Cupid Bow Mouth

Tomorrow is January 20th.

Tomorrow is the day after January 19th, which happens to be (every year in fact) Martin Luther King, Jr. Day.

Tomorrow is the inauguration of the new President of the United States of America. It also happens to be the inauguration of the U.S.'s first black president. There's tremendous symbolism in all of that. People are excited and hopeful. I am excited and hopeful. Mostly. With so much of the countries hope pinned to Obama's slim breast pocket, there is inevitably going to be a huge crush of disappointment as things don't get done exactly as people had hoped, or as quickly.

I never thought that in my lifetime (I will be 32 on Sunday), a black anybody would even be nominated to run for a party, let alone run a very tight race and come out the winner in the end. For all that we are celebrating a more inclusive era, there's still a lot of racism out there and racism isn't something that just goes away. People are inherently given to variations of tribalism. There is and always will be an automatic division that determines an "us" and a "them". Whether us and them are divided by color, race, sexual orientation, political philosophy, religion or nationality, it will always be there. We can't get around it. Most of the time I don't think that we really want to get around it. Groups and classes and divisions are comforting for people. There is fear in the unknown and the unfamiliar. We like to be comfortable and let's not forget that comfort is what got us into the mess that we're in.

( It's not all doom and gloom, but let's say that it *is* darkest before the dawn. )

Fear. One syllable, four letters. Such an itty bitty word to have such great, big, nasty repercussions. Listening to a segment on NPR this morning about voter response to John McCain and Barack Obama, a comment was made by one man that left me shaking my head in disbelief and dismay. The gist of his comment, and one of the reasons that he opposes Barack Obama as president, is that if Barack gets into the White House the nation will be faced with a "Big Black" Agenda that will divide the nation and cause, essentially, a race war. None of the other interviewees agreed, I don't know if that's because they really *don't* agree or because they didn't want to appear ignorant or racially prejudiced.

What I find interesting about this way of thinking is, besides it's a racist, privileged perspective, is that it completely ignores the historical exclusion of other races who are then subject to a "white" agenda. Ignoring for a moment that the kind of racial divisiveness he is suggesting can't exist for a candidate who wishes to succeed at politics in a community as culturally diverse as the United States (please see Al Sharpton's and Jesse Jackson's bids for public office), I find it curious that because the candidate doesn't fit his recognized default that automatically makes him an enemy, and let's face it that is exactly what this guy and people like him consider Barack Obama.

Apparently, it's not an isolated or even racially specific perspective. Cleatus, my baby brother, told me that he had heard the same thing about some Hispanic voters who were choosing McCain over Obama because Rodham-Clinton was no longer an option in the election. Looking at their political philosophies, I thought that Rodham-Clinton was closer to Obama than to McCain, but then again, I am not a pundit and haven't spent an exhaustive amount of time researching the candidates and the minutiae of their positions. As I was talking about the things that I was hearing and reading, I was shocked that there were people making, what I understood as, a huge political decision based on a case of sour grapes. But then Cleatus explained that there were some Hispanics, so fearful of a "Black" agenda that would exclude or actively pursue policies and legislation that would negatively affect them, that they would just vote for the other guy. That kind of reactionary, emotional decision making as it pertains to the political process boggles me. Same goes for decisions based upon perceived understandings of the candidate’s religion, in this country where church and state are, supposedly, separated.

But back to our NPR segment. The conversation segued into a discussion about the role of race in the coming general election, something that is difficult to measure for many reasons. As far as we *think* that we've come, the reality is that the Civil Rights movement was only some fifty years ago. Considering Man's inherent resistance to change, that really isn't very long and as much as the younger generations may consider race as increasingly less important as a way of constructing, defining, and understanding identity, it's still a big deal. I worry about the conservative, traditional "family value" people whose default is White and who are afraid of what it *might* mean to have an African-American president. Those people who can't and don't want to conceive of such a thing. Fear ... fear of change, fear of retribution, fear of whatever it is that prevents them from embracing a more inclusive world. Those people who can't and won't see beyond the cosmetics of race.

I'd like to hope that those unknown and unfamiliar people will vote according to whatever political and "moral" (a word that I use very hesitantly) concerns they have, but that they will do so logically and without consideration of race, gender, or religion. Will that happen? Not a chance. An election like this one with such historical implications and resonance is rife with tension and emotion. There are Black people who will vote for Obama because he is black, just as there were women who voted for and against Rodham-Clinton because she is a woman. In the general election, there will obviously be those who are going to vote along the same sort of cultural and racial lines regardless of policies and political philosophies.

That makes me very, very sad. And very, very concerned.

Race in this country is still a tremendous stumbling block, regardless of whether or not we choose to acknowledge it. For some, Obama is a "ranting", "Martin Luther King type Negro" and for others his race is the white elephant in the room. It'll be interesting to see how the November elections turn out. Regardless of the result, Obama or McCain, I have a feeling that I will be disappointed on some level because politics to me aren't quite as personal as they are to a lot of people. Voting in my house is an intellectual exercise. We research the propositions and the candidates, listen to the pros and cons, read supporting and opposing views, discuss and then go vote. I wonder how many people do that. I really, really wondered that when Arnold Schwarzenegger was voted into office with no political history or governing experience.

In the end, I wonder, can we vote in alternative ways? There are quite a few other countries that have had female prime ministers and presidents, and Peru's former president, Alberto Fujimori, is Nisei (second generation Japanese) born to immigrant parents.

How long will it take the United States, world leaders that we are, to learn to look beyond race and gender? To be honest, I don't have confidence that this time we will.

So, I just read this article: More advanced cancer seen in uninsured Americans and I think, why is this news? Why is this, like, a surprise? Of course their cancer is more advanced when it's discovered because they don't get regular medical treatment or check-ups due to the whole I can't afford healthcare issue. wtf.

That article was followed up by this one where Bush touts U.S. aid to fight malaria. The article included this snippet from Bush's speech:

"The disease keeps sick workers home, schoolyards quiet, communities in mourning," Bush said about the disease which kills 100,000 people a year in Tanzania alone. "The suffering caused by malaria is needless and every death caused by malaria is unacceptable."

"It is unacceptable to people here in Africa, who see their families devastated and economies crippled. It is unacceptable to people in the United States, who believe every human life has value."

And I think, hmmmm, if the people of the United States believe so very much in the value of every human life then how come we don't have Universal Healthcare so that we can take care of the valuable lives dying of treatable CANCER in the U.S.?

Yeah, just wondering about that.