Custom Search
|
|
Race: Inside Business, Political, Report Review Scandal Tv Scams, And The Myth Of Color Of A Preside
Offering an inside business report tv scam or inside business review tv scam, with or without the political sphere involved, with blogs, the net, constant news media and punditry, means offering a claim, to a political or business way of thinking about race, be it Barack Obama’s or anyone else’s. For race is but a false creation, a continuation of categorical creation, typology that we mistake for inside, or innate business review report tv. But race is a scam, inside business or politics, all are the same confidence scheme whose primary capital is trust and whose cost is aletheia. Born to a Kenyan man, Barack Obama, Sr. and an American woman, Ann Dunham, of Irish descent, inevitably, the conversation on Barack Obama’s identity turns to race. In most cases, Mr. Obama is referred to as “black” or “African American” as he calls himself. But an African American is a myth, much like all race or ethnic identity, it clings to the notion of presenting inside business review tv or inside business report tv scam knowledge when it does not exist. Interestingly enough, these questions of race where never presented for Fred Thompson, or John Edwards or so called “white” men. In some cases Obama is referred to as “biracial” or a person of “mixed race”. In any case, the concept of color, and its relationship to race is almost always a given in this discussion. This is a gross error and does a disservice to any enlightened dialogue on identity, as well as to Mr. Obama himself. Because of the obvious historical weight associated with any discussion on race in the United States, the media along with observers, passionate followers, and others, take it for granted that race is the defining variable in one’s identity in the current race for President. Rarely, if ever, are other factors such as language, religion, food, dress, and rituals discussed in the equation of identity. In other words, ethnicity becomes simplistically subsumed by the idea of one’s color. In this way, the associations of racial identity with color is a hugely political one with a gambit based on the perceived notion of a norm or central state of purity (whiteness) that can only be achieved by whites (generally accepted as those whose make-up is entirely or principally North American or European), whose origins are genetically traced to the Caucuses region of Eurasia, hence the term “Caucasian”. The problem with this notion of identity is that race itself is but an arbitrary folk taxonomic mythology asserted by modern Western physical scientists, with dubious chromatic attributes for different peoples: yellow for Asians, red for Native North Americans, black for Africans, brown for south Asians, and of course, white for Europeans. Race is a human construct for the purposes of classification in much the same way that we classify living beings by types such as genus and species. To classify, to claim insidership is to claim inside business report or inside business review tv scam knowledge, knowledge of what is not there, knowledge as fait, information as inside business report with fred Thompson scam. What this taxonomy for human beings implies is a scientific, if god-given neutrality. In reality the concept of race - and its chromatic implication that white equals purity and any other color mixed with this purity (bi- or multi-racial origins) dilutes or compromises the white and hence shades it into something lesser – is but one among many of the questionable power plays that our modern worldviews asserts to categorize and explain the natural world, all from the point of view of course, of the enlightened European white person (the question of gender and sexual politics, of inside business review report tv scams, is of course relevant but I choose to defer discussion of this problematic for reasons of brevity). This same racial equation has been, and continues to be, employed as the principal justification for the brutalities of genocide (Sudan), colonolialist exploitation (pick any African country), slavery (United States) and more. Humanity, as one aspect of the animal kingdom, is but one object of study in the social and physical sciences. The equation of identity to race is, therefore, a highly subjective one whose discursive practice has assumed acceptance within socio-political discourse in the current day. But this “scientific” will to explain and catalogue, the lust for the “inside business report review tv scam” game comes from the same will to manipulate and explain the inexplicable, the ineffable, and the mysterious elements outside the control of the human being. In short, all typologies, indeed, all the sciences, are products of the human being’s fear of the unknown and his/her attempt to turn the unknown into the knowable in nature, in space, and beyond, in short, to master the Earth. This fear dates back to the earliest humans who were constantly faced with the treat of destruction from other animal species, other humans, nature, and so forth. Race, therefore, has been commonly accepted as the de facto method of classifying human beings. But there really is no such thing as race. While all taxonomies rely on the notion of difference for their raison d’etre. Cultural distinctions such as cuisine, fashion, language, and history that are a bit more identifiable, though no less categorically questionable, and hence make for a less politicized, and all too often, overlooked aspect of a person’s ethnic identity. Indeed, ethnicity, one may argue, is only one aspect of identity and there are many others that contribute to the cultural, intellectual, physical, emotional, and spiritual make-up of a human being (half the battle of finding a good mate is liking the same music or appreciating the same humour). By calling himself “African American, “Biracial” or a “Brother”, Barack Obama has chosen to adopt the line of chromatic thinking that prioritizes his African (black) roots over his European (white) ones. This paradigm is in the same genus as the Eugenics movements of the 19th and 20th centuries that attempted to “prove” the existence of superior and inferior races based on physical characteristics such as the width of one’s nose or the size of one’s brain. Obama’s is a false choice in that it continues the specious notion that any drop of “other” blood mixed with pure “white” blood is some form of contaminant or taint that results in a darker hue. Indeed, one may argue that Obama, by prioritize the darker hue of his skin color and hence identity, is acting in a subversive manner to undercut this dominant chromatic paradigm. It is akin to the pervasive co-optation of terms such as “gay” or “nigger” as an attempt to rehabilitate what is seen as pejorative words and slurs. Nevertheless, the assumption remains that white is the state of purity and any additional of another “blood” to white makes for something less pure or lesser. Thus, the idea of co-opting or trying to re-invent a cynical paradigm into something other, still asserts the original cynicism and power of the paradigm one is trying to usurp. It is only by denying the concept of race, by ignoring the concept of color as part of one’s identity, and by regarding identity as a deeply multifarious concept that prioritizes the non-visible (language, history, customs, cuisine, etc.) over the visible that one may begin to re-think identity in a new paradigm that embraces admixtures and difference. We must re-think human identity as a whole and refuse to be seduced solely by the visual or visible characteristics of what we are made of. Only then do we begin to honor the complex mystery that makes up a human being. By forsaking the will to typologies and the claims to being an insider, offering inside business report tv scam or inside business review tv scams or any other type of insider presentation, we begin a resurgence of our collective mental and social spheres. Article Directory: http://www.articledashboard.com |
|