Antwon Rose

by with 2 Comments CultureFeaturedGen Z

Black bodies, young and old, are being cut down by blue hands. This has become the American Normal, an epidemic that many have been fighting to find a cure for. Black Lives Matter is the largest movement of today, potentially since the Panthers. Their aim is to establish equality in the Land of the Free, to show that freedom belongs to Black people also.

Since the abolition of slavery, our chains aren’t visible, but that doesn’t make them any less present. Our movements are restricted through racial profiling, generalizations, and a fear of police. The police force was formed to protect people from people by people. This force is comprised of people who go above and beyond to make our neighborhoods and cities safer to reside in. Lately, I have begun to question, safe from whom? 

What determines someone is dangerous? Reaching for an ID which is being asked for? For having on a hoodie with the hood up? For demanding to know why they’re being detained? For resisting arrest? For being Black? While the reasons behind these deaths aren’t certain, in the last few years, the number of fallen Black bodies has been on the rise. Unarmed Black bodies. Unarmed Black bodies of young men and women, of fathers and mothers, of brothers and sisters.

People make mistakes of all proportions. We are all imperfectly human. What makes a person worth their salt is their ability and willingness to take responsibility for their mistakes.

We have to hold everyone to the same extent of the law, which includes law enforcement. Simply because they enforce the law does not mean that they are above it. When an officer is killed, the person or persons responsible for it are prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. When a civilian is killed, sometimes the officer is fired, maybe they face jail time, but more often than not it feels as if everyone is getting off scot-free, with a slap on the wrist called an acquittal.

Antwon Rose II was seventeen when he and his friend Zaijuan Hester were pulled over for driving a car that fit the description of one that just did a drive by a mile and a half away. Why did they run after being pulled over? What Black boy in this America would sit still when they see the boys in blue in their rearview mirror? And that officer is White, which is, unfortunately, the common scenario for these wrongful deaths? Get away or die trying.

There was footage taken from an apartment window of the shooting. As discussed in court and what can be plainly seen, Rose and Hester were running. All of a sudden ex-Officer Michael Rosfeld was shooting. There was no pursuit, just three rounds echoing in the silence in East Pittsburgh. I watched this video at least twenty times, trying to see anything other than another unarmed Black body hitting the ground with injuries that proved fatal. Each time I jumped as the shots pierced through the air.

There were three people in the car that was seen in surveillance footage that fled from a drive-by shooting. When Rosfeld and his partner pulled the car over, it would make sense to wait for backup since there was no telling how the situation would unfold. It was a choice to engage the teenagers without waiting. It was a choice to not pursue Rose and Hester as they fled. It was a choice to shoot at them, and those three shots landing into Rose’s back. Rosfeld was charged with criminal homicide, which includes murder, voluntary manslaughter and involuntary manslaughter under Pennsylvania law, according to CNN.

As of March 22nd, 2019, Rosfeld was fully acquitted of all charges that could have been upheld. The nation, and especially Rose’s loved ones, are in uproar over the fact the jury’s deliberations lasted less than four hours. Rosfeld was given the proverbial slap on the wrist for murdering a teenage boy, like many others before him.

Race relations in America gets bleaker by the day. America shouldn’t be a battleground. Lives shouldn’t be lost due to itchy trigger fingers and bad snap judgments. We are losing our young people who will make a better tomorrow. While these lives cannot be revived, we can at least in their own effect positive change so that no more bodies join theirs in the statistic of Black lives lost as a result of police violence. 

Similar Read: Dancing With the Devil… A Brooklyn Perspective on Gun Violence 

Reframing the Mueller Investigation

by with 2 Comments FeaturedGen ZPolitics

The Mueller report has been finalized, Barr has released a four-page summary to the American people, and now the fight has been moved to Congress to determine what happens from this point on.  Barr’s summary, though it is notably not a substitute for the entire report, states that “no evidence of collusion” was found on the President himself, and the obstruction of justice case produced results that neither “indict nor exonerate” Trump.  For Democrats, perhaps, and especially those that have been counting on Mueller to save them, the outcome, at least so far, was underwhelming. Now, the focus shifts to Congressional Democrats to decide whether they should fight to have the Mueller report released and move forward with a possible impeachment or simply move on.  But it is important to see the end of the Mueller investigation for what it is: not an unsatisfying end but part of the larger process to remove Trump from office. 

Before we go there, though, it is worth looking back at what reasonable observers should have expected at this point. The Mueller investigation took 19 lawyers, 40 FBI agents, 2,800 subpoenas, 500 interviewed witnesses, and almost two years.  Over its course, it charged 34 individuals, including nine connected to the Trump campaign, though it did not ultimately bring about criminal charges for Trump.  In a lot of ways, the Mueller investigation turned up way more information than we should have expected: what was once a question about a few Russian internet trolls and Facebook algorithms now sheds so much light on the wrongdoing inside and around the Trump campaign.  As compared to past scandals, spanning from Iran-Contra to Whitewater and beyond, Russiagate was a very successful investigation: many people very close to Trump are likely to receive justice and Mueller also recommended other findings about unrelated crimes to their respective departments.  For those who want to see Trump out of office and unable to act on his regressive agenda, the Mueller investigation was hardly a failure, even if it was overhyped by some.

Still, something about it feels disappointing, which is likely to do with our own naivety than anything else.  In other words, we should have expected this to be the institutional result of all this Russia-talk. In America, it has long been said that we have two justice systems—one for the poor and powerless and one for the rich and powerful—and that alone should explain the non-result which has come of Mueller’s investigation.  Beyond that, the history we like to remember tells us a much different story than the one which is true. In school, we all learn about Nixon’s impeachment, from break-in to coverup to resignation. We learn that a popular president was eventually forced to resign by an exhaustive investigation and about how the wheels of justice turn against all who are guilty.  But just maybe we forget or are unaware of the important context that goes along with it. A lot has been said recently of the allies Nixon courted precisely because of—and not in spite of—the Watergate investigation, of people like M. Stanton Evans who said, “I didn’t like Nixon until Watergate.” Eventually, the public turned against Nixon, despite their unwillingness to do so earlier, and the Republican Party was prompted to abandon him too.  In this way, impeachments are not like trials with Congress members as jurors, but trials in which the American people force their representatives’ hands.

Due to this reality, the lesson that transcends Nixon is that removing Trump from office through electing a Democrat in 2020 and through a successful impeachment are not necessarily two divergent strategies forward.  They are, at best, one strategy, with two divergent ends. In other words, the way to impeach Trump is not to find enough evidence to change the GOP’s view on him to obtain the votes, but to change the people’s minds enough to force the GOP to abandon him to protect themselves.  To do this, the Democrat’s private strategy must be seemingly at odds with their public choices. In effect, the bar for impeachment is much higher than the bar for voting him out in 2020: while no one who supports impeachment supports his eventual re-election, there are many Americans currently who support neither his impeachment nor his re-election.  The path forward, then, is to use the cloud of the Russiagate scandal along with the failings of the Trump presidency to fell the president, killing two birds with one stone towards getting him out of office.

On the former, the Democrats have a lot to work with: the uncertainty of the verdict of the Mueller report, it doesn’t exonerate the president, nor leave him untouched with the indictments of his former staff; its incomplete nature, as the people have not read the report and the investigation did not touch on many of issues raised since by Cohen’s testimony; and the apparent secrecy of the findings, Barr issued a summary letter when an innocence-proving-document would warrant a public release.  All of this makes up the public strategy forward for Democrats, but—though I am rarely one to warn Democrats about going too far—I would say their private agenda should be one of caution. Clearly, the evidence in the case is not overwhelming, or Barr would have had to cede such findings. Therefore, impeaching Trump on the grounds of Mueller’s investigation alone with a Republican majority in the Senate is patently impossible.  With that said, Democrats need to publicly raise the Russia questions while never quite bringing the issue to a breaking point, which would likely go against them. To the plain eye, Trump is a conman, but the burden of proof for people as powerful as he is high, and that must be understood.

The point in all this is that the left would benefit from a reframing of Mueller’s investigation from a verdict of success or failure towards a realization that this is but one step in the ultimate process.  While they should not count on the Russia scandal, the left also must never forget it: when they win, they hold all the cards to enact their agenda and keep their place. It is then up to the opposition—those who support democracy and the rule of law—to take it from them.  While legal justice requires a standard beyond reasonable doubt, electoral justice only requires 270. 

Similar Read: Kamala or Bust? 

Twice As Good To Get Half of What They Have

by with One Comment EducationFeaturedGen Z

The cheating scandal involving Yale University, Stanford University and the University of Southern California, etc. has confirmed what people of color in this country have known for years: being wealthy and White stacks the odds in your favor.

Many people believe that being a hard worker, dedicated and honest will make any goal attainable. Sadly, that’s never been the case.

Federal prosecutors charged 50 individuals—including actresses Lori Loughlin and Felicity Huffman—for bribery. They bribed college officials by paying hundreds of thousands of dollars to have their children’s standardized test results manipulated, fabricating their kids’ athletic credentials and having their children falsely diagnosed with learning disabilities for extra testing time, which was used to cheat.

The irony of this situation is not lost on me. This behavior is the exact type of “scamming the system” that people of color are often accused of. High school senior Kamilah Campbell from Florida had her SAT results flagged after retaking the test and going from a 900 to a 1230. Her results were deemed invalid and Campbell “felt like she was being accused of cheating.” After being unsatisfied with her original score, she received a tutor, utilized the Princeton Review Prep Book, and took online classes. Black people are often lectured, told not to expect handouts and to simply work harder if we want any semblance of success. Kamilah put in the extra work and was still punished for it. Whenever we make any type of strides, the goal post is moved once again.

I realized that parents involved in the scandal likely did what they thought was best for their children. This led me to remember the story in which a Black single mother was jailed for attempting to do the best for her kids. Kelley Williams-Bolar, a mother living in Ohio, was prosecuted on felony charges after using her father’s address to have her children enrolled in another school district. All Kelley wanted was to keep her children safe and give them access to a better education. She spent nine days in prison, was placed on probation for three years and given 80 hours of community service. Similarly, Tanya McDowell, a mother from Bridgeport Connecticut sent her son to a school in a different district and was convicted of first-degree larceny. Unlike Lori Loughlin and Felicity Huffman, these women don’t benefit from the privileges of being White and wealthy.

The education system is not equal and children of color often get the short end of the stick when it comes to the quality of their education. Kelley and Tanya did what they deemed necessary to give their children better opportunities; however, Loughlin and Huffman had no reason to do what they did. Their privilege gave their kids access to the best tutors, internships, extracurricular activities, and connections that would have allowed their kids to succeed whether they were capable or not. These women should be prosecuted and be punished the way that the system punished Kelley and Tanya. In fact, these women should be punished to a much higher extent.

The most painful part of this story is knowing that money allowed unqualified students to be given spots at the country’s best universities; meanwhile qualified students who did the work necessary to excel legitimately were denied. I’ve witnessed firsthand the work that lower-income students put in so that they can fund their college education: spending hours applying for scholarships, working tirelessly to excel athletically/academically to receive full rides, going into debt from taking out student loans, and posting GoFundMe’s to receive the money to continue their schooling. This scandal comes as no surprise because the playing field is not, and has never been equal. Laughlin’s daughter, Olivia Jade, stated that she did not care about school, and simply wanted to attend for the “experience.” For many people of color, attending college is more than an experience. For many of us, college is a lifeline. It’s a chance for us to improve our circumstances and create the life that we dream of living. Olivia Jade reducing university to nothing more than a chance to attend games and party is a testament to how rich people live in completely different worlds than everyone else. This scam is a testament as to how even if lower-income people of color work twice as hard, the wealthy can rely on money to cut to the front of the line. 

Similar Read: Segregated Rosters

What is Blackface Really?

by with No Comment Gen Z

Lately, there have been a number of incidents where well-known public figures, celebrities, and even name brands have been accused of blackface.

The well-known brand Gucci was recently criticised for creating a black sweater that featured a turtleneck with a cut-out for the lip-area, which was surrounded by a bright red color.

Gucci isn’t the first designer brand to be accused of supporting blackface. In December 2018, the Italian designer brand Prada, popular for its handbags and shoes, removed statues with brown-skin, big bright red lips, and a monkey-like appearance in a New York store window that was accused of resembling blackface. There was also an entire line of products resembling the same figures titled “Pradamalia”, all of which are no longer being sold. According to a CNN article titled, Prada pulls products after accusations of blackface imagery, Prada stated the images are “imaginary creatures not intended to have any reference to the real world and certainly not blackface.”

Pop star Katy Perry also received backlash for creating shoes designed with blue eyes and bright red lips, which happen to come in black.

Several other celebrities have been called out in the past. In 2016, actor and dancer Julianne Hough dressed as Crazy Eyes from the popular Netflix show “Orange is the New Black,” a black character which Hough wore darker toned makeup to look like her. She has since apologized on her Twitter account.

Unfortunately, even politicians have been apart of this controversy. In early February, Virginia governor Ralph Northam was discovered to have a photo of 2 men, one dressed as a Klu Klux Klan member and another in blackface on his personal page in his medical school yearbook. “I believe then and now, that I am not either of the people in that photo,” Northam stated in a press conference.

He did, however, admit to wearing blackface before. ”I darkened my face in part of a Michael Jackson costume,” he stated. Northam has apologized and stated that he is focusing more on racial issues and educating himself. “His advisers have assigned the governor homework: He’s begun to read Alex Haley’s ‘Roots,’ and ‘The Case for Reparations,’ the seminal essay in The Atlantic by Ta-Nehisi Coates,” according to the Buzzfeed article “Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam Plans To Survive By Changing His Agenda To Focus On Race.”

Incidents such as these highlights the importance of being informed. It is imperative that people of all races and nationalities understand the history behind the word, and why it is so offensive.

What is the meaning of blackface? Blackface originates from the early 1800’s, a time where slavery was still legal. White Americans would place shoe polish on their skin to resemble African-Americans and perform plays meant to be comical called minstrels that help spread many of the negative stereotypes still associated with Black Americans today. African-American actors often times were forced to participate in these awful events and behave in the same ways that blackface actors portrayed them as.

Participating in blackface equates to continuing a time in American history where African-Americans faced social and political oppression. It is denying Blacks the respect that was fought so vigorously for through riots, protests, and bloodshed, which is why many are quick to call anything out that so much as resembles the horrible images created by this.

Similar Read: Press Play & Focus on the Future

Press Play & Focus on the Future

by with 2 Comments CultureGen Z

I learned about the history of blackface in my music history class back in my junior year of college. It focused on popular music and blackface was a prominent form of entertainment dating back to the 1830s. In the late 1850s there was a surge of Irish immigrants due to the famine that overtook Ireland. The crops failed, leaving death to claim the Irish by means of hunger and/or disease. 

At this time, they weren’t considered White. According to author and historian Christopher Klein’s article published on History, they were even considered lower than Blacks for not being Protestants. American Protestants were afraid that the Pope was sending his army to take over America. This fear stemmed from when America’s forefathers fled Britain for religious freedom (Klein). While they lived in the same slums as Blacks, they were still not accepted as White. 

In an interview with author John Strausbaugh published on Vox, Strausbaugh states that blackface was taken up by Irish immigrants in order to set them apart from Blacks. At the end of the day, they were still just as fair skin as Whites. At the end of each performance, they would wipe the black off their faces, to say that well, at least we weren’t actually Black. Through the popularity of these performances, they gained White status (Strausbaugh). 

Blackface, I thought, no longer held a place in society. I thought we made progress. However, our black skin is still worn by white sheep who want to be the big bad wolf. With Gucci’s sweater that has an extended turtleneck which covers the face but has a large mouth printed around the hole in the neck, how were we not supposed to understand that as a new form of blackface? 

It would have been a completely different story if the turtleneck was simply longer than normal because in my opinion, the extended neck isn’t blackface. It just functions as a scarf and ski mask without all the extra material and allows for warmth without the bulk. But I and others like me cannot just look past the glaringly obvious. Apologies are not enough when discrimination, bias, and ignorance are stigmatizing our black skin. More has to be done. Reformation needs to start now. 

Daniel Day, affectionately known as Dapper Dan, is an African-American fashion designer who continues to work in collaboration with Gucci after this incident. It is a bold move that I believe others are not willing to take. Day is thinking about the future of Black fashion designers. 

The fashion industry is notorious for being racially exclusive. Take a look at advertisements in magazines and on television. Take a look at the runways. While the magazines might feature designers and models of color, the runways have always contrasted it with the whitewash. As Day has said in several interviews, he went through a lot to understand the industry/business and to keep his brand growing. These large brands are the stepping stones for Black designers to use to catapult their careers. 

By boycotting Gucci, that is a “now” solution. This will only resolve people’s gripes now but what about later? If we continue to boycott every incident individually, nothing will ever get done. Think of it as constantly pausing a movie every two minutes. It makes the movie much longer than it is, the plot gets disjointed by the constant stop and start, and the end gets pushed farther and farther away. By trying to handle each incident in real time, we are stopping and starting, pushing off the reformation that we seek. Reform will not happen if we keep getting in our own way. 

To make change, we have to be the change. We need to take a stand for the future and not everything that happens in the present. This is not to say that Gucci should be given a free pass, but as Day said in an interview with The Huffington Post, “this is an opportunity to learn.” This incident with Gucci is another moment that you could call a pause. There have been several pauses before this one and can be several pauses after this, but why not make this incident the last pause? In this pause, we can initiate the process of change and let it develop over time like a plot in a movie? Otherwise, we will always be dissatisfied with how things are and always call for change. 

NP

2019 State of the Union Address: Fact or Fiction

by with No Comment FeaturedGen ZPolitics

Various news organizations and media outlets analyzed the SOTU transcript. 

According to the U.S. Constitution, The President “shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient.”

President Donald Trump gave this address to a polarized Congress on Feb. 5, 2019, after a 35-day partial government shutdown – the longest in U.S. history. Topics covered included his continued call for immigration reform to the strong economy to the record number of women serving in Congress. 

Starting off his agenda, Trump states he wants to “reduce the price of health care and prescription drugs, to create an immigration system that is safe, lawful, modern and secure, and to pursue a foreign policy that puts America’s interests first.” According to POLITICO, the Trump administration has indeed lowered those costs, particularly on prescription drug prices.

Immigration reporter Ted Hesson confirmed Trump’s claim that in two years he has launched an “unprecedented economic boom.” The Bureau of Economic Analysis reported the U.S. gross domestic product has increased 4.2 percent in the second quarter of 2018, but Hesson added former President Barack Obama surpassed that level four times during his presidency.

We get into a sticky situation when Trump says unemployment has reached the lowest rate in over half a century. Politico staff counter this with links to articles that say in September, unemployment fell to 3.7 percent, the lowest it has been since December 1969. Last month, the unemployment rate was 4 percent.

Trump used his usual rhetoric towards illegal immigration from Mexico, “As we speak, large, organized caravans are on the march to the United States.” The Atlantic criticized President Trump for not devoting more time to speaking on Afghanistan, trade with China, or Venezuela. They reported he “devoted 463 words to immigration and 180 to the wall—a total of 643 words on a subject where he is bound to lose.”

Looming over the State of the Union address was the approaching Feb. 15 deadline to avoid another government shutdown. PBS Newshour reported Democrats have refused to accept Trump’s demands for a border wall, Republicans are increasingly unwilling to shut down the government, and the GOP does not support his plan to declare a national emergency if Congress won’t fund the wall. 

Trump continued by stating, “Year after year, countless Americans are murdered by criminal illegal aliens.” He brought Deborah Bissell, a woman whose parents were burglarized and shot to death in their home by “an illegal alien.” The couples granddaughter Heather and great-granddaughter Madison were also present. Politifact reported there is no quantitative proof specifically documenting how many U.S. citizens have been killed. This is because we do not have a national database on murders committed by immigrants in the country illegally. 

A striking display of applause from female Democrats dressed in white in solidarity for the suffrage movement came after Trump’s comment that women have filled 58% of the new jobs created in the last year. “You were not supposed to do that. Thank you very much,” Trump joked after the freshman congresswoman erupted in applause.

The internet more specifically erupted at the manner in which Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi clapped. Pelosi, who remained seated for a majority of the address, rose to her feet and clapped at President Donald Trump’s call to end the “politics of revenge.”

Although the Washington Post said Pelosi’s clap wasn’t sarcastic, it still made for some fantastic memes amidst the 82-minute speech.

A detailed fact check of the entire State of the Union address can be found at POLITICO.

Bold Ideas and Lessons Learned

by with One Comment FeaturedGen ZPolitics

While we all look ahead to 2020—which can be fun, that I will not deny—it might be best to start by looking back.  On Tuesday, Trump gave his second State of the Union Address, followed by the Democratic rebuttal given by Stacey Abrams.  Reading through Twitter after the address, I was expecting to find my favorite political voices pushing back on Trump’s falsehoods and rhetoric, and I did, but right before sighing and calling it a night, I found something even more profound.  It was a tweet, retweeted by an account I follow, written by Joe Kennedy. He was offering support and advice for Stacey Abrams before her rebuttal speech. It took me a minute to even understand the tweet’s context: Kennedy gave the Democrat’s State of the Union rebuttal a year earlier, at the end of Trump’s first year in office.  Aside from jokes about Kennedy’s over-application of chapstick (which he poked at in the tweet), the speech ultimately fell flat. That’s not to say it wasn’t well done, but it is to say that it appeared to be Kennedy’s opportunity to be thought of as the future of the Democratic Party, and a year later, he is not. In a very short time, the Democratic Party has experienced some pretty significant changes.  

To explain this, let us go back further, to 2015, when Hillary announced she was running for President.  Her campaign, personality notwithstanding, was essentially a promise for 4 more years of Obama: hold the line on some of the important victories Democrats had won, like Obamacare, the Iran Nuclear Deal, and legalizing gay marriage, and build on some of the things he began to do, like strengthening discrimination laws and making minor cutbacks in incarceration laws.  Then Bernie came along, then Cynthia Nixon, then Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, and today, our Democratic Party has taken an entirely different form. It is being moved by a diverse array of faces, it is confronting and pushing back on its opponents, and it is insisting on bold changes. Part of this, it must be said, is due to a wholly unpopular president and stagnation in progress on health care, tax reform, and mass incarceration, which are key issues for the American public.  But it is also an important lesson in American political science. A lesson borne of our obsession with the moderate, our two-party system, and a relatively obscure idea called the Overton Window (to be explained later).

Let us start with the moderate, who is the fixation of nearly every politician who hopes to take office.  When we envision our two-party system, we imagine our microeconomics lesson on two competing hot-dog stands: if there are two hot-dog stands on a street, logic would say the best placement would be such that the two stands broke the street up into 3 equal parts.  To increase Stand A’s business in this situation, one would suggest moving closer to the middle of the street—customers who were once in the middle now find themselves closer to Stand A, while those on the edge of the street are unaffected. For an example of this kind of thinking in politics, simply look for anyone begging the Democratic Party to abandon things like Medicare for All or free college tuition in order to “appeal to the moderate.”

The problem with this opinion is that it fundamentally misunderstands how American politics work.  If we go back to the hot-dog stands, what happens in the long run if the best idea to increase business is to stay close to the center?  The answer is that we are eventually left with two stands directly next to each other—a smart reaction in the short term turns into a long-term equilibrium where very few people are happy with the inefficient placement of the stands.  Next, who’s to say that the location of the people has to be fixed? The first question ties in deeply to Clinton’s 2016 campaign; an obsession with being near the center leaves voters near the edges unhappy, and they end up staying home or voting for Jill Stein.  The answer to the second explains the importance of figures like Bernie Sanders and AOC; bold ideas, attractive messaging, and genuine desire for change has the Democratic Party promised for success in 2020 and beyond.

The best articulation of this is the Overton Window, a theory whose named was coined in the late 20th century by Joesph P. Overton, which explains just how vital the “New Left” wing of the Democratic Party is.  The theory goes that the mainstream discourse exists in a certain window, with its center being the “moderate” take, and its edges the farthest one can go without appearing extreme (and being dismissed).  Just 3 years ago, college tuition and Medicare for All fell outside this window and would have been disqualifying in a presidential candidate. The interesting thing about the Overton Window is that it is not a fixed box in space, immovable and restrictive; it is a fluid area that can be expanded, contracted, and pulled in either direction.

Bernie Sanders, through his grassroots campaign and social-media-friendly advertising, moved the Overton Window, putting M4A and other “socialist” policies on America’s radar.  In New York, AOC proved that such ideas were not simply possibilities, they were winning policy goals, as she upset a 10-year incumbent en route to becoming the youngest female ever elected to Congress.  As she leads the progressive charge, Republicans are taking notice, as many on the campaign trail made sure to tell voters they would protect their public health care. The point is not to say that the next president will pass Medicare for All or that a stronger Republican Party will not find answers to a growing swell of progressive support, but the lesson is this: too long have Democrats wholly misunderstood the game they are playing, as bold ideas populate the left, they do not weaken Democrats, they pull voters with them, making a stronger party for years to come.  

Learning From Black History

by with One Comment FeaturedGen Z

As everyone likely knows, the month of February is Black History Month. In this country, the topic of race tends to be a very sensitive one. The reason race is such a difficult topic to discuss is because nobody wants to be called a racist. Nobody wants to be called out and told that what they are saying or doing is wrong or problematic. However, what many people don’t realize, is that this kind of call-out communication is sometimes necessary. If a person of color takes the time to explain why something is offensive or harmful, it is important to really listen and understand. White people cannot decide for people of color what is and is not racist.

On the other hand, however, it is never necessarily a person of color’s responsibility to teach White people about their history. People of color should not have to carry the burden of educating White people. If you are not Black but you want to do something for Black History Month, take the time to learn some Black history for yourself. Black history is often not taught thoroughly in schools. In general, we really only learn Black history through the lens of American history — starting with slavery, and usually ending around desegregation and integration. However, we all know Black history didn’t start with slavery, and the hardships certainly didn’t end with integrated schools.

There are centuries of Black history prior to slavery that has essentially been erased. There are so many Black people in this country today who don’t know where they are from or who their family is. Absent history is a huge problem in the recording and telling of history. All it takes is for someone to decide that your storyline is unimportant, and suddenly it’s gone forever. The more you learn about Black history, the more you realize just how much is left out in teachings. 

The best thing you can do as a White person during Black history month is to listen and to learn. If we want to move forward in our society, we need to stop silencing people. We need to listen to these marginalized groups and stop assuming that we know what they need or what’s best for them. Take a step back and listen to those who are actually affected by racism and other race-related hardships every day. We are still far from true equality in this country. One Black president does not mean we have solved racism. We still have a long way to go in our society. If we want to make lasting change, we need to start giving Black people the power and the voice to be able to do so.

Rich, White, and Male – The Perfect Recipe For Privilege

by with No Comment CultureFeaturedGen Z

By now, it feels like most everyone has seen the viral video of Covington Catholic High School student, Nick Sandmann’s encounter with elder of the Omaha Nation, Nathan Phillips at the Indigenous People’s March that took place in Washington D.C. Phillips sings and beats his drum as Sandmann (wearing a Make America Great Again hat, a well-known symbol of hatred) stands in an uncomfortably close proximity to him, staring him down and smirking tauntingly. The video was shared on social media and instantly sparked national conversation.

According to an article from The Washington Post, Nathan stated that he “felt threatened” by Sandmann and the group of teenage boys, some who were also wearing MAGA hats. As public outrage continued to increase, defense of Nick and his peers began to pour in as well. Some Twitter users — including Donald Trump — felt that the backlash was unfair.

However, other Twitter users were aware of the double standard that these defenses represent.

Donald Trump’s defense of Sandmann and his classmates is especially hypocritical, considering that he took out full page advertisements in all four of New York City’s major newspapers, calling for The Central Park 5 (a group of Black and Latino boys accused of rape and assault) to be given the death penalty. Even after they were exonerated by DNA evidence, Trump has refused to apologize. The difference between the boys at Covington High and The Central Park 5?

The boys at Covington High are White.

Nick and his classmates that attended the Indigenous People’s March wearing MAGA hats and making racist gestures have been made out to be victims of persecution. Defenders say that the general public is being too hard on them because they are just children. However, when Black children are murdered by the police, they don’t receive this type of empathy. When 12-year-old Tamir Rice was shot and killed within seconds of police arrival at the park that he was sitting in, he was blamed for his death and repeatedly referred to as a man, a reminder that victimhood and youthful innocence are often denied to Black children. This is similar to the murder of 18-year-old Michael Brown, who at the time of his death was no more than a couple of years older than Sandmann, who is a junior in high school. After being shot and killed in Ferguson, Missouri, many did not perceive Brown to be a victim or anyone’s child. Michael Brown was blamed for his death for a variety of factors, including his height, weight, and an allegedly checkered past that led the New York Times to refer to him as “no angel.” Michael Brown, unlike Nick Sandmann, was not given the chance to make a television appearance and tell his side of the story. He, like Tamir Rice, was denied humanity even in death. Childhood is something that Black children are routinely stripped of, yet it is given to white children in abundance.

White male privilege allows Nick Sandmann to antagonize a Native American man and be given the chance to do a segment on the Today Show. His wealth — another form of privilege — is what allowed his family to hire a PR team to spin the story. White male privilege is what allows him and his peers to be defended due to their youth, meanwhile, Black children are told they deserve bullets, and Brown children much younger than them are separated from their parents, then locked in cages while being told they deserve to be there. The second chances, forgiveness, patience, and protection that White males like Sandmann, along with Brock Turner and Brett Kavanaugh are often given, are not provided to children of color. White children often have racist behavior written off as nothing more than a “youthful indiscretion”, while Black and Brown children are often jailed or killed for actual mistakes made during our youth. We as a society must continue pushing back, demanding accountability, and working to dismantle the system of white supremacy that allows such privilege to exist. As long as white privilege continues to be upheld in this country, White boys like Nick Sandmann will continue to escape facing consequences for their actions, and we will continue to suffer as a result.

The Unknown Heroes of Rojava

by with No Comment FeaturedGen ZGlobal

When people think of war, they imagine the US Marine Corps or the British Royal Air Force. These are the men who receive our gratitude and respect. There are many men and women; however, that seem to go unnoticed. In 2014, The Islamic State declared their “Caliphate” inside of a Mosque in the city of Mosul, Iraq. The videos posted by the Islamic State horrified many people across the world striking fear into their hearts. There were some men and women who couldn’t sit idly and let the Islamic State continue their brutal oppression, so these everyday people, many of whom had zero military experience, left for Rojava (Western Kurdistan) to fight alongside US-backed YPG and YPJ forces. 

It is believed, around a thousand western volunteers have joined their ranks, many of whom have since lost their lives. These men and women live and die for the sake of humanity without anyone knowing their names. An IT technician named Jac Holmes from Bournemouth, UK had joined them. He quickly became infamous for his drive and skill. He carried out many operations and helped liberate the de-facto capital of the Islamic State, Raqqa. On October 23, 2017, Jac lost his life, he stepped on an IED left behind by the Islamic State. Nobody knows his name, not even most British people. He had fought bravely and with honor yet receives zero recognition for his selfless acts.

Why are his actions deemed less honorable than those in the military? He died fighting against the Islamic State and should be honored as a hero. When Trump wants to withdraw from Syria it disgusts me, it is a blatant betrayal to our loyal Kurdish allies and to all western volunteers. Jac had given his life to bring peace to Rojava; however, this peace is threatened by Turkey’s looming invasion. The best way to honor these unknown heroes is by rejecting Trump’s rash decision and demanding we stay and protect our Kurdish partners.