So many of you have been pestering me for weeks, "Where is my Christmas present?" "What have you gotten me for Christmas?" "When will I see that ten dollars that you borrowed from me?"
And, when I pointed out--repeatedly--that I am not a member of any organized religion, denomination or sect, and certainly not of any group that believes that a child is born nine months after an angel visits the household, you merely snickered. And then told me, "What's wrong with you? Don't you realize that the Christmas holiday has nothing to do with Christianity? Shoot, everybody knows that Jesus wasn't born on December 25th. Early leaders of the Christian church pegged his birthday at sometime between mid-March and mid-June, and historical studies support their conclusion. The choice of December 25th as Jesus' 'birthday' was made in the fourth century as a PR ploy to attract Roman sun worshippers to the 'new and improved--not your father's faith--more sins at the same low price--religion'. Because as we all remember, December 25 was the Invictus Sol celebration for the ancient Romans."
And so I'm feeling like I've been painted in a corner. You have made really valid points about the REAL meaning of Christmas--a day dedicated to selling something to some simple-minded consumers through manipulating their emotions. And I'm the king of simple-minded and emotional consumerism. So, yes, I have gotten you a Christmas present. This Blog Post!
And what cheery, uplifting topic have I chosen for my holiday blog? Why, "Race In America", of course. Something that rates second only to the whoopee cushion as a sure-fire laugh riot.
But to clarify: when I say "race" I am not talking about the Boston Marathon, The Amazing Race (copyright CBS television) or even Don Big Daddy Garlits.
No, I'm talking about the imaginary conception that different human beings belong to different "races." Even though there is not physical marker, genetic marker or genealogy that has any meaning when applying our ideas of race to different individuals. Of course, the fact that identifying individuals according to race makes no sense scientifically or otherwise just means that many, many people (and by 'people' I mean 'Americans') hold onto the fiction of racial identity so fervently. Because they find the imaginary world they have bought into so much easier to deal with that the real world where nobody is simply their outer appearance.
For example, you have undoubtedly heard the rumor that Thomas Jefferson had frequent conversations with his slave, Sally Hemings, over many years. Oh, did I say "conversations"? I think I may have picked the wrong word from my thesaurus. It seems that "intercourse" is a more descriptive choice of words. Anyway, whether you chose to believe this rumor or not, your reaction to this rumor is probably grounded primarily in the racial aspect--a white man having sex with a black slave. But whether your visceral reaction was "TJ, how could you do such a disgusting thing?" or "TJ, you da man!" or maybe both, there is one big problem. That being, that, if the idea of race has any meaning, then Thomas Jefferson and Sally Heming were of the same race.
You see, Sally Hemings' mother's parents were an African woman being transported to the new world to be sold into slavery and the British captain of the slave ship. As Mick and Keith told us, "Scarred old slaver knows he's doing all right . . . hear him with the women just around midnight"
.png)
Or--another way of expressing it--"That's no slave ship. That's the Love Boat!"
.png)
As you can see, life was all smiles aboard the H. M. S. You-Are-Now-My-Chattel. No wonder Sally Hemings' grandmother had a shipboard romance! Of course, unlike most passengers who have shipboard romances while on a cruise, when the ship docked and the romance had to end Ms. Hemings did not go back to her regular boyfriend or husband but rather to the slave auction block. Not that that's such a big difference for a woman, to be honest.
.png)
So, Sally Hemings' mother, Betty Hemings, had one European parent and one African parent. So, it's a little confusing to say that her "race" was European or African.
But let's hold off on that question and consider instead the matter of Sally Hemings' father. The place to start on that topic is to look at how Sally Hemings ended up as Thomas Jefferson's slave in the first place. Well, it turns out that she came to Monticello as part of the dowry of TJ's wife, Martha Wayles. And what was Hemings' background leading up to that glorious day when she, the silverware and the table linens moved to Monticello?
Well, the best explanation is the one that Jack Nicholson got when he came to visit the Jefferson's. After a few rye whiskeys, Jack pointed out Sally Hemings to Martha Wayles Jefferson and asked who she was. I have a picture of the encounter right here:
The conversation went like this:
"Who is that young woman?"
"My slave."
(slap) "Who is she?!"
"My sister."
(slap) "Stop lying! Who is she?"
"My slave and my sister."
Yes, Sally Hemings was the half-sister of Thomas Jefferson's wife. And the three of them, of course, were the first guests on the Jerry Springer Show. And I have a photo from that show. Of course I do.
.png)
You see, Martha Wayles' father, John Wayles, was quite the chatty slaveholder. He was such a big fan of conversations with Betty Hemings that he had six children with her, including Sally Hemings. Of course, all six of those children were, and remained for their entire lives, slaves. And since in the Americas it was not allowed to hold European/"white" people in perpetual captivity, then it was necessary to adjudge this six children who had three European grandparents and one African grandparent to be Negroes. So that's what John Wayles did. He declared these children of his to be condemned to lifelong servitude. And that is what forms the underpinnings of the issues of race in America.
So Martha Wayles brought along her slave-slash-sister when she became Mrs. Jefferson. And when she became the late Mrs. Jefferson, Thomas began sleeping with her sister, which suggests that--though Jefferson was not a practicing Christian--he did take a Biblical attitude toward finding a new wife. And he and Sally also followed the Biblical admonition to go forth and practice the multiplication tables (although probably not "3 x 23") and they begat four children. And since these children had two white parents and seven of eight white great-grandparents, they were, of course, Negroes and slaves. Except that as each child became an adult, Jefferson freed them and three of the four at that moment in time changed from being Negroes to being white. Because IT IS ALL A FICTION!
And because fictions are by their very nature not factual, so is the issue of race in America not a matter which is grounded in fact. Rather, it is based on prejudice and stereotyping. 100% based on prejudice and stereotyping. And I am referring to how we Americans perceive people of "our own race" as well as people of "another race", and our expectations on how these other people will behave. And, unfortunately, this prejudice and stereotyping is predictive of behaviors enough of the time that we hold onto it--not because of actual racial differences but because these other people tend to hold the same prejudices and stereotypes about themselves and their racial identities as we do. Which is a testament to the power of a longstanding fiction because THERE ARE NO ACTUAL RACIAL DIFFERENCES, SINCE THERE ARE NO ACTUAL RACES.
In the aftermath of the tragedy in Ferguson, Missouri, I read so many expressions of outrage from people who selectively culled bits of rumor that they then wove into a grand pronouncement of good and evil applied to a generalized population (black people or white people or police or liberals or conservatives or black leaders or President Obama [for some folks, it appears that he is an entire population]). While a few were insightful and thoughtful, most were not. Sadly, most were just ignorant condemnations of some group of people, based not on the available information about what occurred but rather by doing what our professors in law school called "assuming facts not in evidence"--which is an educated way of saying "you are just making shit up."
For example, on the liberal side, there was an article by Ezra Klein saying that Darren Wilson's account of his encounter with Michael Brown was literally unbelievable. That it could not be believed. Klein said this after numerous eyewitnesses (all of them black) had come forward and substantiated the bulk of his testimony. But aside from that, Klein's reasoning was based on what he wanted to be true in order to have the narrative he had already chosen. Among other things, Klein said that Wilson could not be believed when he said that Brown grabbed the waistband of his pants before charging at Wilson. "No one would do that!", asserts Klein. Well, Ezra, I happen to think highly of you in general (I really do), but if you were any more "white" you'd be Chevy Chase. If you are wearing those stylishly sagging jeans that are de rigueur with young black males, you HAVE TO grab the waistband if you want to run. (Yes, what I just said is a stereotype, not based on my having known Michael Brown. Which makes my point, actually--that stereotyping is like a dysfunctional family--each person plays a role that preserves the dysfunction.)
As for what conservatives said, I'm not going to repeat what I read because some things are too vile to ever be repeated. However, the tamer aspect of these comments seems to be that race and violent conduct are connected attributes. To which I would suggest that these people spend some time in non-safari parts of Africa and then explain why these young black men--who have 100% African ancestry, unlike the bulk of black men in America--are not killing each other or anybody else at even the rate that American whites kill each other. It's almost as if it's not a racial thing at all! But rather a cultural thing? And, by the way, the people who say that the high rates of violence in the American black communities are a symptom of poverty? Same thing. Go to sub-Saharan Africa and tell me that they don't know poverty there like we do in America. Yeah, right.
Okay. So the problem is deep seeded and endemic. What's a non-prejudiced, morally impeccable, genuinely nice person--meaning, you--supposed to do about it? Actually, the solution is easy. All you need to do is to forward this blog post to all of your friends, enemies and vague acquaintances, with the admonition to read and follow all my writings. The end result, I fervently hope, will be the realization of my dream to be the leader of a vast mob of simpleminded, brainwashed, fanatical followers. Ideally . . . carrying pitchforks.
So Martha Wayles brought along her slave-slash-sister when she became Mrs. Jefferson. And when she became the late Mrs. Jefferson, Thomas began sleeping with her sister, which suggests that--though Jefferson was not a practicing Christian--he did take a Biblical attitude toward finding a new wife. And he and Sally also followed the Biblical admonition to go forth and practice the multiplication tables (although probably not "3 x 23") and they begat four children. And since these children had two white parents and seven of eight white great-grandparents, they were, of course, Negroes and slaves. Except that as each child became an adult, Jefferson freed them and three of the four at that moment in time changed from being Negroes to being white. Because IT IS ALL A FICTION!
And because fictions are by their very nature not factual, so is the issue of race in America not a matter which is grounded in fact. Rather, it is based on prejudice and stereotyping. 100% based on prejudice and stereotyping. And I am referring to how we Americans perceive people of "our own race" as well as people of "another race", and our expectations on how these other people will behave. And, unfortunately, this prejudice and stereotyping is predictive of behaviors enough of the time that we hold onto it--not because of actual racial differences but because these other people tend to hold the same prejudices and stereotypes about themselves and their racial identities as we do. Which is a testament to the power of a longstanding fiction because THERE ARE NO ACTUAL RACIAL DIFFERENCES, SINCE THERE ARE NO ACTUAL RACES.
In the aftermath of the tragedy in Ferguson, Missouri, I read so many expressions of outrage from people who selectively culled bits of rumor that they then wove into a grand pronouncement of good and evil applied to a generalized population (black people or white people or police or liberals or conservatives or black leaders or President Obama [for some folks, it appears that he is an entire population]). While a few were insightful and thoughtful, most were not. Sadly, most were just ignorant condemnations of some group of people, based not on the available information about what occurred but rather by doing what our professors in law school called "assuming facts not in evidence"--which is an educated way of saying "you are just making shit up."
For example, on the liberal side, there was an article by Ezra Klein saying that Darren Wilson's account of his encounter with Michael Brown was literally unbelievable. That it could not be believed. Klein said this after numerous eyewitnesses (all of them black) had come forward and substantiated the bulk of his testimony. But aside from that, Klein's reasoning was based on what he wanted to be true in order to have the narrative he had already chosen. Among other things, Klein said that Wilson could not be believed when he said that Brown grabbed the waistband of his pants before charging at Wilson. "No one would do that!", asserts Klein. Well, Ezra, I happen to think highly of you in general (I really do), but if you were any more "white" you'd be Chevy Chase. If you are wearing those stylishly sagging jeans that are de rigueur with young black males, you HAVE TO grab the waistband if you want to run. (Yes, what I just said is a stereotype, not based on my having known Michael Brown. Which makes my point, actually--that stereotyping is like a dysfunctional family--each person plays a role that preserves the dysfunction.)
As for what conservatives said, I'm not going to repeat what I read because some things are too vile to ever be repeated. However, the tamer aspect of these comments seems to be that race and violent conduct are connected attributes. To which I would suggest that these people spend some time in non-safari parts of Africa and then explain why these young black men--who have 100% African ancestry, unlike the bulk of black men in America--are not killing each other or anybody else at even the rate that American whites kill each other. It's almost as if it's not a racial thing at all! But rather a cultural thing? And, by the way, the people who say that the high rates of violence in the American black communities are a symptom of poverty? Same thing. Go to sub-Saharan Africa and tell me that they don't know poverty there like we do in America. Yeah, right.
Okay. So the problem is deep seeded and endemic. What's a non-prejudiced, morally impeccable, genuinely nice person--meaning, you--supposed to do about it? Actually, the solution is easy. All you need to do is to forward this blog post to all of your friends, enemies and vague acquaintances, with the admonition to read and follow all my writings. The end result, I fervently hope, will be the realization of my dream to be the leader of a vast mob of simpleminded, brainwashed, fanatical followers. Ideally . . . carrying pitchforks.
.jpg)
