Showing posts with label politics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label politics. Show all posts

Wednesday, July 3, 2013

My Life in Republicanville

I recently moved deep deep deeeeeep into the heart of Texas. I've been here less than two days, and craziness has broken out already.  To keep my sanity, I'm blogging the stories for your entertainment.  

This conversation was with a business associate around 10:00 this morning.  The associate, "Lisa," is a middle aged Christian white woman.  

Lisa: I assume u have to know history for ur job. 
Me: some
L: but u have to be careful with that. Think of how they're changing history in our public schools. It's not what our founding fathers wanted. 
Me: 😑
L: I guess it depends on your perspective.  
Me: yeah.  ... You should think of Abigail Adams, who famously said to John, "don't forget the ladies!"
L: I didn't know that, but I really don't know much history at all. 
Me: 😑😒

Sunday, September 30, 2012

Extremism in Defense of Liberty...and Oppression

Lately, I've been reading Nat Turner's Slave Rebellion by Herbert Aptheker (1937/2006).  It's the first serious (second generally) history of the rebellion Nat Turner led in 1831.  It's an incredibly easy read, and I highly recommend it.

Needless to say, many things stick out to me from the book.  More posts may come...

For now, Aptheker's writing about "the effects" (i.e. social and legal reactions) of Turner's rebellion captures my mind.  Our best guess is that 60-80 black people joined the rebellion, yet at the time whites estimated as many as 800 armed revolutionaries actively participated and nearly every southern state legislature convened to deal with whites' mass hysteria following the revolt.  After his capture, Turner pleaded not guilty (because he had done nothing wrong) and never said he was mistaken in believing God led him to revolt.  Those facts lead me to my two initial thoughts:

1. Oppressors Live in Constant Fear

We, the people willing to act for social justice, severely underestimate our influence.  One of the false lessons of the Civil Rights Era is that "a movement" requires mass numbers.  I am convinced that movement requires little more than a few people willing to move.  People imposing injustice tend to freak out when directly confronted with resistance.  I am reminded of three biblical stories.  One where Elisha showed his chief disciple the invisible chariots and horsemen of Israel.  The second, when Gideon took a very small army (~300 men) and defeated a much larger army when the enemy soldiers turned on themselves.  And a third, when three lepers marched into the enemy camp only to find it deserted because the enemy soldiers mistook their footsteps for the sound of a large army.  My point, God seems to be suggesting the power of small numbers often in the Bible.

My larger point from Nat Turner is that all oppressors live in constant fear of resistance, even resistance from groups that cannot possibly overthrow systems by force alone.  Men live in constant fear that they will be exposed as vulnerable and not masculine.  Whites live in constant fear that the logic of white supremacy (i.e. justified domination because of superior intellect/morality/numerical majority/etc) will be exposed as a lie [thus The Bell Curve, the Minute Men, the Tea Party, etc].  The rich are petrified of labor coalitions.  The Christian Right is obsessed with "creeping Sharia law." Bush began a war against terror itself.  

We don't often pay enough attention to the fact that emotion is an integral part of every social structure.  Specifically, fear is an inevitable part of every oppressive structure.  That means that one of the contradictions inherent to any system of organization is the emotional vulnerability of the dominant group.  Oppressed people thus always have a structural avenue of resistance, even in the most oppressive and closed systems.

Nat Turner demonstrated that.  For months and even years after his rebellion, whites openly claimed that they could not sleep, were filled with anxiety, and were in failing health due to fear of slave rebellions inspired by Turner.  In fact, several southern governors explicitly stated mass anxiety among whites as the reason for calling emergency legislative sessions in fall of 1831.  This mass anxiety despite there being no clear evidence that a single subsequent rebellion was directly connected to Turner or his co-conspirators.  That oppressors were convicted by their own guilt is proven by two facts: 1) Turner "passed-over" the houses of whites who "did not think themselves better than blacks."  His army only targeted open bigots and slaveowners; and 2) there is some evidence that many poor whites supported the rebellion.  Whites were not afraid they would be targeted for being white; they were afraid because they knew they were targeted for being active oppressors.


2.  Retrenchment Is Not Evidence of Failure

After the Turner Rebellion, whites reacted extremely harshly.  They not only assassinated Turner and his fellow rebels, they also mutilated and murdered innumerable black people (slave and free) with and without trials.  Whites killed at least as many innocent black people as the total number of rebells in Turner's army.  In some cases, white militias lynched black people on the mere accusation of white overseers.  Whites tortured, lynched, and murdered black people without any evidence or even reason for suspicion in states as far from Turner's rebellion (in Virginia) as Louisiana and Kentucky.  Whites tortured innocent black people to the point that whites themselves began criticizing the brutality and fearing they would lose the moral ground in the slaveholding South!  [I cannot imagine the savagery that would move slaveholders even that small step toward compassion.  Our black ancestors are beyond heroic!]  Bunches of municipalities and southern states passed a host of laws tightening restrictions on free blacks and making life even more difficult for slaves.  ... None of this is a surprise, but it leads me to my next point...

For black people, the most obvious immediate result of Turner's Rebellion was increased white oppression.  In other words, black people's lives got worse; in some cases much worse.  Turner, his fellow warriors, and potentially hundreds of uninvolved black people were tortured and killed by whites.  In addition to the rampant mass murder, black people lost [i.e. whites took] the few civil rights they had.  Black people couldn't even legally have church without whites present.  Again, biblical parallels come to mind.  The Egyptians made crazy laws against enslaved Israelites (e.g. making bricks without straw) out of fear of growing Israelite numbers and fear of slave revolt.  Moses left Egypt after reacting to Egyptian cruelty, and the Egyptians reacted harshly to subsequent Israelite resistance once the Exodus began.  ... I bring up the Bible to show that the patterns are old and unchanging.  Oppressors oppress, get scared, generate resistance, clamp down, and ultimately lose.

And here, I think, is another false lesson we have drawn from the Civil Rights Movement.  Activists hesitate too often for fear that their efforts will make life harder for the very people they are fighting for.  This fear among activists is one of the main causes of "analysis until paralysis" and splits among coalitions.  We should understand that activism never causes oppression.  Oppressors do that.  We should not assume that harsh retrenchment is a sign that we did the wrong thing.  Often retrenchment is a sign that mobilization meaningfully challenged oppressors.

Again, the immediate aftermath of Turner's rebellion was death and increased white-on-black terrorism throughout the South.  Not only so, but nearly all the southern abolitionist organizations disappeared following the rebellion.  They reformed in the North, but that meant the thousands of free blacks in the South and millions of enslaved blacks had much less local white support after 1831.  But nearly 200 years later, we see that Turner's Rebellion was a positive and critically important part of the liberation struggle.  If we judged him by the lives of black people in October and November of 1831, we would conclude his efforts a failure on every level.  Now we praise Turner and name city parks after him (e.g. in Newark, NJ).  We recognize Nat Turner, John Brown, and other antislavery rebells as national heroes--certainly heroes among people of color.

Selah.

Wednesday, April 21, 2010

Federal Court Strikes Down Washington State’s Felon Disfranchisement Law in Landmark Voting Rights Case

Federal Court Strikes Down Washington State’s Felon Disfranchisement Law in Landmark Voting Rights Case


Stripping felons of their voting rights for life is one of many ways whites systematically deny people of color  our full humanity.  Ultimately, self-government through voting is an institutional reflection of our shared belief that all people are equal.  No person or arbitrarily defined group of people has the natural right to rule over others.  When people strip felons, who are unfairly disproportionately people of color, of their right to vote, they are claiming that the voting public (disproportionately whites) is a more valuable form of human than those who cannot participate in the governing process. 

You may have noticed that Virginia's new Republican governor, Bob McDonnell, has declared April "Confederate History Month" and instituted a new literacy test for felons (again, disproportionately minority--especially African American in Virginia) who want to regain the "right-turned-privilege" to vote.  McDonnell's literacy test requires felons to submit an essay to him as part of voting rights reinstatement proceedings.  If the Governor approves of the essay, he may choose to reinstate voting rights.  Many other states have similar systems.  When I lived in Florida, the governor could arbitrarily restore or deny voting rights to felons (after their release) based on the governor's whim.  This is the kind of thing the 1965 Voting Rights Act is designed to prevent.   These practices are only allowed to go on because they disproportionately harm people of color and greatly increase whites' voting power. 

In Florida, if released felons were allowed to vote, Al Gore would have won the state in 2000.  Among many probable consequences, former felons' votes would mean that our military would likely be home safe, and thousands of Afghan, Iraqi, and American lives would not have been lost.  How ironic that the people society is supposedly punishing for their violent pasts would have given us peace instead of the violence President Bush did in our names!

Wednesday, March 24, 2010

Justice of the Lord

Reading Habakkuk, parallels between Habakkuk's description of the Chaldeans (i.e. Babylonians) and the U.S. are inescapable for someone who works in social justice.  Equally inescapable is the relevance to our current condition of God's warning concerning the future of the Chaldeans.

Habakkuk opens by pointing out that injustice runs rampant in Israel, and calling on God to faithfully enforce God's law and end unrighteousness.  God responds by saying God will punish Israel by letting the Chaldeans conquer Israel.  A baffled Habakkuk questions God, noting that the Chaldeans are a wicked people.  The Chaldeans build their nation by conquering and dominating other peoples.  They do not worship God.  In fact,

[T]heir justice and authority originate with themselves (1:7)...[and their] strength is their god (1:11)  [The Chaldeans] bring all of them [other nations and people groups] up with a hook...and gather them in their fishing net.  Therefore, they [Chaldeans] rejoice and are glad.  They offer a sacrifice to their net  Because through these things their catch is large, and their food is plentiful.  Will they therefore empty their net and continually slay nations without sparing?"  (Hab. 1:15-17). 
In other words, the Chaldeans are unworthy of God's blessing because they built their nation on conquering other peoples.  In modern language, the reference to Chaldeans "offering a sacrifice to their net" means they set up a military-industrial complex, devoting public funds to an ever-expanding and dominant weapons and war-dependent industry.  Questioning God's supposed commitment to justice, Habakkuk asks, "will they empty their net and continually spare nations without sparing?"  In other words, "how long will you let them get away with this, God?!"

This parallels the United States in obvious ways.  White colonists and Americans built this nation on the conquest of other peoples and theft of their resources.  A quick rundown: genocide of Native Americans and theft of their land.  Every inch of the U.S. is stolen land.  Then, the theft of African peoples and theft of their labor and humanity of their lives (i.e. American slavery).  Later, the violent conquering of Mexicans (remember what happened after the Alamo?) and theft of Mexican land (from which I write this blog).  Finally, the coercive domination of Asian immigrants (initially limiting Asian immigration to men, which denied immigrants access to their families and the opportunity to make families here; Europe's global reach made Asian immigration to the U.S. barely semi-voluntary). 

Like Babylon, the U.S. "offers sacrifices to its net" in the form of the military-industrial complex President Eisenhower warned us about.  If you haven't already, please watch the movie, Why We Fight.  You will learn that weapons-producing companies placed parts of their businesses in every congressional district so that they can strong-arm Congress into steadily increasing military spending by claiming that any cut in spending is a "threat to jobs."  No congressperson is safe from that critique.  You might also notice that the most authoritative news programs (e.g. "Meet the Press") are sponsored by Boeing, which makes military planes.  You cannot give news that challenges the need for war if weapons-producers are your primary sponsors.  The people of the United States cannot make informed decisions about wars if they only hear from the weapons-producing industry.

God responds to Habakkuk's complaint by assuring him that God is just and will punish nations who behave like the Chaldeans.  Consider God's answer in Habakkuk Chapter 2:

Write down the vision and make it plain...For the revelation awaits an appointed time; it speaks of the end, and will not prove false (2:2-3)....Because he [arrogant nations like the Chaldeans] is as greedy as the grave and is never satisfied, he gathers to himself all the nations and takes captive all the peoples.  Will not all of them taunt him with ridicule and scorn, saying "Woe to him who piles up stolen goods and makes himself wealthy by extortion!  How long must this go on?  Will not your debtors suddenly arise?  Will they not wake up and make you tremble?  Then you will become their victim.  Because you have plundered many nations, the people who are left will plunder you.  For you have shed man's blood, you have destroyed lands and cities and everyone in them.  

 This is a stark warning to Americans.  Even the child molester and slaver, Thomas Jefferson, understood this point:

For if a slave can have a country in this world, it must be any other in preference for that in which he is born to live and labor for another; in which he must lock up the faculties of his nature, contribute as far as it depends on his individual endeavors to the evanishment of the human race, or entail his miserable condition on the generations preceding from him....And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed from their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of people that these liberties are the gift of God?  That they are not to be violated but with his wrath?  Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God just; that his justice cannot sleep forever; that considering numbers, nature and natural means only, a revolution of the wheel of fortune, an exchange of situation is among possible events; that it may become probable by supernatural interference (Notes on the State of Virginia Query XIV).  

 Jefferson, like Nebuchadnezzar, had brief moments of sanity in which he recognized God's justice and his own condemnation.  In his only book, Jefferson both advocates for slavery and anticipates God's wrath on the country for this (and I would add more) injustice.  Americans must learn these lessons and engage in social justice now before God is required to honor God's word and exact justice.  I am afraid that Americans will follow their founding father's example.  Habakkuk and Jefferson call to us from the grave, telling us to pursue justice.  Hopefully, we will not be like the brothers of the tortured rich man.  The rich man, a former oppressor suffering in hell, was denied even temporary work-release from his jail because Abraham realized that no message would convince his fellow oppressors to abandon oppression.  As Abraham said, "They have the law and the prophets...If they will not listen to Moses and the prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead."

We, the church and body of the living God, are those who are supposedly convinced by one who rose from the dead.  We must demonstrate our faith by turning from oppression to social justice, and pray God and those we have oppressed grant us mercy.  Let us heed and make true the words that another prophet, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., preached 45 years ago this week: "How long will prejudice bind the vision of men....How long will justice be crucified, and truth bear it?....It will not be long, because truth crushed to earth will rise again.  How long? Not long, because no lie can live forever.  How long? Not long, because "you shall reap what you sew."

Tuesday, October 27, 2009

Sociologizing Sin

[I wrote this a few years ago. It wouldn't be identical if I wrote it today, but I still find it interesting. Hope you do, too!]



Coming to understand my place in the world has caused me to completely reconsider my understanding of sin. Recognizing myself as a frequent oppressor of others--whether consciously or unconsciously, individually or corporately, personally or through social structures, intentionally or unintentionally--I have come to realize that avoiding sin is pretty much impossible. Depending on your theology, one of two conclusions will be the logical result of the insights I am about to share. Either one will take this message to further demonstrate our constant dependence on Jesus' payment for our sins and lead a more relaxed Christian life that does not consider it possible to never be guilty of sin ever again (this belief leads many to modern aesthetic practices and is burdensome on us all, especially when it is politicized). Or one will conclude that a personal relationship with Jesus is a poor and illogical solution for a crime that is both individual and corporate. One may futher conclude that judging people as individuals, rather than as social groups, and sending individuals to heaven or hell is fundamentally unfair. I have not thought down these paths yet. Neither am I steering one direction or the other. I simply want to share how understanding my social identity and status has broadened and deepened my understanding of many concepts, including sin and the intractiblility of our dependence on God for forgiveness.

Before I fully understood and considered my social identity, I basically boiled sin down to dichotomous, individualized actions and decisions. Each option presented to me was essentially a choice between doing what God wanted (e.g. telling the truth) or sinning against God (e.g. lying). Regardless of where one stands on the doctrine of original or imputed sin, after salvation, sin is generally understood to be an individualized choice.

But now I think of things differently. I know that I daily actively oppress and/or benefit from being a member of a group that is oppressing others. For instance, I know that my ability to attend graduate school inexpensively is dependent upon Texas A&M University and the state of Texas deciding to financially exploit custodians and other low-wage workers at the institution. I know that the relatively low gas prices I enjoy as an American are due to the American government using its military and financial might to pressure and exploit people in oil-producing countries. I know that, as a man, I participate in and/or fail to stop sexist activities (including joking and objectifying women as sexual objects rather than whole human beings). In so doing, I help to create the social climate we have now. One in which most women experience sexual harassment at some point in their lives. If memory serves, over 20% of American women have experienced some sort of sexual assault, including rape. I am at least partially responsible for that.

These are just a few examples. Just because I don't have the nuclear codes, doesn't mean I'm not responsible for my government's oppression of people around the globe. We all know very well that if the US engaged in fairer military and economic practices and the American economy suffered, the great majority of us would vote for candidates who would restore "the good old days." We would pretend not to know how they did it.

As an active participant, passive (or intentional) beneficiary, and structural party to the oppression and exploitation of countless others, I am constantly in a state of sin from which I cannot and do not extricate myself. No amount of physical, mental, or spiritual self-chastisement will free me from some exploitative relationship to others. And even if I could find a way to have no structural or relational exploitative power over any single other person on the globe, I would not do it. Sin has its enjoyable season.

I never knew how much I was asking God to forgive when I asked God to remove my sins from me and impune them to Christ Jesus. I cannot imagine how much sin of mine God is constantly forgiving (or storing up, if God is judgemental and Christianity is untrue). It's frightening and humbling all at once. For me, it is a beginning to understanding grace, mercy, forgiveness, and the character and omnipotence of God. Forgiveness of this magnitude is far more impressive to me than any of the miracles mentioned in Scripture. No human can even imagine giving that kind of grace.

This is by no means an excuse for our sinful actions or for not trying to end oppression of all kinds, everywhere, regardless of the sacrifice.

It is actually an attempt to bring these kinds of sins to our attention and to bring glory to God for God's mercy, grace, and love.