Reverse Racism

The other day as I was driving to work I heard a caller to a local talk radio show refer to a particular black public figure as a 'reverse racist', and a wire was tripped in my mind.

The phrase 'reverse racism/reverse racist' is a silly meme that is often employed by white racists to describe racist actions perpetrated by (usually) black people. Usually, the so-called ‘reverse racist’ act is some kind of tame or ironic observation, often the so-called ‘reverse racist’ is somehow calling out some kind of institutional white racism, or has been embroiled in a controversy for standing up for themselves against such mechanisms. Sometimes, the ‘reverse racist’ is actually a racist, or has actually committed a racist act(and the offended white person, who is more desperate to call a black person out on racism because they feel that somehow the crimes of the white power structure throughout history have been piled heavy upon their shoulders. They feel that the insistence of our current society to ‘be nice’ and judge people ‘by the content of their character, not the color of their skin’ is somehow an undue burden). People who call out ‘reverse racism’ are the same people who can also be heard saying ‘I’m not racist, but…’. These people have black friends. When asked around black people who their favorite actor is, they may say ‘Denzel Washington’, or ‘Will Smith’, if they’re feeling ecumenical.

The problem at hand is, however, a linguistic one. Even if the label of ‘reverse racist’ is actually applied to a real racist (there are racist black people), the term ‘reverse racist’ is confusing. If a person is racist, they are racist. Wouldn't a 'reverse racist' be someone who goes out of their way to help a person of a different race, or to erase an existing racial barrier?

There’s something weird going on under the surface of the 'reverse racist' label. It seems to imply that racism originated with white people, and any other kind of racism is somehow reactionary racism, impure racism. In one sense, you could think of it as a preference by the claimant for David Lee Roth to Sammy Hagar.

All people are subject to tribal urges, to a greater or lesser degree. Some folks have stronger, more malicious strains than others, with the focal point ranging anywhere from ideology to geography to race. If someone is being racist, feel free to acknowledge it. But please, try to respect your native language by not infusing it with unnecessary silliness (people who call out ‘reverse racists’ are often the same people who feel horribly oppressed at their being a Spanish option when they call customer service*).

If you are white and were offended by this post, let me ask you this: when a black person (public citizen or private) is acting in a ‘racist’ way, among your group of friends/families/associates, are you usually the first person to notice it? Just curious.

*On a (somewhat) unrelated note, aren’t you glad that the Brits are starting to stand up for their healthcare system? It’s about time.

My Son's Directorial Debut

What's The Other Guy Saying?

In an interview with Sean Hannity to promote his current book ‘God Is Not Great’, Christopher Hitchens was forced to observe, ‘You give me the awful impression, I hate to have to say it, of someone who hasn’t read the arguments against your own positions’.

And so it seems to be as well for a widening portion of our population. There are men and women who have made a living turning their ideological opponents into straw men, and then handing those straw men off to an enraged and unhappy herd for destruction ritual. This method of making a living has spread as larger and larger chunks of the American population seem to seek out confirmation of their own biases and suspicions, putting membership in some mythologized tribe above what is right (and even what is true).

Ladies and gentlemen, I cannot give you credit for hearing the arguments of your opponents as repeated by your favorite populist rage outlet. Liberals, Moveon.org is not a good place to read about what Rush Limbaugh is saying. Conservatives, Rush Limbaugh is not a good place to hear about the most recent piece of legislation being supported by the Obama administration. There are usually smart people on both sides of any issue (if indeed there are only two sides!) And Rush Limbaugh and Moveon.org are not among them. It’s not that they aren’t smart (they are), it’s just that they act in bad faith. They have a victory other than the spreading of raw truth in mind, and their particular success depends greatly on the degree of inflammation they can inspire in your heart.

There are thoughtful and honest people of all ideological stripes out there, but they’re often drowned out by the circus of louder and more entertaining voices. Whatever side you may hold on any number of issues may be the best position, but please, consider your sources before you take action, or open your mouth. The voice of Authority, be it that of a founding father or religious text, is not a sufficient buttress for an intelligent argument. The facts must be looked at. Contrary opinions must be examined in a fair way. There has to be discussion. We must understand in a larger sense, that we are human animals, and are subject to some very powerful reaction cues and genetic motivations. Above all, seek to understand yourself.

Whatever position you decide to take on any issue, remember to ask yourself what the other guy is saying, and to sincerely seek out the most reasonable iteration of that stance.

Your best mind does not lie in your gut, and there is no device as liable to affirm your own secret wishes and suspicions as prayer.

My friend Phil has more to say on the subject. See here.

Bob Inglis Should Be The Republican Face Of The Healthcare Debate

The people of South Carolina should be proud to have someone like Bob Inglis representing them. The Republican party needs to churn out some more leaders like this:



This guy should run for president.

Is This Your God?

So, my youngest son comes running into the kitchen this morning saying, 'Come here, daddy! Come with me! You've got to see this!', and I can hear my oldest son yelling from the bathroom, 'Seriously, Daddy! Check this out!'

I let my four year old lead me down the hallway to the bathroom. There's an excitement in the air. My little boy lets go of my hand and runs up to a strip of wallpaper that had been torn away a few days prior. He points to a black smudge on the wall and says, 'It's Jesus!'

My oldest says 'It is!' in enthusiastic assent. I squint and lean in. I see exactly what they're talking about. 'Huh. Wow. That does look like Jesus!' So I sent my wife a pic message of our little miracle. 'OMG!' she replied. 'It's Jerry Garcia!'

My son asked me if I thought it was really Jesus on our bathroom wall. 'Well,' I said, striking my best Ward Cleaver tone, 'It seems like a strange way for Jesus to make contact with us, don't you think?'

'So you don't think it's real?' my son asked.

'I don't.' I said. ' No. I think we just notice things that look like faces. Like those creepy faces I showed you in the wood panel in grandma's basement. It's part of our programming to notice patterns. Plus, remember that we just watched that episode of 'This American Life' where they were taking pictures of Jesus in the sun? And then we saw 'Henry Poole Was Here' a few weeks before? Your mind was primed to see something like this.' I also said something about evolution creating moths with wings that could fool predators into thinking they were large, threatening eyes. 'That makes sense.' he said. 'But why do the faces usually have a beard?'

I didn't have an answer for him at the moment*. I just said, 'hm. That's interesting. It does seem like the faces always have a beard.' I looked at my son, he looked at me, and we both shrugged our shoulders.

We'll be papering over Jesus by the week's end. I really don't like the idea of the good lord watching me while I use the toilet.

*I've since decided that the reason we hear more about Jesus and Lady Fatima appearing on Grilled cheese sandwiches and in water stains is probably because religious people are more likely to be on the look-out for signs, and are probably more subject to confirmation bias in that area. Also, who would report that Harold Lloyd had appeared in their oatmeal?

Possible Universes

Possible Universe # 1:

Edward was surprised to discover his shopping list had transformed into a suicide note.

Possible Universe # 2:

Edward was surprised to discover his shopping list had transformed into a manifesto for a revolution.

Possible Universe # 3:

Edward forgot to buy toilet paper while he was at the store. Now he'll have to go back.

Rooms

Your eyes are buckets of love
That spill onto your shoulders.
You wear a white shirt that is now stained
Because love is red, and it has made you a mess.
You can’t read anymore,
Because your own story is always on your mind;
It’s the story of your love,
And how you planned to splosh it all around,
Filling every one of these rooms,
Washing us all in a comfort and attention
That is so delicate and beautiful,
So long as you know how to swim.

The Medicine Cabinet Recommends

1.Top Ten State Fair Joys, by Garrison Keillor: Mr. Keillor reminds us why it is good to occassionally savor membership in the throng, the sea, the mass, the country club of humanity.

2. Over, by Dan Ames: A damn good poem.

3.Read Epictetusand become a better person.

4.Michael Pollantalks about the weed:



5. Steven Pinker says violence is declining.

6. Shouldn't you know who Frank Zappa is? It makes me sad when young people's cultural education seems to span entirely from their birth only to the present moment. Why is 'oh, it must be before my time?' an acceptable excuse for not knowing important information? Our bottom-line mentality is surely going to bite us bad some day.

7. Read Lodo Grdzak's most recent 5 part serial 'Staying Calm Amongst Big Dogs And Bitches'. Mr. Grdzak has a patience for the blog series that I do not possess.

8. Fred Hersch (brilliant pianist and Cincinnati native) lays it out with So In Love. Tell'em, Fred:

Less Famous Founding Father Quotes

"I have never been a big fan of the turnip."-Thomas Jefferson.

My Receding Hairline Interlude 1

Your Monthly Mix-Tape

I don't know how you got into music*, but my parents introduced me. Whether it was my Mom playing Jim Croce or the Electric Light Orchestra while she cleaned the house, or my dad blaring Van Halen, Bob Seger, or Rush as we drove to and from baseball practices and games, the importance of music was forever underlined for me. Music was never just background noise. It was something to be talked about and thought about. It brought color and depth to life. Lyrics had meaning, and rock stars had little mythologies around them that needed to be deconstructed and talked about. Our tastes have diverged over time, but these songs still hold a special place in my heart.

This mix-tape is for my parents, and for the little boy I once was.

1. Mr. Blue Sky, by Electric Light Orchestra

2. Bad, Bad Leroy Brown, by Jim Croce

3. Heresy,by Rush

4. Jamie's Cryin', by Van Halen

5. Her Strut, By Bob Seger

6.If This Is It (Live) , By Huey Lewis & The News

7.Come Sail Away, by Styx

8.My Generation, by The Who

9.Forever And Ever, Amen, by Randy Travis

10.Bicycle Race, by Queen

Have a great weekend!

*Is music 'gotten into'? Or is the capacity to love it hardwired into our brains like language, and the desire to eat, drink, sleep, and reproduce?

Lodo,

SST just sent me this photo of himself:


I hope it puts the controversy over his ethnic identity to rest.

Sometimes I Wish Louis Armstrong Were Still Alive

Louis Armstrong died of a heart attack in 1971. I’m not being tongue in cheek at all when I say that he totally deserved to have an airport named after him. He should be on money. I’d much rather spend traffic time on The Louis Armstrong Highway than The Ronald Reagan.

Armstrong is an important figure in the history of jazz music in particular, but also in the history of music as a whole. He’s certainly important to me. He was somewhere around seventy when he died—a good run—but I can’t help but wish sometime that he was still alive to make music. What would his voice sound like these days? My friend Ryan used to say that Tom Waits was Louis Armstrong’s evil vocal twin. Would Armstrong’s voice be anywhere near as decimated if he had lived to be one hundred years old? I wonder what kind of music he’d be making if he were around today. Some new recordings from Satchmo would surely be a nice treat from time to time. I’ve heard everything that’s already available, time and again. It’s still good, but I’m a patriotic American, so I always want more.

What would the king of the Zulus be playing today if he were still in business? Hopefully not modern R&B, which is way too produced for my taste. Hopefully he’d steer clear of the hip hop beats and duets with Norah Jones. Dippermouth has to be dirty, he’s got to be real. I would hope his new songs would be true to form, traditional affairs.

I first became a serious fan of Louis Armstrong when my grandfather made a cassette copy of his ‘What A Wonderful World’ CD for me. I already knew the title song, because they played it every year at the Dayton Airshow while the Blue Angels would fly, and my parents took us regularly. I was eleven years old when I climbed up on the top bunk of the bunk bed I shared with my little brother, and popped my grandfather’s tape into a little battery powered cassette player. ‘What A Wonderful World’ is an awesome song, but that whole album is killer. The song ‘Hellzapoppin’’ really got me--especially as I moved into my teens—with its Dionysian defiance:

“Raise your glass...the party will be riotous
What a gas...the cops will never quiet us
There's no stoppin'...hellzapoppin'...hellzapoppin'
We'll be hellzapoppin' till the night is through”

Yeah! Total punk rock, but with more humor and less affectation. 'Hellzapoppin' is a great song, but so is ‘Cabaret’, ‘The Home Fire’, and ‘I Guess I’ll Get The Papers And Go Home’. ‘Hello Brother’ has become something of an anthem for me as a family man:

“A man wants to work...for his pay
A man wants a place...in the sun
A man wants a gal proud to say
That shell become his lovin’ wife
He wants a chance to give his kids a better life
Well hello ah.... hello brother”

What working man can’t feel that? And don’t take my word for it: You don’t get the whole vibe until you’ve heard Louis sing it.

‘What A Wonderful World’ led me to Armstrong’s earlier works with The Hot Fives and Sevens, and other early works, where he got his reputation as a radical trumpet player. He was so aggressive in his playing that he permanently deformed his upper lip, so much so that he was forced to change his playing style later in life (focusing more on vocals), because his embouchure caused him so much discomfort. Sometimes his lip would fill up with pus, and he would pop it (to the disgust of those around) with a pen knife. Speaking of which, no one has been able to touch Armstrong's rendition of 'Mack The Knife'.

I’ve always admired this aspect of Louis Armstrong. He loved his art so much that he let it permanently transform him physically. Just as it should be: Carpenters have rough hands, mechanics have dirty nails, historians have bad eyes. Our passions should ravage us. The world should be able to tell a true craftsman by admiring their deformity.

Louis Armstrong opened the door to jazz for me. Mr. Morgan, my sixth grade music teacher, pushed me along further with a video of a Harry Connick, Jr. concert that he brought in to our class one Friday when (I guess) he didn’t feel like teaching us a new song. Then came the Jazz rich films of Woody Allen, which I explored with my friend Ryan. Jazz got into me. Thanks, Louis! Somebody said jazz is an acquired taste that needs to be eased into, like lobster. Well, I like lobster too. I’m not sure how I eased into the shellfish, but Louis Armstrong helped me ease into jazz.

In Michel Houllebecq’s ‘H.P. Lovecraft: Against The World, Against Life’, he says about both Sir Arthur Conan Doyle and H.P. Lovecraft that:

“To understand what’s at issue, one must appreciate the strength of that sense of frustration that overran England at the death of Sherlock Holmes. Conan Doyle had no choice: he was forced to revive his hero. When, defeated himself by death, the author in turn laid down his arms, a feeling of resigned sadness passed over the world. They would have to be satisfied with the fifty or so existing Sherlock Holmes stories, reading and rereading them all tirelessly. Receiving with a resigned smile the inevitable (and rarely amusing) parodies, keeping in their heart the dream of an impossible prolongation of the central core, of the real heart of the myth. An old Indian army packing-case, where, magically, are discovered some unknown Sherlock Holmes stories…”

And that’s how I feel about Louis Armstrong. He contributed heavily to the mythical structure of my life, and it would be great to hear some newly discovered lost recording. But it’s not to be. There’s not going to be a second act for Louis, just as there’s not going to be one for Doyle or Lovecraft; Apparently, God is as indifferent to jazz as he is to good pulp. Or maybe he’s hording it all for himself.

Either way, we’ll have to survive with what fragments we have of the legends in our lives. We’ll have to patiently wait for that ultimate horn blast that will knock us on our collective asses for good, inevitably with the opening strains of ‘When The Saints Go Marching In’…

Eyeshot Is Over

Eyeshot is over, and I'm sad to see it go. But honestly, the rationale Lee Klein gives for ending it all is impeccable.

My favorite Eyeshot pieces:

A Glacial Parade, by Brian Foley.

Marlene & Philip, by Ryan Kennebeck.

My two meager contributions to the magazine:

Other Things That Very Well May Eat Me

Lawnmower Season


Pequin (Eyeshot's illegitimate spawn) is still in operation, so there's no reason to despair.

The Episcopal Church Looks Forward

I'm not offended by those who opine the Episcopal church's recent decision to allow homosexuals to serve in any level of ministry. Willful ignorance isn't offensive. It's sad, and it should be embarassing (and maybe painful), but it's not offensive. I also have no problem with churches discrediting themselves in the eyes of history, which is what those who would complain about the Episcopal decision are doing.

What I am offended by are people who set themselves up as community leaders and counselors contributing to the stigmatization of a benign orientation by insisting that it is ‘sinful’, and somehow deserving of sanction. This is what church leaders are doing when they decry the Episcopal decision. This is also what so-called moderates are saying when they say ‘We support equal rights for homosexuals, but they are not allowed to serve as leaders in our church unless they do not practice homosexuality’.

There is nothing wrong with homosexuality. There is no credible study that indicates there is anything corrosive about it. This fact has been proven again and again. The only proven negatives to having a homosexual orientation are those associated with living in a society that views the orientation as somehow 'less than', or impure. Homosexuality isn’t a temptation that needs to be overcome, and to suggest otherwise is to betray basic ‘do no harm’ tenets of counseling. Homosexuals in our culture have higher rates of depression and suicide than other minority groups. It's the kind of thinking demonstrated by dissident religious leaders that contribute to those statistics. Those who support the myth that there is something dysfunctional about homosexuality are not acting in good faith towards those who would seek their counsel; They are more concerned with selling a product than they are facilitating healing and growth, and it's shameful.

Thankfully, there are still believers daring enough to honor the spirit of Christ's message over the dubious iron age legalisms that were written about him.

Not only has the Episcopal Church decided to remain relevant, they've decided to do what is right.

River Interlude 1

A Moral Conundrum

Is there a way to love your enemies and destroy them at the same time?

FDR's Bill Of Rights=Not Scary.

Today I listened to Glenn Beck for a little while as I did some housework. He was talking about 'FDR's Bill Of Rights', as gleaned from one of his Fireside Chats. Beck used his scariest voice to deliver his indictment of some of the terrible 'rights' that may be coming our way under Barack Obama. What are some of these horrible, evil, spine-curling socialisms we should fear? Cut to FDR:

"Necessitous men are not free men. People who are hungry and out of a job are the stuff of which dictatorships are made. In our day these economic truths have become accepted as self evident. We have accepted, so to speak, a second Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be established for all—regardless of station, race, or creed. Among these are the right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation."

Terrifying, right? Well, it gets worse. The socialisms keep coming:

The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation. The right of farmers who raise and sell their products at a return which will give them and their families a decent living. The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition. The right of every family to a decent home. The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health.

Protection against monopolies, the protection of recreations, homes, fair business practices, healthcare, and education. These are the things we're supposed to be afraid of? Glenn Beck talks about government as if it were some horrible Lovecraftian god, bent on the annihilation of humanity as a whole. I've heard him acknowledge before that government is a useful tool of the people (he compared it to fire), but I don't think he believes it.

Of the major institutions that shape our lives, we (the people) have the most control over government. We don't get to elect CEO's. We don't get to produce Madonna's next album. We do get to vote for our representatives, and they are rightly concerned with what we think.

Government isn't like fire. If it's properly managed, it's more like a fluorescent light bulb. Strict adherence to the perceived values of the founders is a narrow kind of thinking; They had a king stepping on their neck when they wrote the first bill of rights. They weren't exactly thinking about the internet age when they first put quill to parchment. The founders had more basic rights to consider.

The founders were brilliant in laying out the rights that they did lay out, but they could never have dreamed of how far our country has come since then, how educated it's citizens have become, and what a high standard of living we've achieved. We've entered an age (and a wealth) where we can secure a higher level of happiness, health, and enrichment for all of our citizens, with no cost to the freedoms secured by our founding documents. Ours is a country of visionaries.

The stuff FDR is talking about here is that kind of forward thinking that should inspire us to thought and action. Thanks to Glenn Beck for bringing this talk to my attention, and for demonstrating the poverty of his own worldview against the daring vision of one of this country's greatest progressives.

Cloud Interlude 2

The Truth

"If there is a God, it's going to be a whole lot bigger and a whole lot more incomprehensible than anything that any theologian of any religion has ever proposed."-Richard Dawkins, From a TIME magazine debate with Francis Collins (2006)

This quote should have created common ground in the religion v. science war, but why am I not surprised that it didn't?