Trying to follow

As true as much of what you say here may be, I’d invite you to compare life for yourself, the descendants of slaves or native peoples, or anyone else here in this country to the plight you or they would have if your lives were lived as a citizen of, say, any country in Central or South America, or Asia, or India, or Africa, or a Muslim country in the Middle East. -Aaron

Let me be honest and start by saying that I deeply appreciate when Aaron takes the time to comment on my blog. He is challenging, always kind, and continually leaves me pondering my beliefs and reflecting on my position and values.
The comment above is one Aaron left on a post I wrote about the fourth of July. It was a letter to the editor, esteeming the sacrifices of a range of people who helped make this country great, but did not receive equal freedom on the day whose anniversary we celebrate each July 4th. The letter was a response to a politicians opinion piece esteeming the sacrifice of the soldiers who fought in a the numerous wars our country has been through. Here is how I began my piece.

I want to first of all thank Congressman Mark Kennedy for his article concerning this country’s “Independence Day.” There is certainly room for celebration and many of the historical facts he pointed out are worth noting and esteeming. Unfortunately I fear Congressman Kennedy missed out on the whole picture of the American Experiment and I feel the need to complete, or at least add to his summary.
It is true our Experiment has succeeded because of sacrifice, but whose sacrifice?

Aaron’s critique is that I am often negative and always pessimistic about this country, The United States, and seem to do little to recognize the good in it. Honestly, I think Aaron might be right about that. I’ll let you be the judge, but I am open to admitting that I might be critical to a fault of this country.
However, I do not feel I should stop raising my voice in solidarity with those who are mistreated, overlooked, or oppressed in this country. Just because our plight is better, relatively speaking, then some other countries on this globe, does not make it right.

This might seem harsh, but this is what I felt and what deeply disturbed me when reading the comment above. It’s a simple, and seems at first, fair argument, that even the citizens who have it ‘bad’ here are much better off then those anywhere else. It’s similar to the “Each your beans, there are children starving in China” argument. However, here is what is disturbing to me.

The same argument could have been used in the Jim Crow south: “Blacks in the segregated south are better off then when they were slaves, they should stop complaining and just be happy with how good they have it now.”
It could be used on the Native Peoples: “They should be happy we left them any land at all.”
or Jewish people: “At least your not living in Germany.”

Comparing the oppression of one person or group to those worse then them is not justification for that group to stop fighting for their freedom and justice.

I don’t know if you’ve ever went to your boss and asked for a raise, or worse, tried to address or file a grievance because of mistreatment of some kind, but imagine if your boss said:

“Look, I’m sorry for you, really I am. But, Things aren’t going to change around here, your just going to have to get over it and be happy with where you are. Look at all the grunts working below you, they’re making minimum wage and don’t have it half as good as you! Quit complaining.”

If you were like me you’d be hurt, offended, or disturbed.

I believe we live in a great country. It is a place where I not only have the opportunity to speak my mind with little risk of being harmed (not all on this planet, or in this country have that freedom), but it is also a place where I can speak challenging words with the hope that they might bring about some change. If I didn’t have hope in the people and powers of this nation, I wouldn’t be spending my time speaking out about those areas that are lacking. I do hope that those in power will write celebratory words that congratulate the achievements of this country, but that they would do it holistically, recognizing the sacrifices of all the people involved that have made this country great. Until that happens though, I will continue to raise my voice.

Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere
-MLK

(p.s. “We were better off in Egypt!” was the complaint of the Israelities to Moses as they wandered the desert eating manna, having just escaped slavery in Egypt. As the story goes, they where definitely not better off, eventually making it to the promise land as free people. I used this as the title, because I’m aware that I don’t know the end of the story here and I might look back and find my complaint as ridiculous as the Israelities.)
photo credit

(photo credit [photo not of me])
Here’s my basic premise: The person whose only interaction with people of a different cultural/ethnic group is in a serving/charity capacity is likely to form stereotypes about that group based on that limited and extremely isolated interaction.

I myself went to a fairly large, suburban, predominately white church during my formative high school years. I went on three “missions” trips while attending there to: Mexico, South Dakota and D.C. On each trip we worked with a different ethnic group: Hispanics in Mexico, Native Peoples in South Dakota, and African-American’s in D.C. Now, Madison, where I grew up, is fairly diverse, so I had the good fortune of those not being my only interactions with other races, but they were some of the most significant interactions I had had with anyone of Hispanic or Native origin.

When I went to College I met and discovered a large number of other students had had similar “missions” trip experience. Some had even gone to countries in Africa and Asia. However, my more shocking discovery was the number of students who had come from far more ethnically homogenous (read: mostly White) cities, towns and neighborhoods then even I did. In addition, it seemed that in those homogenous neighborhoods, the rare interaction with a person of a different ethnicity typically involved that person in a serving capacity. Even our college campus, Wheaton College, was an example of this. The number of students and facility from multi-cultural backgrounds had been growing, but a large amount of white students primary interaction with different ethnicities was the cafeteria workers.

Now, couple those brief interactions with the limited portrayal of ethnic minorities in the media (again, often overly portrayed in historically oppressed or currently oppressed roles), and then we send them on “mission” trips. This might sound harsh, but I think the feeling behind many of those trips is the chance to “go help those poor unfortunate people.” The combination of all of these interactions creates, I believe, a strong stereotype of other cultures, and not only are they stereotypes, but the are dangers in that the person doesn’t seem them as stereotypes, but as fact, since they have by and large proved true in their interactions.

This is just one of the reason I think so much structural racism still exist in our country. It’s why efforts like affirmative action are necessary and why many voices are still needed to speak up against unjustice and prejudice, yes even racist, treatment.

Here are a few stories of creativity I’ve read recently…

1. With all the foreclosures there are a lot of neighborhoods with houses with rather unpleasant plywood covering the doors and windows. An artist in Chicago took advantage of the opportunity and began offering his boarding contract services with a twist. Basically he puts boards on windows, but he paints the boards to look like windows and doors, rather then just boring plywood. He’s done it to a few houses in my part of the city and is hoping to get a big city contract. I’d sure like to see more art in the neighborhood. -Star Tribune
2. There’s this guy Steve Lambert, who is pretty awesome. He runs the Anti-Advertising Agency. They are responsible for stuff like PeopleProducts123, and this video (which I’ve shown before)
   
   There’s a great interview with Steve in Gelf mag.
3. And the last one is this pastor from Detroit named Harvey Carey. He spoke at Sanctuary Covenant recently and he mentioned one of their creative activities. The men of the church go camping every summer. They get their tents and lanterns and they set up in front of the drug houses in the neighborhood. They hangout, cook s’mores and basically keep any business from happening. And when they drug dealers move out to a new location, the church camp out moves with them. He said they’ve shut down 15 drug houses that way in the past few years.

We need more creative stories.

My wife had this brilliant thought the other day (this occurs most days, the really brilliance is when my brain stays focused long enough to remember it): “If the government is just giving away money with this Economic Stimulus package thing, then why not at least give it to the people it was once promised to.” Brilliant.

Okay, so I know it’s a little late for the suggestion, but it’s worth dreaming about. The government is giving $600 to every person who made over $3000 and filed their taxes this year. Now, I don’t think it would right years of slavery and oppression, but it seems like it would be a small gesture in the right direction.

I believe the Economic Stimulus is a $168 billion bill, and at the 2005 census there were 40 million Black and Native People’s living in the USA. If you just split the money that way you’d have $4200 per person, and that included children.

It’s a shame that the term, “40 Acres and a Mule“, instead of being a honest attempt to right the terrible injustices of our history, is just one more indication of how the people of this country have been oppressed and mistreated. It was another unkept promise, one of many from the past and just another of the many to this day. I know this one might spark some controversy too, but I had to throw it out there.

Okay, this isn’t necessarily my solution, just the most recent thing I’ve come up with, but it would take a LOT of effort for it to happen, and there are probably a great many problems to it as well (my more conservative brethren can speak up now). But, here’s my idea.
I think urban centers that have experienced the negative affects of absentee landlords (many slum lords) and now the recent foreclosure crisis, should make homesteading mandatory in those neighborhoods. What homesteading means is that a home must be owner occupied, they must live there. I slightly looser option would be that all owners of property in that zip code or neighborhood must live in the same neighborhood. Basically, this would mean you can only own property in the neighborhood if you lived in the neighborhood.
One of the primary things I believe this will do is create a vested interest in the community. Many of our problems today from slum lords to sweatshops exist because we are able to distance ourselves from the injustices we often passively (or actively) contribute to and participate in. Requiring all owners of pieces of a community to actually be a part of that community would create geographic proximity that would build awareness and sensitivity to the problems within that community.
As it relates to the foreclosure problems currently, it would force banks to liquidate the properties in a community, rather than being able to sit on vacant houses in hopes of riding out the low parts of the real estate trend. And, those properties would then be available to people who are interested in living in that particular community and not a wealthy investor who is interested in the bottom line rather then the interest of the people in the community. This would more then likely drop the value of the property in a neighborhood considerably, since those interested in purchasing and living in the neighborhood might not have the financial means to offer what the previous market values might have been. However, the benefits of increased homeownership in a community, vested interest, and the possibility for individuals to build equity would far outweigh the loss in property value.
It seems this sort of thing has been done in a few cities before, but the goal was more for a sort of ‘urban renewal’ that brought middle and upper class folks back into cities. It in effect pushed the people of the neighborhood out and basically gentrified the neighborhood to the degree that the original people of the community were no longer there. I think efforts toward this sort of required homesteading would need to be done sooner in a city facing a lot of abandon and foreclosed houses, so that the original community isn’t displaced.

I haven’t thought through all the ins and outs but it seems like, with the right planning, it could be a very beneficial solution to many urban neighborhoods.