I read in the New York Times ( April 16, 2016 ) that Georgetown University had sold 272 slaves to raise money to pay it's bills in 1838. The slaves had belonged to the most prominent Jesuit priests and were sold for funding to keep this top Catholic institution at the time open. Reparations to those slaves' descendants are actually being considered by the University. Mr. Richard J. Cellini, an alumni of Georgetown University, started this movement, with the help from other's affiliated with the University initially. Mr. Cellini is a White man.
Legend has it, (I saw it on ABC News) that an 11 year old girl from Massachusetts named, "Sofia" had suggested in a letter to President Obama, 2 years ago, that Harriet Tubman should be on paper currency. A great public relations move by the Federal Government in light of on-going racial struggles in Black communities. "Sofia" is White.
The majority of people involved with approving this decision, (who are undoubtedly White males) choose the $20 bill instead of the $10 bill because the $20 bill is the highest used form of U.S. currency. They didn't want another failure like the Susan B. Anthony $1 coin. A Black President, "Black" money, Confederate flags being removed, and acknowledgement of the evils of slavery would lead you to believe that many White people think very highly of the Black community now. Is the Harriet Tubman $20 a form of reparation?
In my opinion, the Black communities have tremendous political power and influence. During political election years like now, you can see how candidates try to tap into it. This fact motivates certain "reparations". Free colleges for example.
As long a human skin color differs between ethnicities, people will continue to discriminate against one another, whether it be blatant or anonymous. Even if the Earth's population was comprised of a homogeneous skin shade, certain peoples would still be discriminated against for other physical differences. This seems to be the nature of Mankind. This racist "survival gene" ( or genetic flaw ) seems to be in everyone to some extent.
Perpetuation of the use of the word "Nigga" in Black communities dismays me. Many other ethnicities are now empowered to use the term freely because Hip Hop culture has become globalized. I don't even pretend to know how this happened. But ironically, it's unreasonable to believe that a Hip Hop mogul for example, would teach any child of theirs say "Nigga", so why would we allow our youth to say it? The term "Nigger" has been re-engineered into the user friendly "Nigga" to the point that many young people, especially internationally, wouldn't even associate it with slavery, or racism. Was that the agenda? Is this what Black communities want?
The Wikipedia definition the word "Nigga" doesn't sound so bad actually. The problem is that it's a word at all. It's meaning is a lie regardless of any positive intent. The word "Nigger", as opposed to "Nigga", is also a word according to Wikipedia. "Nigger" was manufactured too, with it's origin being the Portuguese and Spanish word "Negro" that was derived from the Latin word "Niger". "Niger" simply means "black". Not "Black people", but the color "black". The Dutch, German, and English used the word "Neger" to mean "Black person", also derived from the Latin "Niger". It's possible a White slave owner owner mispronounced or misspelled either "Neger" or "Niger", and thus "Nigger" was created. This likely mistake spread amongst his peers, and obviously became widely used, popular, and accepted. Yes, "Nigga" can be an improvement on "Nigger", depending on how the target of that remark perceives it. But should a functional word have a positive and negative meaning at the same time? Can we just stop using the "N" word? Would you accept you child using it? Let's keep making progress.
No comments:
Post a Comment