Response to Polar Opposites...
In the last post (8/8/05), this question was posed:
Does the solution for racial equality and racial upbringing fall on the singularity of one man’s dream/goal, or is that solution found in the fusion, or combining of key concepts from each man’s ideals?
Personally, I feel that such a solution depends on the fusion or combining of key concepts from multiple sets of ideals.
Gaining multiple views is something that coincides with any major endeavor that involves the uplifting of people. For one, incorporating everyone is powerful simply because it shows that everyone has a vested interest in that endeavor, and that major issues aren’t pending on one person or a few people’s manpower. Aside from that, because of biases that exist with every one of us, it is important to not have the fate of a race or group of people invariably affected by a single person’s bias.
It is important to understand, however, that it is important while fusing or combining key concepts that everyone has the SAME GOAL IN MIND. It is fruitless to combine or fuse ideas if the same goal isn’t in mind. Now, let’s address the ‘polar opposites’ directly…
Concerning WEB and BTW, much progress could’ve been made in the combining of focusing on hard work and financial structuring, while also understanding the importance of being treated equal in the pursuit of such monetary gain. This conflict also opens the classic debate of idealism vs. realism, focusing on the importance of following your ambitions, dreams, and what you want society to be like against the realistic aspect of not being able to follow such aspirations because of the need to be secure financially (or, like most of us, just trying to make it from check to check)
In the case of MLK and Malcolm, the latter during his later stages of life saw the importance of not driving a resistance with hate; after his return from the Mecca, X opened an invitation with all civil rights leaders legitimately wanting to work towards that cause. Had such an invitation been issued earlier in the civil rights movement, there is no telling how many more advancements may have been made in that period of time.
Even looking at such a simple thing as the dynamics of a comic book, we see the frustration(s) of Professor X and Magneto looking to advance their group of people with their singular philosophies. Throughout the evolution of the series, we see the 2 work together towards the betterment of mutantkind, and even when the 2 are in duress, they have an internal respect for another, ultimately understanding that the answer to their similar cause may not be with one or the other, but rather with a fusion of key ideals with the both of them.
This brings us now to Mike Dyson and Bill Cosby. What I intend to do with Dyson and Cosby, as opposed to with the other comparisons; I intend to address the pros and cons of each person’s philosophy.
We’ll go with the comedian first. It’s refreshing to see Cosby have a vested interest in civil rights and the ‘black state of affairs’ after keeping a seemingly safe distance from such conversation in the long running series ‘the Cosby show’. It’s even more refreshing to see him touring nationwide to address such issues. What’s disheartening is that Cosby’s views are addressing lower-class blacks; in fact, he addresses very little else. In addressing what I like to call ‘negro-syncracies’, Cosby focuses on conditions of living where there is lower financial circulation, and takes some ill-advised shots at neo-afrocentric names, and the lack of emphasis on education. Cosby should be commended on addressing the lack of emphasis on education, as well as the lack of black representation at the voting booth; however, his limited look at the black community should come with some opposition.
Dyson’s views; more specifically, his book Is Bill Cosby Right? Or Has The Black Middle Class Lost Its Mind? addresses the lack of accountability for Cosby and those of the same economical class. Dyson, as an intellectual would and should, breaks down and pinpoints, in essence, how those that have more should do more. With this point, Dyson brings up what is a biblical truth; in turn, he calls out himself as well as other black intellectuals like Cornel West. My fault with Dyson is that it is infinitely easier to call out Mr. Cosby in a book as opposed to financing a tour to correct the wrongs of America against African-Americans. In fact, I liken Dyson’s endeavors to that of putting on a pair of shoes and walking. Words, in reference to actions, are like putting on a pair of shoes and the eloquence of those words are like tying those shoes really, REALLY tight. The power of action, or in this case, with the shoe…is actually taking positive steps, simply moving forward.
Now, to bring this back to my original opinion. If the two were to combine key concepts, we would see an intellectual movement that would actually take shape, a tour of prominent black minds and black figures working towards the singular cause of continued civil rights and black movement.
In close, I would like to wish blessings and condolences to journalists and those who aspired in journalistic endeavors during their lifespan. Recent tragedies includes the passing of Peter Jennings, Ebony magazine founder John H. Johnson , and, though his passing was a while ago, a great writer that I look up to even now, Ralph Wiley. Take care you all, and always love,
The Good Doctor
Does the solution for racial equality and racial upbringing fall on the singularity of one man’s dream/goal, or is that solution found in the fusion, or combining of key concepts from each man’s ideals?
Personally, I feel that such a solution depends on the fusion or combining of key concepts from multiple sets of ideals.
Gaining multiple views is something that coincides with any major endeavor that involves the uplifting of people. For one, incorporating everyone is powerful simply because it shows that everyone has a vested interest in that endeavor, and that major issues aren’t pending on one person or a few people’s manpower. Aside from that, because of biases that exist with every one of us, it is important to not have the fate of a race or group of people invariably affected by a single person’s bias.
It is important to understand, however, that it is important while fusing or combining key concepts that everyone has the SAME GOAL IN MIND. It is fruitless to combine or fuse ideas if the same goal isn’t in mind. Now, let’s address the ‘polar opposites’ directly…
Concerning WEB and BTW, much progress could’ve been made in the combining of focusing on hard work and financial structuring, while also understanding the importance of being treated equal in the pursuit of such monetary gain. This conflict also opens the classic debate of idealism vs. realism, focusing on the importance of following your ambitions, dreams, and what you want society to be like against the realistic aspect of not being able to follow such aspirations because of the need to be secure financially (or, like most of us, just trying to make it from check to check)
In the case of MLK and Malcolm, the latter during his later stages of life saw the importance of not driving a resistance with hate; after his return from the Mecca, X opened an invitation with all civil rights leaders legitimately wanting to work towards that cause. Had such an invitation been issued earlier in the civil rights movement, there is no telling how many more advancements may have been made in that period of time.
Even looking at such a simple thing as the dynamics of a comic book, we see the frustration(s) of Professor X and Magneto looking to advance their group of people with their singular philosophies. Throughout the evolution of the series, we see the 2 work together towards the betterment of mutantkind, and even when the 2 are in duress, they have an internal respect for another, ultimately understanding that the answer to their similar cause may not be with one or the other, but rather with a fusion of key ideals with the both of them.
This brings us now to Mike Dyson and Bill Cosby. What I intend to do with Dyson and Cosby, as opposed to with the other comparisons; I intend to address the pros and cons of each person’s philosophy.
We’ll go with the comedian first. It’s refreshing to see Cosby have a vested interest in civil rights and the ‘black state of affairs’ after keeping a seemingly safe distance from such conversation in the long running series ‘the Cosby show’. It’s even more refreshing to see him touring nationwide to address such issues. What’s disheartening is that Cosby’s views are addressing lower-class blacks; in fact, he addresses very little else. In addressing what I like to call ‘negro-syncracies’, Cosby focuses on conditions of living where there is lower financial circulation, and takes some ill-advised shots at neo-afrocentric names, and the lack of emphasis on education. Cosby should be commended on addressing the lack of emphasis on education, as well as the lack of black representation at the voting booth; however, his limited look at the black community should come with some opposition.
Dyson’s views; more specifically, his book Is Bill Cosby Right? Or Has The Black Middle Class Lost Its Mind? addresses the lack of accountability for Cosby and those of the same economical class. Dyson, as an intellectual would and should, breaks down and pinpoints, in essence, how those that have more should do more. With this point, Dyson brings up what is a biblical truth; in turn, he calls out himself as well as other black intellectuals like Cornel West. My fault with Dyson is that it is infinitely easier to call out Mr. Cosby in a book as opposed to financing a tour to correct the wrongs of America against African-Americans. In fact, I liken Dyson’s endeavors to that of putting on a pair of shoes and walking. Words, in reference to actions, are like putting on a pair of shoes and the eloquence of those words are like tying those shoes really, REALLY tight. The power of action, or in this case, with the shoe…is actually taking positive steps, simply moving forward.
Now, to bring this back to my original opinion. If the two were to combine key concepts, we would see an intellectual movement that would actually take shape, a tour of prominent black minds and black figures working towards the singular cause of continued civil rights and black movement.
In close, I would like to wish blessings and condolences to journalists and those who aspired in journalistic endeavors during their lifespan. Recent tragedies includes the passing of Peter Jennings, Ebony magazine founder John H. Johnson , and, though his passing was a while ago, a great writer that I look up to even now, Ralph Wiley. Take care you all, and always love,
The Good Doctor
posted by The Good Doctor at 4:07 PM
2 Comments:
Although I only have time for a brief comment (new york city awaits), I must note that I don't think this is a question of "polar opposites". The one comparison that's made in this post that I really must object to is MLK v. X, especially as you mentioned in the later days of X's life. He was not specifically against non-violence, he just encouraged us to treat others as they treat us. In his way, it was simply a different approach, which occasionally included MLK's way, not a polar opposite.
When I initially read this post, the first quote that popped in my head (yes, tv commercials do affect the masses) was "there's no wrong way to eat a reeses." Yes, they are refering to candy, but beyond working against the movement, i don't see how anyone can say we should stick to only one approach. I say, try different methods, as long as the goal is the same, whether it's enjoying a peanut butter cup or uplifting the masses that form the minority in the great United States of America.
I know I don't wax as eloquently as drmoblack(hehe), but that's what I got to say.
I agree with Ashley in that I don't think that sticking to one approach is the answer. At the same time, I think we're looking at the wrong question. Sometimes it's not a matter of picking one path or collaborating two efforts as much as it is simply allowing several efforts to operate independently. If you notice, most of the episodes where multiple plans fell short were not as a result of a direct failure to cooperate; they fail due to simple interferences between the parties.
It's a mistake to think that there's only room for one method, and it's a mistake to think that all methods toward the same cause should be collaborative. Regarding the latter scenario, most of the time it's not even the same goal that multiple factions are working toward, but the goals are so generalized that they and their onlookers believe so. Take Booker T. Washignton and W.E.B. Dubois. What was their common goal? Uplifting Black people... a very generalized response. When you take a close look at their motives, their goals are not so simple. Booker T. Washington sought to establish the Black community as a practically SELF-SUFFICIENT and SEPARATE entity from the established white culture by setting foundations on which Black people could build their own lives. W.E.B. Dubois sought to establish the Black community WITHIN the confines of the white establishment; force the white community to create a legally upheld place for Black people in American society (which is more than likely why he and Marcus Garvey had discrepancies).
So what was the problem? It's not that they didn't work together; they actually began with intent to support each other. What happened is that they decided to become adversarial to each other, and THAT's what stopped the progress.
So it's not always choose one course or joining forces, but oftentimes it's just, "you go your way and I'll go mine. Just don't get in my way."
Post a Comment
<< Home