The equality trap: the psychological fallacy where people comprehend, evaluate, and judge the racial politics present in our lives based on the assumption that we are all equal Continue reading The Equality Trap: A Call for a New Paradigm
“The truly damaging part of Chief Justice Roberts question is the tacit implication that black students must justify their presence at all” Continue reading Understanding the Value of Diversity
In a recent article for the National Review, senior editor Jonah Goldberg discussed the popularity of Ben Carson amongst the GOP (at least based on recent polls). He notes that
“… most analysis of Carson’s popularity from pundits focuses on his likable personality and his sincere Christian faith. But it’s intriguingly rare to hear people talk about the fact that he’s black. One could argue that he’s even more authentically African-American than Barack Obama.”
Goldberg makes this statement and then goes on to make a number of claims as to why President Obama is not “authentically African-American” enough, at least when compared to Carson.
“…Obama’s mother was white and he was raised in part by his white grandparents. In his autobiography, Obama writes at length about how he grew up outside the traditional African-American experience — in Hawaii and Indonesia — and how he consciously chose to adopt a black identity when he was in college.”
This isn’t a new sentiment. Many people of many different races have often brought up Obama’s racial heritage in a way to discredit his blackness. In fact, a 2014 article by the Washington Post shows most of America doesn’t consider the president as black, but as “mixed-race”. The problem with this line of thinking stems from how we conceptualize multi-racial identities in this country- one with a history of hypodescent ideologies, like the infamous one-drop rule. The problem with this line of thinking is that all Obama needs to be “authentically” black is to be black, and that he most definitely is.
By now, you have most likely seen the video of the young student from Spring Valley High School being reprimanded by the resource officer- Ben Fields- so I’ll spare your eyes a posting of the video, but here’s a link. Since the video went viral about two days ago, it has sparked some debate over whether Fields’s actions were justified.
In the video, you see clearly how Fields handles the student, but you don’t know much about how he “went from 0-60”, as Professor Marc Lamont Hill put it, or why he is in the classroom to begin with. As it has been reported, the student in the video was being disruptive to the class by having her cell phone out and not turning it into the teacher when he asked her to give it to him so he could continue with the class. Since she refused, the teacher called for the resource officer to remove her from class. Then… well… you’ve seen the video.
So this all brings up numerous- related- questions. First and most obvious, was the officer justified in his use of force? But this also calls into question the purpose of having officers in schools and also the obligations students and teachers have to each other.
This one is an article about the word nigga.
Ok, so not really but kinda. Just wanted to be sensational haha. You did read the title right, it says “M” word. This article is about words you shouldn’t say and why, like the n-word and the m-word. Because some people don’t seem to get why one group can say some things and other groups are excluded. Like Tom Hank’s son (who’s apparently a rapper???) who has decided he is in fact allowed to say the n-word.
Even lesser known than the n-word, a large number of people (especially younger people) don’t even know anything about the m-word. As the identity is re-emerging I thought I should shed some light on it. I also figured releasing it today, known as Loving Day, would be awesome!
Check it out and let me know what you think! As usual, always open for a respectful debate on the topic!
Continue reading “The “M” Word and Other In-Group Words You’re Not Allowed to Say (and Why)”
I recently ran across a Rachel Maddow story about North Carolina’s House of Representatives reviewing a proposal that I thought would open a conversation on the tug and pull between “religious freedom” and the law. The proposal would allow county magistrates to reject marriage licenses to people based on their religious beliefs. In the video, Maddow notes that under the new law…
…Magistrates could refuse to marry gay and lesbian couples, or couples who were remarrying after a divorce, or couples with one Buddhist and one Jew, couples where one person is white and one person is black- like the good ol’ days.