The Show Must Go On; Put on a Happy Face ("Have a Good Day!"); And when the happy face is a lie and it actually hurts inside ("Cheer up for chrissake, you're making me feel rotten")

One of the nice things about a liberal Western democracy is that mostly anything can be said, at least for the time being.

"The show must go on" might as well be the American motto, one that finds its way across the globe in search of new markets and opportunities for "growth."

"Put on a happy face" might serve as well.  We are supposed to do this as a solution for what troubles us inwardly, and as the modus operandi for our lives.

But sometimes I think this becomes a poor substitute for real change.

In any case, the American way of life is predicated on sheer materialism with a veneer of religion to make the former palatable and go all the way through.

If you speak louder, are up to date with the latest cool gadgets, laugh with greater zeal, shout-out with more "enthusiasm," and relentlessly smile, smile, smile, maybe other people--and yourself, along for the way--won't realize how truly unhappy you are with your life.

Being distracted on (= concentrating on) technological innovations (the "cool" factor, along with sports, among most people) are a neat way of not noticing.

And if you can't have a genuine smile, fake it.

Most of us are faking it, and doing a pretty good job.

That's what we get paid for.

The name of the game that dare not speak its name.

* * * *

Lindy English was not some aberration.   She was the child and the face of America that got slapped down for doing what the culture denies, disallows, and produces.

It's not as if bullying--and getting away with it--is something that doesn't happen all the time.

A country which believes that the solution to violence is more violence--hence, our capital punishment and our near non-existent gun control laws--and confuses that belief with fundamental human liberty is not doing so well.

A radical difference in interpretation: It makes as much sense for men to cry "unfair!" and "sexism!" since statistically they commit more rapes than women

It [Charles Mudede's argument below] makes as much sense for men to complain that because compared to women there is a statistically greater chance of their committing a robbery [or rape, etc.] that they [men] are the victims and are forced unfairly by society to commit these crimes.

    * * * * *

Charles Mudede in The Stranger (September  25-October 1, 2013) this week brings up the following statistics:

Now, some facts: 30 percent of black male dropouts are behind bars; only 17 percent of all blacks complete college (it's more than 30 percent for whites); 20 percent of active-duty soldiers in the army are black (but blacks make up only 13 percent of the total population); and, as Ivory Toldson, a professor at Howard University, pointed out on NPR recently, there are 1.4 million black males in college and 840,000 in prison.

He views the above as proof of racism in the United States.

I beg to differ:

30 percent of black male dropouts are behind bars.

To me this means that blacks commit more crimes because their families and communities fail in inculcating basic values, including recognizing the difference between right and wrong, respect of other human beings...

He states earlier on in this article that  

If you [as a black] fail to obtain a high school diploma, you will not be allowed to enter the first two institutions, and the remaining options for your future will be either entry-level positions at the very bottom of the job market or committing crimes that'll most likely land you in the third institution.

He seems to be implying that crimes are involuntary acts, ones that are caused by a self-evident statistical iron, one that is a result of racism rather evidence of a set of self-defeating, destructive beliefs engendered generation after generation within a racial group that believes that pointing the figure at others and wallowing in self-pity, simmering resentment, rage, and defiance is the solution to low achievement and overall lower income.

That's tantamount to saying that

If a black man murders someone, that that's incontrovertible demonstration of racism (that drove him to do it), and that the black man is made a victim once again, since blacks disproportionately commit murders (and other violent crimes) at an alarming rate compared to other racial groups.

I don't think that African, Hispanic,  or Asian immigrants have bought the argument that there is a statistical inevitability that they commit violent crimes, not get a good education, or remain forever poor, even if they arrive on these shores practically penniless.   (That's not to say that it doesn't require considerable sacrifice and hard work in a capitalistic system that is rigged towards the rich and super-rich).

http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/race-trouble/Content?oid=17779686

What about the failure within the African-American community itself (civic and religious leaders, sports and entertainment celebrities, parents, and teachers) to roundly condemn violence at school, in the home, on the street, etc.?

What happened to the place of individual choice rather than inexorable statistical law (which says and decides that you must break the law and have no choice in the matter) in the lives of African-Americans?

God knows how much sympathy there is for African-Americans in places like Seattle and how affirmative action allows them to have an edge in educational opportunities (often or usually lagging 300 points or more behind their counterparts on the college board entrance examination*) and in careers, especially in government?

At 12 percent of the total population, African-Americans are not exactly under-represented in politics (President, Attorney-General...), entertainment (Oprah, Will Smith, Denzel, Jamie Fox, Beyonce, etc.), or sports.

(Can we have a little more balance in our discussions of race in this country?)

For some racial/religious/ethnic groups or communities, a much higher rate of criminality would be a cause for shame, not for indignation aimed at society and its ostensible "racism."   

As in If Anthony's in trouble with the law [again], we must not be doing our job [of raising him] well.  We've got to do a better job and take more responsibility, providing a better role model for him.   

It's our responsibility, primarily,--and not society's--to teach him the difference between right and wrong.  Violence does not make a man a man.

The self-pity and belly-aching of Mr. Mudede and others is truly disappointing.   They seem to be making excuses and justifying those who break the law in such a fashion as to wind up in prison, which, in a way, encourages such actions, as "I am not to blame.  I am a victim, as I'm statistically far more likely to murder someone than a white person."



* To take another example, at one selective Northeastern liberal arts college, the admit rate for whites is about 1 in 10.   That of blacks, 1 in 2.5.  The college is clearly highly desirous to find black students even if it disadvantages whites and Asians.

An answer to the Urban League's question: Why are African-Americans so disproportionately disciplined in the Seattle Public Schools?

The new executive director of the Urban League has stated that she is very disturbed by the vastly disproportionate numbers of African-Americans disciplined within the Seattle Public School system.

Why?

My guess:

Because they disrupt classes with unruly behavior (as in bullying, threatening, or striking other students, getting into fights, yelling, kicking, biting, screaming, using abusive four-letter-word language, stealing or grabbing other students' possessions, "acting up" in class, not listening to their teachers' requests to not interrupt class...)

Not so different from the '60s, when their parents were "acting wild" in junior and senior high school in Seattle.  (My personal experience).

 A frank discussion of race in Seattle is not going to happen unless views such as mine or not smacked down, figuratively and literally, and attacked as "racist."

"We can criticize you because we're African-American and you're not."

Being a minority

Belonging to a group which has experienced oppression (racism, discrimination...) in the past does not excuse in any way incivility, laziness, arrogance, belly-aching (wallowing in self-pity), or violence, physical or otherwise.

People of any race will take it out on someone they don't think will either react or retaliate. Who says black men always get the short side of the stick?

In contrast to what most liberals believe, when people--of any race, skin color, or ethnicity--are frustrated, afraid, resentful, or hostile, they will take it out on someone they don't think will either react or retaliate.

This will often mean an Asian-American, Hispanic-American or another white person (depending on his or her girth and/or perceived social standing).

After all, who are you "going to take it on":   the short white nerd, the Asian-American eunuch, the Mexican immigrant (as long as he's not flashing knives of malevolence), or the black man, whom experience has taught you will erupt at the slightest perceived injustice?

Asian-Americans would, in particular, rather turn on each other than fight against African-Americans, which is explained by the particular hierarchy.

* * * * *

I took the #16 Metro bus from Madison & 3rd Avenue at 11:15 am today to get to Vine & 3rd (Belltown) to meet a friend for lunch.

But between the Bell St and Vine St. stops, the #16 made a sharp right and headed towards a new stop I had never seen it stop at, ro my consternation, six blocks away at at 7th & Denny.

The bus had to stop at 4th Avenue for a red light.  Having realized that the bus was heading in a direction opposite to where I needed to go, I bolted towards the front of the bus and asked the driver if he would left me off.

He refused curtly and firmly, explaining that the #16 was on a re-route due to construction.

Now if I had been a black man and demanded, "HEY, LET ME OFF THE BUS," I'm guessing the bus driver would have just opened the door and let the guy off.  No argument.

I've seen it happen time and time again, as Metro drivers make an exception for a black person--letting him/her off at a non-designated stop, picking him/her in the middle of a block, etc.).

This is one instance I can think of where black men often assert and obtain rights that others (Asians, Latinos, and whites) don't have by dint of the color of their skin (many black people being, for some reason, bigger and meaner than others).