Race-Baiting No Longer Computes

Now that we are some weeks past South Carolina's primary, in hindsight the whole race-baiting thing seemed to parallel what happened to Michael Richards when he used the N-word at a Los Angeles comedy club against some patrons of color, hoping to rally the majority white crowd behind him. Didn't work in LA and sure didn't work in South Carolina.

Can we say that America has turned a corner on the race issue, that we have finally come to the point where neither whites nor blacks can stand the N-word and race-baiting?

For a long time we've heard whites saying they are not racist. Well, I think for a lot of us in the Redwood Forest it's time to sit down and have a few helpings of humble pie.

Political Pollution

The wise say politics is a dirty game we must learn to play, from Washington to workplace.

But if it's so dirty, why don't we treat it like anything else that pollutes our environment? Let's change it over for something sustainable. What we really want is not politics but governance.

Political campaigns and games are only a grand show for the candidates to exhibit their gladiatorial skills, to cut each other to pieces in public and private as proof of their ability to govern. But barbaric combat proves no such thing; it is relevant to organized crime, not the task of governing a civilization.

The wise say you can't have governance without politics, and to think otherwise is utopian.

Ah, these wise realists. They always remind me of how it's impossible to have food without pollution. Yes, please, I'd like an order of mashed potatoes, with a nice bowl of MSG on the side, thanks.

Too bad organic agriculture is sweeping across the world at lightning speed. It's so unwise.

Tiger the Tireless Firefighter

In the recent bruhaha over an unfortunate and unintended comment that ruffled racial feathers across the US for a few days, Tiger Woods simply dealt with the issue firmly and succinctly and put out the fire. Ever since the beginning of his pro career he has consistently demonstrated balance between action and discretion, neither ignoring insults nor fanning them into flames. Like any good firefighter he efficiently douses them. And in the process he leads by example, teaching all of us that racial discrimination is not to be tolerated and yet unity is to be preserved. He's the master of the "no hard feelings" school of conflict resolution. Perhaps that's the kind of child Dr. King had in mind.

From Oil-Rich to Sun-Rich

It's about time. An oil-rich country in the Gulf is transitioning to sustainable energy, and building a city for 50,000 as a proof-of-concept project. If it works, we can be sure the idea will spread quickly, because there are plenty of sun-rich countries with money to burn.

These photos are hard to see here, but they can be found blown-up in the original brochure, The Masdar Development.

It seems the buildings are a bit dark for a sun-drenched desert environment. Maybe the photos are not accurate as to color. In any case, details are not so important now as making a start. I'm sure that once even a partial success is made the rest of the world will jump into the pool. And the prices will come down.

One thing you have to admit, no Hollywood set designer has produced anything more sophisticated than this for a futuristic city. It's a stunning vision.

Barack the Black Quarterback

The characterization of Barack Obama as an “eloquent speaker” rings some old bells.

First, it reminds me of the classic and long-running debate: blacks can’t quarterback. They’re great at running the ball, and doing all the work in the trenches, and they may even be able to throw passes accurately. But when it comes to leading the team as quarterback or head coach, they just don’t have it. Fortunately in the past few years we’ve seen that myth well and truly exploded.

But there’s an even more disturbing hint of something insidious in the pigeon-holing of Barack Obama. It is the silent but clear assumption that he can talk but he can’t actually fight. He’s too young, too inexperienced, too marginal, too foreign, too culturally alien, to get the job done. As one very progressive website put it – in strikingly reactionary language – he doesn’t seem to have the aggressiveness to throw the jabs and punches needed to win the nomination and the presidency.

There is so much food for thought here that I have to put a new leaf or two in the table. But let me first say that the following comments, and anything else talked about here in the Redwood Forest, are offered in a spirit of love, fellowship, and constructive inquiry. If it sounds like harsh criticism, that is not what is intended. I'm just trying to look at our wounds a little more closely, and get some ideas about what we can do to heal ourselves.

America's political culture is in some ways rooted in traditions of conquest, the "terrible swift sword," the "bombs bursting in air," "from the halls of Montezuma to the shores of Tripoli." Blacks are by definition lacking the violent power to conquer. They and the Native Americans are the quintessential conquered.

Typically, blacks are most acceptable to whites when they (the blacks) are manifestly disarmed, peaceful, impotent. Barack Obama seems attractive to some whites only so long as he has no teeth. But teeth are what the whites want in their president, nice long sharp fangs to deal with our enemies abroad and at home. But a black with fangs? That’s not the might of a conqueror but a nightmare. And a Catch-22.

Voters in the white community don’t want a leader to demonstrate a unifying ability, but a destructive ability. We want our leaders to have long, sharp fangs and claws, and powerful muscles. This resonates with the ancient traditions and glorification of European conquest, and with what Riane Eisler called the culture of the blade. The opposite, what Eisler calls the culture of the chalice, is focused on bringing life, unity in diversity, harmony with nature, partnership between women and men.

So there are two kinds of leadership, one based on the threat of violence with the resources to back it up; and another based on building unity, across racial, class, gender, political and national borders. Some candidates might seek to represent a vision of security in a world threatened by an ongoing cold war and terrorism, and some a vision of security in a world undergoing globalization and unification. Neither vision is necessarily opposed to the other; it’s just that each candidate has chosen to emphasize their differences by means of this distinction, and to criticize each other through them. And consequently the visions sometimes become exaggerated and distorted.

Fickle Unity

Not to be partisan in any way (sure), but shouldn't we be concerned that racism is perhaps being used consciously and systematically to win votes?

It is not for me to judge who is at fault. But one thing's for sure: to see Latinos and African Americans pitted against each other is simply hearbreaking.

The Perfect Candidate

We can't seem to stomach an imperfect black man, or a woman who is not flawless. The first wrong step, the slightest mistake, and the trumpets sound and the herald declares: "Off with his head!"

I don't mind the media and the public trying to find the candidates' weak points. That's what we ought to do in order to make an informed decision in our vote.

But there might be a double standard: that an African American and a woman must be picture perfect or they'll be shredded to bits and discarded as completely unacceptable, while a white male candidate can have the same or similar errors - or worse? - and be given a "get out of jail free" pass on just about anything.

But why all the bellyaching. Of course, boys will be boys. They don't mean anything by it. We can trust 'em. But those Lakota women, now those are the ones you have to watch out for. They'll seem right nice, but you just turn your back for a second and... Just can't trust 'em.