An Essay On What They Call Us

Home > Other > An Essay On What They Call Us > Page 6
An Essay On What They Call Us Page 6

by Pegasus Books

Ages.

  And that has happened. America is more soup than salad. In language, food, libation, celebration, education, religion and tradition, the varied people and cultures have blended, shared, borrowed from, combined with and augmented each other. They have stood and fought together, bled together and died together for the shared idea of “liberty and justice for all.” They have melded together to create a nation and an edifying culture that truly is E Pluribus Unum, or “Out of Many, One.” It has been a singular triumph, but most Americans just don’t get it yet. Why? Because there is a destructive culture in America in opposition to unity, a counterbalance that pits brother against brother, parents against children, believers against non-believers, man against woman, middle class against poor, Jews against Gentiles and black against white.

  This counter-culture is perpetuated by the ever-pressing objective of some government operators who perceive an advantage in keeping people divided and at odds with each other. They understand how to capitalize on the innate tendency of some individuals to separate themselves, to divide and form groups, finding strength in numbers. They know natural human aggression will cause the powerful and more aggressive groups to dominate the weaker and peaceful groups. But they also understand the frightening power and potential of a united people.

  Behold, the people is one, and they have all one language; and this they begin to do: and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do. Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand one another’s speech.

  More simply put, the unity of people, groups, cultures and ideas is a threat to governments, who realize that a society in which groups fight each other, compete against each other, resent each other and do not trust each other need constant governance and meddling, while a united, considerate and cooperative people do not need government at all. When people unite, governments lose power and control. And so when the ideals of America started to become realized, and racial and cultural lines became blurred, it became incumbent on the government to continually redefine the people, to re-categorize, to create new divisions, new groups and new distinctions for the purpose of confounding and discouraging unity.

  The Haters

  But just who are the “government operators” who oppose the people and unity? Look only to individuals in the three branches of government, the White House, Congress and the Supreme Court. Look to the bigots, the hate-mongers, the judgmental, the spewers of vitriol, the “red-meat” vendors, the intolerant and the divisionists – these operators, regardless of their rhetoric, are the instruments of big government and the wealthy. And because the media in America has lost its conscience, independence, objectivity and sense of purpose, the media has become the tool and mouthpiece for those anti-unity government operators.

  Of course the operators within the three branches of government are most often the unwitting pawns of wealthy players who control the boards, the invisible one percent. These operators do not realize they have been carefully chosen, groomed, favored and financed by the rich and powerful, perhaps the greatest beneficiaries of disunity and divisions among the people. These manipulated operators, who understand that money is the mother’s milk of politics – these self-serving sycophants are willing to risk and ruin America in order to protect and to increase the wealth and power of their benefactors.

  And so the wealthiest Americans are able to augment and enhance themselves at the expense of the middle class, the poor and arguably their own biggest benefactor, the federal government. Because this elite group dominates, they control the narrative – the debate in Washington, government regulation and taxation, employment and spending, military actions and foreign policy, the decisions of federal courts, and the actions of big city executives and those of the President. Because they own the media, they control the very perceptions of Americans, right down to how we self-identify and what they call us.

  “Race” versus Culture

  Despite all the attention Americans have been conditioned to pay to it, the whole idea of race is an illusion, ten microns (1/2545 th of an inch) thick. There is no such thing as race in humans, and there never has been. Scientifically, there is no taxonomic significance. Thus there is no English blood, no Gypsy blood, no Polynesian blood, no Latin blood or Black blood. The color of a person is literally superficial, involving how many melanin cells are contained within the stratum basale, a single layer of the epidermis that is merely one cell thick.

  There is one race, the human race, which refers to the human species. And phenotypes –what individuals look like – can often belie their genetic make-up. Beyond that, phenotypes can be altered through cosmetic surgeries, tanning, tattooing or bleaching of the skin, through hair coloring, straightening or curling, by disease, mutations and acts of nature. Ancestry carries genetic implications, but “race” has become a more matter of perception and a way to divide people and alienate groups.

  Culture however, is a different thing. Culture indicates a shared lifestyle, set of beliefs, history, shared challenges, language, sometimes a dialect, tradition, food, religion, music, dance and celebration. Culture teaches, validates and fosters continuity from generation to generation. It is private and inward, yet something to be proudly shared, explored by others and preserved. Culture accepts converts and embraces diversity. It reveres white hair and bald heads, and while it often involves complex ancestries or genealogies, it has little to do with race or stereotypes. “Race” describes, but culture defines. The conflicts in America are differences about culture and not about race.

  The Mizrahi, the Ayhud and the Ashkenazi share a greater common culture, while their physical characteristics, skin color, hair texture and facial features could not be more diverse. “Black,” “White,” and “Asian” are not races. They are cultures, and within these cultures, there are many sub-cultures, such as Gullah, Latvian and Laotian. In America, there are many people with white skin who are “culturally Black,” who may or may not have had a recent black African ancestor. And there are dark-skinned people who are “culturally White,” not because they are traitors or pretenders, but because that is the culture they know, or identify with.

  American President Barack Obama is the product of two cultures, “Kenyan” and “American Mid-West,” but he is “culturally Black.” His wife, children and extended family are Black, he attends a predominately Black church, shares the challenges of the Black community and self-identifies as “African American.” On the other hand, Tiger Woods is also the product of two cultures, “Black” and “Thai,” but he is “culturally White” and does not identify as “African American” or “Thai.” And ironically, Ward Connerly, who does not identify as “African American,” actually grew up “culturally Black.” But he’s “Irish” if he says he is.

  And so when the U.S. Census asks Americans to indicate a “culture or cultures” they identify with, the question has nothing to do with skin color, hair texture or facial features, and if Americans answer honestly, then Census results will not separate Americans on that basis, on the basis of so-called “race.” A white person who is culturally Black should properly self-identify as such, and an “Asian” who is culturally Mexican or Peruvian should be honest about his or her culture. In all fairness, any person who can self-identify as two or even three distinct cultures should indicate as much.

  The Numbers Game

  But the U.S. government and the U.S. Census have a problem with race, and they always have, all the way back to the Three-Fifths Compromise of 1787, when non-free Persons [Negroes] were counted as three-fifths of a person [60% a human]. The provision was contained in Article 1, Section 2, Paragraph 3 of the United States Constitution and remained in effect for eighty years. So from its inception, the United States government has played games with the numbers to achieve desired results, in this case a compromise between northern and southern states through their operators on a tax and apportionment deal.

  In the end, the numbers
do not reflect real truth when the methods are altered to produce specific, premeditated results. For this reason, all Americans should take the time to consider the implications of the numbers game these operators have played in hopes of altering or skewing the results of the 2012 general election. On the national level, legislative operators representing a tiny minority issued directives to be introduced by Republican dominated state legislatures, which would enact measures meant to disenfranchise dark-skinned cultures, the youth and the elderly and deny the voting rights of five million people who voted in 2008.

  How Dare They!

  Recalcitrant in the wake of a landmark election that made a statement to the world, a significant indication that Americans could move past the division and racism perpetuated by government operators to discourage unity – in the wake of this election, the nation’s rich and powerful doubled down, confident they could rekindle the hatred and bigotry of the nation’s most troubling wounds and appeal to the lowest common denominators of insecurity, ignorance and resentment to once again divide and dominate. In the

‹ Prev