The Struggle

Several months ago, during the height of the Ferguson fiasco (the first time), I stumbled across this piece on “the struggle”. For those too lazy to go read it yourself, a quick summary: American black family moves to Amsterdam, moher is now worried that their young son will not grow up “black”. To solve this challenge, she was actually wondering if she should move back to America so that her son could understand "the struggle", an idea that I just couldn't wrap my head around. Parents usually want the best for the kids, so why would she want to purposely impair her son?

We all know the stats, indeed that’s the whole basis of the #blacklivesmatter movement to begin with. Why would a parent want to put her son in an environment where his chances of mobility in life will be seriously impaired? What kind of parent wants their child to be in a society where they’re likely to get hassled for being in the "wrong neighborhood", for biking, for listening to music, for "resisting arrest", or for any other number of minor "offenses" just so that they know "the struggle" being referred to by others?

Additionally, this brings up another age-old question: what exactly does it mean to be “black”? As a black man, I personally happen to have a lot of experience with being “not black” thus far in my life. The term “Oreo” was frequently used in the same sentence as references to me by both non-blacks but especially blacks (and most pointedly as I attended a HBCU) since I skateboard, wakeboard, snowboard, bike, read books, listen to rock/metal music, and participate in other “non-black” activities, all the while NOT playing much basketball or football. Being that her son will likely speak Dutch and participate at least in some parts of Dutch culture, he already won't exactly fall fully into the "black" segment of American society by anyone's standards.

She mentions that she wants him to have a "black American" experience, but why set her target so low? If she’s already wanting to move from her current location to get the "black" experience, why not just go to Africa? It stands to reason that there is not a more “authentically black” experience than one would experience in the ancestral homeland of almost all blacks. From its royalty, bustling cities, and shiny new trains to its slums, child warfare, and AIDS, he can experience Africa and Africans in a vivid reality that most American blacks can only dream of having. Additionally, if it’s injustice at the hand of whites that she is searching for, South Africa offers the legacy of apartheid with the added bonus of a language that is based on Dutch, the language her son is likely learning.

Of course, she herself admits in the article that she's not exactly sold on the idea yet, likely for some of the reasons mentioned here and probably more too. Hopefully, she continues to rethink her position. Certainly, it isn't all doom and gloom here in the States for members of the black community. However, there are arguably few things to be gained by leaving a country that rates higher than the United States on numerous rankings, from health to education to happiness to transportation. In the modern era, culture can be gleaned from a practically limitless amount of sources online and travel is within reach of the average person. Take advantage of those opportunities.

Campus 'Diversity'

The topic of campus "diversity" has been around for quite some time here in America. It hasn't even been two centuries since many individuals were not even allowed to learn. That didn't stop several brave people who went to great lengths to get educated, including some who literally died in the process. Even after many of those laws were abolished, education was still segregated, bolstered in no small part by Plessy v. Ferguson. As a result, "separate but equal" flourished all throughout the Jim Crow Era and well into mid-century. During that time, the HBCU (historically black college/university) became a pivotal and powerful force in the black community. Thousands of doctors, lawyers, teachers, and other black white collar professionals came out of the roughly 100 institutions that were specifically tasked with educating blacks.

In 1954, Brown v. Board of Education overturned the separate but equal idea, but widespread integration of schools still didn't happen until the Civil Rights Act of 1964 threatened to hit pocketbooks. That decision resulted in the establishment of quotas, but they were subsequently turned over in 1978 by Regents of UC v. Bakke decision. In the place of strict quotas, "affirmative action" now is the law of the land at many institutions. (With notable exceptions in the states that have outlawed it, with CA being the first state to do so back in 1996.)

Which leads us to where we are now. Of course, the issue has never actually gone away. After Prop 209 passed in CA, enrollment of coloreds plummeted. However, social media has highlighted it again this year. These two videos were recently produced by students at their respective schools asking hard questions of the schools' administrators as to why darkies represent such a comically low portion of students in attendance (even as they constitute substantial portions of sports teams). I'm sure answers are forthcoming, but I'll wade into the fray first. Intermission for videos.

UCLA

Oregon State

And we're back. Where to begin? I suppose with UCLA since it's closer to me.

The video by Sy Stokes certainly gained him some attention and brought a bit of traction to the issue. Since he filmed and put up the video, he's appeared on several news shows to chat about it. Additionally, he has an online petition going calling on the UC to "implement more effective diversity initiatives". Short, simple, and to the point. But with quotas and affirmative action both off the table for the UC, they will still certainly have a tough time meeting this goal. At the moment, anyone graduating in the top 9% of their class from a [participating] CA public school is guaranteed admission to the UC, though not necessarily to a specific campus. Not considering all the eligible blacks who (perhaps wisely) decide not to attend the UC, not many black kids are graduating in the top 9% of their class.

But high school isn't really the realm of the UC at all. I would hardly expect the UC to start spending a major portion of their money on high school programs. High school is the realm of the community that the school's are in, parents, and students. The UC can only choose the kids who are actually coming out of high school having met the A-G requirements (the topic of remedial classes is a discussion for another day). Unfortunately, those schools with higher populations of blacks often have a disproportionately lower numbers of students meeting those requirements* upon graduation. However, even schools in where blacks are really minorities, they still have lower black achievement than their peers**.

Anyway, how about them Beavers? I really didn't realize that OSU even existed until the last year or so when I would talk to students in class and they mentioned that they were thinking of going there. To play football. At a school with a pretty popular engineering program, even if it isn't MIT or CalTech. Need I even say more? However, the critique of the racial makeup of OSU is also misguided when viewed in the context of the entire state of Oregon. Blacks make up only 2% of the entire state, so it's no surprise to find that they also make up a comically low percentage of the OSU campus, and yes I'm aware that 1.3% isn't 2%. Amazing as it may sound, not everyone goes to college. But I digress.

I know less about the Oregon K-12 education system than I do CA's, but I can't imagine that it isn't similar. Therefore, especially in light of the enrollment stats, it seems as if the black students there are also (not) achieving at a similar level as their California counterparts. So again, what is the university to do? Oregon also outlawed affirmative action, so they're also left to pick the students who come out of high school meeting their requirements for entry.

So, while I certainly don't think it's cool for colleges to be photoshopping darkies into their brochure, there also needs to be a larger conversation within the black community itself about what is going on. Of course, I realize that numerous black leaders give back to their communities at all levels. But it's apparent that not enough is being done, so more is necessary. I'll start by challenging Anderson and Sy to start giving back to the community. Immediately. Go spend some time in [inner city] schools mentoring young blacks. Help them get into college on merit alone, then a ball scholarship is just icing on the cake, instead of the other way around. Most importantly, help them graduate high school college-ready. Fin.

*For example, let's examine Lancaster High School in Lancaster, CA. The school is 20% black and mirrors the city itself, which at 20.5% black, is quite a bit higher than the state average of a hair over 6%. The school has a state rank of 4/10 based on the API scores and I'm sure that there's a correlation between API scores and completion of A-G requirements. This can be further inferred from the graduation rates because only 84% of black students graduated and less than 45% of black students were considered "proficient" in ELA and math in the latest round of testing.

**Let's consider Palo Alto High School in Palo Alto, CA--you know, where Stanford University is located. According to the stats, the city is about 2% black and the high school is 3% black, or about 1/3 and a half of the state, respectively. Yet even there, the black students are far behind in their proficiency and graduation rates.

Justine Sacco's AIDS

Well, unless you've been on a flight as long as Justine's was, you know by now that she's become unemployed quite unceremoniously. And her dad ain't pleased. With what she did, not that she's now a bum. She probably has a bright future with that NTSB intern who 'confirmed' the pilots from Asiana 211. But I digress. We're not here to discuss up and coming comedians, we're here to discuss AIDS.

For those in out of the loop, Acquired Immune Deficiency (or if you prefer, Immunodeficiency) Syndrome is the product of the Human Immunodeficiency Virus. Long story short, the virus shows up and shuts down the body's immune system. It propagates in the body and can spread to others via bodily fluids (e.g. mucus, semen, blood, etc.). But not by shaking hands. Again, I've digressed.

On to the real reason we're here: Justine. Ms. Sacco apparently has quite a history of inflammatory tweets and was probably asking for it. Intermission:

Anyway, back to reality and the matter at hand: AIDS. Ms. Sacco's comments certainly weren't the best choice of words one could've used, as evidenced by her needing a new employer soon. However, all of this glosses over the serious problem of our day. AIDS IS A SERIOUS ISSUE IN BLACK [Sub-Saharan] AFRICA! We could be here for weeks going debating statistics on it. But one thing we cannot do is continue to sit idly by.

All the armchair outrage is useless without action. Imagine what could be done to actually address the actual problem, AIDS, if half of the energy that's been directed at Sacco had instead been expended three weeks ago for Justine's favorite holiday. Thankfully, some people aren't just trying to add their voice to the cacophony, they actually do care. Several websites have been set up in Justine's honor to benefit AIDS charities. And there are certainly volunteer opportunities too.

So I'll actually challenge y'all to go do something. Justine's 15 minutes are quickly fading, now it's time for the armchair crowd to get up and put up. Even if it's just donating a few bucks.  Gogogo.

PS: No gogo, I still will not pay your outrageous fees to maintain connectivity during flight.

Syrien

Yes, this post is coming to you as I sit in the living from of a flat just outside München, Germany. As such, the title is in German. But that's somewhat of a digression. I've been in Europe since last Monday, during which time I've been kinda unplugged from what's been happening at home. However, the noise has finally spread far enough and word of the latest gaffe has reached my ears, which must disgruntlement from me.

To be quite clear, I'm definitely not supportive of the death and violence in Syria as has happened by either side. At the same time, the sudden interest in the conflict by the US is nothing short of hypocritical. After almost two years sitting by watching it happen, it's suddenly a big issue? That part sounds unbelievable.

If the situation has somehow suddenly become unacceptable, then the UN needs to go ahead and be the agency to do something about it. Not the US. This is of course sounding eerily similar to Iraq, except this time the weapons have supposedly been used instead of just being assumed to exist. Either way, this is not an area that the US should be wading into. We've already created a new generation of terrorists in several countries, so I see little reason to do it yet again somewhere else. That is all.

Happy Memorial Day

Today is Memorial Day here in the States, the time where we remember all who have fallen in the line of duty fighting whilst clad in one of our uniforms. Though things about the country are now rather questionable, especially concerning the liberty and freedoms side, we should still honor the memory of those who have died so that we can be what we are. So once more, a big thank you to all the fallen.

Put 'Em to Work!

When kids were stuck in factories, they wanted to learn.

 Last year, Newt Gingrich caused a firestorm when he said that he'd like to see poor kids put to work as school janitors. I hope I can escape unscathed, because I now have the same idea. Yes, put the kids to work. They need it. Although unlike Newt, I wouldn't differentiate based on economic status. Under my plan, students who have chronic behavioral problems or just showing general apathy towards education would be put to work. No, they won't be in a factory putting together iPhones. Nor will they be crawling in coal mines, à la the turn of the 20th Century. (Although that might be the experience they really need to finally realize how much they have that they're just wasting.)

So since I said they won't be working in factories nor will they be mining coal, what will they be doing? We need more details on this here plan. Well for starters, it should be obvious by now that I'm not advocating a free-for-all to get kids behind the counter of McDonald's and I'm certainly not suggesting that kids replace janitors like Gingrich suggested. But kids are not incapable of doing anything at all. Libraries all over are scaling back on hours, they can assist there. Computer programs need testing. Other kids need help with schoolwork. The list goes on, although it is much shorter than the list available to the able-bodied adult.

To protect the children, the child labor laws will have to be modified somewhat. I'd suggest that children aged 12-15 be allowed to work a maximum of 15 hours weekly, but with a minimum of three school days included in there. Why the school days? If they're working, they're not out causing mischief on the streets. They're not vegetating in front of a TV. Then by time they get home, their parents will probably be arriving as well. The children would also have to get a report signed from their supervisor on their performance. Meanwhile, any company wishing to participate would have to get their program signed off by the school as meeting all the guidelines and requirements.

As for their pay, I'd set a special minimum wage for tweens that is lower than the federal by 30%. The federal minimum is currently $7.25, so that means the tween minimum would be $5.075/hr. Don't worry, it would rise whenever Congress decides to quit being lazy and raise the federal minimum. This depressed minimum would accomplish a couple things. First, it would give the kids a bit of money in their pocket. Even if they didn't work the 15 hour maximum but a very plausible 10 per week, they would be earning around $200/month. While raising kids can definitely be expensive, I certainly didn't receive $200 a month for allowance and I'm sure parents would welcome their kids having a little spending money of their own.

At the same time, the minimum would be low enough to (hopefully) keep families from exploiting the child's labor. An additional $200 can fit nicely into a family budget. (I'd even welcome it, that's my car payment.) Naturally, the parents will have to know that their kids are in the program and will almost assuredly find out how much the kids are making. To help lessen the appeal of that money to the parents, several program contingencies will have to be in place and met. First, the kids will have to register for a 529 account if their parents don't already have one for them. Then, 30% monthly will be put in there automatically. At that rate, they should have a couple dollars available for tuition room & board books a parking pass by time they start college. That also drops their income down to $120/month, which is hopefully less likely to be plundered by their parents.

In addition to the 529 plan, these kids will be enrolled in a mandatory money management course that must be completed within the first quarter of the program. Failure to do so will mean the program ends for them until they finish. The classes should be geared more toward extolling the virtues of saving and thrift over just conditioning them to believe that credit is both a natural and inevitable part of life that can't be avoided. This is especially imperative if the children really are the "poor" that Newt Gingrich was talking about. They will often not be able to see a good financial blueprint modeled for them at home at all and the areas they live in are chuck full of predatory lenders. This could be an important step toward reducing poverty both in future generations and in the current generation by the kids taking their knowledge home.

On the employer side, things will probably be quite a bit trickier. Understandably, it could potentially open them up for litigation, so many employers may choose to not participate. At the same time, it could potentially offer several advantages to those who do participate. At $5 an hour and no benefits, their labor costs would be relatively low. It also helps them identify individuals they'd like to pursue as employees in the future and could be useful as an early form of recruitment. Soon as the kid turns the full legal age, the company could offer an already trained employee some more hours (and higher pay) to keep them around.

Of course, this idea isn't perfect. It relies a lot on trust of the business owners, which some may scoff at. At the same time, it also relies on trust in the kids, which others may scoff at. There'll be a limited amount of jobs the kids can even do due to various privacy laws and insurance statutes, etc. But at least, they will be able to do something and see an alternative to what many of them happen to have grown up with so far.

Photo from US National Archives.

I'm Now Independent

So I finally did it. I changed my party identity to none, thereby joining the ranks of a fast-growing segment of the electorate in this country: the independents. When I originally registered to vote, I signed up as a Democrat. However, as time has passed I've come to realize that (at least for the moment), the best representation of my views is not found in either of the two major parties nor in any of the smaller ones. Only I can accurately represent those views. Therefore, I will be the one to speak for myself on all the issues that matter to me.