Black people just get it all wrong, all the time!
Here is how the conversation went between Jim and I on his post:
My initial response to Jim’s post:
Jim,
While I agree with you that the problem with human being is human beings (the point of your post), you are mistaken to compare one’s being a Christian, Muslim, or Jew to one’s racial/ethnic identity.
You state yourself:
“Gandhi was once asked what kept him from becoming a Christian. He replied, ‘Christians’. ”
However, Ghandi’s answer to the question is irrelevant to the problem of the stereotype of black criminality at all. The notion of “becoming a Christian” implies a choice, the choice to identify with a religious tradition (to receive Jesus as one’s Lord and Savior). Becoming a Muslim is a choice–submit to Allah as God and accept Muhammed as his prophet. Becoming Jewish is a choice–accept the teachings of the Torah and the rabbis.
There is no way, however, for one to “become” black, even if one changes their skin color. Like the prophet says (paraphrasing), can the Ehtiopian change his skin like a leopard changes his spots? Being black is a social construct, created by Europeans, yes white people, if you will, who were the disciples of Darwin who imposed the notion of racial evolution onto science. Blackness, whiteness, all social constructs imposed on us living in the 21st century. Secondly, blackness, is biological, traits common to people born with similar physical features.
The problems with black is whites.
Jim’s reply to me:
i think i understand what you’re getting at. but i think the jews would disagree with you. in any event, you’ve focused on a secondary issue- my primary point is that we often are the source of our own bad press. we can’t blame anyone but ourselves when that’s the case.
My reply to Jim:
Jim,
Point well noted about the Jewish view on race and religion. I am not unfamiliar with that perspective.
However, your primary issue, “that we are often the source of our own bad press” is only partially true. Racial stereotype have histories behind them. They do not just appear out of thin air. Behind these histories of racial stereotypes (where bad press as you call it comes from), there are actually historical events and people groups which have suffered the consequences of these stereotypes. For example, the Mammy stereotype, noted in Womanist religious scholarship, is known as the domesticated, asexual, overworked, overweight black woman. We can see this stereotype plainly in movies like Gone with the Wind or even today in t.v. shows. The history behind this stereotypes, as it has been documented, is the female enslaved African who worked in the homes of the plantation. Thus, the stereotype, the bad press, is not the fault of overweight overworked black women today, but the history of chattel slavery as it took place here in the United States.
Nice dialoguing with you on this issue.
Truth and Peace,
Rod
Now, before people start accusing me of being a racist or a race baiter (well, alas, too late), let me explain what I mean by “the problem with black is whites.” If you look two sentence before, I said that blackness and whiteness are social constructs handed down to us by disciples of Darwin and adherents to racial and social evolution where the blacks were held to be the lowest on the racial totem pole, since they were the closest to looking like monkeys according to pseudo science. So, the whites I was referring to were the pseudoscientists. Black criminality and the stereotypes that justify it in the media are founded upon systems of racial oppression and historic economic inequality. That was what Jim West does not see.
As for me:
Every time I turn around, read journals and articles, or watch specials like CNN’s Black In America, it gives me pause for reflection about how scholars want to show how much of a victim the Black community is. Yes, the death penalty is stacked heavily against people of color as well as drug-usage arrests; partially do to the fault of the African American community, and partially because of histories of racial bias and injustice, but here are my positions on some of the race issues:
Affirmative Action: No need for it. Racial minorities never benefitted from it and it only seems to be working for those who are of the white and female persuasion. Just ask anyone at any college campus.
Reparations: No need for it. Cannot put a price tag on lost life; we should always remember African enslavement and always repent from it, but no amount of money can cover the cost.
Afro-centrism: It is pure baloney! A disingenuous practice trying to recover an unrecoverable past and it strips the humanity of Africans today. Plus, there is not one way of doing things “African.” Africa is a construct imposed on the people living on that continent. Thank you, imperialism.
President Barack H. Obama: Not a supporter. Did not vote for him. I was like one of 2 African Americans that did not in November (just a joke). But not a crazy, have to change my facebook status to prove how libertarian I am- anti-Obama guy. He is, for the record, African-American. He was not raised in the Black community, which has the history of experiencing blackness in the United States. His father was African; He is rightfully called African-American.
Racial Segregation in the North American Church: The institution known as the Black Church was created in large part because persons such as Richard Allen (an 18th century Methodist Bishop of African descent) was refused the right to worship in a church during the days of African enslavement. While I have heard many White Christians blame African Americans for refusing to join their churches, it goes without saying that maybe there is possibly a history of oppression that has defined these relationships. Maybe we can start to change that history by first recognizing that history of racism, and then go from there, rather than ignoring it. That would be a small step towards reconciliation.
I guess Jim West’s post is part of the reason why I am doing my independent study on Evangelicalism and Histories of Race Relations in the USA. Just when I was beginning to question why I was doing it in the first place; motivation comes from the strangest places.
Truth and Peace,
Rod
19 responses so far ↓
Jared Albin // August 21, 2009 at 11:07 PM |
Yes, in Darwin’s Origin of Species and Descent of Man, he details how women are less evolved than men, not only in their physical ability, but also in their mental capacity. He also detailed how those of African descent are the least evolved, having similar noses to that of apes, as well as skin.
I have often wondered why such a misogynistic and racist thing like the theory of evolution has continued on today as it has. Giving the rise in liberalism—even the good sides of it such as women’s rights and desegregation laws—-how can these same people also push for something as opposite to their cause as that of theory of evolution? Science is not isolated. Ideas have effects. Social Darwinism is only the logical outcome of the science.
Rod // August 21, 2009 at 11:21 PM |
You are correct, Jared. Scientific Darwinism and social darwinism have a very strong relationship.
mike // August 21, 2009 at 11:32 PM |
rod,
this was a fun post to read. definitely food for thought.
here’s a question for you – how appropriate is the label “black?” in one of my classes i mentioned that my brother plays guitar in several bands in little rock. someone asked about that, so in the process of explaining, i reached the point where i said, “yeah, he also plays in a blues band. he’s actually the only white guy in the band. yeah, a 21-year-old white guy playing with a group of older black guys.” anywho, when i said that, the room became eerily quiet & i felt like i offended everyone in the room. i thought, “okaaaay . . .”
so, in your opinion, what was that about? aside from the euro construct stuff, is there a local negative connotation with the word “black?” i just haven’t lived anywhere where the word “black” was offensive (though i’ve definitely seen racism in some ugly forms)
just curious what your thoughts are
mf
Rod // August 21, 2009 at 11:40 PM |
Hey Mike,
That is an excellent question. I believe that the class’s response was probably one of confusion. Perhaps you did not explain what you meant, but in any case, race is a volatile issue at Brite. As Dr. Feille says, no one has arrived.
There is nothing wrong with using the term “Black” to describe African-Americans (I prefer black). Maybe you should have given the context a bit more, like the population of Arkansas and its culture; otherwise, people will just depend on their stereotypes to inform them of their own opinions. That is probably the reason for the class’s judgmental attitude.
I hope that helps.
Truth and Peace,
Rod
Celucien Joseph // August 22, 2009 at 1:04 AM |
Well articulated Rod.
Yeshua is the Lord of Glory // August 22, 2009 at 3:24 AM |
Unrelated Rod.Well sorta unrelated-you decide…Anyway i thought you might like this…
I took it from Polycarp’s blog….The epistle to Diognetus…
For the Christians are distinguished from other men neither by country, nor language, nor the customs which they observe. For they neither inhabit cities of their own, nor employ a peculiar form of speech, nor lead a life which is marked out by any singularity. The course of conduct which they follow has not been devised by any speculation or deliberation of inquisitive men; nor do they, like some, proclaim themselves the advocates of any merely human doctrines. But, inhabiting Greek as well as barbarian cities, according as the lot of each of them has determined, and following the customs of the natives in respect to clothing, food, and the rest of their ordinary conduct, they display to us their wonderful and confessedly striking 281 Literally, “paradoxicalmethod of life. They dwell in their own countries, but simply as sojourners. As citizens, they share in all things with others, and yet endure all things as if foreigners. Every foreign land is to them as their native country, and every land of their birth as a land of strangers. They marry, as do all [others]; they beget children; but they do not cast away fetuses. They have a common table, but not a common bed.They are in the flesh, but they do not live after the flesh. They pass their days on earth, but they are citizens of heaven.They obey the prescribed laws, and at the same time surpass the laws by their lives. They love all men, and are persecuted by all. They are unknown and condemned; they are put to death, and restored to life. They are poor, yet make many rich; they are in lack of all things, and yet abound in all; they are dishonoured, and yet in their very dishonour are glorified. They are evil spoken of, and yet are justified; they are reviled, and bless; they are insulted, and repay the insult with honour; they do good, yet are punished as evil-doers. When punished, they rejoice as if quickened into life; they are assailed by the Jews as foreigners, and are persecuted by the Greeks; yet those who hate them are unable to assign any reason for their hatred.
This Week's Favorite Posts | The Church of Jesus Christ // August 22, 2009 at 10:05 AM |
[...] to Dr. West’s post this week. I don’t agree with Dr. West. I would prefer to agree with Rodney. Rob, as weighed in as well. (Unrelated, but Rodney has an excellent post in the Wisdom/Logos [...]
Rob Kashow // August 22, 2009 at 10:09 AM |
Bill Cosby has been speaking out against the black communities for years.
Rod // August 22, 2009 at 1:35 PM |
Louis Farrakhan has been speaking out against the white and Jewish communities for years. Does not mean that he is right.
mike // August 22, 2009 at 3:06 PM |
does bill cosby really speak out against the black community? i’m uninformed, but my general impression was that cosby was critical of black leaders who reinforce a victimization mentality and in effect hinder many african americans from striving for excellence. i’ve only seen one of his speeches, and that was pretty much the tone of it (without agreeing or disagreeing with it, i think that’s what he was trying to get across on that occasion). so, is there more to cosby than i know?
thanks for the help. one day i might actually be an informed person. strike that – no is truly informed, i guess i should jump in & pretend to be just b/c everyone else is.
thanks for your time
Rod // August 22, 2009 at 3:58 PM |
Mike,
You are right. Cosby just criticized the black community but he did not really “speak out against them”; just a poor choice of words on Rob’s part.
Rob Kashow // August 22, 2009 at 5:15 PM |
what are you talking about. ’speak out against’ and ‘criticize’ are essentially synonymous. ridiculous.
Rod // August 22, 2009 at 5:19 PM |
Actually, no.
To criticize is not really to speak against. Cosby is criticizing because he wants to see improvement in an area that may or may not be lacking in the African-American community. Speaking against would be like Farrakahn, my early example, speaking against the USA simply because it was founded by white men for the sake of spreading his angry feelings.
At any rate, Rob, the point is that Bill Cosby’s comments do not just excuse certain churches and particular Christian circles for remaining racially segregated. That is all.
Truth and Peace,
Rod
Rob Kashow // August 22, 2009 at 6:15 PM |
criticize: “to find fault; judge unfavorably or harshly.”
This is the same as what “Farrakahn” is doing. You’re making up a distinction between the two because you have already decided that the two are different.
And my point is that I did not have a poor choice of words.
Concerning Cosby, I never said his comments excused certain churches and particular Christians circles for remaining racially segregated. But there are many more layers to it then a call to unity. There are geographical and socio-economic considerations that need to be accounted for.
Rod // August 22, 2009 at 7:03 PM |
Rob: “There are geographical and socio-economic considerations that need to be accounted for.”
Sounding more and more post-colonial each day Rob. I think I may be converting you! lolz.
Is Jim West Blaming the victim again? « Political Jesus: Journeys In Nonresistant Love // September 3, 2009 at 10:12 AM |
[...] True to form, Jim West had to give his two cents in as pope of the Biblioblogs. Two weeks ago, Jim blamed racial minorities for the stereotypes they are cast as over and again without examining the histories of oppression or histories behind these stereotypes as I pointed out. [...]
Can the Subaltern Blog?: The problem of institutional sexism and the biblioblogs « Political Jesus: Journeys In Nonresistant Love // September 6, 2009 at 2:33 AM |
[...] Wisdom in John's PrologueMoses as Fanon's Colonized Intellectual: Wretched of the Earth and ExodusBlame it on Black People: let's find some more negative statistics! About RodPedagogy BREAKING NEWS: Senator Ted Kennedy has passed [...]
This Week in Bibiloblogdom | The Church of Jesus Christ // September 12, 2009 at 7:03 AM |
[...] Top 50. Surely, it’s an innocuous title, and we don’t blame him for it (here, here, here, and here), however, some have questioned the idea of formalizing the group – which has been [...]
Playing the Victim « Political Jesus // December 8, 2009 at 12:42 AM |
[...] there is one thing that I hate more than blaming the victim is when persons, who have a voice in the academy and society, and a predominant one at that, feign [...]