our own needs and viewpoint and very little to do with others. We all seek respect, we feel we are denied it, we accuse each other of not giving it. But in reality, we are simply in love with the idea of the word itself, not its implementation. This could be because we really do not understand the meaning of this important word. Let's take some glaring examples of disrespect.

Origins of Disrespect
1. Exclusive labels: October has a special significance for minorities. As usual, it is Black History Month to celebrate Black heritage and culture. This is not just a showcase but an educational opportunity for the White majority to learn about their minority neighbours. It also empowers Black people to take pride in their identity and thus a wholesome cause for celebration. There are also many pointedly 'Black', 'Asian' or 'Muslim' organisations which were created to encourage a positive identity and to guard against isolation, primarily because of their exclusion from the mainstream. Nothing wrong with that at all. However, how would members of minority groups feel if they suddenly saw signs and promotion for a 'White History Month', 'White Women Forum', the 'White Professional Association' or the 'White Entrepreneurs Club', labels which are clearly racist and exclusive? They would rightfully be up in arms. Where is the sensitivity (respect again) for the pointedly White exclusion in those labels? Yet, in a diverse society, such cultural sensitivities are very important if we are to learn about, value, and appreciate one another.

2. Negative media coverage. Black History Month emerged because of a lack of positive attention to minorities (respect again!) by the media. Minorities in Britain are virtually invisible in every aspect of life except crime. We hear about them ad nauseam in relation to terrorism, guns, gangs and street crime but hardly in any other dimension. The only time you hear about minorities is when something negative is being reported. Black History Month was introduced to counteract that media exclusion, to give much needed positivity and visibility. Yet, there should be no need for a Black History month at all because there is just a flurry of activities in October (and February in the USA), a month saturated with events where everyone tries to be heard, to be significant and valued, and then nothing else for the other 11 months. Like tragic cuckoos, they coo loudly once, then go back inside their clocks for another year. What minorities need is to be treated ordinarily, like the majority community, with balance and value.

For example, the focus on celebrities is pervasive in our society. But where are the minority celebrities and achievers? The ones well known in their communities but are ignored by the mainstream press? Where are the minority guests on chat shows? On discussion panels? On entertainment programmes? Where are the minority writers to give alternative viewpoints? Such an exclusive and racist approach keeps minorities in the public eye as extraordinary and non-contributing beings who are simply taking from society. It uses them in situations that bolster national fear (immigration and crime) while ignoring the vast majority of law abiding, legal citizens quietly playing their part in their communities. Minorities are also used in a cynical way to show national pride abroad, as with the Olympics when multculturalism was suddenly cool and essential, but are largely excluded from the preparations, the promotion and the service contracts.


Lack of Recognition
3. Today I visited the website of a top national newspaper and, of its 24 writers paraded for the public, only one was Black. I won't even mention television and radio because commercial radio, in particular, is dismal when it comes to representation of their diverse audience among radio staff. Is it any wonder that the views in the media are so skewed against minorities when there is a basic lack of recognition for them, with hardly anyone speaking with any cultural knowledge? That is why there is very little sensitivity (respect again) to minority views and feelings. Being on the negative end of any reporting, they are fair game for people seeking sensational headlines without any responsibility for the divisive consquences of their actions. The BBC has been recently accused of racism by a prominent writer in 21st century Britain. That is very sad today. The real worry is that if the BBC is still lagging behind in its own objectives, a service which is supposed to be serving, and representing, the whole community, what can one expect of lesser organisations?

Diversity and multiculturalism can work harmoniously when all parties are prepared to compromise, and accord each other respect. We cannot simply demand respect for ourselves while giving none because no country can thrive with a divided nation. If we really love our country, we strive together to make it a great place to live. However, we cannot respect what we don't understand or appreciate.

Starting from that base, Black History Month should be scrapped and minority heritage and culture celebrated all year round, just like that of the White majority, but under a diversity label. For example, what about Our Diverse Music in January, Our Diverse Literature in February, Arts and Crafts in April, Dance in May, Diverse Foods in June?...You get the drift. It means that, instead of just focusing on minority crime and negative issues around minorities, the White media can actually begin to pay some proportional attention, throughout the year, to the positivity of being a minority, and the rich diversity of our nation, through the cultural exchange of knowledge, particularly encouraging involvement and patronage by White sponsors and patrons. That is the only way to make all people feel included, to engender loyalty and pride, and the main way to change White perception of their Black neighbours.

It is also the only way for all British citizens, whatever their origins, to feel significant, appreciated, valued and included. In effect, to feel respected.

Monday, 4 June 2007

Is the British Royal Family Irrelevant?


A member of the Royal Family finally said something about the disappearance of little Madeleine McCann, a full 14 days after she disappeared. Members of this august family are not known for their pronouncements on the public stage, but it has been accepted that when there is a real tragedy, especially on a personal basis, we expect our Royal Family to give a lead, especially in compassion, care and appreciation of the situation. Despite that appalling tragedy for the family, and the incredible amount of attention it has drawn, it took Prince Andrew two weeks to say something, and it wasn't planned either. He departed from his set text in Scotland to be human. One could be cynical and say that, whatever else he was going to pronounce on at that event would not have had so much media coverage, so he made a wise decision!

The Royal Family is rapidly becoming an anachronism in today's classless world of high tech reactions, individual expressiveness and instant soundbites. The Queen still gives out medals and public honours based on the 'British Empire', yet where that empire exists these days is entirely beyond me. Paradoxically, she is head of a commonwealth which is highly multi-racial, yet there is not a single Black person in her entourage, no Black advisers and certainly no Black staff in her palace. Furthermore, this commonwealth is is weighed down under the oppressive symbolism of an unjust 'empire' that obstinately continues to take pride of place in our language, no matter how offensive it is to certain sections of the British community. There is no move to get rid of the archaic, divisive and racist symbolisms which divide her subjects, despite her important role in the commonwealth.


In the dark ages
The problem with the royal Family is that it has not changed with the times. Members are still trying to apply traditional, unequal ways of behaving to a situation which has long dispensed with tradition. Diana offered a golden chance of bringing the monarchy up to date with current expectations, but her demise meant that her sons offer the best hope of change. In a world where blog is king, there is no place for silence from our Royal Family anymore otherwise they rule themselves out of our rapidly advancing world simply by omission. That could explain why, except for the Queen, William and Harry, their popularity has dramatically declined and only a few people turn up to see them at events. We need a caring, expressive Royal family who is not just there for the tourists, but one who, through its own lead, will begin to justify the £10 million per year the public purse has to supply to keep them in the dark ages.

In its present form, the Royal Family is definitely irrelevant, having the trappings without the substance. As a strong Royalist who has no desire to see Britain become a republic, to me it would be nice to see a leading Family which is more in tune with our modern age, more approachable, more inclusive and far more appreciative of the benefits of technology to getting their own message across; one that is no longer guided by a colonial empire but reflecting a modern society based on respect for the individual, regardless of class, race, creed or birth.

Tuesday, 10 April 2007

Why Don Imus Was Right to be Sacked



The CBS popular radio announcer, Don Imus, who enjoys over two million listeners on the radio station WFAN, called the Black members of the Rutgers University team "nappy headed hoes". As usual, he does not believe he is racist and leading Black leaders called for him to be fired. As a Black person, normally I would be against anyone losing their job or livelihood because of a racist remark, no matter how abhorrent. But this case is different for three main reasons.

First, Imus has had thirty years in his job, building up a sizable audience for his morning show; people who, no doubt, look to him for guidance and being a role model. One would have thought that those years in the job would have given him a sensitivity for the feelings of his audience and a respect for the listeners who keep him there. One would also have expected that such long years would have built up an expertise which fosters the kind of responsibility and respect we would expect from such an experienced talk show host.

Yet, his critics say that during his thirty years he has shown a 'pattern of racially charged remarks' which he retorted were either 'misinterpreted' or 'satirical'. Regardless of misinterpretation, or otherwise, they were still racist, yet he did not desist. But racist remarks of any kind have no place in the vocabulary of someone on the public stage who is supposed to be serving a diverse audience. Being in a position of authority, especially with the privilege of being White in a majority White community, carries certain responsibilities as well as rights. We cannot attack people who are weak, or powerless, then say we are not bullies. Just as one cannot continue to use racist language down the years, aimed at vulnerable members of the community, then say one is not racist. It's a contradiction in terms. If we use the language of the bully, we are bullies, and if we use the language of the racist, we are racist. We cannot use the language of hate if we aspire to love. The two are inompatible.


Language Conveys Meaning
Second, the language we use defines who we are. For example, the word 'boredom' does not exist in my vocabulary. I have never used it in my lifetime to describe my feelings because I have too much to do in any one day and cannot find the time to be bored at any point. The word NO does not exist for me either, especially when trying to achieve something, because I believe everything is possible. Someone else who does not believe that will think 'no' first before they look at the possibilities. Moreover, I have never thought of saying anything racist about another person because I value every person and treat them with respect until they show me otherwise. So language is not just something we learn to use for communication or our benefit; not just something we pluck out of the air at random. Language represents who we are, body and soul, and the meanings we wish to convey.

We cannot use negative language and achieve positive aims, neither can we put down others and expect to make friends with them. Language reflects our identity, ethics, beliefs, who we are and aspire to be. We give life to what we believe through language. We would NEVER use words we are not comfortable with unless we are coerced. We also stamp our own style on our use of words so much that when something comes from us which doesn't sound in line with our personalities, not the 'normal' thing we would say, people begin to wonder. Language comes from the heart and the head to reflect exactly who we are and what we value. So when we use negative terms against others, we are actually demonstrating our fears, our insecurities, our low self-esteem, prejudices and, most of all, our feeling of power over them. We have the power to say such remarks, so we do it. Otherwise, why would this man, who has a job many would die for, wish to say something so awful about vulnerable women far away he didn't even know - comparing Black beauty to White beauty which is culturally incomparable.

Finally, his responsibilities. Don Imus has a radio programme which goes out to a diverse community with sponsors from that community. When he disparagingly talks about certain people in such racist ways, what message is he giving to his Black listeners about their worth and value? Most important, how does he expect those listeners to react who thinks him worthy enough for their time in tuning in to his programme? Sometimes, as we get so bloated with our own power, we forget about respect to the people who put us where we are. The word RESPECT has sensitivity at its core. Where was Imus' sensitivity to his diverse audience?

However, the comment which summed up the real effect of Don's offensive remarks came from Senator Barack Obama about his children and went straight to the heart of the issue with its simplicity. "He didn't just cross the line," Obama said in an interview. "He fed into some of the worst stereotypes that my two young daughters are having to deal with today in America. The notions that as young African-American women.....that somehow makes them less beautiful or less important. It was a degrading comment...."

Imus abused the authority placed in him as a public announcer, one who is supposed to be serving ALL members of his public, not just the White section of it. If he decides to make racist fodder out of others, he should know that carries consequences. By showing little sensitivity to his diverse audience and supporters with those awful sexist and racist remarks, he effectively relinquished the authority vested in him to act in an unbiased way and forfeited that respect. It depends on the society we seek if we can actually condone such discriminatory behaviour in the 21st century. The world has moved on a lot with our global interaction, a point that certain old hands are ignoring and resisting until they are foced to acknowledge it. Perhaps for the first time in his life, Don Imus is learning that certain actions have consequences, and free speech actually carries responsibilities for ensuring the rights of everyone.
Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket