I am deeply moved
and impressed with the efforts
of many to combat the injustice system that overwhelms America.
Where ever I read about planned and past events, the resolution
with which activists aspire to reach their objectives, I am
positively impressed and excited. There is so much undauntable
energy in these writings and announcements, that readers and
hearers, I feel, must be compelled to act on them in some way.
And, of course, this is the desired effect. Consequently, when I
read of attempts of others to thwart these legitimate goals, and
how, conversely, sincere but misguided people are targets of
repercussions, I perceive a need. This weekly is a
proposal in which my interpretation of this need is presented
together with a possible remedy. First, let me explain my perception
with some examples.
Shakur, the black African American that awaited the death
penalty in the midst of international protests in a Texas prison
on death row, was killed there. This fact provided ample
substance for describing the situation I am referring to.
Im sure that
many would agree that it would obviously be ignorant to assume
that every Texas policeman was in favor of legally lynching Mr.
Shakur on the 23 of June, 2000. Many would also agree that
it would be equally ignorant to believe that every white Texan
discriminates by skin color or sex. But, more importantly, it
cannot be proven that every Texan profits from discrimination,
not even indirectly.
As an example, when a
person of color is discriminated against by a law enforcement
officer in Texas, there is no evidence to support an assumption
that this same officer would allow a white person more leniency
when in the same or similar situation, as a direct result. Let me
put it differently. With few exceptions, when a person of color
loses their job in a Texas department store, an unemployed white
person applying for a job at the same store would not receive
that now vacant position. The most obvious reason is that the
vacant position wouldn't typically be of the kind that a white
seeks, since people of color are apt to be offered specific types
of jobs, in specific categories of work areas and are typically
not on the same employee level as a white. This predicament is of
course not only restricted to Texas, as we know.
Respectively, when a
person of color applies for a scholarship at a white university
in Texas and is turned down, this won't mean that the unissued
scholarship will now be available to the next white enrollee. I
contend that the official number of scholarships that can be
issued to the general public (this is every one else), will, in
most cases, have no significance to the number of white students
to which scholarships may be issued. Which, in turn, has no
relationship to the number of white students who have a necessity
for a scholarship.
which I'll expand on later, has successfully assured that the
needs of whites are not equivalent to that of people of color. So
the question is, when a white discriminates against someone of
color, what, if anything, does that person gain? Is it a sort of
collectivity that some whites adhere to, wherein they are merely
protecting what they've already secured for themselves? Right off
hand, you would assume that it is. But, when you look deeper, you'll
realize that it isn't.
I mentioned Mr.
Shakurs murder and some of the events surrounding it
because it is both tragic, and expounds my point. When Bush Jr.
allowed the murder of Mr. Shakur, it wasnt because he
believed that his chances of securing the presidential election
would increase. I suppose he didnt even get a pat on the
back. He may have subconsciously envisioned a sort of collective
gain, or triumph, but I disbelieve that he nor anyone else that
agreed with his decision, with certainty, believed that there
would be less black African Americans in Texas that whites would
need to fear, after Mr. Shakur was killed. Why? Mr. Bush Jr.
knows that there are more people of color in Texas jails and
prisons than there are whites, for crimes ranging, in essence,
from serious offenses to being a person of color. He and every
one else knows that a significant level of injustice has been in
affect in states like Texas for decades. He and everyone
interested can discover that the very composition of the Texan
political and economics systems have prevented augmentation for
people of color in these arenas for decades, with almost no
significant change, no significant challenges or reprisals.
The point is that the
injustice system in Texas has believed for a number of decades
that it is anchored in a sturdy and effective foundation that
stands adamant to fear of uprisings of any kind, from any peoples!
The system obviously also believes it has a direct influence on
the number of people of color in Texas that have the opportunity
to exert fear on the whites there. On the contrary. Mr. Shakur's
murder was, in this respect, absolutely trifling for Bush Jr. and
Texas, from the political stand point. The political power
structure in Texas, after witnessing the 133rd legal
lynching under Bush Jr., after the submission of global protests,
is more than likely content that theyll be carrying out
this sort of injustice in decades to come.
Looking deeper will
also convince you that Mr. Shakurs 18 year story served
two purposes for the power structures in America: It kept the
world concerned about the "triviality" of an injustice
to this one person, which distracted from the injustices that
America performs daily as part of it national and international
agenda. It also offered evidence to support the myth that the
power structures throughout the world are their own "masters".
So with this being the current state of things in Texas and
throughout the US...is the real enemy apparent?
To my knowledge, after
all the evidence available to Mr. Shakurs attorneys was
examined, it was asserted by many that there was significant
evidence to support the juristic point of view that a retrial was
necessary. Yet the American power structure denied to grant the
implementation of this assertion. As a result, Mr. Shakur was
killed. Is the American power structure then the enemy?
exploitation of many poor countries has caused the disruption of
economical and cultural structures in regions of the world, in
which thousands now die as a result each day. It can be observed
that the American government and that of most european countries
(France, Great Britain, Holland, Belgian, Germany, Spain, Italy,
Austria, to name a few) are actively involved in perpetuating
this situation as well as securing covert political power to
ensure the stability of the world political system they are
nurturing. Therefore, all these countries are content that the
public and political oppositions concern themselves with a legal
lynching, the killing of whales, the pollution of the seas, etc.,
rather than their government constitutions, the
manipulation and exploitation of other weaker nations, hunger in
the world, poverty in the world, sickness and disease in the
world! Countries that share these interests have effectively
convinced all opposition as well as the public conscious
that solving these problems will bring happiness the world over.
When we challenge this
with some questions and ask: Unless the whale is saved from being
slaughtered at sea so that its wealth of meat can be used to feed
the starving, why should we be more concerned about their
slaughter than the slaughter of whales? Or, Unless companies
should be prevented from dumping harmful chemicals wastes, in the
attempt to cause an end to the production of such chemicals so
that concentration can be directed toward the production of
medicine to be used in the healing of the sick in poor and needy
countries, why should we be concerned about stopping this as long
as people are dying? Shouldnt we wish to hear and see
Greenpeace barricading a G7 meeting, to prevent participants from
leaving because they hadnt reached an agreement on how they
plan to end world suffering? But, generally, we the misguided
public and opposition will say, "efforts that simply fall
short or fail to recognizing the ultimate goal, are not vain and
must be continued. What cannot be tolerated is the exercision and
acceptance of these activities."
And that is really
where we are wrong. The real enemy is not the government bodies,
political power structures, or covert organizations that devise
means of making things like this possible. The real enemy is the
current value system, and those who support it!
What is the current
value system? At one extreme, it contains that consciousness in
which people are willing to perform the atrocities that have
become common in our world. It contains the belief that there
will be some terrestrial relief, godly savior that will right all
wrongs. It contains the belief that "good", by
definition, will triumph eventually. It contains the concept that
the problems of certain peoples are not the problems of all. It
contains the belief that the concept of political and economical
isolation exist. It contains the belief that people, as human, do
not share a collectivity.
At the other extreme,
it contains that belief that people exist with inherently more
rights, more knowledge, more strength, more fundament, and more
heritage than others. It contains the belief that, that people
have an inherent destiny, a pre-destination that exceeds all
reality, all predominance. It contains the belief that we are
what we know. It contains the belief that reality is an
individual creativity. It contains the belief that commonalties
are selective. It contains the believe that people, as humans, do
not share a collectivity!
I was by chance
viewing a documentary on television about island life in the
Caribbic. The words of a restaurant owner in that documentary
never left my mind. When asked how the tourists had influenced
life on the island, he replied, "Life on our island changed
on the day that an English man paid for something that we had up
till that day always given each other for free." This
statement lends information to my explanations. It marks the
subtle beginnings of a new value system. It can be scaled, this
transaction or transformation.
Money could be placed
at the lowest point on the scale. This is the level at which
people will do anything for a sum of "dollars", and
everything has a monetary value. For me this has become the most
dangerous entity in the current value system. It has created some
people who really believe that, what money cant buy, they
dont need. Next on the totem is ideology or loyalty. At
this level, its the organization or the institution itself
that represents the most important entity. A religion, a club, a
sorority, an organization receives the utmost commitment from its
followers, members, etc. An implementation of this, for example,
is not that a policeman or a gang member working and living in
the Bronx, Watts, or East LA, would not hesitate to shoot a
person of color in the Bronx, Watts, or East LA, its rather that
the value of a life in places like these is often no more than
that of a bullet.
Its not that a male
person of color, who doesn't have an education nor a job, would
take the risk of getting a teenaged girl of color in the same
social situation pregnant or infected with AIDS, its rather that
he doesn't value himself or her enough to accept and exercise the
fact that having sex is more than a sexual act.
But, you could just as
easily apply these values to killing whales, chopping down trees
in our emerald forests, letting millions starve while throwing
away food and wasting water, killing animals for sport, polluting
water, modern day slavery, illegally selling weapons to warring
countries, dictatorship, building trillion dollar satellites and
telescopes to further mankind, when the same monies could be used
to feed the masses, etc., etc.
There is a people in
an African Nation, whos daily objective is to find water...and
only to find water. In this society, the lifes perspective
is quite realistic. If they had guns, they would use them to
shoot holes in the ground where the would expect to find water.
If they had chemicals, the would try to use them to transform the
moisture in vegetation to water. If they had prisons, they would
not be used because they cannot afford to restrict anyone from
the search for water.
It is up to us to
accept or reject the current value system and to build a new one
out of old values. We must place ourselves not as mothers, fathers,
sisters, brothers, husbands or wives, but as humans before all
other values. We should not uphold any law, support any
government, agree with any treatise or discipline that does not
hold this to be of utmost importance. We must recognize our
collectivity, as humans, void of monetary, historical, political,
academic, transcendental, or terrestrial standing. We must deny
our support in the subduction and destruction of lives, at the
cost of our lives, for the sake of our lives, collectively.