The classification is historically for horrific white supremacist slavery, white supremacist Jim Crow segregation and lynch law ; and second class status of Black people today - Black people are worse off than white people in every statistical category of quantity and quality on average or at the median : life expectancy , wealth, income , unemployment educational attainment , morbidity, ragged , crime ridden neighborhoods , victims of police brutality and enprisonment etc. These facts of a white supremacist system prove that race based on skin color is a _real_ social and economic , political classification of Homo sapiens in America .
Modern race category based on difference in skin color is invalid biological category. It falsely purports to establish sub-species Homo sapiens white, Homo sapiens black ... The inaccuracy of the color terms indicates unscientific empirical observation.
white supremacy is a dominate force in this society. Black bias against white people is a response to the enormous oppression and exploitation of Black people for the entire history of the US up to the present. It is defensive and self-protective.
Prof Brown:), can u please further explain why race based skin color is an invalid biological, taxonomic , phylogenetic classification but a real and pernicious economic, political, soc and cult classification? Thnk you! You had said: "I understand that there are a number of different races besides Af. American that have darker skin, which makes it invalid." This begins to get at the answer. There are many other physical characteristics other than skin color, and people with the same skin color can be different in so many other physical characteristics that putting them in the same race is illogical or invalid under the idea of what phylogenetic and taxonomic classification is all about. Taxonomic and phylogenetic classification is about grouping individuals in the same group because they are more like each other than they are like some other individuals. "More like" means their _whole_ bodies are more like each other. Now biologists can compare the genes of individuals. The genes for one skin color can be in the same person for the whole range of genes for the thousands of other characteristics. Skin color is an illogical basis for dividing into sub-species -taxonomic groups or races. So _race_ would be below species, or a subspecies phylogenetic classification. It would divide a species into subgroups. Race based on skin color would divide the species Homo sapiens into subgroups based solely on one physical trait, one characteristic, one phenotype - skin color.
The minority of white people who voted for Obama did strike a historic blow against racism , like the white Union Army soldiers in the Civil War. But like Jim Crow after the end of slavery , the white majority took steps backward in electing the openly racist Trump; as when the racist Reagan was elected going backward from the Civil Rights movement gains. There's this zig-zag pattern wherein when gains against racism and for equality are made , a majority of whites take it back some.
The FRONTlashs from the beginning have been by whites . The Black people do BACKlash, which is not morally equivalent of the FRONTlash, and definitely doesn't justify another FRONTlash by whites.
To deny that white people are racist is what's horrible and disgusting" ///
Someone had said : "Charles Brown I disagree. Racism against white people is just as bad as racism against black people. They're both wrong and are not borne out by the facts. I worked for President Obama in 2008 and 2012. If it weren't for white people, he would not have won anything. There simply weren't enough black votes to elect him. So to call these white people racist is horrible and disgusting. It white people are racists, then the black racism against whites justifies it. It polarizes America. That's not good. //
Barack Obama's mother was white , and he was raised by white people. Is he white or Black ?
There is a sense in which Obama was raised white but became Black by learning and moving to Black people later in life.
Importantly, Obama is brown skinned ! He can't be white. It doesn't work both ways in the American system. Light skinned people can be Black, but dark skinned people can't be white. This asymmetry is the crux of the white supremacy here. //
A white person says : "Don't blame all whites" A white person replies : "Why not? The issue of white supremacy movements didn't happen by itself, it has been nurtured and promulgated in plain sight and few whites actively work to stop it.. Dom't want blame? Then actively put an end to it, publicly and privately...in all areas of life, if you hear, or see, racist nonsense call it out... Be proactive or take your lumps" // The use of the word "racist" to describe white supremacy is back on the lips of monopoly media commentators a significant change from the last 40 years of Reaganite crypto-racism as essayed below: http://take10charles.blogspot.com/2014/05/black-people-still-slaves-to-1-and.html?m=1 .// https://www.salon.com/2019/04/11/scholar-jonathan-metzl-white-supremacy-is-literally-killing-white-people/ White supremacy chains whites , too. Word ! A physician reveals how right-wing FRONTlash policies have mortal consequences — even for the white voters they promise to help (!) How the Politics of Racial Resentment Is Killing America's Heartland DYING OF WHITENESS How the Politics of Racial Resentment Is Killing America's Heartland by Jonathan M. Metzl A physician reveals how right-wing backlash policies have mortal consequences — even for the white voters they promise to help by Jonathan M. Metzl https://www.kirkusreviews.com/book-reviews/jonathan-m-metzl/dying-of-whiteness/ .// Yes color only comes in in the last 500 years with capitalism which got its start based on enslaving Africans and other non-Europeans and dividing their global empire up based on skin color and white supremacy . The original people were 200,000 years ago, in Africa and dark skinned ( wasn't called Africa then ). Anyway racial supremacy based on skincolor is a relatively recent development in human history . // https://truthout.org/articles/in-venezuela-white-supremacy-is-a-key-driver-of-the-coup/?utm_source=sharebuttons&utm_medium=facebook&utm_campaign=mashshare&fbclid=IwAR2zlFy6t07l3wC0HXE7ZmCXBvqnFFhkGpdoLTGooiLriEUtJ4Sb-goCZGw
In Venezuela, White Supremacy Is a Key Driver of the Coup
Greg Palast,
Truthout
First, we have Juan Guaidó, self-proclaimed (and Trump-proclaimed) president of the nation, with his wife and child, a photo prominently placed in The New York Times. And here, the class photo of Guaidó’s party members in the National Assembly. They appear, overwhelmingly light-skinned — especially when compared to their political opposites in the third photo, the congress members who support the elected President Nicolás Maduro.
This is the story of Venezuela in black and white, the story not told in The New York Times or the rest of our establishment media. This year’s so-called popular uprising is, at its heart, a furious backlash of the whiter (and wealthier) Venezuelans against their replacement by the larger Mestizo (mixed-race) poor. (Forty-four percent of the population that answered the 2014 census listed themselves as “white.”)
Four centuries of white supremacy in Venezuela by those who identify their ancestors as European came to an end with the 1998 election of Hugo Chavez, who won with the overwhelming support of the Mestizo majority. This turn away from white supremacy continues under Maduro, Chavez’s chosen successor.
In my interviews with Chavez for BBC beginning in 2002, he talked with humor about the fury of a white ruling class finding itself displaced by a man who embraced his own Indigenous and African heritage.
In Venezuela, as in the USA, poverty and race are locked together. Why did so many Mestizo, poor Venezuelans love Chavez? As even the CIA’s surprisingly honest Fact Book states:
“Social investment in Venezuela during the Chavez administration reduced poverty from nearly 50% in 1999 to about 27% in 2011, increased school enrollment, substantially decreased infant and child mortality, and improved access to potable water and sanitation through social investment.”
But, just as Maduro took office, the price of oil began its collapse, and the vast social programs that oil had paid for were now supported by borrowing money and printing it, causing wild inflation. The economic slide is now made impossibly worse by what the UN rapporteur for Venezuela compared to “medieval sieges.” The Trump administration cut off Venezuela from the oil sale proceeds from its biggest customer, the US.
Everyone has been hurt economically, but the privileged class’s bank accounts have become nearly worthless. So, knowing that the Mestizo majority would not elect their Great White Hope Guaidó, they simply took to the streets — often armed. (And yes, both sides are armed.)
I’ve seen this movie before. When I look at today’s news reports of massive demonstrations against the so-called “dictatorship” of Venezuela’s left government, it looks awfully like 2002, when I was first in Caracas reporting for BBC Television.
Then, The New York Times, NPR and other mainstream outlets in the US reported on marches against the Chavez government, describing the tens of thousands of Venezuelans calling for Chavez’s removal. The light-skinned protesters were overwhelmingly wealthy — and they wanted you to know it. Many of the women marched in high heels, the men peacocking in business suits, proudly displayed in the uniforms of their privileged class. The Chavistas wore patriotic yellow, blue and red T-shirts, sneakers, jeans.
To anti-Chavista protesters, race was an issue as much as class economics. I heard these opposition demonstrators shout “Chavez, Monkey!” and worse.
Many in the US have never heard this story of race war in Venezuela (and war is what it is), as the US press does not recognize its own racial bias. In 2002, as today, the massive demonstrations of the whiter Venezuelans were reported as evidence that Chavez was wildly unpopular. Yet, the day after each anti-Chavez march, I would witness and film the pro-Chavez demonstrations that flooded Caracas with an ocean of nearly half a million marchers, largely the Mestizo poor, that received little or no coverage in the US press.
The bias continues. The New York Times did not run a photo of this past week’s pro-Maduro demonstrations. But in hard-to-find photos and reports from my colleagues on the ground, the Chavista demonstrations are bigger, involving mass turnouts in several cities, not just wealthy neighborhoods in Caracas.
Why do the poor march for Maduro? Even though the Mestizo majority suffers today, they will not turn back to the pre-Chavez days of de facto apartheid.
And we must remember this is not the first time the US government has tried to overthrow the elected government in Venezuela.
In 2002, George W. Bush’s State Department cheer-led the coup. The plotters kidnapped Chavez and held him hostage. The coup was led by an oil industry leader and head of the Chamber of Commerce, Pedro Carmona, who had seized the nation’s White House, and, like Guaidó today, declared himself president. Carmona told me proudly about the fancy inaugural ball held by the nation’s elite and attended by Bush’s ambassador.
But the Bush/Carmona coup collapsed when a million mostly Mestizo, Indigenous and Black Venezuelans flooded the capital and forced the plotters to return their hero, the supposedly unpopular Chavez, to Miraflores, the presidential palace. “Presidente” Carmona fled.
Today, Guaidó’s supporters, like Carmona’s, know they can’t win an election given the overwhelming fact of the newly empowered Mestizo majority. So Guaidó has skipped the idea of an election altogether, simply replacing running for office with the “recognition” from Trump and allies which Guaidó can’t get from Venezuelans.
When I see the images and hear the chants of the anti-Chavista demonstrators now, I’m also reminded of what I saw at a Trump rally in Macon, Georgia, this past November. The president slid out of Air Force One to tell the crowd — heavily weighted with white supremacists — that they needed to take back their country from those “invading” the border. Trump told them to fear gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams, who is Black, saying she would “turn Georgia into Venezuela.”
I don’t think Trump was talking about Abrams’s program to bring universal health care to Georgia, as Chavez did for Venezuela.
Some of the US press is quick to condemn the racial hatred on display at Trump rallies. But I have yet to hear or read in the US press what our eyes can see in the three photos from Venezuela: an uprising of white or light-skinned people wanting to “take back their country.”
The putsch in Venezuela is run by the wealthy, internationally connected minority operating by a regime-change plan designed by neocon retread John Bolton, Trump’s national security adviser — a plan to control Venezuela and its oil, as Bolton openly proclaims.
Ah, yes, the oil. It’s always the oil. And Venezuela has plenty to seize: the world’s largest reserves.
We’ll get to that in Part II. Yes, ---
White supremacy surges in Michigan state government By Charles Brown Circa February 2011 Republican Governor Rick Snyder, State Treasurer Andy Dillon and the Republican legislators are ratcheting up for a white supremacist* takeover of Detroit from its people and elected officials as has already been done with the Detroit Public Schools. They are aggravating the law, empowering an emergency financial manager to act as an un-elected dictator, seizing all the powers of the mayor and city council, who are chosen by the People of Detroit, attack city workers� wages and benefits and take control of all the city�s assets. We can expect that they will dispose of the assets to further enrich suburban and out-state rich people. The new dictatorial, un-American law is going through the legislature lickity split headed for the governor to sign. They are preparing to steal the vote of the Detroit Black majority. It is not a surprise that this happens as we celebrate for Black History Month, our first, all-Black Detroit City Council. This state action is the culmination of many years of out-state takeovers of majority Black Detroit by majority white populations out-state. The DPS takeovers by Governors John Engler and Jennifer Granholm were preceded by the abolition of Recorders� Court, the abolition of city residency requirements for city workers, snatching of Cobo Hall, and federal court takeover of the water department. The majority of white Michiganders also passed a Constitutional Amendment outlawing affirmative action. The latest colonialist, white supremacist action is done under the phony claim that Detroit is fiscally irresponsible. This comes from a state that is more than a billion dollars into fiscal irresponsibility; a state that used a huge swathe of federal stimulus money to cover-up its own �fiscal irresponsibility,� all the while with its White Supremacist Tea Partiers denouncing President Obama, who is Black, for providing said stimulus money. Can you belieive it? In other words, out of one side of the Republicans� mouth, they won the mid-term election by attacking President Obama and on the other side of their mouths. Instead of providing some of the money for impoverished Detroit, they use the $7.8 billion in Stimulus money from Obama to hide their own bankruptcy and then turnaround and move to steal Detroit�s public wealth to enrich their sectors. The state has reneged on a deal between Engler and former mayor Dennis Archer to pay Detroit more than $200 million (which would balance Detroit�s deficit) while restricting Detroit from raising its income taxes. Thus, the state is forcing the city into an alleged �fiscal irresponsibility� as a shell game to seize the city�s wealth and power. Both Michigan and Detroit are in difficult fiscal straits, not because of the failings of government, but the failings of private business, finance and industry which have caused Michigan to fall into a one-state depression and Detroit into a 30-year depression. The People United will not be defeated. Fight the Powers that be! *We use �white supremacist� rather than �racist� because the white supremacists have reversed the meaning of the venerable sixties rhetorical term �racist� in the public dialogue to use it mainly to slander Black people as �racist� or �reverse racist.� Hopefully , �white supremacist� will be more difficult to twist. /:
No comments:
Post a Comment