So What Now?

So the world's most fearsome red herring, Osama bin Laden, is no more. I don't want to rain on anyone's parade, but militant Islam doesn't live or die with OBL, and hasn't for a long time. I'm elated he's dead, but I'm not deluded enough to think this will have any effect on our endless War on Terror, much less a downscaling. I'm also not deluded enough to buy that OBL wasn't being sheltered and shuttled by very senior, high-ranking elements within Pakistan. But we'll see how it plays out.

An appropriately subdued speech by the Prez, with a minimum of chest-thumping.  Of course, a dirty hippie like me can point out the irony of our America-hating, secretly Muslim president being the one to finally "get" OBL, but there's no reason to think that those who are hell-bent on othering Obama will be swayed by the wonderful news.

Commentary: The Furor Over Black Marriage

Depending on the day, my attitude toward traditional heterosexual marriage ranges from agnostic to pretty cynical, so perhaps what I say should be taken with a grain of salt. But the current obsession with the relatively low rates of marriage among African-Americans is starting to get on my nerves.

It's no easy thing to go against the pro-marriage tide, since the Crisis of the Black Family has been an established theme for damn near 50 years (if the notorious Moynihan Report of 1965 can be marked as its beginning). Moreover, our community's obsession with the issue does reflect some genuine yearning for the kind of haven in a heartless world that present conditions too often deny us. And who can deny the advantages of two stable, resourceful, mutually committed people (of opposite sex or not) working together to manage a household and raise children?

Therein lies problem with this one-sided discussion: the benefits of marriage are so relentlessly hyped that it's hard to believe that Black people haven't gotten the message by now. Whenever we come in for a public scolding on programs like CNN's "Black in America" series, it seems that the gathered Black talking heads never offer more than the most token resistance to the "fact" that heterosexual marriage should be the desired state for all Black people. Then we have contrived events such as the proudly heteronormative "National Black Marriage Day"--which, though undoubtedly well-meaning, gives off more than a whiff of Black insecurity, the kind that would make a besieged people say, "See, White America? We're worried about this problem too!"

The Villager, 4/8/11 - "Democrats fight losing battle over state budget"

In a vote that sharply reflects the deep ideological fissure within the state, the Committee Substitute for House Bill 1 (C.S.H.B. 1), the general appropriations bill that sets the budget for the state, passed the Texas House of Representatives Sunday by a vote of 98-49. The bill cuts tens of billions from public and higher education, health and human services, and public safety programs, while keeping the state Rainy Day Fund mostly intact—a key goal of fiscal conservatives.

For the 82^nd Legislature, the momentum toward steep spending cuts was established early, even though Democrats have always insisted that the story of the deficit is also the story of certain well-heeled players—some of them major corporations—refusing to pay their fair share in taxes.

“We can’t afford to subsidize companies that are making millions and billions of dollars while we have folks that are getting layed-off in our schools,” said Davis. “It’s the will of the leadership to recognize that we need additional resources.”

Dallas Examiner, 3/31/11 - "Why minorities can not afford to let redistricting take a back seat"

It’s basic civics: the U.S. Constitution requires a national population count, or census, to be conducted once a decade in order to determine the apportionment of congressional districts. In the case of Texas in 2011, the issue of legislative redistricting, despite its profound implications for the practical workings of democracy (not to mention the ability of certain minority groups to be represented by the elected officials of their choosing), has so far had to take a back seat to the ongoing wrangling over the state budget—a sign of the unprecedented fiscal crisis confronting the state. But previous redistricting battles offer a prelude to what Texans can expect in the coming months.

Casual political observers got their most recent taste of partisan redistricting in 2003 when a Republican majority was able to push through a controversial mid-decade redistricting plan—fought by numerous advocacy groups including the Texas NAACP and Texas League of United Latin American Citizens—that sent more Texas Republicans to Congress in 2004. But a pair of North Texans on the House Redistricting Committee, Rep. Marc Veasey (D-Ft. Worth) and Rep. Roberto Alonzo (D-Dallas), insist that concerned Texans can’t afford to lose sight of the fact that more than just partisan advantage can be lost for those who end up with the short end of the redistricting stick.

Dallas Examiner, 3/24/11 - "Johnson discusses bills, budgets and service"

As the newest member of the Dallas delegation to the Texas legislature, Rep. Eric Johnson may have had the slightest inkling what he was getting into when he first contemplated running for the District seat once held by longtime state rep Terri Hodge. But with the legislative session entering its third month, and with Johnson having filed several pieces of legislation, including bills on ethics reform, eminent domain, and curbing abuses in the payday lending industry—not to mention his recently being named to the all-important House Appropriations Committee—Rep. Johnson can no longer be considered uninitiated. With HB 1, the House’s version of the budget, having just passed out of the Appropriations Committee on an 18-7 party-line vote, Johnson has a front row seat to some of the most contentious and high-stakes negotiations among legislators, negotiations that will profoundly impact the lives of his own constituents as well as those of Texans in general.

Examiner: On Feb. 9 the Senate passed SB 18, which purportedly protects private property rights against eminent domain. Have you had a chance to look at it, and how similar is it to your bills?

Johnson: I have begun to review SB 18 with my staff.  It contains provisions similar to my bill, HB 747, which requires the disclosure of more information to property owners who are affected by the eminent domain process.  My other bills touch on subjects not addressed by SB 18:  HB 745 will ensure that property owners are provided documents pertaining to eminent domain in the language of their choice. HB 746 will ensure property owners receive enough compensation to allow them to continue to own a home or operate a business in their community.

Dallas Examiner, 3/17/11 - "The Doggett Amendment controversy"

In this time of budget deficits and calls for shared sacrifice coming from the Texas GOP, some are holding the rigidity of the party’s leader, Gov. Rick Perry, to blame for preventing more than $800 million dollars in federal assistance money from flowing into the state’s coffers.  While the Education, Jobs and Medicaid Assistance Act was on its way toward becoming a law last summer, a Texas-only provision was added by Rep. Lloyd Doggett (D-Austin) which binded the Texas governor to apply for the funds on the condition that he certify the money would not be used simply as a substitute for state spending on education, but in addition to it. Texas’ application to the Department of Education was rejected on that basis, leaving the cash in limbo.

The so-called “Doggett Amendment” has been the subject of much conversation among state officials, and considerable indignation among Texas Republicans. In his State of the State speech back in late January, Perry referred to it as an “anti-Texas” amendment, and characterized Doggett as a lone liberal Texan who is penalizing the rest of the state.

Why Black Folks?

There are many things that fascinate me, as I hope this blog will eventually show. But the issue I am most passionate about, unquestionably, is the unfinished history of the black freedom struggle in the United States. More than just an "issue," it is one of the most illuminating facets of American life, serving, however fitfully and problematically, not just as a model for progressive activism, but as a supreme mode of creative trouble-making for those of us able to learn a thing or two from its fearlessness, impetuosity, and joyous infidelity to the dominant "success narrative" of America.

It's an interesting time to be writing about race. Sooner than any of us expected, a black man found a way to get himself elected President of the United States. Predictably, this leads many to herald the inauguration of a post-racial America, especially among those benighted intellects for whom the mere presence of black faces in high places is sufficient to proclaim the end of racism.

But some of us are duty-bound to continue worrying about ordinary black folks, however much it may put us in bad odor with the prophets of post-racialism, and I'm just arrogant enough to believe I can give some coherent form to the experiences of people such as families victimized by the subprime mortgage implosion, young men (and increasingly women) caught up in the racist "War on Drugs," and those left to their own devices to respond, constructively and otherwise, to the economic shocks of our post-industrial society and its destructive permutations.

I can and will write about things other than race. But, given the unprecedented degree of popular dissatisfaction with mainstream institutions (shown in poll after poll), it is apropos to frequently revisit the history of a social group that, more than any other (and with all due respect to everyone fighting similar forces), has put into practice the imperative of getting this goddamned country to rethink its own bullshit.

Take what is happening right now in Wisconsin. Yes, those people deserve applause, as well as every possible show of solidarity from progressives. But, deviant that I am, I can’t help wondering how the national conversation about Wisconsin’s public employees would be different if it were mostly black and brown faces that we saw on those nightly news broadcasts. Of course, when it comes to workers standing up in the face of relentless political attack, nothing can be taken for granted, and under all but the most extraordinary circumstances (which these are) workers of all colors struggle to earn the benefit of the doubt in a country that holds up visionary capitalists as the true makers of society. So for heaven’s sake let’s not minimize the crap that Wisconsinites are dealing with.

But let us consider for a minute how things might be different if the protesters were mostly people of color. In fact, we already have some context for such a comparison. In 2009 and 2010, while a few scattered Tea Party protests dominated the headlines, at least a few on the left couldn’t help but be fascinated by the relatively indifferent press response to the far larger immigration reform protests of a few years ago. Yes, there was press coverage, notably from the Los Angeles Times, as a click-through will show. But there was nothing approaching the saturation coverage of the Tea Party phenomenon, and never any suggestion that Latino disaffection is a world-altering force to which the two major political parties must orient themselves or else. For some, the Democrats’ losses in the 2010 elections confirmed the wisdom of focusing on the Tea Party, while others see the shellacking of the Dems as the predictable result of an off-year electorate being allowed to marinate too long in the sour juices of a bad economy. For this writer, it confirmed at least this much: spasmodic expressions of black and brown rage can spark “national conversations” but they will never be given public sanctification, and much less will they be seen as outpourings of the true national self to which all must answer.

To see just how different the discourse can be, the immigration protests can again serve as an illustrative case. At around the time that the protests reported on by the L.A. Times were happening in 2006, Fox News talk show host Bill O’Reilly took the opportunity to make repeated claims on both his radio program and TV show that the immigration rights movement is little more than a conspiracy to take over the nation and subjugate good, decent white folks. For example, during the May 16 edition of The O’Reilly Factor:

The New York Times and many far-left thinkers believe the white power structure that controls America is bad, so a drastic change is needed. According to the lefty zealots, the white Christians who hold power must be swept out by a new multicultural tide, a rainbow coalition, if you will….An open border policy and the legalization of millions of Hispanic illegal aliens would deeply affect the political landscape in America.

Additionally, on the May 1 edition of the Radio Factor, sayeth O’Reilly:

Then there’s the hardcore, militant agenda of “You stole our land, you bad gringos.” The organizers of the demonstrations [say] “We didn’t cross the border, the border crossed us.” That is their slogan, that “you stole our land, and now we’re going to take it back by massive migration into the Southwest, and we’re going to control those places because you stole it from us,” and that’s the agenda underneath.

assimilationist urge can even exist side-by-side with an ironic awareness that “the border crossed us,” a fact that seems to escape Mr. O’Reilly and many others. For all their surface militancy, the immigration rights protests fall well within the best traditions of American reformism—it’s no accident that the movement’s signature legislative initiative is The DREAM Act, which aims at nothing more radical than easing the path to citizenship for undocumented college students, who by their very existence prove their group’s fealty to middle-class striving.

And the Tea Party? Well, we have this from O’Reilly’s Fox News colleague Sean Hannity:

Hannity: The summer may be coming to a close, but politicians across the country are still feeling the heat from their constituents. Now thousands of ordinary Americans (emphasis mine) are taking part in what is known as the Tea Party Express. They’re speaking out against government-run health care, out-of-control spending, and the rallies that started just last week in CA will conclude in Washington on Sep. 12. And our very own Griff Jenkins has been on board the Express since day one, and he joins us now from the site of tonight’s rally in Flagstaff, Arizona. Griff?

Griff Jenkins: Sean, this is the story of the America that Washington forgot, and apparently doesn’t want to hear from. They’re miners, they’re small business owners, they’re veterans, they’re nurses, they’re mothers, and what you’re hearing right here in Flagstaff is going on all across the great American West.

This broadcast came near the beginning of the Tea Party phenomenon in 2009, and Fox’s coverage would only become more shamelessly obliging toward the movement after that. Now, there is more to media discourse than just whatever emanates from the Fox News sewer, and the Tea Party certainly has its critics, both inside and outside mainstream circles. But even among those who know better, it takes effort to beat back the media narrative that the Tea Party, for all its overheated and at times violent rhetoric, is where “ordinary Americans” are to be found—not the brown-skinned people who are lobbying to get The DREAM Act signed into law.

And not the African-Americans who were among the first to protest what the subprime mortgage industry was doing before the bubble burst in late 2008. This brings me back to the situation in Wisconsin, indeed the situation confronting the entire country. As heroic as the protesters truly are, I can’t help but wonder how much further down the path toward a less brutal social order we might be if black disaffection were taken as seriously. As it is, some in the chattering classes (and not just in the precincts of the far right) can’t seem to resist trying to niggerize Wisconsin’s public sector workers—as lazy, coddled, overpaid, undeserving—so it doesn’t take much imagination to see how actual, protesting niggers would play.