I probably do not know this country enough to speak, but I will speak anyway so that maybe someone will tell me where I am wrong. As a foreigner, I appreciate the opportunities I have been offered here, but I do not see a contradiction in living in a country peacefully on one hand and constructively criticize it on the other. We all do that with our native countries, I never got why we should stop when we move somewhere else.
In what follows below, I will simplify the discussion a bit in order to make it easier for me to explain. And for sure, I will leave something behind. My apologies for that. Among the things I will leave behind are those I am blind to. I am a middle-class white woman, so I am aware I am blind to plenty of issues my white-skin privilege preserves me from experiencing. I am not trying to substitute my voice to the voice of those who really suffer discrimination, nor to speak on behalf of them.
Of course, when it comes to public debate, we agree racism is a plague affecting every society and it has different nuances. The facts happening now in the US are no exception. We all know this as well. We also, united (a very popular world in the US in time of crisis) condemn any act of violence and ask for social and racial justice. The point is …how do we want to reach it? I read, I listen, and I cannot really find an answer to the “how”. How do we reach racial justice? Protests are legitimate, and I am impressed by the donations given to the associations working for racial justice. But, among the proposals that I found, while surfing the websites of those associations, I cannot find a “how” that convinces me. Something that brings a radical change, instead of a way to cope with this system, that…as it is evident, is not working. I even watched the live stream made by NAACP tonight (https://www.naacp.org/latest/naacp-host-virtual-town-hall-systemic-racism-featuring-former-vice-president-joe-biden-congresswoman-marcia-fudge/).
Protests are legitimate, but nowadays there is no Martin Luther King able to formulate a constructive dialogue and proposing a real, meaningful “how”. No one is proposing a structural change of these United States of America, that looks like everything but United. And this is the point. I agree with the idea that racism in this country is structural. Because of its history, of the origins of its society, that…to my eyes, did not change that much since then. This country raised wiping away the natives of this land, land worked by those who did not choose to be here and enjoyed by those who did. Then, what else? A couple of civil wars, the abolition of segregation, the man on the moon and here we are. But the structure of society did not change radically. In the way I see it, this is a society that preserves and reinforces class separation. And, given its origin, there is a big overlap between social classes and racial groups. How can we really live together if we do not know, in a direct way, by first-hand experience, each other? The lack of real public education is one of the instruments for class separation and racial segregation. I am happy to read that plenty of associations offer scholarships for blacks and minorities. But this is coping with the system not changing it. It is true, a real free public education system costs a lot. Well, some governors could look outside this country to check on ways to do that. There are plenty of countries outside the United States that have reached an education system that is completely free or at a low cost for the citizens. A real public system would allow the young generations to meet the “other”, meet their families, know how people with different house income and background, live. Of course, this already exists in some cases, in some cities. But, that is not how the system works in general. Another issue is urban planning. How is it possible that there is a huge difference in the quality of life among the areas of the same city? Why houses and structures for low-income families are not planned to be integrated within high-income areas? How many of us, white people, have a black neighbor in our building or our street? Labor rights. A citizen of the United States has different rights according to the work he/she does. And, since education does not allow a real systematic economical emancipation through an equal offer of possibilities, it is most likely that kids from low-income families will end up doing the jobs with fewer rights guaranteed. The right to be sick and being paid anyway. The right to maternal leave. The right to paid holidays. The right to be fired only after the employer has proven the worker misbehavior. The lack of universality of these rights is not only unfair, but it generates frustration on one side and ignorance on the other. How can a middle-class white person understand the struggle of other social and racial groups if he/she does not know the struggle that it takes keeping a job for many people? If this seems hard to reach systematically…again…look at other countries. There is a variety of choices out there. I will not speak about the health system. It comes along with everything said above. And I think there is no need to reiterate that denying medical assistance to those who cannot afford it, is against human rights. Religion. I am strongly convinced that religion should stay within the private sphere of life. I have never been to a country where the word god comes under my eyes and to my ears that often. I never heard so many politicians (of whatever party) calling to god in public discourses so many times. I thought to be Italian made me acquainted with religion interfering with the public sphere, but the United States brings it to another level. I find god written even on money. And in times of crisis, what do many community leaders propose? To pray. Religion has been always an instrument of mass manipulation and domination. If half of the white population, after praying, would also ask the President for universal labor rights and public free education, this would be a very different country. If, furthermore, all the religious groups that still promulgate race superiority, sexual orientation discrimination, historical revisionism would be closed, and their material capital confiscated this would be even a better country. Because tolerance is important in a society, but to tolerate the intolerance is an act of indifference towards it or, worst, of approval. So many abuses against human rights are defended just because they hide behind the name of religion or belief. And so many good people are doing so many bad things just because they have been convinced it is god (or whatever name you want to put to it) who wants it. And they truly believe it. If, at least, the institutions and the politicians could get rid of the presence of this hypothetical existence of some superior being, maybe some affirmations from some religious groups would at least sound “out of the mainstream”. They would be, maybe, questioned a bit more instead of mixing up with all the speeches about god that inundate this country. Why do I have to be afraid of Hell to understand that it is not good to kill another person? And, in case I lack human empathy… Can’t I just think it is the only way to low down the probability that someone kills me? Why do I need god to understand that we are all, maybe not born equal, but entitled to the same possibilities in life in order to self-determine who we want to be? Despite the nice talks from the preachers, what I can observe is that in this country (and not only) religious speech is used more to divide than to unify. Do we want to speak about guns? I think this topic has been discussed already in many ways. The USA does not give up the idea of private justice calling it “the right to self-defense”. I remember our teacher, at primary school, made us read Pudd'nhead Wilson by Mark Twain. I cannot recall clearly the story, I think a lawyer was involved. But, there is one sentence that stuck to my mind across the years until now. When I read it, my very young mind did a jump. It clicked. “If you give a man a gun to defend himself, you can be sure he will use it to attack.” How many people, of any color (of course minorities are always at greater risk) died in a way that shows how true this sentence is? Finally, I came to the United States with the idea that there was a very big difference between Democrats and Republicans. If I could vote, of course, I would rather vote for a Democrat than for a Republican. But none of them is speaking about the changes I would like to hear. Obama tried something, but it was enough to have a few years of Republican leadership to take everything away. And this is because the changes made were not structural. With a political campaign system that allows big, huge investments from private funds, no President will be for real the President of the United States. Politics is always a game of compromises and balancing between different forces, but if, since the very beginning, the highest institutional role is kept captive by big investors, I wonder how he/she could reach that balance. If some of these structural changes could be made, I am sure we would get closer to racial justice. I believe (and I might be wrong since, as I said, I live the privilege of being white) blacks and other minorities would benefit from these changes directly and immediately and this, in an indirect way, would be of benefit for whites. At least for those whites who claim they want a better world for everyone.
Comments