Got Fear?

Over the past few weeks it has occurred to me that the majority of the literature that Ive been reading (as chance would have it) has been on the topic of the increased use of fear in the American political process. The authors of the various literature has scrutinized it in interesting ways. A few examples of the material Ive been reading has been the new Al Gore book “The Assault on Reason”, the cover story of last week’s Newsweek by Fareed Zakaria “How to Restore America’s Place in the World”, and the Time article “Immigration: The Case for Amnesty” to name a few. Ive been cognizant of the fear tactic that has been in practice for many years now, but it has noticeably risen and become more relevant during the years of the Bush administration, primarily due to the war and the boogeyman of terrorism. It has been succeessful in part because of the sheer ignorance of Americans in the political process and their indifferece about what our leaders in Washington are doing. Even on the 24 hour news cycles the topic of fear in the process has been covered, well at least when they are not covering Paris Hilton’s incarceration saga. The media reporting it like it is a new phenomenon. And as if they have not been vehicles for it.
Gore’s book does a very thorough job in explaining this phenomenon in politics. The book combines history of our country via the Founders, human psychology, and policy in addressing various topics such as religion, wealth, and climate as they relate to politics. He addresses fear at the top of the book, the chapter titled “ The Politics of Fear”. In the course of this chapter Gore quotes the Roman philosopher Lactantius, who says, “where fear is present, wisdom cannot be”. Which I think is extremely relevant in our time bc we have a President who lacks the wisdom and does not take into consideration advice from those who do. Not to mention his faous quote of telling the world that “youre either with us or against us”. Gore cites examples by the President in this chapter in which he has played on the fears of the citizenry post 9/11. He did this by using three techniques identified by USC sociology professor Barry Glassner (author of The Culture of FEAR) that make up “fearmongering”. These techniques include “repetition, making the irregular seem regular, and misdirection.” These tactics were used by the President in making his case to invade Iraq. Gore delineates these - repetition (repeating the same threat of Saddam Hussein over and over again), “misdirecting attention (from al-Qaeda to Saddam Hussein), and using vivid imagery (a “mushroom cloud over an American city”).” These tactics in combination with the President summoning Americans to “imagine” what the fear of another terrorist attack would be like after the nation endured on 9/11 allow him to bypass the reasoning functioning of the citizenry (Gore details the psychology of this in the book). Gore notes that “terrorism relies on the stimulation of fear for political ends. Indeed, its specific goal is to distort the political reality of a nation by creating fear in the general population that is hugely disproportionate to the actual danger that the terrorists are capable of posing.” I think that this sums of the years of the Bush administration post-9/11. Bush and his cabinet have manipulated the psychology of the citizenry by the “fear” of bearded brown men trying to destruct American democracy...or has it been destructed by this Administration. Time will tell....
Fareed Zakaria’s article looks to life after Bush. The article itself is wholly optimistic and in the seven pages he lays it down! However, there is much work to be done. One example is seen in a new global survey that Zakaria includes that found that “most nations polled believed that China would act more responsibly in the world than the Untied States. The problem isn’t that America is too strong, but that it’s seen as too arrogant and insensitive.” Zakaria goes on to wonder “how does a Leninist government comes across more sympathetically than the oldest constitutional democracy in the world?” The answer he posits is that we have become so entranced with our notions of terrorism that we have stopped listening to the rest of the world. He finds more troubling than Bush’s rhetoric is the GOP candidates. For example, (and the use of fear) is Rudy Giuliani’s speech at Atlanta’s Oglethorpe University, where he told the audience that “they hate you!” and furthermore that “we are facing an enemy that is planning all over this world, and it turns out planning inside our country, to come here and kill us.” Zakaria notes this has been his M.O. on the campaign trail. All of this in the face of heightened defense spending in the last five years to the tune of $187 billion (that is the budgets of China, Russia, India and Britain COMBINED). The terrorist attacks that have since occurred in around the world subsequent to 9/11 have been local groups. However, in the US the advantage we have is that we do not have a radicalized domesti population. Zakaria points out that American Muslims are generally middle class, moderate, and well assimilated.
Terrorism is the only concern to look to after Bush. But the issue of immigration will be another. And once again fear tactics are being used, most notably by CNN’s Lou Dobbs who nightly whips up hysteria up the borders. Zakaria ironically points out that the Republican party (the party of free enterprise) has dedicated itself to a huge buildup of police power to stop people from working. Zakaria uses the duration of his article to delineate how the US can recover its place in the world. In his TIME article, Nathan Thornburgh makes the case for the dreaded word that has been attached to the President’s immigration bill by his party - AMNESTY. Thornburgh puts forth five reasons why amnesty can work for America. His reasons make sense to me as someone who has worked and studied in the field of immigration. There are 12 million illegal immigrants here in this country, thinking that deportation of these people is going to work is grossly naive. Not to mention the fact that these immigrants are too vital to a healthy US economy. The Senate compromise on the bill is anything but a free pass to illegal immigrants. It calls for a 13-year process including $5,000 in fines per person, benchmarks for learning English and an onerous "touchback" provision that calls for the head of each household to leave job and family behind and return to his or her home country for an indeterminate amount of time to queue up for the final green card. Nothing free about that.
The politicians who use fear as a way to drum up protest of this bill are playing on the ignorance of the citizenry. Yes, Mexicans speak Spanish. Just like Indians speak their native tongue or Chinese their native tongue or Egyptians Arabic. The point being that all these groups know that to get ahead in the US knowledge of English is a must. And that is the sole reason for their eagerness to come the the US. Assimilation is a slow process, but will happen. Im reminded of a quote that I heard a few years ago in which a man asked, “How many generations does one have live in America to be considered American?” The notion that illegal immigrants would destroy the fabric of this nation is ludicrous. This country has taken in immigrants from all over the world and assimilated them into American society and culture. Why would illegal immigrants be any different? Amnesty of the 12 million illegal immigrants is a proposition that I agree with because I understand that these people are not criminals as some would lead you to believe. Rather, they are individuals similar to immigrants groups that are in America to find the proverbial “American Dream”. Legalizing the illegals will help law enforcement focus on the real criminals.

Here We Go Again....

Let me start this post off by conveying my sympathy and condolences to the family and friends who lost someone they love in the shooting at Virginia Tech last Monday. In a way I suppose we all lost something....

It has been a week of soaking up all the coverage from the shooting at Virginia Tech. As the days unfolded I began to notice a noticeable trend w/ the media coverage on television. It was curiously slanted a bit. I could not put my finger on it exactly. Then it crystallized on Wednesday night when I was speaking to one of my friends before we went to the Ozomatli show, regarding what she thought of the coverage of the VA Tech shootings, since she was East Asian. And like me, she noticed the usual tactics by the news outlets (as she put it perfectly) of "othering" the shooter since he was not a white "American" kid. From an immigration point of view, he was an "American", but not naturalized. She explained how she found it interesting that the media keep reiterating that he was South Korean, even though he has lived in the United States since 1992. Therefore, a majority of his socialization as a person has been as American rather than Korean. She continued on by telling me about a commentary the Robert Siegel did on that day about this very misinformation by the media. Essentially Siegel talks about how the shooter grew up very American and that his writings depicted problems very American, not Korean. I found this extremely interesting b/c I dont EVER remember hearing about school shootings in South Korea. I dont remember hearing about writings by students in Korea talking about pedophilia as it relates to Michael Jackson or Catholic priests. These as Siegel put it, our stories of our news pages. Not to mention the shooters apparent affinity for guns. The shooter was American. Yeah, his ethnicity was South Korean, but to think for a second he is not American would be very naive. He was just American as those kids from Columbine, or the other number of school shootings that have occurred in years passed in the United States. This brings me back to the feeling I have when people ask me what I am and when I respond with American I generally get the response of "no really what are you....like where are you from?" Or when Im in India, Im always looked at as American even though the customs and values I grew up w/ are Indian. Its an interesting juxtaposition people in my position find themselves-not really having a culture that is completely ours or fully accepting of us. I remember reading in a Time article a year or so ago about this issue and having hearing it termed the best way Ive heard. One of the people in the story said we're the hyphen between Asian and American.
As Im sure w/ all Asians, I was guilty of hoping the shooter was not Indian once they had information was Asian. Can you blame me when there are conservative talking heads out there saying things like this before having all the facts.....

Who is the “Asian” Mass Murderer at Virginia Tech?

Here’s what we know about the murderer of at least 32 students and maimer of at least 28 more at Virginia Tech, today:

* The murderer has been identified by law enforcement and media reports as “a young Asian male.”

* The Virginia Tech campus has a very large Muslim community, many of which are from Pakistan (per terrorism investigator Bill Warner).

* Pakis are considered “Asian.”

If I were Asian, I’d be legitimately upset with this broad generalization of the mass murderer’s identity.

Why am I speculating that the “Asian” gunman is a Pakistani Muslim? Because law enforcement and the media strangely won’t tell us more specifically who the gunman is. Why?

and it finishes w/ a BANG.....

Even if it does not turn out that the shooter is Muslim, this is a demonstration to Muslim jihadists all over that it is extremely easy to shoot and kill multiple American college students.

The post has since been removed by the author bc of "the slimy comments from the Nazi-infested Media Matters for America cretins." I began thinking about the backlash that could possible occur from people (and law enforcement like this Indian was subjected to). Some things that went down after September 11th (and continue to go on to this day) are still fresh in my mind. The piece of the reporting that I found as interesting was the reference the media made to the shooter's parents. Whenever they made mention of his parents they always followed it up w/ their profession-owning and operating a dry cleaning business. Now this made me shake my head for two reasons; first the renewing of the East Asian stereotype of owning and operating a dry cleaning business; second, the double standard the media has when referring to minority and white parents which I would muse is spawned from the first reason. Example, the Duke rape case. Whenever, the three lacrosse players' parents were referred to their profession did not follow their relationship to their son. Why is it relevant in this case, but not w/ the Duke situation? Is their a dichotomy between the two different demographics? Albeit it may be a subtle nuance to some, but its these little things that you notice when you've been "othered".

Imus(t) Stop Talking

WOW!!! Its been quite a few days for the provocative topics of race, ethnicity, and gender for our country. Topics that we don't like to have a discourse on. First, Newt Gingrich opens his mouth (which is never a good thing in my estimation) and equates Spanish with the ghetto. And then apologizes in Spanish on YouTube. Really? In Spanish on YouTube? Hmm. Because apologizing via that medium will reach all those he offended. When I read about this, it reminded me of an incident a few years ago when this ass from Maryland felt the need to share his misinformed thoughts about Spanish too. Then on the heels of that, Don Imus refers to the Rutgers women's basketball team as "nappy-headed hos." So if youre keeping tally at home for the year, I believe that's three (somewhat powerful) white men-Michael Richards, Newt Gingrich, and now Don Imus (who I like to refer to as Death Angry) that obviously have some issues with folks that dont look like or speak like them. In addition, I just read that one of the kids from MTV's "The Hills" and "Laguna Beach: The Real Orange County" was arrested and in the process punched an officer in the mouth and called him a "n-----" and a "f-----". Damn!
The thing I find interesting in this whole Imus situation is the reaction of Imus and the media. Ill start with Death Angry. He seems a little too conciliatory for saying something so insensitive as that on the public airwaves. He spit what he said a little to easy for me to believe that he really thinks it was a stupid thing to say. Not to mention the comedic factor being non-existent. So the idea of it being cool for Imus because Chris Rock and/or Dave Chappelle talk about race and ethnicity in what some may define as offensive is like comparing apples and oranges "bitches". Through the recent slips of racist barbs that have been exposed, I feel like white males consult the same handbook for cleaning up what they say. That is to say they are overly apologetic and then they meet with Rev. Al or Jesse. Its almost like they think that apologizing and meeting with black leaders will smooth everything over and things will be status quo. There is no quick fix in this situation for Death Angry. I think he should be relieved of his show. If this was any other workplace situation and some employee was spittin racist, misogynistic verbiage at someone, Im sure that would be done quite swiftly. Its also interesting to see that the individuals coming to say that the suspension and the apology are sufficient are white males, specifically of the Republican Presidential candidate types. Which brings me to my next point...the media.
I am surprised that this story has blown up to be as big as it has. Not to say it is not news worthy, but rather that race and misogyny are not topics this country likes to discuss on a national stage, we much rather tow the line that everyone is equal, when we all know (at some level within ourselves) that is not at all true. Whether it is Death Angry, Newt, Kramer, or my favorite former Virginia Senator. Which is why I think its quite comedic that it takes incidents like this for talking heads on news shows to question whether it is time for a national dialog on race in America. REALLY? Its 2007, we should have had this dialog many many years ago. And we wonder why other countries repel being force fed American democracy? I dont think the white power structure is ready for that conversation b/c it will shake the structure to the core. Racism may not be as blatant as what Death Angry said on a day-to-day basis, but it is institutional on the regular. And that I suspect is what the majority is not ready to recognize. For example, the recent "apologies" by the States of Maryland and Virginia for their endorsement of slavery. Which was not a apology, but an acknowledgment. Apologies include the word sorry and demonstration of remorse for your actions, not saying you have "profound regret". If I told me sister when we were coming up that I had "profound regret" for pulling her hair when my mother forced me to apologize to her, I would have probably still gotten grounded till I offered a proper apology. So to think that States involved in slavery is naive bc it will demonstrate guilt on the part of the the white power structure and that will never come to bear. As someone who is not part of the majority in this country or part of the African-American demographic, I look at this situation as an outsider looking in, so to speak. Being at an HBCU presently, it helps me understand the effect better on the African-American diaspora.

Ruler for Color

Anyone that has been following U.S. politics lately cannot escape the coverage of the upcoming Presidential race. In particular, the coverage given to the Democratic frontrunners Sen. Hillary Clinton and Sen. Barack Obama. One of the “stories” being covered is the question of whether or not Sen. Obama is “black enough” to court the black vote in 2008. But I wonder; how do you measure the color of someone? I know in this instance the black community’s measuring stick is that Sen. Obama is not of direct lineage of slaves that were brought to this country and that he may not sympathize with the issues concerning the black community. But are those the prerequisites to be “black enough”. I just don’t know how you measure color based on that prerequisite. I am not in direct lineage of Indian slaves taken to Africa or the Caribbean does that make me less brown? I can remember thinking the same thing when my ex-girlfriend told me she was “more Indian than I was”, which kind of baffled me b/c I was not sure how you quantify something like that. Or when one of my aunts a couple years ago, told me that I had become “Indianized” because I had a shirt on with the image of Gandhi and could carry a conversation w/ her in my native Indian language, Malayalam, to her surprise! So when I heard about this story it made me wonder about the measurement of color again.

I read an interesting article in the February 3^rd edition of The Economist by Lexington regarding this story. Lexington looked at the larger issue of black power in this upcoming election. The conclusion of the article was that blacks in the U.S. should stop acting like a “racial pressure group” (i.e. focusing on economic aid of the U.S. underclass because they will disproportionately benefit as they as make up a disproportionate amount of the U.S. underclass). Rather they should focus on thinking in terms of class which is a rapidly growing problem. I have to agree with this conclusion. There is emerging today a black middle class which in my estimation, from what I have read, is going to shift the plight of the community politically. In other words, holding blacks to the same standard as everyone else. This is not to trivialize the role that race plays in the policies of our country. It is deeply in entrenched in the form of institutionalized racism. But will progress come from redress? I don’t think so.

This article made me think about the issue of Affirmative Action as well. Specifically, at which point does a policy become a crutch rather than an aid. I think the policy itself is necessary, but solely as a tool to redistribute power to minorities and women. But at what point do minorities want that sense of personal fulfillment that achievement renders. When do we take personal responsibility and stop blaming our environment? Bill Cosby got denounced for voicing this sentiment. But he’s right, just because he has been selling Pudding Pops for the last 20 years, does not mean he does not knows what he is talking about. I concede that in being Indian, Affirmative Action is not a primary issue I am concerned with, however being a minority it does affect me. With this idea of redistribution of power and the upcoming election with a possible female or African American Democratic nominee, the black community has notable leverage. Their vote will be vital in the success of the nominees for either party. For example, Sen. Obama and Sen. Clinton’s appearance in Alabama this past weekend to court the black community speaks to this leverage they hold. While polls are inconsequential, it shouldn’t be surprising that Sen. Clinton tapped the “First Black President” to accompany her to Alabama to help improve her poll numbers in the black community. I find an interesting point to note in all of this that the African American community would question the empathy of Sen. Obama to their plight b/c of the lack of direct lineage and as a result be more apt to vote for a white woman who has NO lineage at all. So the idea of Sen. Obama not being “black enough” is puzzling to me. Perhaps these news organizations and the black community should look deeper into the grassroots organizing he did on the Southside of Chicago before they question his empathy.

I believe Sen. Obama would be an invigorating Presidential candidate, I do concede that his foreign policy platform will need some work. However, the lack of tenure he has had in the District I believe will be an advantage. It will have been 20 years when the 2008 race comes around that a Bush or a Clinton will have occupied the white house. Do we really want to continue this rite of passage of the Oval Office or is it time for a change in the form of a nominee who is representative of the populous he would serve via his ethnicity and life experiences?

So, Are YOU Smarter Than a 5th Grader?

Last night I was talking to my 12 year old nephew on my way home from class as I do most nights and was asking him about what he was up to, what he is learning in school, and if he finished his homework. Which, I suppose is to be expected from a 5^th grader, not much elaboration on his answers. But he was telling me how well he did on his report card and that he made sure he got his homework done b/c one of his favorite shows was on television. That show would be Fox’s Are You Smarter Than A 5^th Grader?. I immediately thought to myself “Wow this is what this country has come too”. I’d never heard of this show prior to this, so I had my nephew explain the premise of the show to me. Basically, the adult contestant has to answers questions ranging from 1^st to 5^th grade and moves up the “money ladder” which tops out at $1 million. They have a “classroom” of 5^th graders (I suppose they are all in 5^th grade) and they help the contest if need be (the contest has 3 various ways to request help). The show is a varied form of Who Wants to Be a Millionaire, but in an elementary school setting.

I decided to watch this show when I got home just to see how atrocious it would be. The questions were not as hard as I thought they would be (i.e. how many sides does a trapezoid have; how many decades are in two millennia). The young lady that was on the program last night got to the $175,000 question and decided to stop, so she left with $100,000 and she had to proclaim “I am not as smart as a 5^th grader”. The latter of the above two questions was the $175,000 question. As the show ended I was thinking a couple things. First, I don’t what to think about someone who is “not as smart as a 5^th grader” running around w/ $100K. I wouldn’t want my nephew to have possession of $100,000. This sentiment was especially bothersome since I am a grad student who is grinding and pursuing a Masters in part to better my future financial standing and this woman is celebrating her ignorance and won $100K w/ the help of 5^th graders. The other thing I was thinking was what does a show like this say about American culture and society? How self-absorbed, short-sighted, and gluttonous a people have we become? I understand it is entertainment and Im sure the producers of the show weed out any intelligent people so they can create that entertainment. But at what cost? Furthermore, has education come to the point where we need shows like this to teach our children something? There is a genocide going on in the Sudan, a war in the Middle East, a majority of the world lives below the poverty line, and we in the U.S. are being entertained by people who are “not as smart as a 5^th grader” winning money. It might just be me, but I see a disconnect. A disconnect between us and pretty much the rest of the world. It’s a disconnect that frustrates me. We are supposed to be the leaders of the free world and in that we are to set an example. I know that there are no answers b/c quite frankly we have become victims of our own success. We have more or less (speaking on which make sure you check out the new Talib Kweli song More/Less) become a country in which one-size-fits-all. And provocative and thought-provoking discourse has taken a back seat to primetime television. And like it or not television programming is telling the rest of the world about the U.S. Now it may not be this show, but certainly others. The one that specifically comes to mind is Baywatch, I can remember being in India during multiple summers and episodes being played at nauseum. And that sets an example. I don’t think you can blame people abroad that they don’t know that this is not reality in the U.S. In a country where people are concerned about Brittney Spears shaving her head and the custody battle over Anna Nicole Smith’s daughter, I don’t think we can stand on the soapbox anymore and critique societies of developing countries as being beneath us.

"Hip Hop: Art or Poison?"....Those Are My Only Choices?

Yesterday Im online making my rounds to the various news sites to see whats going on in the world when I come across a report that CNN's Paula Zahn is doing entitled "Hip Hop: Art or Poison?". I decided to TiVo it and see what CNN had to say about hip hop, knowing full well what was going to be said. It discussed the roots of the hip hop culture briefly, boiling it down to the South Bronx, Run DMC, Beastie Boys, and LL Cool J. Nevermind the influences at the start of Melle Mel, Grandmaster Flash, or Sugarhill Gang. The Hip Hop of the 90's got boiled down to 2 Pac, Biggie, and Jay Z. I understand the show is only an hour, but please lets not oversimplify it like that. The duration of the hour talked about the hip hop lifestyle, the jewelry, the cars, the money, the women. Oh and I cant forget the misogyny, homophobia, and the violence. Then like every news show on the 24 hour outlets they had their talking heads debating the topic at hand. And for the most part they were on point with their comments.
As someone who loves hip hop it is very frustrating to me to see reports like this because they are all the same talking about the same thing reinforcing the same qualities about what is getting airplay. Why not go a different direction and do a report on the positivity and creativity in hip hop? One of the talking heads was Michael Eric Dyson, and in one the segments he made reference to Common, Talib Kweli, and Mos Def as artists that had something to say...kudos. But then in another segment he said concious rappers need to get better beats. Really? Sorry, Prof Dyson I have to disagree. As a counterpoint you may want to pick up a copy of the new K-Os album or take a listen at his website: http://www.k-osmusic.com/home.asp. Then tell me they need to improve their beats. I will give CNN credit for including Byron Hurt's film on hip hop in their report.
Im not saying that we should turn a blind eye to the ills of hip hop. In Talib Kweli's new song More/Less, he puts it best, "More rap songs that stress purpose with less misogyny and less curses/Lets put more depth in our verses till they're left at the surface". We know the stereotypes of hip hop because thats what MTV, VH1, BET, and the major record labels are putting out there because it sells. Thats what the white suburban kids want, they want the drugs, the misogyny, and the violence in the music they listen too. 80% of all rap albums sold are bought by white kids. And the record execs of the major labels are white. So to me the logical question becomes shouldnt some of the blame fall upon the execs? Institutional racism? And what does that say about white society? And we're suprised that some priveleged white kids at Duke could be capable of raping a black female? Granted the case turned out to be a farce, but its the underlying issue. Theyre not going to actively promote an album that points out the fact that white execs are running it....ahem The Rape Over (circa "The New Danger" Mos Def). Perhaps if we as a society are appalled at what these rappers on the radio are saying to our children we should take some personal responsibility and monitor what is on their iPod and expose them to other types of music or artforms, maybe point out to them that that lifestyle in surreal. Instead of blaming the rappers, Russell Simmons, or the media, we should take some responsibility and be the adult in our children's lives and be responsible for them and what is shaping their minds.
I am part of the population that has long been fed up with what is on the radio and cant remember the last time I turned or a hip hop station to see what was being played. In my opinion mainstream hip hop is a neo-minstrel show. If you dont think so, go watch the Spike Lee joint Bamboozled and tell me it doesnt fit as an overlay for mainstream hip hop. Mos Def is right, "Hip Hop...modern times...glossy and raw so self-absorbed and immature I cant remember being this bored". And thats what mainstream hip hop has become, a Fake Bonanza. To me, the shit played on the airwaves is inconsequential and we should not be surprised that is what is being bought and sold. Its a shame that the real MCs like Kweli, K-Os, J Live, Mos Def, Common, to name a few are not geting their due. Its a shame that we as a society cant turn on the radio and hear MCs that have someting to say and could possiblely expand our minds. Its a shame "Hip Hop is dead".

Allow Me To Reintroduce Myself......Again

It has been a little more than a year since the last post on my blog and throughout the year I had always wanted to drop in and post some of my thoughts, but just never got around to it. Well in that year my life has had its ebb and flow and I now have the time to consistently devote to this blog. Since my last post I got a new job at an immigration law firm and left the firm after 8 months. I got into grad school and am in school full time working on my Masters in Public Admin with a focus on International Development. I broke up with my girlfriend and have come to remember the joys in being single. I lost a good friend in the last year as well
(R.I.P. T). Ive met some really interesting people in the past year. I have made some enjoyable and not so enjoyable trips in the past year. So much has happened in the past year, that i cant enumerate it all! I look forward to having time to use this as a conduit to vent my thoughts, but dont worry I will keep it "clean" per Sen. Biden's standards.
GO HEELS! BEAT DUKE!
One Love.
Peace.