The business of race

Of recent Kanye West has been talking out of his ass and stirring up a lot of controversy with threatening and offensive pronouncements about Jews. A lot of his behaviour and what he has been saying has strong hints of clinical paranoia. People have turned on him in droves and he has not made much of an effort to make amends or row back his comments. Multiple businesses and organisations have ended relationships with him in response to the public outcry. He is clearly being hit in the pocket by the reactions to his unconscionable utterances but his reputation is taking an even bigger battering. It remains to be seen if there is any way back for him from casting out that he is currently going through. 

Kanye has been accused of stirring up anti-semitism and giving license to fascists and nazis to show off their bigotry. This might be a bit of a reach because fascists have never needed any encouragement to abuse or attack Jews. While fascists might wholeheartedly agree with Kanye it would appear he is actually getting more obvious and vocal support from Republicans. Republicans have literally hoisted Kanye on their shoulders and showed him around as their gladiator in their war against “wokeness”. While the mainstream is working overtime to cancel Kanye the Republicans are promoting him for all they’re worth. 

Kanye West is currently topping the unpopularity charts but he has an extensive back catalogue of bigoted declarations dismissing the suffering of Black people and criticising the response to historic abuses, and icons in the civil rights struggle. He also routinely mistreats and verbally abuses Black people and women he comes across. It is interesting that even when he was at his most obnoxious he did not receive the wholesale disapproval he is currently experiencing. In fact, businesses were falling over themselves to throw money at him for his questionable creative endeavours. Whether you call him a maverick or a moron businesses had no problem making money off him while Black people and women were the targets of his unsavoury sayings. 

It is only too right that Kanye West is facing censure for his anti-semitism. His behaviour thoughtless and feeds into harmful stereotypes of Jews. However, it is problematic that society in general is a lot more tolerant of prejudice when it is directed at other minorities. We have seen mainstream right wing personalities and politicians try to downplay the murder of George Floyd and the GOP in America have launched an all out onslaught on Critical Race Theory. A lot of the right wing outrage is a concerted effort to deny the reality of prejudice and discrimination suffered by Black people in America. A lot more could be done to address racial inequality and tensions but they would rather put all that effort into covering it up. 

The U.K.’s prime minister’s office recently released a statement saying that Rishi Sunak; the prime minister, does not consider the U.K. a racist country. While it is true that not all people are racist certain groups definitely are and the institutions still show evidence of systemic racism. Health inequalities, disproportionate involvement in criminal justice system, the ‘Windrush Scandal’, and the current animosity towards Critical Race Theory are strong indications of that. These are permitted to persist because the environment we’re in allows it. There is such a strong undercurrent of prejudice towards Black people that many cases of subtle or overt racism towards Black people barely cause a ripple. The business community has figured out that they are better off covering up or just ignoring the issue. Maybe this was what Kanye was hoping for when he decided to give vent to his inner voice. 

Democracy in Disrepute

© OECD

The United Kingdom has for long prided itself on having one of the world’s most highly regarded democracies. The history and workings of the parliamentary political system have facilitated the smooth transition of power for generations. However, recent going ons has meant that its gilded reputation has become less than sparkling. In recent times other than Tony Blair and David Cameron there hasn’t been a prime minister that has been elected into the post. Now a new prime minister is about to be chosen but by a narrow partisan political group rather than a national mandate. Of the two contenders for prime minister; one is seeking to defund civil servants who work in the North, and the other wants to defund deprived neighbourhoods all over the country. So we are left to put up with a pantomine prime minister playing out his last days; and two witless clowns spouting inanities in the slap dash scramble to succeed him in the circus.

The parliamentary and presidential political systems in the United Kingdom and United States are generally considered to be the foremost examples of the democratic process. However, neither of them actually make provision for the country prime minister or president to be elected directly by a straightforward majority count of votes. The U.K. is comprised of four nations yet in recent years the country’s prime minister has come from a political party that barely wins enough votes to come second in three of those nations. And still the prime minister is able to assume office as the leader of a United Kingdom! In America there have been two recent elections in which the winner of the presidency actually failed to win the popular vote. At least Vladimir Putin had the decency to dispense with the people’s mandate and take power by trickery and scheming. 

Across the world democratic elections now represent a trade off between partisan jingoism and nationalist fear mongering. Ideology and public service barely get a look in anymore. The notion of a democracy being a government of the people for the people has become a distant ideal. Now government’s get voted in to protect special interests. No true democracy should elect a national leader without a national vote in which the whole electorate gets a say. France’s elections are one of those to adopt this approach but even  then it doesn’t guarantee the election of a universally liked candidate. Too often a compromise has to be settled on between aspirants who might often be considered a choice between bad and worse. 

Democracy has evolved from from a political idea into a universal ideal. However, a system in which the will of the citizens is subverted by the desires of a select few is not ideal or even acceptable. However, while a powerful elite only seek to perpetuate their control and power then the majority will remain disenfranchised. 

Lawfully Unjust

The trial of the ‘Kenosha killer’ was recently concluded in Wisconsin with non guilty verdicts on all counts. The jury largely accepted the self defence justification put forward by the defence. There are clearly mixed feelings about the verdict and how this verdict could have been reached. The arguments will rage on and a lot of people will remain outraged while others claim it was a just verdict given the circumstances. There have been views given about missteps by the prosecution and the Judge’s general approach to the case. The case may be concluded but ill feelings engendered by it will be with us for a very long time. 

It is impossible to look into this case and not see that it feeds into the whole issue of gun ownership and use in the United States. It is impossible to legitimise common gun ownership and enact ‘open carry’ laws, and not expect that guns will become a means of focusing minds on fears and anxieties. The more people are encouraged to possess weapons the more likely those weapons will replace reflection and restraint when people are confronted with threats and challenges. It becomes more plausible to imagine danger to life when oneself is possessed of the means to take a life. And the simple truth is that guns are made with the sole function of causing harm and ending life.

Whether it is acknowledged or not, the thing White people in America fear the most is Black people. And it doesn’t make any difference whether the Black are actually dangerous or not. There is an inbred fear and a perception of Black people as angry and volatile that automatically makes white people fear for their safety. This is borne out in everyday interactions and it is what underlies law enforcement’s lethal approach to policing Black communities. When you throw gun ownership and a militarised police force into the mix you end up with the legally permitted murder of Black people. 

Troublingly Different

We can be of different gender, race, sexuality, ethnicity, faith, ideology, ability and yet still find things to unite us. We all want love, safety, security, health, shelter, and the best for those we care about. We have no right to deprive anyone of any of these things; and no one should feel entitled to deprive us of it. Unfortunately, individual mindsets and society itself are being conditioned to believe inequality is the just dessert of the underclass.

There are so many contradictions in modern day American society; and too few Americans are doing enough to confront them. America wants to be strong but it can’t abide the idea of free or universal healthcare. America wants to be wealthy but it continues to sow the seeds of disunity and conflict across its communities. America wants to be safe but it holds fast to the idea that unfettered access to guns is at the heart of being American.

Law enforcement in America claims that its many killings and shootings of Black people is in response to the threat they pose, and are perceived to pose to law enforcement officers. However, the one thing that would drastically reduce that threat would be gun control. There is no doubt that a reduction of personal gun ownership would significantly reduce the cases of law enforcement officers being confronted by armed assailants. Unfortunately, history has shown that this would probably not equivalently result in a reduction of police brutality on Black people. The incidence of unarmed Black people being violently confronted or killed by the police speaks for itself.

Since after World War 2 when people from Africa and the Caribbean were ushered into Britain to help with the rebuilding of the shattered nation; they have been confronted with being told to go back to where they came from. This is still a common occurrence across the United Kingdom. There is a core of British people who just hate the presence of foreigners. They just won’t ever be British enough for them. There is another section of society that sees diversity as a threat. They continue to stereotype people of colour even when the objects of their vitriol were born in the UK and are actually British citizens.

Prejudice and discrimination are learned traits. As much as individuals and groups are the perpetrators of the rough and harsh justice being dealt out to minorities; it is society and its institutions that have normalised and reinforced the oppression that minorities have had to endure and live with. There has to be some recognition that there will be no real change in people until social institutions themselves are reconditioned. Any calls to defund the police, reform education, restructure healthcare, refocus the justice system, or address institutional racism are not about shutting down the institutions. Rather it’s about redirecting policy and retraining organisations to better meet the needs of a changing society. Improvements are needed and it will take a lot of work to make them happen. However, everyone will need to trouble themselves to make the difference that is needed for things to get better for all people. I believe this is what the late John Lewis, the American civil rights pioneer called; making “good trouble”.

Politics Makes Strange Bedfellows

Politics appears to be that one arena where partisanship is valued a lot more than higher principles. In order to get ahead in politics some people are forced to set aside their principles while others just completely abandon principle in favour of a front seat on the bandwagon. In the 2016 US presidential election a lot of people have lined up behind Clinton and Trump racked with no small degree of ambivalence, and through gritted teeth.

One politician who hasn't been too discriminating about entering one room or the other with people of dubious reputations has been Nigeria's President Buhari. He swept to power claiming to be a new broom committed to changing a culture of public fraud and corruption. However, he didn't hesitate to join forces with Atiku and Tinubu to rally support for his presidential bid. Both men have been tainted by accusations of enrichment in public office and facilitating fraud. Raji Fashola (the well loved former governor of Lagos State) who Buhari appointed to key ministerial portfolio failed to properly respond to claims that millions of public funds were spent on a personal website for him.

Hillary Clinton has appeared happy to apologise for things she has been found to be wrong about but never prepared to explain what really happened with the deletion of emails from her private sever, speeches she was paid to give on Wall Street or links between donations to the Clinton Foundation and her role as Secretary of State. Michelle Obama says she believes Hillary Clinton is a truly good and decent person. But she couldn't have forgotten the things Hillary said and did during the Democratic Party nomination contest with Barrack Obama. Hillary Clinton's appointment as Secretary of State was mainly intended to ease her bitterness and avoid any acrimony from her loss. Bernie Sanders is campaigning for Hillary but he knows that Hillary stands for everything he is opposed to. However Sanders knows that the best chance of adoption of any liberal policies is if Hillary becomes president.

Donald Trump's candidacy is literally ripping the Grand Ol Party a new one. A lot of Republicans are desperate for a return to the GW Bush era when social projects were a liberal evil and sleazy lobbying and corporate greed ruled the day. However there is a recognition that with Trump as president even these things are likely to be taken to such an extreme that the party will become so toxic that it will fall out of public favour and its members start to devour themselves. However most Republicans will get behind Trump even if there are more than a few who won't stand beside him.

There's nothing wrong with having someone new and inexperienced in the White House. What's required is someone with integrity and vision. Trump is definitely not that person. Unfortunately, neither is Hillary Clinton.