Some say that in polite society, one should not discuss sex, politics or religion; or for that matter, race.
Well, I beg to differ; it is time people did discuss race and I mean all people, white and black as a means of learning something about each other. Barack Obama, who is basically a white person in dark skin, knows both sides. He was abandoned by his Kenyan father at 2 and raised by his white mother and white grandparents - so is he white or black and why does he have to run as a “black” and not a “white” in dark skin? Is it how you look on the outside or on the inside that counts?
Anyway, the saga of Detroit Kwame Kilpatrick raises a historic opportunity to see the changing face of race from the black side. Detroit is basically black with a smattering of Latinos and whites here and there but 80-90% black.
This morning’s papers reported that a recent poll found the city divided in half about the mayor’s case. One half supports the mayor and the other half want him gone. As I have suggested in my previous comments; this is a battle between the old school blacks and the new school blacks (I made up the designations for the purpose of identity).
The old school blacks met at the Shrine of the Black Madonna Church last night in support of the mayor. Speaker after speaker blamed the “suburbanites”, read “whites”, for trying to weaken if not destroy the mayor because he is a symbol of black power.
This theme has been echoed many times in the past when the “white” state of Michigan took over the Detroit Public School system because it was totally dysfunctional, run by corrupt and inept administrators who neglected the student’s (black) welfare to line their own pockets. You would think Detroiter’s would have thanked the State for stopping or trying to fix this abysmal situation. No, the cry went out that whites were trying to steal power from the black community to run their own affairs even if all evidence pointed to the fact that they could not run their own affairs.
The mayor’s supporters (including many prominent church pastors) along with city whites, ignored the fact that crimes have been committed by the mayor and painted him as the victim of a power grab by “others”. The mayor himself said that, and I paraphrase, others have done worse things and have remained free; in essence, minimizing what he did in relation to all the “good” that he has done and is capable of doing in the future.
A very diverse group of Detroit women also went on TV in support of the mayor saying he is a huge asset to the city and should not be compromised by these insignificant legal charges; just make them go away. The fact that this was an all-female group spoke to the infidelity charge; we forgive him, he is only a man like the rest of them and can’t help himself.
A special, very expensive public relations woman / firm was hired to orchestrate this whole charade and by the looks of things, she is doing a hell of a job which begs another question; who is paying for all this and what do they expect in return?
But enough about the old school blacks; what about the blacks on the other side, the ones I call new school? The way the media describes this group, they are a group that does not want to remain isolated by race, they want to be part of the greater society; a society that wants to eliminate race as a divider. In the case of this specific issue, they want to be known as just “responsible Detroiters” who will no longer put up with a politician and a political system in the city that mocks the law, mocks the citizens of Detroit and in a greater sense, insults the black community by intimating that blacks are somehow above or exempt from the rules that guide American society as a whole.
The above, I think, is a crucial point in this whole sad, sordid affair. I think the city of Detroit is at a juncture where things can remain the same which means sinking lower and lower or things can change, finally, for the better. Just getting rid of Kilpatrick will not solve all the problems right away but replacing him with someone that will not answer to or depend on the entrenched black city “mafia” would be a great start.
Does such a person exist? Well he or she probably does exist but is not visible at this point in time. This person will need to step up to the plate and announce themselves as a candidate to be the leader of a new Detroit. I have my fingers crossed.
Note: To the people that are squeamish about my views on race for whatever reasons they may have; I want to reiterate that I am a history nut, a religious history nut as well as an observer and commentator on our world as it passes by my window. I may not always see things as others do or even, for that matter, correctly but it is my view, based on my perceptions and my experiences and my erudition and as long as I am allowed to voice my opinions freely, I will do so but I will also welcome and embrace constructive criticism.
Well, I beg to differ; it is time people did discuss race and I mean all people, white and black as a means of learning something about each other. Barack Obama, who is basically a white person in dark skin, knows both sides. He was abandoned by his Kenyan father at 2 and raised by his white mother and white grandparents - so is he white or black and why does he have to run as a “black” and not a “white” in dark skin? Is it how you look on the outside or on the inside that counts?
Anyway, the saga of Detroit Kwame Kilpatrick raises a historic opportunity to see the changing face of race from the black side. Detroit is basically black with a smattering of Latinos and whites here and there but 80-90% black.
This morning’s papers reported that a recent poll found the city divided in half about the mayor’s case. One half supports the mayor and the other half want him gone. As I have suggested in my previous comments; this is a battle between the old school blacks and the new school blacks (I made up the designations for the purpose of identity).
The old school blacks met at the Shrine of the Black Madonna Church last night in support of the mayor. Speaker after speaker blamed the “suburbanites”, read “whites”, for trying to weaken if not destroy the mayor because he is a symbol of black power.
This theme has been echoed many times in the past when the “white” state of Michigan took over the Detroit Public School system because it was totally dysfunctional, run by corrupt and inept administrators who neglected the student’s (black) welfare to line their own pockets. You would think Detroiter’s would have thanked the State for stopping or trying to fix this abysmal situation. No, the cry went out that whites were trying to steal power from the black community to run their own affairs even if all evidence pointed to the fact that they could not run their own affairs.
The mayor’s supporters (including many prominent church pastors) along with city whites, ignored the fact that crimes have been committed by the mayor and painted him as the victim of a power grab by “others”. The mayor himself said that, and I paraphrase, others have done worse things and have remained free; in essence, minimizing what he did in relation to all the “good” that he has done and is capable of doing in the future.
A very diverse group of Detroit women also went on TV in support of the mayor saying he is a huge asset to the city and should not be compromised by these insignificant legal charges; just make them go away. The fact that this was an all-female group spoke to the infidelity charge; we forgive him, he is only a man like the rest of them and can’t help himself.
A special, very expensive public relations woman / firm was hired to orchestrate this whole charade and by the looks of things, she is doing a hell of a job which begs another question; who is paying for all this and what do they expect in return?
But enough about the old school blacks; what about the blacks on the other side, the ones I call new school? The way the media describes this group, they are a group that does not want to remain isolated by race, they want to be part of the greater society; a society that wants to eliminate race as a divider. In the case of this specific issue, they want to be known as just “responsible Detroiters” who will no longer put up with a politician and a political system in the city that mocks the law, mocks the citizens of Detroit and in a greater sense, insults the black community by intimating that blacks are somehow above or exempt from the rules that guide American society as a whole.
The above, I think, is a crucial point in this whole sad, sordid affair. I think the city of Detroit is at a juncture where things can remain the same which means sinking lower and lower or things can change, finally, for the better. Just getting rid of Kilpatrick will not solve all the problems right away but replacing him with someone that will not answer to or depend on the entrenched black city “mafia” would be a great start.
Does such a person exist? Well he or she probably does exist but is not visible at this point in time. This person will need to step up to the plate and announce themselves as a candidate to be the leader of a new Detroit. I have my fingers crossed.
Note: To the people that are squeamish about my views on race for whatever reasons they may have; I want to reiterate that I am a history nut, a religious history nut as well as an observer and commentator on our world as it passes by my window. I may not always see things as others do or even, for that matter, correctly but it is my view, based on my perceptions and my experiences and my erudition and as long as I am allowed to voice my opinions freely, I will do so but I will also welcome and embrace constructive criticism.
No comments:
Post a Comment