he's been a busy boy lately, our reverend wright--so much so that i, focused as i was on his national press club appearance, completely missed sunday night's naacp performance. thankfully, reader judi was more observant than i, and she and her commenters had some interesting things to say about it--so interesting, in fact, that it's taken me all goddam day to muster a proper response.
a complete transcript of reverend wright's words can be found here, but the highlight of the evening (for judi and me, anyway) was when the good reverend attempted to use the research of a certain dr. janice hale to explain away the scholastic-achievement gap between black and white students here in america. for brevity's sake, allow me to paraphrase (and again, if you're incredulous and don't trust my interpretation, please feel free to click on the link provided above and read for yourself, draw your own conclusions): euro-american (white) and afro-american (black) children have two completely different learning modes--i.e., white kids learn in a left-brain, cognitive (logical/analytical) style, while black kids learn in a completely-incompatible right-brain (creative/intuitive) style.
or, as reverend wright puts it, "[we] learn from a subject, not an object. tell me a story."
[and of course his audience was cheering him on, because god knows black folk love it when other black folk tell 'em how special and apart they they are--when that suits their purposes, anyway (reserving the right, of course, to be "just like everybody else" when that suits their purposes).]
and then he goes on to say, "different does not mean deficient."
yeah, right--as long as you're hunting antelope on the veldt and not crunching numbers on wall street.
i look at this shit and i laugh and cry at the same time--the good reverend wright is doing the work of white-racist america for them, because you know damn well that by next wednesday every half-wit white-supremacist in america will be quoting him verbatim as complete, justifiable verification for their hate.
seriously--imagine if this theory had been posited by, say, david duke: white people learn best by reading books written by other white people, while black people learn best by squatting around a campfire and telling each other stories, thus neatly explaining why most white people live in houses with electricity and running water, while most black people live in mud huts in africa.
can you even in your wildest dreams imagine some white educator coming out and saying, "black children require special education here in america because their ability to perform at a caucasian level is limited due to the constraints imposed by their racial origins."
hell, let's take it to the logical next step: "since blacks' ideal mode of learning is so completely different from that of whites, perhaps, in order to provide them with the optimal education, we should give them their own specialized, separate (but equal) schools." is that what you want, reverend white--to go back to pre-1954?
i mean, i've heard some lame-ass explanations for the performance gap between white and black students in this country, but this one takes the cake. i dunno about you, but i can't imagine anything as inherently limiting and ultimately destructive to young black minds as to feed them this crap--telling 'em, "don't even bother; you can't hope to compete in a white man's world because your brain isn't wired the right way."
yeah, you black folk just go on entertaining us white folk with your (creative/left-brain) singing, dancing and athletic feats, and we'll continue to do the (analytical/right-brain) heavy intellectual lifting.
as a white boy who spent the better part of his youth having the dogma of "we're all the same under the skin" pounded into his lily-white brain, may i reserve the right to hereby and respectfully say
"what the fuck?"
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
15 comments:
DAMN, you said it bro.
The funny think, Mikey, is that my father used the exact example of "What if David Duke had said it" when we were discussing these appalling notions.
Glad to have brought it to your attention.
First, let me agree that I know of no credible scientific study that shows there is a difference in learning styles based upon race.
So, the Reverend Wright is flat wrong about that issue.
But, there is another related issue that is not so easily dismissed: black achievement scores lag behind white achievement scores when controlled for every other factor including income and parental education.
What is the explanation for that? And, more to the point, why has nothing really been done about this for decades?
It is easy to point out underachieving black students in inner city schools. But the underachieving scores also occur for black middle class and well to do kids.
We can and should do better.
But before I go, I want to make a third point: Why has the Reverend Wright been so thoroughly embraced by other African Americans -- particularly at the NAACP speech and the National Press Club appearance. What is that about?
It is too simplistic to say that black America is rallying to one of its own.
So let me give my own theory here: the level of grievance in black America is so great, so deep, that many people will flock to anyone who is perceived to stand up to the "white" power structure -- be that person O.J. Simpson, Al Sharpton, or Jeremiah Wright -- no matter how flawed or crazy that person is.
This, too, is a problem. It reflects an America divided, unequal, and with deep resentment.
And Obama whatever he says now, cast his lot with one of the more extreme voices in this divide.
Whatever Obama has said in his campaign up to now, I can't shake this thought and how much it troubles me.
anon: thanks--wish it didn't have to be said.
judi: yeah, the david duke analogy immediately does come to mind--and damn, don't you know he has some new talking points this week?
noblesavage: very thoughtful comment--tell you the truth, i really wasn't aware that a substantial learning gap existed between white kids and middle-class black kids; i need to go check that out.
as far as your second point is concerned, i agree with you--i believe there is a deep and abiding resentment within the african-american community that rev. wright and his ilk tap into and, while it might be satisfying on some level to marinate in that anger, it's not useful.
I'm scared of black people when they pass me in the sidewalk when I'm heading to class .
It's not because I think they're more violent than other people .
It's because I think they have more of a reason (albeit deluded) to resort to violence rather than reason .
I'm not saying they can't reason either , but that they think of me as the enemy . In some cases they're right , but then you'd have to talk about racial profiling .
Mike: forgot to thank you for the 'shout out'.
Byzantine Boy: I hope you were kidding. With every bone in my body I really hope you were. If not, it's a sad commentary as to what's wrong with the youth today. That you're scared of someone else simply because their skin is a different color? That's just unacceptable.
You would never have made it in my high school or the 'hood in which I lived before moving to TX. You would have cowered in your living room, scared to move for fear that the black man two doors down was going to get you. And that's pathetic.
NOBODY has a reason to resort to violence. YOU are giving nameless people power over yourself simply because you're scared. Of what? Potential violence? Child, please. The cheerleaders in my high school were far more violent than anyone else.
Noblesavage: Again, not sure what to make of you...seems to be hit or miss, lol.
There is always going to be cultural bias amongst testing groups--to change a test to suit said group is to be culturally biased against another group (with me so far?). That said, I think my stepmother's students would be appalled at your statements as they are all AP English students, a large percentage of the class is black (any given year) and at least one of her students is now attending/going to attend Harvard.
I'd like to see your proof to back up your statements--statistical analysis, etc.
I do; however, agree with you about the black support (specifically the NAACP speech) with regard to Reverend Wright and Al Sharpton; however, I draw the line at OJ but that's based on personal experience.
I'll throw one more into the mix: Mike Tyson. When he was convicted of raping that girl back in the early 90s, I was working in a predominantly black neighborhood, at a 'no tell motel'. I actually got into a fight with one of my co-workers because she firmly believed that Tyson had been framed (she was black) while I believed that justice had been served. I walked away, in furious tears, because she'd basically accused me of being racist. All because Tyson, a black man, had been convicted of rape.
It was sad, and it was scary and it was the only time I've ever been accused of being a racist in my life.
Obviously , I was privileged enough to live in places that have not had a strong minority representation . The black friend that I had growing up ended up being in jail today . The other black person in the school ended up the same . I'm not saying this applies to all black people , it's just how I have experienced the minority .
Blacks are also never as easy to be subservient to the dollar as Mexicans are , and to that respect , Mexicans can at least swallow their pride more easily than black people and that's how I've lived in California . I am not saying it as a general rule , just how growing up has shaped that impression .
As for cowering in my home . Perhaps . There are definitely other ways than merely retreating in avoiding the dangers of anyone whether they are poor whites or poor blacks . Such as having a driver instead of going on the bus .
Let's face it , I have the right to choose who i'm around . I have the right to choose the option that has the highest chance of securing an understanding and safety . I like being around other people that are like me . Although I can't avoid everyone else all the time in every circumstance , I can at least eliminate 90% of their interaction with me while still engaging in economic congress with them .
judi: while i truly don't give a damn what color somebody is, i never forget when i'm talking to an african-american that i always have to be careful in what i say--it's a combination of their perceived touchiness and my perverse sense of humor (of course, this is true whenever i'm talking to feminists, latinos, gays or whoever--i'm an equal-opportunity offender). and i especially never bring up shit like oj (or, for that matter, tyson) until they do first.
bb: you know i'll defend to the death your right to not only have but to air your opinions, but i gotta tell you--they're not opinions that were forced upon you by circumstance; on the contrary, you chose them, and continue to choose them. and also, lemme say that feeling that way is gonna make it very tough for you to live in the america of the 21st century--unless you become really, really rich.
oh, and i like being around people like me, too--hell, most humans do. but i try to define my similarities to others in terms of the way they think rather than what color they happen to be.
try it--it could be liberating.
"Progress should mean that we are always changing the world to fit the vision, instead we are always changing the vision."
-- G.K. Chesterton (1908)
In other words , the 21st century must be changed and I will work to do it .
Man, this IS a cool blog. Byzantine Boy recounts coming to his own conclusions through his own life experiences (not by how others tell him he SHOULD believe), and though mkf disagrees, he's civil. I'm astounded.
You just caught us on a good day XD . Now let me get my rope and cement ... har har har
bb: i agree--rather than having and adhering to fixed standards of excellence, the goalposts do get moved around a lot in an attempt to placate whatever "oppressed" group is whining loudest, thus dragging society down as a whole; it's a problem.
joey7777: welcome, and thanks--yeah, there are too many blogs out there that only accommodate one point of view, and flame anybody who dares to disagree; i at least try to be a little more open in that regard.
mkf : It IS a refreshing change, especially with the vitriol flying around all over other blogs lately.
joey: as you can see i've got plenty of vitriol--i'm just tryin to save it for those targets of my rage who so richly deserve it.
but that generally doesn't include commenters who don't share my views. i welcome diversity of opinion around here; last thing i want is to be one of those ideologue bloggers who only preaches to the choir.
I understand. I guess there sometimes is a place for vitriol. (We don't want you castrated!)
Post a Comment