Lose Your Mother

The Civil Rights Movement had changed the futures of African Americans for the rest the the United State’s history.  However, one such restriction upon the freedom of the African American people was the Plessy v. Ferguson legislation, which made it legally acceptable to discriminate and separate African Americans from Whites. I decided to investigate the context and the consequences of Plessy v. Ferguson to further understand why it was upheld and how it can be seen/felt today.

Homer Plessy, as he was called, was a mixed man living in New Orleans. Mr. Plessy, despite being mixed, was designated as a black man and had to sit in the “colored car” as per the Separate Car Act of 1890.  Nevertheless, he had attempted to board a white’s only car only to be detained shortly after refusing to leave the “White’s only” car. Of course, this was fought all the way up to the Supreme court with the help of many people like Albion W. Tourgée and Louis A. Martinet. Albion W. Tourgée was the lead attorney for Plessy and had experience in both defending the civil rights of the African American people in court and as a Union soldier.  Louis A. Martinet was an editor for a New Orleans newspaper and was capable of scrapping enough donations and general support to support the legal battle to the Supreme Court. Despite the risky decision to bring it to the Supreme Court, racial segregation was upheld and protected through the court as “separate but equal”.

As consequence of this decision, races could be segregated and treated differently, despite claims by the court that African Americans can be treated as equals. Although, this could be seen as expected as there was support for separating the races by society, from beatings, kidnappings, to lynchings. Even today, there are politicians that publicly wish to enforce white supremacy, despite their attempts to back peddle. The article mentions Steve King but who knows how many other politicians silently agree with enforcing racial supremacy upon the American citizens? Furthermore, how many people claim the inequality of races to this day can be justified by the same though the same words, “separate but equal”? he consequences of Plessy v. Ferguson lead to long-term justification of subjugating and separating of African Americans, even after it was defeated by those who fought in the Civil Rights Movement.

https://www.wbur.org/onpoint/2019/02/08/plessy-v-ferguson-segregation-separate-but-equal-supreme-court

I found it very interesting that WWII was so significant in African American history because I didn’t know that it significantly impacted the rights of African Americans and how the Democratic Party became so significant to minorities and women as well. I thought that it was interesting to understand the political realignment that was changed over time. This improved the expansion of black political strategies,  even though there was still improvement there was resistance from many white Americans. Although from what we learned it is clear that the black media also expanded at this time, which helped shape, form, and persuade the community. This in itself really helped start the Civil Rights movement because it allowed for African Americans to have a voice in American society, and it was being heard.

  https://www.essence.com/celebrity/daniel-caesars-comments-confirm-biting-the-hand-that-feeds-you-is-the-new-wave/

Within the last week, Canadian singer Daniel Caesar, during a drunken rant, made a comment on Instagram Live asking his Black fans, “Why are we being so mean to white people right now? “  His question arose after YesJulz, a White media personality, made racist and anti-Black comments. Mr. Caesar continued to state that Black people are not “on top” because “we can’t haven’t gotten with the strategy of the winning team”.

Its is disappointing to learn that an artist with so many Black fans and has such a huge media presence can make such an outlandish comments.  Even in a drunken state, his words have a profound effect. But there are a few facts that Mr. Caesar fails to realize: 1) The criticism that YesJulz is facing is not to be mean, but to make her realize that her comments and actions offend a large number of people within society and could lead to negative societal effects. 2) Associating the “winning team” with race is absurd. It is true that most executives and producers within the entertainment industry are White however, to connect their race with success and ignore the success and struggles of Black and other minorities within the industry is wrong

     Other celebrities (Waka Flocka, Tammy Rivera),  have reacted to Daniel Caesars comments stating that because he is Canadian he may not understand the struggles Black people face in America. But discrimination is something that is faced all over the world, not just in America. It is how people respond to discrimination that makes a difference. Hopefully, this is a learning experience for Mr. Caesar, that its important to understand the cultural and political climate in another country before making such strong comments. Most importantly, Daniel Caesar should understand that in the fast-paced, get-famous-quick world that we live in, the same support that was used to build his musical profession can easily be turned into opposition that ruins his career.

https://www.essence.com/news/virginia-school-underground-railroad-game/

Recently a Virginia Elementary School was criticized for allowing students to play a game where students pretended to be runaway slaves while navigating an obstacle course meant to represent the Underground Railroad. To add to the disappointing news, an African American student was designated as the “slave” for the game.

There are many obvious wrongs within this scenario, but what really stands out the most is the miseducation of slavery that the school was teaching the students. Instead of learning about the serious subject matter of the historical enslavement of Africans within the classroom, the school officials made mockery of the historical subject with a game.

Although the school has sent a letter following the incident apologizing for the event that transpired, more needs to be done in regards to the teaching of such subject matter. A suggestion for the educators that allowed for the “Runaway Slave Game” to occur would be to undergo a cultural competency course that would encourage the appropriate manner of teaching young children about slavery.

Before reading this piece I was completely unaware of restrictive covenants. I had always believed that it was a personal preference of the person selling the home. But now I am aware of the fact that the discriminatory action of refusing to sell someone of a different race a home is written into the neighborhood laws. I was completely shocked while reading this piece because it is just another example showing how the dominant race uses laws and restrictions to hinder the success or comfortably of the minority race. To add to that, although this reading is from 2005, I find it ridiculous that these restrictive covenants haven’t been thrown away. The fact that there are people still abiding by these racist restrictions shows that we haven’t made much progress in this country. There was a time in which it seemed as if there was an amazing amount of progress being made towards equality. But now it seems like the dominant group thinks minority groups are “content” with where they are, which couldn’t be more wrong. This requires the minority groups to fight even harder, and make sure everyone knows that they are not content. More change is necessary.

I recently saw someone post this website depicting the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade in two minutes. I already knew and learned about the trade in class before I saw this video, but it was still very startling. I noticed that it depicted ships primarily going from Western Africa to the Caribbean and Brazil instead of North America. I also realized that around 1807 and 1808 the ships drastically stopped leaving Africa, however, there were still ships bringing slaves across the Atlantic. I knew all of this before, but it was interesting to see it demonstrated in a new way.

This depictions gives you an understand of the scale of the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade across time. In addition, the depiction allows you to click on the dots that represent each ship and learn about its origin point, destination, and history in the trade. I understand it does not represent every slave or slave ship, but it still demonstrates the intensity of the trade and the impact it had on so many lives. The website also provides more information other countries involvement in the trade and I think it is important more people are exposed to this information and this diagram makes it easier for people to understand. It will spark an interest and hopefully inspire people to learn more about their history and the history of whole African diaspora, especially if it is being spread across social media. 

http://www.slate.com/articles/life/the_history_of_american_slavery/2015/06/animated_interactive_of_the_history_of_the_atlantic_slave_trade.html

I had a chance to attend the MLK Commemoration’s justice dialogue about the Vietnam War, or from my country’s perspective, the Resistance War against America. After Dien Bien Phu and the Geneva Conference in 1954, the French colonial rule in Vietnam and Indochina were thought to come to an end. But instead, the north and south of Vietnam once again experienced another long and costly war that was influenced by the financial support and political power of the United States. Participating in the justice dialogue of Dr. King’s 1967’s “A Time to break silence” was refreshing, especially as a Vietnamese generation whose memory of “the War against the Americans” was only learned during high school’s history classes and through my parents’ stories. 

The speech, targeting American audiences, calls out the lasting involvement of the U.S and portrays the Vietnam war as “the enemy of the poor” to both the Vietnamese and American citizens. Dr. King argues for a “radical departures from the destruction of Vietnam” as a civil rights leader that promotes peace, morality, integrity, and non-violent coexistence. He does not limit the vision “to certain rights for black people”, but convicts to “save the soul of America”, and believes that American liberation and the descendants of its slaves are still not “freed from the shackles”.  Dr. King first points out the hypocrisy of sending the “black young men who [was] crippled by the society and […] send them to guarantee liberties in Southeast Asia which they have not found in [the U.S].” and the irony of “Negro and white boys […] kill and die together for a nation that has been unable to seat them together in the same schools [nor] live in the same block in Chicago”. Additionally, Dr. King believes the image of “revolution, freedom, and democracy” of the U.S is turned into “violence, militarism, and materialism” through the U.S’s involvement in the war. “Funds, energies, men, and skills” are invested into the “demonic destructive suction tube” instead of into the “rehabilitation of its poor”. And “the voice against the violence of the oppressed in the ghettos” could never be heard without speaking first about “the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today – [his] own government”. In short, the speech argues that being an activist for the Civil Rights is not only the more reason to promote moral peace and co-existence instead of violence but also is relevant to his vision of the American liberation. 

Additionally, Dr. King believes it is the American’s responsibility to “speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for the victims of our nation and for those it calls ‘enemy'” because of the “privileges and burden […] bound by allegiances and loyalties [that are more vital and goes beyond] the nationalism and [the U.S’s] self-defined goals and positions”. As a Vietnamese student who has always been curious about how the contemporary Americans’ view of the Vietnam war, I was aware that there was a wave of anti-Vietnam War movement and many have strong opposition against the government’s stance of the war during that time. However, it is refreshing to see how MLK, a figure that promotes civil rights and liberation, describes the U.S’s involvement, such as “Western arrogance that poisoned the international atmosphere”, “encouraged [the French] with [the] huge financial and military supplies to continue the war even after [the French] had lost the will” – as the U.S supports 80% in terms of the finance and military – and “soon [the U.S paid] almost the full costs of this tragic attempt at recolonization”. Dr. King reaffirms many intolerant acts, such as the destruction of the “Vietnamese cherished institutions – the family and the village” and the support of “the enemy of the peasants in Sai Gon”. The speech is a powerful dialogue that radically criticizes the U.S’s imperialism, militarism, and materialism that do not only poison the international and the Indochina, but also the America and its children. 

 

It was eye opening to learn of the history of slavery. It was a much different story then what I have learned in High school. Reading Equiano, it gave me a perspective from someone who has been trough the slave trade. It was always explained that slaves were taken from Africa and made into slaves. I have learned that slavery always existed in Africa just not as it was in the colonies. Most slaves were prisoners of war or Indentured slaves. They worked until they were paid off. When people went to Africa it was not just for slaves at first because it took a while for the need of slaves to increase so much. Another eye opener was the Emancipation Proclamation. It was taught to me as Jefferson just wanting to free the slaves because he felt they should not be slaves anymore. I have since learned that is not the case. The freedom of the slaves was simply a war tactic. I have learned that he did not actually want to free slaves he was simply willing to do anything to win. He tried different compromises to before freeing the slaves. This course has shown and taught me many things I otherwise would not have known.

This is a reflection of the book, The Mismeasurement of Man by Stephen Jay Gould which argues that the Western view of inherent inferiority and the ranking of groups of people was founded on bad science. This outlook has carried into our present thinking and social norms.

Race, racism, and other forms of bigotry have evolved over the course of our nation’s history. We have been witness to the notion that the ranking of groups is somehow dependent on innate capacities, or lack thereof, and the justification that seems to come from a common norm and understanding of our society. There is an understanding that the inferiority of minority groups is ingrained in their biology, and throughout history, science has been used as a tool for validating this myth. Biological determinism holds that social and economic differences among groups, such as race, class, and gender, is not contingent upon the their shared experience. These differences arise, however from an inherited inferiority based in the biology of that group, and that their social standings are a direct reflection of their biology. Science has been called to justify these claims. But science is not without cultural or political influence. It is not a solely objective activity, it has been used throughout history as a way for people to justify their prejudices.

Men considered historical heroes, from Benjamin Franklin to Thomas Jefferson and Abraham Lincoln, have long embraced the racial attitudes and movements of their time. However, we cannot take these men out of their social context for fear of idolizing them. They used science and facts to justify their prejudice, continued to oppress slaves and black citizens, and they possessed the power and social standing to do so.

Last week, I went to a talk by Professor Shakes, titled African Futures/ American Legacies: an Africana Perspective on Marvel’s Black Panther and Luke Cage. One of the things that stood out to me during the talk was when she spoke about the differences between the protagonist T’Challa and the antagonist Killmonger.  Throughout the movie, T’Challa is a king with diplomatic responsibilities and gives the political perspectives on what they should be doing and how to run Wakanda. On the other hand, Killmonger is giving the more aggressive military perspective on how they should be handling the world from Wakandas point of view. Killmonger and T’Challa have very different ideas on how Wakanda should be run an that is one of the main sources of conflict in the movie.

Throughout the movie, the audience sees that Killmonger wants to start a race war and wants Wakanda to provide the weapons for the war. Professor Shakes talked about how a lot of people were upset that we did not get to see any part of the race war because the plan was never successful in the movie. In a lot of other Marvel movies, the villains plans start to succeed before the hero comes in and saves the day but it Black Panther, we didn’t see any of the race war. Professor Shakes was saying that Marvel has to be aware of their audience. It would be too  intense and political for them to put a race war in a superhero movie. Even though many people would love to see it, there are also many people that would be upset by seeing it. I think that it was a tough call whether or not Marvel should have included a brief scene of a race war. It definitely would upset some people but sometimes it is okay to upset people and push the boundaries in movies like Black Panther.