Paul R. Lehman, The killing of George Floyd underscores the bigotry in America and its law enforcement

May 28, 2020 at 7:17 pm | Posted in African American, American Bigotry, American history, American Racism, anglo saxons, Bigotry in America, black inferiority, blacks, Constitutional rights, criminal justice, discrimination, Disrespect, equality, Ethnicity in America, European American, fairness, identity, jail & prison overcrowding, justice, justice system, law enforcement agencies, Media and Race, Minnesota, Police, Prejudice, race, Race in America, racism, skin color, skin complexion, social conditioning, social justice system, tribalism, whites | 6 Comments
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The killing of George Floyd by Minneapolis police should leave no doubt in our minds of fact that ethnic bigotry is a fabric of the European American psyche regardless of the geographical location. The bias they have been conditioned to accept as normal prevents them from seeing people of color as human beings; they, the European Americans, are to themselves, the only real human beings. In addition to seeing people of color as less than human beings, they also are conditioned to see them as a constant threat to their safety, comfort, and privileges. These people of color must be controlled under all circumstances if the well-being of European Americans is to be maintained. While the European American psyche readily embraces this bigotry, the problems of fear and hate of people of color and especially of African American men become inflated in law enforcers.
As a matter of fact, contrary to law enforcer’s accounts, African Americans are not usually the initiators of physical force against officers. Rather than treat them as citizens deserving respect and courtesy, African Americans are viewed as criminals first, last, and always by law enforcers. The concept of innocent until proven guilty does not apply to people of color. More often than not, when we see a video of an officer interacting with an African American the officer never listens to what the African American says even if it’s a plea for help. The videos from Eric Gardner to George Floyd show the callousness of the officers to the cries and pleas of the victims. Studies have shown that European American law enforcers seemingly lose touch with reality when they confront a person of color.
When European immigrants came to America they came using their national and cultural identities like German, French, and Italian etc….But once they arrived, they learned that abandoning those identities that at time also brought discrimination and social rejection, offered them so much more. In particular the identities of Irish, Italian, and Jews, not to mention the Polish and Slavic, rushed in claiming whiteness.The pseudo science of race was firmly in place in the late 1800s and the immigrants worked hard to claim that whiteness because if they were seen as white, their former identity would be of little concern. In essence, the European immigrants submerged themselves in whiteness because of the power and privilege it offered. But by abandoning their former identity, they lost the value and self worth that came with it and embraced a color that offered nothing of personal value but membership in the white tribe.
Time is the only thing that is consistently changing and so over time many European Americans not only forgot who they were but also had nothing of personal cultural value to pass on to their children except to tell them that they were white. Of course, whiteness has never been defined, only described. The fear that many European Americans have and causes then to react violently and aggressively towards people of color is the loss of their white identity. For European Americans to lose their white identity would render them, in their eyes, valueless because they abandoned their ethnic identities to become white and now would have nothing of themselves to value. Evidently, being an American is not enough if the white is omitted.
Today, more and more European Americans are experimenting with their feelings of privilege and power as in the example of a European American woman who threatened an African American male who was bird-watching in a park and mentioned to the female who had a dog with her that the park had a leash law. She became upset with him after an exchange between them and called 911 saying that she thought an African American man was about to attack her. Fortunately, the incident was resolved without anyone being harmed. However, the woman displayed the power of her whiteness by calling the police and saying that she was being assaulted by an African American man. Had the woman used the word black instead of African American man, the impact would have probably been more alarming to the police, because the word black would bring help running. Studies have shown the psychical and emotional reactions experienced by European Americans and especially law enforcers to the seeing or hearing the word black. To be sure, the word black ignites an alarm in their psyche similar to that of the word fire. Both words trigger a similar reaction—contain, control, and kill.
The increase in displays of bigotry by European Americans come from their fear of loosing the one thing of value they have—their whiteness. They have a reason to be frightened because the rapidly changing cultural demographics spell an end to the concept of a white and black race. The power of whiteness today comes from the use of the reference to black. Bigots might appear to dislike the word black being used in various civil and civic organizations like Black Lives Matter, but the opposite is true; they love and encourage the usage of black because it is the fuel that keeps their whiteness in power. Most people are not mindful of the practice in the media that has existed for too long—when an item of interest is broadcast involving people, the only ones described by skin complexion are people of color. If no person of color is involved, no description is given. The reason for this is the concept of European Americans being the only normal people on the planet; all others are abnormal and need to be described.
European Americans and especially those in the criminal justice need to know that changes are coming relative to race and color and the way people are perceived and treated. When we realize that eighty percent of the world’s population is people of color and the population of America will have a majority of brown people by 2045, they are and will continue to lose the numbers game. Looking at the videos of George Floyd and other victims of bigotry makes us mindful of the saying—what’s done in the dark will come to the light. As the darkness comes to light it brings with it the need for reckoning.

Paul R. Lehman, The word race has yet to be defined, but controls life in America.

May 20, 2020 at 1:16 pm | Posted in African American, American Bigotry, American history, American Racism, Bigotry in America, biological races, black inferiority, blacks, Civil Right's Act 1964, criminal justice, discrimination, DNA, Donald Trump, ethnic stereotypes, Ethnicity in America, European Americans, Human Genome, identity, justice system, language, Police, Prejudice, President Obama, race, Race in America, racism, skin color, skin complexion, social conditioning, social justice system, Supreme Court Chief Justice, The Nation. Michelle Alexander. The New Jim Crow, white supremacy, whites | 1 Comment
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

When the English, Anglo-Saxons, came to America they brought with them the concept of their nation is superior to all other nations under a myth proven to be bogus many times over, b nevertheless promoted by them. The element of superiority over other nations was incorporated into the concept of race by color. So, for all intent and purposes, the word race would be the key that opened or closed the doors to all things of value. In essence, the word race served to unite, separate, control, and discriminate one group of people from others. The word race, however, has no basis in science relative to biology but was invented to suggest a biological connection. So, if no one ever challenged the nature of the word race or tried to define it, it retained its place as the key element in European American, Anglo-Saxon superiority in society. The word race has been used in American society to control all the people regardless of their skin complexion.

Because European Americans are conditioned to view themselves as normal and superior to all other people they must continue to support, maintain, and promote that race perception. In doing so, they must perceive others as not normal and inferior. The problems manifest themselves when common sense, logic, reason, and reality come into play. First, the concept of biologically different races defies all scientific data beginning with Linnaeus in 1735, right up to today, and the study of DNA. Second, the word race has never been defined because data identifying a fixed race does not exist, and skin complexion varies individually. Third, the idea of a group of people all having the same characteristics, physically and mentally based on skin color is illogical and irrational because that would imply that these characteristics were biologically fixed, which we know to be false. Yet, this is the concept that Americans have been conditioned to accept as believable. However, to accept and believe all the aspects associated with the concept of race would render individuals mentally delusional.

To be specific, the word race id based on a myth, and myths are invented from mystical and magical elements not based on facts, for example, like the Tooth Fairy. The word racism comes from the word race and implies a belief in the concept of race. This belief in racism now becomes a form of superstition which the Oxford Dictionary defines “the belief that particular events happen in a way that cannot be explained by reason or science” and that has a direct impact on the believer’s life and sense of reality. The Oxford Dictionary defines a delusion as “an idiosyncratic belief or impression that is firmly maintained despite being contradicted by what is generally accepted as reality or rational argument, typically a symptom of mental disorder.” Americans who accept and embrace the concept of race, in effect, suffer from this mental condition that is generally supported by the government and society.

One of the problems facing America today has to do with how the concept of race has and continues to influence our everyday lives. European Americans, Anglo-Saxons, Caucasians have all been conditioned to view themselves as privileged, which carried with it the elements of arrogance and authority. They have been conditioned to believe that their comfort and security should never be compromised by the presence of other people especially by people of color. If and when such a comprise takes place, they simply have to call law enforcement or take matters into their own hands. Either way, they look to receive satisfaction because all the powers of society and government reside with them.

For all intent and purpose, the word race still exercises its power, influence, and control in America today despite the many social changes that have taken place. Taylor Lewis in an article in The Nation over one hundred and fifty years ago wrote about the power of the language:” Even when we advocate the cause of the African, we do it in a manner that would be thought insulting and utterly undemocratic in any other case. We use the language of the masters and the owners.”He later noted that “The way in which we speak to the colored man, and of the colored man, shows an unconscious yielding to the anti-christian prejudice we are striving to overcome.” When we do not challenge the language, we simply acquiesce to its influence. More specifically, whenever the word race is used in any form socially and especially relative to African Americans, an advantage is given to European Americans. The word race serves to entrap the uninformed into thinking that it is legitimate rather than the bogus invention that it is. All the social gains made via civil rights legislation are taken back by the use of the word race because with its use, the concept becomes viable.

Michelle Alexander in her book, The New Jim Crow, shared the power the word race has today in our criminal justice system: “The dirty little secret of policing is that the Supreme Court has actually granted the police license to discriminate.”In essence, the court gave the police the right to stop and search anyone based on race; however, race could not be the primary cause for the stop and search. Therefore, when a person of color is stopped by law enforcement, any reason other than race will suffice. Little wonder that police officers are usually deemed within their rights to stop and search anyone. Unfortunately, the fact that an excessive number of people of color are the victims of stop and search is apparently of no consequence.

During the Obama presidency, much attention was paid to the injustice in the criminal justice system, but the present administration has tried to undo the good that was accomplished. Because of the rapidly changing demographics in America, the opportunity for improvement in our criminal justice system will come in time. When that time comes, we must be very careful in how we choose our words. The word race, which has yet to be defined, should not be used in a social context involving identity if its power is to be neutralized.

Paul R. Lehman, Gentrification is a double-edged sword for the African American communities.

May 5, 2020 at 2:21 pm | Posted in African American, American Bigotry, American Dream, American history, American Racism, anglo saxons, Baltimore, Bigotry in America, blacks, Brown v Topeka, chicago, Community relationships, desegregation, Disrespect, employment, equality, ethnic stereotypes, Ethnicity in America, European Americans, fairness, Oklahoma, poverty, Prejudice, Race in America, riots, segregation, social justice system, Tulsa Riot 1921, white supremacy, whites | 1 Comment
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Occasionally, on talk radio, television talk shows, and social media the topic of improving the African American community is discussed and reasonable and logical points, as well as opinions, are offered in that regard. In many of those discussions, the most salient point regarding success in the African American community revolves around ownership and control of the property. Many people of color have experienced financial success in these communities usually because they owned and controlled their businesses. However, the primary lesson we learn from history is that all African American communities are tentative because the ultimate control of their property is not in their hands.
Many of the opinions and advice offered for improving African Americans involve four essential elements: finance, subsistence, education, and religion. Take away any one of these four and the community cannot endure very long. Even when all four of these elements are functioning well, the community is constantly at risk. Yes, individual people of color can and do fair very well financially from their efforts within the African American community, but their businesses are usually confined to that community and not the larger European American community. History reminds us of what has and can happen to successful African American communities in the examples of Wilmington, North Carolina; Tulsa, Oklahoma; Atlanta, Georgia, and Rosewood, Florida, just to mention a few. These examples are not given to indicate that efforts to improve one’s condition should not be made, but to recognize that the social progress that has been made has not altered the conditions facing African Americans relative to their community including owning and controlling property.
In the cases of the four African American communities mentioned above, each was met and destroyed by violence, abuse, and death. Today, African American communities have one major destroyer that comes with a plethora of weapons; that enemy is known as gentrification. Unlike the violence of the past, gentrification works so slowly and gradually like cancer that the loss is hardly noticed until it becomes obvious. An article appeared in (The Charleston Chronicle, February 20, 2020) that identified and described this process: “Gentrification involves the transformation of under-invested, predominately poor communities from low value to high value. During this transformation, long-time residents and businesses are displaced; unable to afford higher rents, mortgages, and property taxes.” The article added that “For some, gentrification is a process of renovating deteriorated urban neighborhoods through the influx of more affluent residents. To others, gentrification magnifies the racial divide as it shifts a neighborhood’s racial composition as white residents move in and minorities are moved out.”
In essence, this process can rob a community of the four essentials it needs to exist. A brief example can underscore how the process works. In his book Boom Town, Sam Anderson states that the Land Run that occurred in Oklahoma and particularly in Oklahoma City “was for white men.” The spirit of dominance and control by Anglo-Saxons was quite evident during his event. He noted that African Americans did not take part in the actions of the first day and when they did arrive, “They found themselves relegated to the least appealing pockets of the remaining land, up against the railroad tracks and down by the river. One of their neighborhoods, Sandtown, flooded so often that its houses were built on stilts. Residents were frequently rescued by boats.”
As time progressed, the African American community gradually began to expand north from the river and the railroad tracks and eventually was permitted to establish businesses and residence on the south side of 2nd street. The north side of the street was reserved for European Americans until in May of 1919 when through the efforts of Roscoe Dungee an African American family was able to move “into a house on a street that touched the very bottom edge of a white neighborhood. And so, after many years of confinement, by the tiniest possible increment, OKC’s black world began to expand.” This area became known as the “deep duce.”
The expansion of the African American community continued and by the 1940s had grown to include the south side of northeast 8th street. The area from the railroad tracks to northeast 8th street and east from Walnut Street just passed Bryant Avenue came to be known as “The East Side,” or “Colored Town.”The community experienced success in many areas, except the majority of the homes occupied by African Americans were not owned by them, but rented. Homeownership for African Americans also came in the early ’40s with the arrival of Hassman Heights (Edwards Addition) and Carverdale Addition. Edwards was an African American while the owner and builder of Carverdale was a European American. Other additions reserved for people of color soon followed.
The enterprise areas that defined The East Side were located on 2nd Street, 4th Street, and Bath Street between 5th and 6th Streets. However, once desegregation came into effect after 1954, the African American community began to slowly disintegrate. First to suffer was the mom and pop businesses because they could not compete with the new, larger, and generally, lower-priced choices offered by the European Americans’ goods and services. Today, because of gentrification, little to nothing remains of those once-thriving areas to makes reference to earlier days of The East Side. Certainly, some African American businesses still remain on the northeast side, but they are simply businesses that no longer comprise an element of an African American community. Two businesses that continue to embrace the concept of the community are the churches and funeral homes. Any plans for revitalizing that African Americans community as such are no longer viable.
The article made note of a study that was done on gentrification and noted that “In Washington, D.C., 20,000 Black residents were displaced, and in Portland, Oregon, 13 percent of the Black community was displaced over the more than decade period that was studied. Seven cities accounted for nearly half of the gentrification nationally: New York City, Los Angeles, Washington, D.C., Philadelphia, Baltimore, San Diego, and Chicago.”
In Oklahoma City, slowly over the years, gentrification has come to deprive a once vibrant African American community of a powerful population, political voices, community leadership, health, education, and food facilities owned and controlled by African Americans. Segregation and bigotry invented these African American communities and gentrification is destroying them.
Consequently, since gentrification is today’s reality, our thinking must shift to that of participating within a diverse community where the well-being of the individual is the concern rather than one defined by ethnicity. For a novel example of how gentrification is manifested in society today, just tune into the TV show, “The Neighborhood.”Hopefully, we will all get through this together.

Paul R. Lehman, Christianity and the church’s failure to address the problem of race

April 24, 2020 at 3:13 pm | Posted in Africa, African American, American Bigotry, American history, American Indian, American Racism, Bible, Bigotry in America, biological races, black inferiority, blacks, Christianity, desegregation, discrimination, Disrespect, education, ethnic stereotypes, Ethnicity in America, European Americans, Jesus, Nigeria, Pilgrims, race, Race in America, racism, segregation, skin color | 2 Comments
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

In the fall of 1947, a young African American man entered the doors of a traditional Christian church near the downtown area of the city and asked to speak to the pastor. This particular church was located in a segregated area of the city and its parishioners were all European American. The young man met with the pastor and explained that he and his family had recently arrived in the city and could not locate a church of his denomination that included African Americans. He asked the pastor if God was worshiped in his church and if so, could he and his family could worship there. The pastor said that indeed, God was worshiped in his church, but he would have to get back to him about him and his family attending service there. A short time later, the pastor informed the young African American that he and his family could attend services at the church, but they would be required to sit in the rear of the church and wait to be last to partake of the Eucharist.
One might imagine how pleased the congregation felt about itself permitting a family of African Americans to worship God in their church. A gold star might be given the church for doing God’s work. After all, ethnic segregation was the norm for America during this period of history, and to go beyond the limits of the law was quite courageous for a European American church. While this incident might seem heart-warming and appropriate for a Christian community sharing God’s love, the action of the church were not consistent with the concept of Christianity.
Christianity, and by extension, the church, has always been complicit in the inhumane treatment of people of color. Before coming to America, the Portuguese and Spaniards destroyed many of the cities and enslaved many people of Mexico and portions of South America. In America, the Explorers from Spain and England captured American Indians and sold them into slavery. In the year 1535, Cabeza De Vaca and his party “…encountered a party of Spanish slave hunters under Diego de Alcaraz in Western Mexico. Seeing the terror of his American Indian escorts at these “Christian slavers,” as he acerbically called them, Cabeza de Vaca became openly critical of Alcaraz, who arrested him and sent him south and seized as slaves the six hundred natives in his company.”The explorers often referred to the Pope as giving them the authority to do whatever they wanted while enslaving the native people to enrich their investors.
When the English came to America under the guise of seeking religious freedom Christianity was used to both defend and condemn slavery and since the majority of the founders were slaveholders the only thing consistent relative to Christianity and slavery was the argument. Karen Armstrong wrote that “After the Civil War, demoralized by their failure to resolve the slavery question, many of the Evangelicals withdrew from public life, realizing that they had marginalized themselves politically. Their religion thus became separate from their politics, a private affair—just as the Founders had hoped.”The key point Armstrong made was the actions of the clergy and the church explains the situation today: “Before the war [Civil War] preachers had concentrated on the legitimacy of slavery as an institution but had neglected the issue of race.” She added that “Tragically, they would remain unable to bring the gospel to bear on this major American problem.” She also noted that for one hundred years after abolition African Americans continued “to suffer segregation, discrimination, and routine terrorism at the hands of white supremacist mobs, which the local authorities [including the church] did little to suppress.”
In recent years the church in America has given some attention to the problems of civil rights for people of color by working independently and with various civic organizations. However, the church has yet to speak to the primary issue of race, only the consequences of race in America. The ignorance or lack of action by the church relative to ethnic biases is not confined to America. A recent article’s (cruxnow.com>church >in>Europe>2020/04) opening sentences brought this message home clearly: “A Nigerian priest in Germany has been forced to leave his parish over concern for his safety after his car and house were attacked and he received a death threat. Catholic officials in Germany say the priest, Patrick Asomugha, who is the head of a parish in Queidersbach, a small municipality in western Germany, will leave his post this week.”The article stated further that “ ‘Concerns for the safety and wellbeing of pastor Asomugha makes this step unavoidable,’ Andreas Sturm, vicar general for the Speyer diocese’s bishop, said in a statement. It would be irresponsible to continue exposing pastor Asomugha to the threat.”One wonders why the church would place a person of color in a congregation that clearly showed ethnic bias.
The article referenced two statements made by members of the church served by Asomugha. The first stated that: “I won’t let my child be baptized by a black man.” The second also noted that “During communion service, one parishioner is also reported to have said: ‘I’m not taking anything from those dirty black hands.’”These two statements underscore a plethora of concerns the church had not addressed.
The Christian church, meaning protestant and catholic religions, have yet to debunk the false concept of races either biological or by skin color on a national and international level, and as a result, have helped to promote the concept of European supremacy. The church has not used the Bible to educate it, followers, that all people are God’s creation and reflect his image, so no one should be discriminated against because of their ethnicity. By not making the effort to educate its parishioners, the church invites segregation and discrimination to perpetuate among its members. The church fails to consider the ethnic and cultural differences among its members and places members of its clergy in harm’s way by not preparing the congregations and the priests appropriately relative to the challenges they face. The experiences faced by the priest could have and should have been avoided had the church done its job.
The church may have done considerable work in combating bigotry, but little work has been done to replace the cause of that bigotry—race.

Paul R. Lehman, The safety and well-being of African American males and all people of color are a constant concern

April 17, 2020 at 4:18 pm | Posted in African American, American Bigotry, American history, amygdala, anglo saxons, Bigotry in America, black inferiority, blacks, Civil Right's Act 1964, Civil Rights Ats, Constitutional rights, criminal justice, discrimination, Disrespect, equality, Ethnicity in America, European Americans, fairness, incarceration, justice, justice system, law enforcement agencies, minorities, Police, police education & training, police force, Race in America, racism, respect, skin color, skin complexion, social conditioning, social justice system, The New York Times, white supremacy, whites | 1 Comment
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

African American men specifically and men of color in general, put their lives on the line every day when they walk outside of their residence or simply appear in public. For the people that are not of color in America, this statement might seem somewhat amusing or offered in jest. On the contrary, the statement is not an opinion, but a fact. The reason for this experience comes directly from the social conditioning of European Americans generally and law enforcement agents specifically. Society and by extension, the governments, local, state, and national have given the law enforcers the power to exercise total control of its citizens without fear of reprisal; that is, they have no fear of repercussions for their actions against citizens. The attitude and action of many of these law enforcers seem to be that people of color have no rights that the officers should respect. For the people of color, once they are stopped by officers, they lose all their rights and privileges while the officers exert total control over the individuals.
The criminal justice system works in favor of the officer, not the citizens of color because the word of the officer is taken over that of the citizens. Historically, the relationship between the African American community and the European American one has been one of dominance and control by law enforcement. According to Danielle Sered, “The racially inequitable legacy of policing stretches back to the formation of this nation, and police have not only failed to protect communities of color from harm, but they have enacted enormous levels of harm.” She continued by noting that “This [harm] is not simply or most importantly about individual police officers, many of whom have the best intentions and even behavior in their work. It is about an institution with a history of enabling and enforcing the worst disparities in our country’s history.” More specifically, she added that “It is about officers who returned escaped people to the plantations they were fleeing, officers who publicly announced the times of lynchings to be carried out in the backyards of their own precincts, officers who drove black residents out of neighborhoods where they had bought homes,” and finally, “officers who continue to arrest, assault, and shoot black people at glaringly disproportionate rates.” So the question of trust in the criminal justice system has never been one that people of color readily embraced.
Americans have been socially conditioned to fear African Americans generally, but especially one with whom they are not familiar. According to one source, new scientific research provides some data into how African American men are perceived: “When people see black men they don’t know, they have a physical response that is different from their response to other people. Their blood pressure goes up and they sweat more. When a white person sees an unfamiliar black male face, the amygdala, the part of the brain that processes fear, activates.” (American Values Institute, March 2013) When European Americans join the criminal justice system they do not leave their fear of African American males at home, but bring them to their workplace. This fear might explain why many European American law enforcers become excited and aggressive when engaging with an African American male.
Fortunately for the Law enforcement agents, their actions against people of color are not often questioned, so the fear of having to suffer any consequences for their unreasonable treatment of people of color is not usually scrutinized. The public record of their actions speaks for itself and supports the fact that officers are not held to the same standard of behavior as other citizens. So, they often misuse and abuse the power granted them by the system. A recent incident underscores the power given to law enforcers who are free to profile, stop, and detain men of color without offering any reasons for their actions. A recent New York Times article noted that an African American man wearing a protective mask and working outside near a white van when a Miami police officer drives up next to this man. Next, “The officer steps out of his squad car. Words are exchanged. Then the officer handcuffs and detains the man, Dr. Armen Henderson, who was recently featured in a Miami Herald article about volunteers who provide free coronavirus testing for homeless people in downtown Miami.”Rather than seeking information from the doctor regarding his actions, the officer ignored the doctor’s informing him of who he was and what he was doing. The doctor did not have any identification on him and would have been taken away had he not called for his wife who came out of their home and confronted the officer. Once the officer realized that he had made a mistake, he removed the handcuffs from the doctor and left the scene without any word of his actions or an apology.
What this incident shows is the vulnerability of African American males to the justice system that ignores everything but skin color in administering their control. The fact that Henderson is a doctor, a volunteer risking his life in helping to fight the coronavirus or the fact that he was working in front of his home wearing a protective mask made no difference to the officer who did not take the time to inquire about or grasp the nature of Henderson’s presence at that location. One wonders what kind of education the officer received at the academy regarding the treatment of citizens.
If society can benefit from this crisis of the coronavirus it should be in the fact that to the virus we are all one. The virus does not discriminate on the bases of ethnicity, age, economic or educational status, social position, religion or health. We, hopefully, understand that by working together even though we are sometimes put in harm’s way, that our combined efforts and sacrifice will help us to finally successfully control and manage this crisis thereby contributing to our mutual survival. We must learn that our strength is our unity.

Paul R. Lehman, America’s problem: the myth and superstition of race and bigotry

April 1, 2020 at 7:24 pm | Posted in African American, American Bigotry, American history, anglo saxons, Bigotry in America, biological races, black inferiority, blacks, criminal justice, democracy, discrimination, DNA, equality, ethnic stereotypes, Ethnicity in America, European Americans, identity, justice, law, Negro, Prejudice, President Obama, race, Race in America, racism, respect, segregation, skin color, social conditioning, tolerance, U. S. Census, white supremacy, whites | Leave a comment
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

For centuries man has viewed the cat as having mystical powers, some for good, and some for evil and has even included the concept of the cat having nine lives. We generally view the many and various beliefs concerning the cat as myths and even superstitions. However, before a superstition can become a superstition it must first begin as a myth, a story, event, action, person or thing possessing magical, mystical, illogical or irrational powers. The accounting of the myth provides the necessary information for the possibility of belief. For example, at one time it was a common belief that it was a sign of good luck if a black cat came into a house or onboard a ship uninvited. The belief was that the owner of the house or ship would experience good luck and that the cat should never be chased away because by doing so, the good luck would go with the cat. So, the statement simply provides the information relative to the powers of the cat. As long as the information serves as just information, it remains a myth. However, when the supposed powers of the cat become accepted as real and influence the actions and expectations of the home or ship-owner, the myth becomes a superstition. In effect, the information moves from a passive to an active form and become a part of the individual’s psyche.
Why do myths and superstition still exist when the knowledge to explain the so-called mystical or magical powers posited in them can easily be debunked? Scholars say that present-day myths and superstitions are the remains of faded or forgotten faiths, rituals, and beliefs and that in spite of the passage of time the acquisition of information has not robbed them of their powers to still influence people today. For example, “When we touch wood to avert misfortune or drop pins into a wishing-well, or bow to the new moon, we do so only because of a vague idea concerning luck.”That idea of good luck is something passed down to us: “Our pagan forefathers did much the same, but they were moved by a genuine belief in the sacred character of trees, or water, or the moon, and their power to affect those who reverenced them for good or evil. Because of that belief, their actions were rational.”Unfortunately, Christianity and science have not been sufficient to eliminate the power of superstition from many modern-day minds.
In one of his hit songs, Stevie Wonder summed up the primary mental condition and challenges in American society: “When you believe in things you don’t understand, then you suffer. Superstition ain’t the way.” America has been living a life based on superstitions in that it accepted the story of the myth of race and then began living life as though the myth was real. Because the majority of society invented and instituted the myth, the rest of society went along with the program. However, when we take the time to examine just what society has believed relative to the superstition of race, we must ask ourselves, why? The answers are easily recognizable: social control and dominance based on ethnic biases especially of African Americans and other people of color.
Believing that bad luck will follow when a black cat crosses your path is one thing, but believing that simply because of a person’s skin complexion that each and every person of color possesses the same exact characteristics and that these characteristics are biologically fixed in every individual is lunacy. Nonetheless, America has been embracing this concept as real since its beginning. We can see evidence of this lunacy in practically every institution in society. In many rural towns across America one can still find cemeteries marked “Colored” and “White” as signs of just how deep and ubiquitous superstitions can affect a society. Ethnic bigotry has been a part of the American social fabric for so long that trying to acknowledge its existence causes a challenge—the preverbal elephant in the room.
People of color and especially African Americans have had to pay the price for America’s superstition but the changes in the nation’s demographics escaped notice, for the most part, until Barack Obama was elected President of the United States. That election sent a shock wave through a part of America that challenged the myth and subsequently the superstition because Obama represented the antithesis of how the African American is perceived. According to Peter Loewenberg, “In the unconscious of the bigot, the black represents his own repressed instincts which he fears and hates and which are forbidden by his conscience struggles to conform to the values professed by society.”He added that “This is why the black man becomes the personification of sexuality, lewdness, dirtiness, and unbridled hostility. He is the symbol of voluptuousness and the immediate gratification of pleasure.” Finally, he noted that “In the deepest recesses of the minds of white Americans, Negroes are associated with lowly and debased objects or with sexuality and violence.”In essence, the superstition that had been in effect since the founding of the nation had been debunked by Obama’s election and the country was turning sane, almost.
Leaders in Congress, rather than accept the reality of the race superstition being debunked, gathered forces to combat the sanity and reinforce the superstition. We must remember that myths and superstitions are based on belief and according to Solomon Schimmel, “…beliefs are often affirmed even when they are highly implausible, irrational, or even absurd, because of their actual or presumed rewards for the individual and community who affirm and reinforce them.” He further noted that the reason for resistance to letting go of a belief can be extremely difficult in spite of all the evidence against it because of “…the actual or imagined aversive effects of doing so, for the individual and the community. The believer is not always fully aware of these underlying fears and anxieties.”Therefore, while beneficial changes are being made to replace the superstition of American bigotry, efforts continue to promote, maintain, and support it.
With the rapidly changing demographics and greater involvement and participation of people of color in politics and government, the battle for America’s sanity is gaining momentum. The first order of business for America in removing ethnic bigotry, however, is to recognize and then acknowledge the myth and superstition of race.

Paul R. Lehman, Identity confusion persists among Americans concerning race, ethnicity, and nationality

March 24, 2020 at 3:45 pm | Posted in African American, American Bigotry, American history, American Racism, anglo saxons, Bigotry in America, biological races, black inferiority, blacks, China, DNA, education, equality, ethnic stereotypes, Ethnicity in America, European American, European Americans, France, Human Genome, identity, immigration, language, Media and Race, minority, Negro, race, Race in America, racism, skin color, skin complexion, social conditioning, white supremacy, whites | Leave a comment
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

When the founding fathers invented and instituted their system of Anglo-Saxon/ European Identity confusion persists among Americans concerning race, ethnicity, and nationality American supremacy they knew that it was based on a myth and using color to define race was an illogical choice, but as long as they could maintain, support, and promote the concept, there was no fear of the myth being replaced by facts. Unfortunately, time has a way of uncovering things meant to stay hidden, but race as an identity is not one of them. Today, many Americans are confused as to their identity because society and the government have deliberately invented the confusion by mixing terms that are distinct and different from one another and using them as though they are interchangeable. All the words focus directly on personal identity, but when used refer to different things: race, ethnicity, and nationality.
What happens, generally, when Americans are asked their race? Too many will respond with an answer that includes a color; usually black or white because that is how society and the government have conditioned society to see themselves. If the words black and white were not used then words that signify the same idea are used like negro, colored, and Caucasian, etc… While these words might make reference to a so-called race, the fact is that race is an invented word and does not exist in the taxonomic classification. In addition, these words actually prevent a person’s factual identity from being recognized or used.
After delivering a lecture one afternoon at a small community library, one of the attendees, a senior European American woman raised her hand to ask a question. After I acknowledged her, she asked, “What is the European American you keep speaking about?” I explained to her that if she identified herself as white then she was a European American as far as society and the government was concerned. She responded that she was actually white. I asked her what did white mean. Her only answer was the color of her skin, she had forgotten about her ethnic identity and nationality. My next comments went to explain to the group the concept of ethnicity and ethnic groups.
Early scientists discovered variations in our species and found no biological differences in those variations, but because of their observations and experiences involving other peoples, they formed ideas and biases relative to many of these people. Rather than credit the cultural differences to the groups and their ways of life, many of these scientists, scholars, doctors, and others used their biases to identify various groups. All people belong to an ethnic group in some way or another. An ethnic group is defined as a group that sees itself and that others see them as a distinct community that possesses certain characteristics that sets them apart from other groups. What is considered ethnicity are shared characteristics such as culture, language, religion, and traditions, which contributes to an individual or person’s identity. None of these characteristics are biological, so they cannot be transferred from one person to another biologically.
So, every person on the planet has two identities, one ancestral and one chosen. The ancestral identity occurs when a person is born because that person takes the identity of the parents whatever that happens to be. For example, if both parents were Korean than the child’s identity would be Korean. However, if both parents had different ethnic identities, then the child would share both identities, but conform to the cultural practice of the group as to which one to present publically. In this example, the ethnicity and culture are the same, Korean. However, what would happen if that Korean child grew up and moved to France and decided to become a citizen there? Well, the child’s ancestral identity would remain the same, Korean, but the cultural identity would change to French.
“So, why do I identify myself as white,” she asked. I explained that probably because your parents decided that life in America would be more rewarding by discarding their ancestral and cultural identities for the one highly prized white identity. She seemed satisfied.
The American identity confusion persists in that race and ethnicity are perceived as the same which they are not; race is a myth, and ethnicity has nothing to do with biology. Nonetheless, the confusion continues when we introduce the term nationality. This term nationality refers to an identity that includes culture and a geographical location that is distinctive from other cultures and locations, like China or America. When Americans leave America to travel to other parts of the world the primary identification they take with them is a Passport. A brief examination of the Passport will show that no reference to a person’s physical appearance except in a photo of the person; no reference to skin color or ethnic identity is included. The same is true for individuals entering America. In essence, a person’s identity is based on their nationality, not their skin color or ancestral identity. Nationality has no biological component to its definition because it is inclusive to all that take shelter under it. When foreigners become American citizens they simply become Americans, not Irish Americans or Haitian Americans, just Americans.
Demographics have been rapidly changing America’s social landscape to the point that predictions indicate by the year 2045, the majority of Americans will be people of color. What that means is the system of European American supremacy will have a loss of its power to control the majority by using skin color. America’s practice of grouping people together by skin color was a way to control and discriminate the population and although other avenues of approach to achieve those ends exist, at least this one will no longer be available. Simply said, a person’s race is human, their ancestral ethnic identity comes from their parents, and their personal identity comes from their nationality. So, unless someone is writing an article or a book about someone, no need exists to provide an ancestral or cultural identity. In America, when someone is asked, “What are you,” the answer is simply—American. And what does an American look like? Just like you. And that’s all folks.

Paul R. Lehman,The 2020 U.S. Census still shows ignorance, stupidity, and bias concerning race

March 18, 2020 at 9:36 pm | Posted in African American, American Indian, anglo saxons, biological races, black inferiority, blacks, DNA, ethnic stereotypes, Ethnicity in America, European American, European Americans, Human Genome, identity, law, minority, Race in America, skin color, skin complexion, social conditioning, U. S. Census, UNESCO, whites | Leave a comment
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Ten years have passed since the last Census and one would have thought that the government or at least the Census Bureau would correct the mistake it has been making for too many years; that mistake is using the word race as though it is legitimate which it is not. At least three reasons exist for the continued use of the word race in the Census and they are ignorance, stupidity, and bias.
If the reason for their use of race is due to ignorance, then the people of America should demand that competent, intelligent, and knowledgeable people be employed to handle the Census. For example, we know from the Gnome study that no such thing as a black or white race exists; all humans are 99.99% alike. Nothing in our DNA indicates a fixed group or place that can be identified as a race distinct from the human race. Of course, if the people at the Census Bureau are not acquainted with this information then they can plead ignorance. As early as 1945 America was cautioned to stop using the word race because it has no scientific value, only social and political. So, it should not be used for identity, the word ethnic or phrase ethnic group should be used instead. America, however, ignored that cautionary warning and instead began using all three words that served to cause more confusion. Let us take a look at the problem.
In 1737 Carl Linnaeus invented Taxonomy, the system of classification of living organisms including man, which we still use today. His classification began with Domain and continued with Kingdom, Phylum, Class, Order, Family Genus, and Species. He found that all human beings belong to the same species, but there could be variations within the species, though not biological ones. In essence, if species is a pie, then all the pieces of the pie regardless of the shape and size would still be the same as the pie. Unfortunately, some people, including prominent scientists, scholars, and others saw an opportunity to insert their biases into the variety within the species and began to identify different groups as nations, and associated certain characteristics as superior or inferior to one another. Once the English established themselves as the superior and dominant nation the element of biology became more prominent and the term race replaced nation in some instances to underscore the biological connection. The English believed in a myth that supposedly identified their biological superiority in all areas and acted on that belief although it was continually debunked.
Nonetheless, the English brought to America the belief that their nation/race was superior to all others and so to ensure the maintenance and promotion of that belief, they put into effect the system we have today of European American superiority. All other nations/races are viewed as inferior to them by virtue of their skin complexion; if they considered you acceptable to them, then you were identified as white or Caucasian; all others were considered as black or at least non-white. So society and the government began using in documents, laws, and other forms of communications the words white race and black race knowing full well that no factual or biological basis existed for usage.
For some readers who might consider my comments conjecture, let me call your attention to the current 2020 Census form. The question on the form states: “What is (person’s name) race? (Help)”
This is followed by the sentence: “Select one or more boxes AND enter origins. For this census, Hispanic origins are not races.” This is where the ignorance comes into play. Nowhere is race defined, so the reader is presumed to know what race is, except people of Hispanic origins are told not to use race.
Next, the word White is listed alone followed by suggestions for people considered white: “Enter, for example, German, Irish, English, Italian, Lebanese, Egyptian, etc.”White is not defined, so how are people not listed to identify themselves? The next words listed are Black or African American and the following are examples to consider entering: “Enter, for example, African American, Jamaican, Haitian, Nigerian, Somali, etc.”Just a note, are Egyptians not from Africa? So why are they to be considered white and not black? Just asking.
The section for American Indian or Alaska Native is listed and they can “Enter name of enrolled or principal tribe(s), for example, Navajo Nation, Blackfeet Tribe, etc.”What follows this section is a list of specific cultural/geographical ethnic groups, but they seem to be identified as races. They include Chinese, Filipino, Asian Indian, Vietnamese, Korean, and Japanese. Other Asians (for example, Pakistani, Cambodian, Hmong, etc.) Native Hawaiian, Samoan, Chamorro. Other Pacific Islander (enter, for example, Tongan, Fijian, Marshallese, etc.)
The last choice is Some other race (Enter race or origin). The list of all the groups identifies their culture and ethnicity, not their race. Everyone’s races are human, but the census suggests that biological differences exist among these groups. Listing and identifying as a member of an ethnic group is in keeping with collecting data, so why the confusion?
What seems somewhat stupid (defined as showing a lack of intelligence) are the labels that can accumulate over a brief time. How would parents identify their children if each parent was from a different so-called race? To be fair to the children, the parents would have to select both of their ethnic identities so as not to discriminate against one another. Unfortunately, no slot exists for that kind of response. The Government and the Census Bureau seem to view ethnic groups as fixed races which are totally irrational, illogical, and unreasonable, yet they want intelligent citizens to respond to their equally confusing questions about race. Also, what happened to the Caucasians? They are not listed as a choice with whites.
Finally, the system is rigged in favor of the European American/white when the word race is used as though it is legitimate because it performs precisely what it was invented to do in the first place back in the 1700s: to unite, and separate, control and discriminate. Therefore, as long as the word race is used as a form of identity the system will remain intact.

Paul R. Lehman, “To Kill a Mockingbird,” the book, is not revered by all readers

November 5, 2019 at 7:27 pm | Posted in African American, American Bigotry, American Dream, American history, American Racism, blacks, Christianity, Constitutional rights, criminal justice, democracy, discrimination, equality, Ethnicity in America, European Americans, happiness, integregation, justice, Negro, Prejudice, Race in America, skin color, Slavery, social conditioning, social justice system, white supremacy | 2 Comments
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

According to a recent article in AARP: The Magazine, (June/July 2019) one of the most important books that helped to influence our thoughts about ethnic bigotry and prejudice in America is To Kill a Mockingbird, by the late Harper Lee. The article noted that “It’s one of our nation’s most revered texts—and it’s probably the book that has most shaped our collective understanding of the evils of Jim Crow.” How the writer arrived at that assessment of the book was not disclosed, but a number of people might question the supposed results of it being the most revered text that enabled our understanding of Jim Crow.

Any literature worth the ink used to print it can easily support a variety of interpretations and keep the reader searching for more points of interest. Mockingbird is such a work that invites the reader to find meaning and social value. Because of its popularity, “more than 40 million copies since it’s publication in 1960,” much has been written and said about it. A lot of the attention seemed to have fallen on the character of Atticus Finch who is often viewed as the story’s hero. While viewing Finch as a hero might be easily established and supported, one interesting assessment of the book leaned toward the book having no hero, but simply represented a picture of America’s society with emphasis on its past, present, and future.

Without having to deconstruct the entire novel, we can say that the story is told by Scout Finch, a young girl, the daughter of Atticus Finch. She and her younger brother Jem lived with their widowed father who was a well-to-do lawyer. They lived in the small southern town of Maycomb. Scout and Jem made friends with another young boy, Dill, who visited their town for the summer. The three children and their adventures represented one aspect of the book but also connected with another focus of the book that dealt with Atticus. A young African American man, Tom Robinson, was arrested and charged with assaulting a young Southern European American female. The sheriff of the town asked Atticus to represent the man and since he was one of the town’s people who had the least to fear or lose, he accepted. Another character that provided an essential social element to the book was Calpurnia, the housekeeper, cook, and guardian of the children. With this brief summary, we can now look at how the book represented the past, present, and future.

The past is represented by the townspeople of Maycomb in their attitude and view of people of color generally, and the young accused African American male. With the institution of slavery and the concept of race by color, European Americans saw themselves as superior to all non-European American people. They saw African Americans as less than a human being and believed that treating them like animals was no crime against God or nature. The first inclination of the townspeople upon learning of the assault of the young woman was to get the accused and lynch him—a trail was not necessary. Fortunately, what saved the town from being viewed as savage and barbaric was the sheriff who exercised his legal authority and felt the need to protect the young African American, Tom, from a mob.

The present was represented by Atticus who served as the lawyer for Tom Robinson. Many readers relied on the performance of Atticus as the lawyer and his attempt to save his client as fuel for him being seen as a hero. In all likelihood, Atticus knew what the outcome of the trial would be even before he took the case. The case provided Atticus an opportunity to display his knowledge of the law and his dramatic presentations underscored his belief in the law. The words he spoke, however, fell on the deaf ears of the townspeople whose minds were already set and the African Americans who were forced to sit in the balcony of the courtroom and who had no expectation of justice from the court. The only people emotionally affected by the trial were the children, and they represented the optimistic hope for the future.

The future is revealed primarily through Scout, the children and their relationship to Calpurnia, an African woman, her African American community, and of course, the trial. The townspeople became angry at Atticus for defending an African American, but because he was wealthy and independent, they represented no threat to him or his well-being. His children, however, were not protected from the jabs and sneers of the local children.      When Calpurnia took the children with her to her African American community, the children saw for the first time, a contradiction in what they had been conditioned by their society to believe about African Americans. Rather than feeling fearful and threatening by the African American community, Scout and Jem felt compassion, warmth, and safe.

Scout experiences a loss of innocence throughout the story, but especially near the end after she and Jem were attacked. She knew what happened to Tom Robinson and what Boo did. She also heard what Heck Tate said about the experience: “Tom Robinson died for no reason, he says, and now the man responsible is dead: “Let the dead bury the dead.”  The townspeople knew that Tom could not have committed the crime, but punished him anyway. Tate knew that Boo had killed Bob Ewell, but looked the other way.

So, given the fact that an innocent African American man died for a crime, he did not committee and a European American man is excused for the crime he committed, we recognize how ethnic bigotry and prejudice along with European American privilege worked in America. In other words, a relationship with the younger European American generation gave hope to the future relations of the communities in that a bridge of ignorance was crossed that revealed the existence of other human beings, African Americans, not animals or inferiors.

When we read the book with reference to the past, present, and future, we wonder why the book is so revered. We find no hero or a need for one since the story looked at society and justice relative to time. The Maycomb community’s sense of justice was not changed; the African American community’s status did not change. Finch’s words defending Tom were like Shakespeare’s Macbeth, “full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.”Could the importance of the book depend on the ethnicity of the reader?

We need to understand that change is the only constant reality we have to reckon with in striving towards social justice.

Paul R. Lehman, What about this thing called reparations

October 26, 2019 at 3:08 am | Posted in African American, American Bigotry, American Dream, American history, Bible, blacks, Christianity, Constitutional rights, Declaration of Independence, democracy, discrimination, Disrespect, education, equality, Ethnicity in America, European Americans, fairness, Georgetown University, justice, Prejudice, protest, race, Race in America, respect, Slavery, social conditioning, social justice system | 1 Comment
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

 

Visiting with some acquaintances recently, the subject surfaced of the students at Georgetown University considering ideas on reparations for slavery and its influence on the university. A number of the acquaintances stated frankly that they did not believe in reparation as a consequence of slavery. Some stated that they did not own slaves nor had any direct relations to slavery; they believed that slavery had ended and they felt no responsibility for the tragedies the slaves experienced. While all of the responses were sincere and honest, they were not based on facts and knowledge of history.

Many European Americans as well as some other Americans, in general, share the concepts regarding reparations. Part of their reason for believing as they do is based on a number of points beginning with the social conditioning they experienced growing up in America. For example, when American slavery is taught in schools it is from the perspective of the European American which is biased. The concept of American slavery is limited to viewing it as a set period of time with a beginning and an end. So, after slavery ended at the conclusion of the Civil War, 1865, everything relative to slavery also ended. Finally, since slavery is part of the American past the idea of considering reparations for slavery has no place in the present or future. These views and opinions are very common among many Americans.

The problem with these views and concepts is that they avoid history, reason, and common sense. When we consider the history of slavery in the world, we can find no examples of where the enslaved thanked their enslavers and praised them for kidnapping them from their homes and forcing them to give free labor and to obey all the commands of their masters. The most popular account of slavery in ancient history is recorded in the Bible book of Exodus where we learn of the Hebrews being slaves of the Egyptians and their God coming to their rescue, with the help of Moses. We also are generally familiar with the Greeks being slaves to the Romans. Slavery in the ancient world was common and slaves despite their being in bondage were still considered human beings which were not the case in American slavery. In any event, slavery, wherever it occurred was considered morally wrong. No one should be kept against his or her will and forced to comply with the wishes of another. The fact that slavery is wrong is the most important point to acknowledge when considering the process of reparation.

Acknowledging American slavery as wrong does not mean simply saying the words I am sorry or I apologize but fully grasping the experience and understanding their implications in it and those elements of its legacy that still exists in society today. For one to fully acknowledge American slavery is to recognize the fact that the concept of European American supremacy that initiated it still exists so, in effect, aspects of slavery have never really ended. We know this is factual because African Americans today still have to fight and protest just to receive the rights, liberties, and freedoms that are guaranteed in the Constitution. So, arriving at this point of acknowledgment for many European Americans is very difficult because their social conditioning can prevent them from accepting the reality of European American supremacy and the brutality of slavery and it’s after-effects.

In any event, an acknowledgment must be made in order for one to move on to the next element in the process of reparation which is accountability. If one admits that slavery is wrong and that innocent people have been deprived of their human rights, then the people who enslaved and profited from the labor of the slaves must be held accountable. Many Americans do not realize that had it not been for the institution of American slavery America would not have achieved the success it continues to experience. The conditions of the slaves and their subsequent release from bondage with nothing but their few meager belongings coupled with the constant forms of discrimination have affected their ability to gain upward mobility, in general. On the other hand, European Americans have enjoyed all the blessings granted in the Constitution. Accountability then is about accepting the responsibility for addressing the injustice America perpetrated on the slaves and showing remorse for the injustice.

For many people, the idea of reparations simply means giving money to people who have been victims of injustice. That approach misses the intent of reparation. The intent is to address those areas where the enslaved were denied access and an opportunity to achieve and compete unencumbered by biased animosity. As mentioned earlier, some undergraduate students at Georgetown University in Washington DC felt a need to show some form of accountability for the injustice done to the 272 slaves owned by the Jesuits who sold them in 1835 to pay off the institution’s debts. The students decided that they and the school should consider paying the tuition cost for the descendants of those 272 slaves who want to attend Georgetown. Not all the students agreed, but two-thirds voted to approve the plan. The fact that the students had given thought to how the selling of those human beings help to make possible the educational experience they are presently enjoying shows their understanding of American history and slavery as well as compassion for the slaves whose lives impacted it.

Reparation, when it is fully understood forces us to consider not only the injustice or wrong committed against other human beings, but also how we might acknowledge, apologize, feel remorse, repair, and start to heal or make right the wrong that was done. In small ways, we understand what it feels like to experience an injustice that goes un-redressed. For example, when a man returned home from a few weeks’ vacations and received his monthly water bill, he discovered that the bill was far too much since he was not home to use the water. After investigating around his home he discovered that his next-door neighbor had a hose running from his home to the neighbor’s property and that he has been using it to water for his yard. The neighbor had not consulted the man prior to his leaving and has not said anything to him since his return. The man still, however, must pay the bill. What would be your expectations from the neighbor? Chances are you would expect some form of acknowledgment, apology, remorse, and repair from your neighbor—that would be a form of reparation.

We as a society must learn how to recognize, accept, and account for our debt to those who labor continues to enrich our lives.

Next Page »

Blog at WordPress.com.
Entries and comments feeds.