The subject of discussion was Puerto Rican Judge Sonia Sotomayor. Interestingly enough the audience had gone slightly past the "Republican opposition" of a "qualified Puerto Rican" and instead they delved into the relationship between Blacks and Puerto Ricans AND the shared base of "discrimination" that the two groups shared in America.
Clearly "discrimination" based on skin color and race is a valuable currency in the consciousness of many people in these two communities.
Some callers made the point of defining "Hispanic" in proper terms as a political rather than racial category. Others talked about how Puerto Ricans come from a variety of racial backgrounds and thus one can't assume that all Puerto Ricans come from the same struggle based on skin color.
Of course they inspected how Blacks and Hispanics might forge a power partnership to gain more power in this country and make the changes necessary to allow more individuals from the group to prosper. The current level of racism and marginalization negatively impacts both groups in the way of health care, academics and employment. Indeed two groups that have been victimized by the White establishment were seeking a common working order.
The dialogue that was heard on the Al Sharpton Show could be found in various labor union organizing sessions or community forums. There is some threat to the people around which everyone needs to coalesce. The claim is made that if the people, having united work for their common interests that better days will be ahead.
Let's stop right here. I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH UNITY. In fact, I am happy that these people are, at least on the surface, acknowledging that OUR COMMUNITY HAS PROBLEMS. They would even argue that while I (me - Constructive Feedback) publish the ills that are taking place within the Black community.......they are forging action to address these problems by changing the power relationship.
Here is where I depart.
WHO IS THE ENEMY?
The first step in understanding the effectiveness of their movement as well as the flaws is to focus upon the enemy that is commonly brought forth. Admittedly they don't specifically pin it upon one person or regime.
We can gather that the "American Power, as headed by White people of European heritage" serves as the main threat to their interests. From this core extends the tentacles of
- The Police Force - that harass them and occupy their community
- Corporations that refuse to hire them or that pollute their community - exploiting them
- The Medical Establishment - which denies them health care and runs them through mazes
- The Banking System - denying them loans, seeking to steal their houses via foreclosure
- The Republican Conservative - the voice of racist White people
The Plan And Its Flaws
In forging an alliance for their own benefit, almost unerringly the Democratic Party and the Progressive movement stand as the key beneficiaries of their resolve. As I have noted before - with the use of this intermediate structure (drive PROGRESSIVES into power and THEN we will be healed) though they may fail to ever achieve their end point, the intermediary infrastructure is empowered more than ever.
One needs to WANT to achieve the end point status more than they want to have the intermediate empowered to even CARE that, functionally they are being used. Unfortunately this does not matter.
In pursuing this course, for example, they are effective at changing their sub-par public schools that were run by people "who didn't have their interests centrally in mind" over to sub-par public schools that are run by people who are ideologically compatible with where they stand. The effect of this cannot be understated. As an external critic of this movement from an ideological perspective - it is clear to me that certain people love their IDEOLOGY (the methodology by which they seek to achieve their end) more than they love their PERMANENT INTERESTS, the destination that the actions performed in the confines of the methodology purports to take us to.
Loathed to "throw bombs at" the favorable leadership that is now running their key local institutions yet still being dissatisfied.........the logical course of action is to EXPAND!!! Go after more ideological adversaries, higher in the framework of the American political hierarchy and thus the movement stays alive. Despite failing to achieve its immediate endpoint objectives - the intermediate force has grown in power. From this we see the growth in size and power of the centralized government and its distribution of resources to the periphery. Just as this movement desires as a means of papering over their inability to organize and generate economic resources at the edge to satisfy their requirements for living.
The Union Of Shared Grievances
In line with the notion that a fist is more powerful than individual fingers that are separated - what was initially a movement of individuals that had a common experience of discrimination within the institutions that they looked to for employment, academics and police protection NOW has become a union of communities (ie: cities) that now speak as one to the state and federal legislatures, demanding resources and policy changes.
For most this is a good thing as it leverages a power base to fight for effective change. In my analysis - this is unsustainable.
Looking past the fact that the cities that this force now dominates (ie: both Philadelphia and its immediate suburbs) failed to deliver the promised services and quality of life that the politicians and community activist forces sold the voters upon if they were provided with the people's votes, there exists a basic perversion of the charter of these places. Cities were once UNINCORPORATED AREAS. Upon their ascention local visionary leaders saw that these functionally self-sufficient areas could produce a better standard of living for their local enhabitants if they were allowed to retain their tax revenues at the local level and apply them to their own local interests.
Today's Progressive ideology threatens to retain the local power that they have fought for AND seek financial resources from the same institutions that their city charter had decoupled from.
In effect they tap into the frustrations of the local people to build a power base via these grievances and they move the central system closer to the point of collapse because of the increased burden placed upon it.
The "one voice" that they speak with also serves as the "Package Of Talking Points". These talking points more often than not DECONSTRUCT the messages of the opposition than they JUSTIFY their own positions.
For example, straight for the left wing, Progressive line is the chrage that "We can cut the military spending of the USA in half and still defend this country, applying the resources to more social programs domestically". (I just read this from George McGovern yesterday). They fail to mention that while US military spending is around $650 billion per year, the INTEREST PAYMENTS per year on the outstanding FEDERAL DEBT will reach $800 billion per year over the next 10 years if the expansion is allowed to go unchecked.
In their unified stance - this truth will not be mentioned as a means of shaping their own policies as they weigh ALL OF THE CONSEQUENCES.
Ultimately none of this matters. Their movement is centrally based upon the pursuit of a basket of resources that is holed up in someone else's investment account, obtained via ill-gotten gains as levered by discrimination and economic oppression. In as much as there is a "pot of gold at the end of their rainbow" the movement will be focused upon the expansion necessary to get the gold.
Instead they need to be centrally focused on increasing the PRODUCTIVITY of the individuals at the periphery. The construction of strong communities where they fund their own living standard, going to the higher government for resources when there is an EXCEPTION is the only way our system can remain viable.
Look no further than the state of California to show how despite getting a favorable distribution of resources LEGISLATIVELY, the economic realities of this flawed system of resource distribution trumped the voter's desires and thus the system is near collapse.
Within these racial power groups what on the surface appears to be the prevailing rationalized "common interests", in truth is often a body of thoughts that are gathered together and then ENFORCED using various tactics of group unity enforcement actions. Failing to agree with the group can lead to your functional excommunication.
I dare to change this prescription. Let FLAWED STRATEGIES which undercut the community interests be grounds for excommunication off of the stage, as new, more effective strategies that leverage the individual power of the people to define their living standard.