Thursday, January 05, 2006

A disgrace to King's legacy?


Ok Snoop in his quest to probe the most mysterious aspects of life............
Aw hell, I’m bored, and what do you do when you are bored? You think and ponder all kinds of stuff. Thankfully I have my little blog.

Now this topic is something I know some of you white people may have pondered at one time or another. Why are there so many streets named after the great Civil Rights Leader Martin Luther King Jr?
BUT the more important question is, why are these streets, named after such an icon in this countries history, tend to be the most fucked up streets in Anytown, USA?
As we are close to celebrating King's birthday, more than 650 streets in the United States bear the civil rights leader's name. No other American enjoys such a distinction.
Soon after King was assassinated on April 4, 1968, in Memphis, Blacks began a campaign to get a holiday named in his honor and to get streets and buildings named for him.
In fact, a school in Arequipa, Peru, has been named for the Nobel Peace Prize winner, and so has a library in Lusaka, Zambia. City governments and other organizations are still considering ways to memorialize King by using his name.
However, few address the ugly side of the King-name phenomenon and is generally ignored.

Chris Rock tells a joke that goes something like this: When a white friend told Chris Rock that he was on a street called Martin Luther King and asked what he should do, Chris Rock answered, "Run!" At another time and on a more serious note, Rock said: "I don't care where you live in America, if you're on Martin Luther King Boulevard, there's some violence going on."

Trust me folks, particularly you white people out there. I am not aware of any such MLK Boulevard where I would be comfortable walking at night, hell DURING THE DAY!
But in the zeal to honor King, folks forget to ask a few fundamental question. Does most of the streets, boulevards and avenues named for King actually disgrace his great legacy?
I am from Oakland California. I remember reading some time ago about the street that was San Pablo Boulevard was being renamed MLK.
The street I remember was the center of prostitution, drugs, gang violence. I would be willing to bet that it is still a corridor of broad dilapidation, abandoned structures, vacant lots with junked vehicles and trash and debris, black-on-black beat downs, public drinking, ect. And yes even worse, perhaps, most of the viable businesses on this stretch of MLK are owned by people other than blacks a glaring testament to black powerlessness.
The reasons for this state of affairs are many and complex. From the beginning, streets named for King (at least significant segments of them) were in poor black neighborhoods. From the beginning, these streets were themselves symbols of segregation and decay. From the beginning, streets named for King were a "black thing." Black folks happily settled for streets in these places because this was all they were going to get from whites who were under fire from fellow whites to resist change.

Martin Luther King III, head of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, the organization his father co-founded: uttered the following typical (anti-whitey rant)
"Most of the streets are still located in areas where they have been neglected. Their (white leaders') intentions were honorable, but, unfortunately, what they didn't do in most cases was to create the kind of street or area that would be an appropriate tribute."
On the surface, King's words are correct. But he fails to see the real source of the "neglect." The fault does not lie with white people. It lies with black people.
Martin Luther King Jr. was born and reared on a clean, quiet, middle-class street in Atlanta, that he grew up with strict conservative values, values such as serving your community, protecting and respecting your neighbors, hard work, thrift, sobriety, cleanliness?
You won’t find that on any MLK Boulevard.
We should resolve to transform all King roadways into clean, well-lighted places that will attract businesses of all stripes, that will entice residents and tourists alike to spend time and money.
Simply naming a street after someone is not a tribute to King's legacy. It is an outrage. It disgraces the memory of one of the greatest figures of the last century.
Neither is it symbolic of a transformation of racial solidarity in our society.
Remember James Byrd, Jasper, Texas, where you can find the MLK street that James Byrd was walking on in 1998 when he accepted a ride from a group of white men who murdered him and dragged his body three miles with a pick-up truck.
Many of these street tributes are phony attempts to appease ignorant black folks into thinking that all is well, whitey cares.
Here in Lawrence I wonder if changing our beloved main downtown Street, “Massachusetts” to Martin Luther King Street would go over with the liberals here?
Sounds like a letter to the editor. “To the Residents of Lawrence, its time we name some streets after black folks and not these damm states.”

Sincerely, Snoop

P.S. I use to be a Republican, does that help?

Nicknames blame game

By George F. Will

WASHINGTON - The University of Illinois must soon decide whether, and if so how, to fight an exceedingly silly edict from the NCAA. That organization's primary function is to require college athletics to be no more crassly exploitative and commercial than is absolutely necessary. But now the NCAA is going to police cultural sensitivity, as it understands that. Hence the decision to declare Chief Illiniwek "hostile and abusive" to Native Americans.
Censorship - e.g., campus speech codes - often are academic liberalism's preferred instrument of social improvement, and now the NCAA's censors say: The chief must go, as must the university's logo of a Native American in feathered headdress. Otherwise, the NCAA will not allow the university to host any postseason tournaments or events.

This story of progress, as progressives understand that, began during halftime of a football game in 1926, when an undergraduate studying Indian culture performed a dance dressed as a chief. Since then, a student has always served as Chief Illiniwek, who has become the symbol of the university that serves a state named after the Illini confederation of about a half-dozen tribes that were virtually annihilated in the 1760s by rival tribes.
In 1930, the student then portraying Chief Illiniwek traveled to South Dakota to receive authentic raiment from the Oglala Sioux. In 1967 and 1982, representatives of the Sioux came to the Champaign-Urbana campus to augment the outfits Chief Illiniwek wears at football and basketball games. But one of America's booming businesses is the indignation industry that manufactures the synthetic outrage needed to fuel identity politics.

The NCAA is allowing Florida State University and the University of Utah to continue calling their teams Seminoles and Utes, respectively, because those two tribes approve of the tradition. The Saginaw Chippewa tribe starchily denounces any "outside entity" - that would be you, NCAA - that would disrupt the tribe's "rich relationship" with Central Michigan University and its teams, the Chippewas. The University of North Carolina at Pembroke can continue calling its teams the Braves. Bravery is a virtue, so perhaps the 21 percent of the school's students who are Native Americans consider the name a compliment.

The only remnant of the Illini confederation, the Peoria tribe, is in Oklahoma. Under its chief, John Froman, the tribe is too busy running a casino and golf course to care about Chief Illiniwek.

The NCAA ethicists probably reason that the chief must go because no portion of the Illini confederation remains to defend him. Or to be offended by him, but never mind that, or this: In 2002, Sports Illustrated published a poll of 352 Native Americans, 217 living on reservations, 134 living off. Eighty-one percent said high school and college teams should not stop using Indian nicknames.

But in any case, why should anyone's disapproval of a nickname doom it? Civilization depends on, and civility often requires, the willingness to say, "What you are doing is none of my business" and "What I am doing is none of your business." But this is an age when being an offended busybody is considered evidence of advanced thinking and an exquisite sensibility.

In 1972, the University of Massachusetts at Amherst replaced the nickname Redmen with Minutemen. White men carrying guns? If some advanced thinkers are made miserable by this, will the NCAA's censors offer relief? Scottsdale Community College in Arizona was wise to adopt the nickname "Fighting Artichokes." There is no grievance group representing the lacerated feelings of artichokes. Yet.

By George F. Will

WASHINGTON - The University of Illinois must soon decide whether, and if so how, to fight an exceedingly silly edict from the NCAA. That organization's primary function is to require college athletics to be no more crassly exploitative and commercial than is absolutely necessary. But now the NCAA is going to police cultural sensitivity, as it understands that. Hence the decision to declare Chief Illiniwek "hostile and abusive" to Native Americans.
Censorship - e.g., campus speech codes - often are academic liberalism's preferred instrument of social improvement, and now the NCAA's censors say: The chief must go, as must the university's logo of a Native American in feathered headdress. Otherwise, the NCAA will not allow the university to host any postseason tournaments or events.

This story of progress, as progressives understand that, began during halftime of a football game in 1926, when an undergraduate studying Indian culture performed a dance dressed as a chief. Since then, a student has always served as Chief Illiniwek, who has become the symbol of the university that serves a state named after the Illini confederation of about a half-dozen tribes that were virtually annihilated in the 1760s by rival tribes.
In 1930, the student then portraying Chief Illiniwek traveled to South Dakota to receive authentic raiment from the Oglala Sioux. In 1967 and 1982, representatives of the Sioux came to the Champaign-Urbana campus to augment the outfits Chief Illiniwek wears at football and basketball games. But one of America's booming businesses is the indignation industry that manufactures the synthetic outrage needed to fuel identity politics.

The NCAA is allowing Florida State University and the University of Utah to continue calling their teams Seminoles and Utes, respectively, because those two tribes approve of the tradition. The Saginaw Chippewa tribe starchily denounces any "outside entity" - that would be you, NCAA - that would disrupt the tribe's "rich relationship" with Central Michigan University and its teams, the Chippewas. The University of North Carolina at Pembroke can continue calling its teams the Braves. Bravery is a virtue, so perhaps the 21 percent of the school's students who are Native Americans consider the name a compliment.

The only remnant of the Illini confederation, the Peoria tribe, is in Oklahoma. Under its chief, John Froman, the tribe is too busy running a casino and golf course to care about Chief Illiniwek.

The NCAA ethicists probably reason that the chief must go because no portion of the Illini confederation remains to defend him. Or to be offended by him, but never mind that, or this: In 2002, Sports Illustrated published a poll of 352 Native Americans, 217 living on reservations, 134 living off. Eighty-one percent said high school and college teams should not stop using Indian nicknames.

But in any case, why should anyone's disapproval of a nickname doom it? Civilization depends on, and civility often requires, the willingness to say, "What you are doing is none of my business" and "What I am doing is none of your business." But this is an age when being an offended busybody is considered evidence of advanced thinking and an exquisite sensibility.

In 1972, the University of Massachusetts at Amherst replaced the nickname Redmen with Minutemen. White men carrying guns? If some advanced thinkers are made miserable by this, will the NCAA's censors offer relief? Scottsdale Community College in Arizona was wise to adopt the nickname "Fighting Artichokes." There is no grievance group representing the lacerated feelings of artichokes. Yet.