The Allegory of the Color Blind Bind

Hello Everyone,

Thank you for such an amazing class conversation.  The topic of race can be an issue that makes for uncomfortable conversation.  Many topics in regards to social justice are uncomfortable topics.  Baker brings light to an issue that plagues many individuals race, but more importantly, the specific bind that exist about race in terms of social policy.  The bind attempts to create an equal playing field, but runs the risk of ignoring the struggles of the particular groups of people.

Baker puts race into the context of history through mentioning the pseudoscience that reinforces the idea that some races are more superior to others.  He gives examples of the biological and genetics “evidence” to support this claim. Baker mentions the racial realignment of particular races in our nation’s history.  Some races come with a certain privilege while other races do not receive those privileges.  The realignment of race exemplifies the social construction.  Is there a way to share privilege without giving something up?  Is there a way to realign the racial categories to give privilege?   

I have a couple of additional questions:

 Are we in a post racial society where race is not an issue? 

Who is benefiting from the particular bind in relation to color blindness initiatives and policies?  

Is it possible to live in an age with the absence of color?  

What can we do in order to create a color blind society if we do not have one?

Best,

J.T.

The Prosecution of Rap!

I first just want to thank everyone for engaging and sharing their honest thoughts on my topic.  I loved the fiery debates that came out of this lesson. 

In our discussion of music and its use in the court system, many in the class pointed to race and the class of people the music appealed to as underlying factors for their prosecution.  I know we talked indirectly about it but I wanted to ask how heavily do you think the race/social class of the artist weigh into the fact that their music is being introduced in court?  Also, we talked about the artists who make the music having to be authentic to the struggle in their music (Professor Reitz’ example of Johnny Cash writing violent lyrics of crime to appeal to his audiences in prison).  Do you think the image these artists portray of themselves should be put into context in court if they or one of their listeners is being prosecuted? In answering, take into account that some of the grittiest artists pride themselves on the REALNESS of their persona for their audience. 

Also, since we did not mention Immortal Technique’s “Dancing with the Devil”, I want to hear your opinions here.  I want to know if you think Immortal Technique should be incarcerated for his involvement in the crime he describes in the song.  Also, how do we compare Immortal Technique’s more artistic approach to describing a crime to 50 Cent’s blatant disregard for the DA playing his tape back in court?  Do we give Immortal Technique artistic license to speak more creatively about his crime or do we treat both lyrical expressions as blatant dares for the criminal justice system to take action?

With that I want to leave you with a very funny short clip from the cartoon “The Boondocks” featuring a very incriminating verse from artist Gangstalicious! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QYoKTo0wsPI

Thank you again for the class participation and I look forward to your answers. I’m off to celebrate my birthday but I will check back!!!

-Spencer

Assignment for Spencer's class (Th Apr 10!)

Sorry to use blog space for e-mail matters, but some of your email is bouncing (and please see Leena's post and great comments below).  Here is what Spencer's e-mail to you says:

I would like to change my readings to the two readings and video below:

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/14/opinion/rap-lyrics-on-trial.html?_r=0

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/08/nyregion/seeking-clues-to-gangs-and-crime-detectives-monitor-internet-rap-videos.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qggxTtnKTMo

Below are the questions I want to pose from these readings:

1) To Be Answered Leading up to class: Think of the most incriminating picture, video or post you or a friend put on social media.  How would you explain yourself (or your friend) in a court of law?

2) Should Rap Lyrics be used in court? If yes, should other forms of art and entertainment be admitted to judge a defendant's character? If no, why not?

3) The "Rap Lyrics on Trial" article mentions that other white artists from other genres were never prosecuted for their lyrics. Is this prosecution of hip-hop in particular unfairly targeting urban males or are these rappers incriminating themselves?

4) After listening to "Dance with the Devil", should Immortal Technique go to jail? Explain.

Money Talks

Hey Everyone,
  

 Although we didn't get to prosecutorial misconduct, I thought last week's seminar was fascinating! I hope everyone enjoyed it as much as I did. 

       

          In class, we briefly explored the idea that as residents, we are taught principles of American superiority and exceptionalism. We choose leaders who are charismatic, as George Orwell so eloquently explains, and leaders who can come to our rescue, rather than ones who show their humanness and admit difficulty and thoughtfulness in decision-making. We want leaders who will remind us how strong, brave, and free we are, in comparison to the rest of the (“uncivilized”) world. Why is it that we love and praise our troops when they are in other countries killing people, yet when they come home, we ignore them and do not give them the proper medical care they so desperately need? We value people so long as they are “productive members of society,” a euphemism for profit-producing workers. As we have seen, those who prove not to be so are criminalized and sent to prison, so that the rest of the population can function effectively.

       

         On Wednesday, the United States Supreme Court struck down a long-standing limit on how much corporations and individuals can donate to federal candidates, parties, and action committees. This is clearly a disastrous decision for Democracy and for everyone who has hope in the electoral system. While many of us agreed that every citizen should vote and should be concerned with their political system, wouldn’t this give one a justifiable reason not to do so? If a billionaire can buy out a politician or a political party, what difference would a single vote really make? If our Supreme Court, the ultimate judicial body of the United States, whose primary task is to uphold the Constitution and its democratic values, endorses this, then what power do I have, in comparison? How can my single vote compete with billions of dollars pouring into candidates’ bank accounts from the Coca-Cola Brothers or from J.P. Morgan & Chase? At this point, can you seriously argue that my vote matters? While I will continue to vote because I want to practice the right that so many others are deprived of and because I have a naïve hope that it will actually make a difference, not believing so is legitimate and reasonable. In High School, I worked on the Obama campaign and canvassed around Bay Ridge to encourage the Arab American community to vote, so that we could have numbers in the elections, with hopes that candidates would notice us and make an effort to work with us. However, such an effort seems useless in light of the recent Supreme Court ruling.  Even more so, my vote and direct advocacy for Obama now makes me complicit in the wars and murder of innocent people around the world, under his administration.
         

 For those of you who disagree, consider this: how would you convince a black man who has grown up and lived in poverty his entire life, has been a victim of police brutality, and has been repeatedly oppressed by the criminal justice system, that he can affect the results of an election by reading the paper and casting his vote for "the lesser of two evils?" How can you convince him that he is not just choosing another white guy to pass the same torch on to? 


**You can watch an interview with Senator Bernie Sanders on Democracy Now! about the ruling here ** : 
http://www.democracynow.org/2014/4/3/sen_bernie_sanders_supreme_court_undermines