Protesters should direct their focus on changing the criminal justice laws.

August 5, 2023 at 3:08 pm | Posted in criminal justice, justice, justice system, law, law enforcement agencies, Police, police education & training, police force, police unions, protest, social justice system, The New York Times | 2 Comments
Tags: , , , , ,

A small group of civic-minded protesters gathered in front of the Oklahoma County jail recently and registered their protest of the District Attorney for her part in not charging six police officers in the death of three citizens. The protesters believed the decision to not charge any of the officers showed a disregard for the law and the lives of the dead citizens. The protest will produce no action relative to the District Attorney nor will it bring about any changes to the criminal justice system. The reason for any lack of action or change is because the District Attorney did not make the law and has no authority to change it. If the protesters want changes, they must go to the people that make the laws, not the ones that enforce or use the laws.

The law that provides the law enforcers the right to use deadly force against a citizen is part of the problem because it does not establish any parameters from which to judge the actions of the police. The statement that refers to officers in fear for their lives for any circumstances is open to interpretation, as well as the potential harm to others being harmed. Since police officers involved in any alleged criminal action are reviewed and judged by members of the criminal justice community, they usually get the benefit of the doubt regarding their actions, with the law and their training serving as justification. The concept of the Blue Line holds a lot of influence.

Although the protesters have a legitimate concern regarding the rights of the citizens, they need to seek changes in the laws and their interpretation relative to the treatment of the citizens. After all, the law states that a person is presumed innocent until proven guilty by a court of law. Unfortunately, because of the power and influence given to law enforcers, the rights of any citizen can be lost simply by a police officer stopping them. In addition, regarding the reason for the citizen being stopped, the officer can escalate the situation with no regard for the citizens’ fear for their lives based on the history of the treatment by some police videos relative to the citizens. The fact that videos show citizens running away from officers and being shot in the back or citizens showing empty hands and still being shot and killed can and probably does have an impact on the citizens’ behavior.

The desire to eliminate law enforcers is not a concern with respect to those wanting change in the criminal justice system, but the fact that members of law enforcement are treated as more valuable than any other citizen is apparent in the ways their deaths are handles by the media regardless of how the death occurred in the line of duty or not. In some instances, the tribute to the fallen officer goes on for weeks and outshines the death of some heads of state. The public realizes that officers put their lives on the line every day for the citizens, but more and more of their actions recorded on video indicate that they are more concerned with their own safety than that of the citizen. We certainly want the officers to be safe and avoid being in harm’s way, but being in harm’s way is part of the job they signed up to do. So, why glorify them for doing what they were hired to do?

The media treatment of the law enforcers in some communities shows them to be above the average citizen and viewed as a special group of select people treated with respect and honor far and above ordinary folk. The media often reminds the public of the anniversary of the death of some of the fallen officers to underscore the idea that their lives are more important than our because they were officers. We do not begrudge the recognition given officers, just the attempt to place them in a special category above the average individual. A 2017, article in the New York Times, by Blake Fleetwood noted that the police officers on the street can experience a life and death situation on a daily basis, but added that: “However, the misconception that police work is dangerous, propagated by the media and police unions, could become a self-fulfilling prophecy—especially if police believe that they are going into deadly battle when they head out on patrol.” He stated that “They are likely to be nervous and trigger-happy and might affect their decision-making in a stressful situation.”

Fleetwood continued to address the subject of the dangers of police work in the statement: “The fact is: being a policeman is not one of the most dangerous jobs you can have, according to statistic from the Bureau of Labor.” Some statistics showed that “In five years, 2008 to 2012, only one policeman was killed by a firearm in the line of duty in New York City. Police officers are many times more likely to commit suicide than be killed by a criminal.” Fleetwood, who taught Political Science at NYU, offered the advice that “If police want to protect themselves, a wise move might be to invest in psychiatric counseling rather than increased firepower.”

The protester questioning the criminal justice system question why citizens can be shot and killed by police when other reasonable approaches could have been taken. However, the law, apparently, does not hold the officers accountable for their actions if they feared for their lives or followed their training. For whatever reason, the idea of a law being inadequate, and training is not sufficient to meet the needs of the day seem to be absent from any consideration by law enforcement. Laws should reflect concern for the citizens’ lives and not leave the consequences of police action resulting in death to interpretations by members of the law enforcement establishment.

If the protesters want to see changes in the criminal justice system, they should get together with their lawmakers, other concerned representatives and citizens and work on making the changes they want to see.

Paul R. Lehman, We can begin at stop

March 19, 2021 at 3:13 pm | Posted in African American, American Bigotry, American history, American Racism, Bigotry in America, blacks, criminal activity, criminal justice, discrimination, Disrespect, education, ethnic stereotypes, Ethnicity in America, European Americans, fairness, incarceration, interpretations, jail & prison overcrowding, justice, justice system, language, law, Media and Race, Police, police education & training, police force, Prejudice, social conditioning, social justice system | 4 Comments
Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

Several years ago a number of local police chiefs from the surrounding metropolitan area got together and held a public forum. The forum was held in a predominately African American community in a local church’s auditorium. Each police chief was introduced by the moderator, also a police chief, and given an opportunity to share information about how his department was addressing community relations, the various programs and projects they were administering. After each chief had spoken, the audience was invited to share their concerns and experiences relative to law enforcement. A long line was formed in the auditorium and one by one each individual related his or her concerns. When the line had shortened to the last two individuals, I decided to bring up the rear, and joined the line.

When my turn to speak arrived, I addressed a question to the entire group of chiefs. My question was what programs or activities are you conducting to educate your officers to treat me as a member of the community and a human being? I said my reason for asking the question was due to the fact that each time I or any person of color is stopped, we automatically lose all our rights and privileges because we are generally viewed as suspects, thugs, or criminals and treated as such. Anything we might say is ignored except in response to an officer’s request or command; any movement, remark, gesture is interpreted as disrespectful, threatening, or fearful. We are totally at the mercy of the officer.

All of the chiefs in turn tried to discredit my remarks saying that their officer training does not include that type of behavior and that there were no problems in their departments. Their remarks continued until the moderator stopped them and admitted that I had a legitimate concern. The general response from the chiefs was that they would look into the problem. When the forum ended everyone in the audience went their separate ways most knowing that nothing in the criminal justice would change because of this program.

The fact that bigotry is a part of the American fabric and is maintained systematically is well known. What else is true is the knowledge that no one segment with problems of bigotry can be addressed without affecting other segments. That is why trying to rid bigotry in any one segment of society fails. Nevertheless, corrective changes can be made in some segments that might have a positive impact on other tangential parts. The usual question asked is where do we start? With respect to the criminal justice system, my answer is start with the stop. Permit me a hypothetical example.

In a small community of approximately one-hundred-thousand residents, twelve percent of that population is people of color. According to recorded police data, forty percent of the stops, tickets, and arrests fall in the people of color community. So, according to the data twelve percent of the population commits forty percent of the crimes. How does that happen? If we check the police date relative to the calls to the police and 911 services from the people of color community, we find the total number less than four percent. So, how does forty percent adequately reflect crime in the community?

One answer is the designation of the community where people of color live as a high crime area. Well, how does it get to be a high crime area? The data collected and reported by the officers are derived from the stops, tickets, and arrests made by the officers, but that data does not support a designation of a high crime area. So, what happens? The high crime designation is a manufactured one that allows the police force to send more men to patrol that area. When we check the data from the officers, we discover that most of the stops are for minor offenses that do not involve more than a fine. However, when we check the data for reasons for arrest, we discover that the reasons for the stop are not the same for the arrest. The numbers tell the story that when a small segment of the community is patrolled frequently by officers, stops, tickets, and arrests will result. Why? Officers are not generally rewarded on their record of protecting and serving the community as one would think; they are rewarded on the basis of the number of stops, tickets, and arrest that are made. Communities of color are generally low socio-economic areas, so officers are not usually concerned with legal challenges to their actions which can serve as an incentive to develop more data.

The above example is hypothetical, but for evidence of the real thing is action, one needs look no further than Ferguson, Missouri. Rather than parade a litany of stats about Ferguson, lets us look at the point in question. Why are people of color stopped, ticketed, and arrested more than any other American citizens? The answer is systemic bigotry in the criminal justice system, and it all starts when an individual of color is stopped. We know from studies, books, and reports that a disconnection exists between law enforcement and people of color, but not necessarily of the peoples’ making. More than enough videos exist to underscore the attitude and behavior of officers involved with people of color and how thing escalate from a minor infraction to an arrest. If we want to try and correct the disparity between the data and the population, then we must begin with the stop.

No one answer will fit all the problems, but developing data from each officer’s stop focusing on who, when, where, why would be a good starting place. Another concern about how areas become designated as high or low crime area based on independent data, not officer generated data. The number of calls into the police department and 911services from the community of color should be relatively easy to collect and record. We know that entry into the criminal justice system begins with a stop. Let us work to make certain that those stops are based on law, not bias.

Paul R. Lehman, Many Diversity Programs are misused to avoid confronting Bigotry

December 26, 2020 at 3:38 pm | Posted in Affirmative Action, African American, American Bigotry, American history, American Racism, Bigotry in America, biological races, blacks, Constitutional rights, democracy, discrimination, Disrespect, DNA, entitlements, equality, ethnic stereotypes, Ethnicity in America, European Americans, Human Genome, identity, integregation, justice, language, law, Media and Race, public education, race, Race in America, racism, representation, respect, social conditioning, socioeconomics | 2 Comments
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

The primary reason diversity programs are unsuccessful is because the element of race is not debunked,  but accepted and used as criteria to separate one ethnic group from another. The objective of any diversity program should be to underscore the similarities among all human beings regardless of their ethnic differences. Many diversity program focus primarily on the differences and stereotypical ethnic characteristics which readily separate the group’s one from another rather than characteristics than unify them. The programs attempt to justify the ethnic differences while not exposing the falseness and myth of the concept of race. Thereby maintaining and promoting the Anglo-Saxon myth of superiority. Let us take a closer look at how the concept works its magic using diversity.

Diversity programs, training, workshops, institutes, and other initiatives, from the beginning to the present day have one thing in common—they fail to debunk the false concept of race and by doing so maintain, support, and promote the Anglo-Saxon /European American system of supremacy. The very word diversity when used relative to human beings implies that some human beings represent a standard that other groups do not meet and so they are different and less than the standard group. For whom and to what objective are diversity programs instituted? Bigotry comes to the front the moment so-called target groups are identified. The group that decides who represents the target groups apparently, maintain a position of dominance over all the target groups. Since the nature of the group differences is not stated, according to the race myth, only the Anglo-Saxon can represent the normal human being. Any diversity program that begins with an Us versus Them perspective implies that some biological component accompanies the difference. That being the case, regardless of the format that diversity takes the results will naturally involve a feeling of inferiority by the target group.

Lisa Leslie in a Greater Good Magazine article, “What Makes a Workplace Diversity Program Successful?” (01/21/2020) underscores the fact that many of these programs do not succeed: “…research suggests that these initiatives often don’t work like they’re supposed to.” She added that “For example, studies have found that a variety of diversity initiatives—including evaluating managers based on diversity and inclusion metrics, and diversity networking and affinity groups—can lead to either more or less representation of target groups.”Again, the primary reason many of these programs do not succeed is bigotry is not addressed: the initiatives never debunk race or the false concept of sub-species. If everyone involved in a diversity program is not seen and accepted as belonging to the same species, the program cannot succeed. Leslie offered three reasons why some initiatives do not succeed.

She listed the 1st as Backfiring: “This is when a diversity initiative has an undesirable effect on the intended outcome, like when the program decreases representation or increases discrimination. A likely cause of backfiring is the implicit signal that target groups need help to succeed.”She added: “Because diversity initiatives are supposed to help target group members, some people infer that target group members might not be able to succeed on their own. And this is problematic because it can lead to stereotyping and discrimination.”

Next, she listed Negative spillover: “This is when diversity initiatives have an undesirable effect on something other than the intended outcome. For example, diversity initiatives may result in negative attitudes among non-target group members. The root cause of this reaction may be the signal that targets are likely to succeed in the organization.”

Finally, she listed false progress: “This is when a diversity initiative has the desired effect on the intended outcome—when the diversity numbers improve, so it looks like things are getting better—but that improvement is not accompanied by true underlying change.”

To address these problems, Leslie’s study suggested that the diversity initiative leaders use language and specific messages to influence the attitudes of the initiative participants. Three messages were given: Diversity is good, Diversity is bad, and Diversity is good but also really hard. After employing these messages the participants were surveyed, and the outcome generally mirrored the messages. When the message was positive, some improvement occurred. When it was negative, no improvement occurred. The results of the last message were mixed as expected. So, what is the problem?

When diversity initiatives are introduced regardless of the targeted groups the primary implication is that this group is inferior to the majority group and needs special attention. If and when that special attention is given it can be viewed as an effort to level the playing field. Since Anglo-Saxons and European Americans are conditioned to view themselves as superior to other groups, leveling the playing field would mean destroying their superiority.

 Diversity programs for people with obvious physical and mental challenges are generally accepted because they do not represent a threat to the status quo. However, when people that are not identified with the majority are the focus of the program, their success can and often is viewed as a threat to the superiority of the majority. In other words, they are viewed as receiving advantages that come at the expense of the majority. If the disparity between the Us versus Them attitude is not resolved at the start of an initiative, then failure is assured.

Diversity came with the species of Homo sapiens and was not considered a problem until the invention of false sub-species, first called nations and later called races. The myth of Anglo-Saxon/European American supremacy is dependant on that myth. Without the myth, all human beings naturally belong to the same species which our DNA indicates is 99.9%. If any diversity initiative is to be conducted, it should not focus on the ethnic differences that are not biological but the similarities all humans possess. In essence, the biases against targeted people are a matter of choice, not genetics and that should be the first concern addressed or the initiative will fail. Most people prefer to be seen as a part of the group rather than being seen as apart from the group which diversity presently underscores. ������99�S�w

Paul R. Lehman,Breonna Taylor and Equal justice under the law: What is it good for?

September 24, 2020 at 12:44 am | Posted in African American, American Bigotry, American Dream, American history, Bible, blacks, Constitutional rights, criminal activity, criminal justice, discrimination, equality, Ethnicity in America, European Americans, fairness, incarceration, justice, justice system, language, law, law enforcement agencies, mass incarceration, Oklahoma, police education & training, police force, police unions, race, racism, respect, social conditioning, social justice system, Tulsa, whites | 1 Comment
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

In 1969, Edwin Starr recorded a popular song that still resonates with us today. The song asked and answered an important question: “War, what is it good for? Absolutely nothing.” The significant phrase in the question is what is war “good for,” and forces us to place a value on the loss of life and justifying its loss. The answer “absolutely nothing,” can also be the appropriate response to the question what is “equal justice under the law” good for? The phrase is a very popular and often used one when it pertains to the law enforcement establishment. More often than not the phrase is used to protect someone in law enforcement that has been accused of a crime and the system wants to justify the results of the finding by the court, judge, jury or grand jury. Under close examination we discover that the phrase “equal justice under law” is an oxymoron and simply sounds appropriate to a purpose.
The first word in the phrase is “equal” and a mathematics or arithmetic term that deals with fixed elements like numbers. When the word is used relative to human beings, it loses its fitness because no two individuals are or can be equal. Using the term equal suggests that somehow a fixed assessment can be associated with human beings. Unfortunate, that is not the case. For example, in a family of four, the mother, father, and one girl and one boy. The parents can in no way treat them equally simply because one is a male the other female. Their individual needs and wants are different. To treat the equally would mean that every time the girl get a new dress, her brother would receive the same dress or whenever the boy got a new suit, his sister would also receive a new suit. The best human being can hope for is fairness, because equality is impossible. Too often we hear that the law treats everybody equally, but all one has to do is look at the facts of people incarcerated to disprove that statement. We know for a fact that the state of Oklahoma incarcerates more females than any other state in America. Would the females incarcerated in Oklahoma be treated equally in other states? We cannot answer that question because equal has no fixed definition.
The term “justice” is as elusive as equal when one attempts to associate a fixed definition to its applications. Justice in one state is not the same justice in all the other states. Take, for example, the use of marijuana and the fact that in some states it is legal while in other states people go to prison for mere possession. The word justice is often used as an excuse or justification for a questionable action that challenges common sense and logic. For example, many juries and grand juries find that police officers are justified in shooting and killing unarmed individuals, especially people of color when videos and eyewitnesses reveal the contrary. The local criminal justice authorities in Louisville, Kentucky determined that only one of the officers that fired more than twenty rounds into Breonna Taylor’s apartment where she was struck numerous times and died was found to have committed a crime, and that crime had nothing to do with Breonna. So, one wonders just what does justice means when it defies logic and common knowledge?
The last phrase, “under the law,” is closely associated with the word justice in that too many questions are left unanswered relative to the law. In my childhood days when an argument presented a challenge to any one of use we could always win the argument by using the phrase “it’s in the Bible.” In other words, because it was in the Bible, it was the law and the final word. Unfortunately, throughout the history of America the law has been used to control, discriminate, punish, abuse and kill its citizens, especially those of color. More often than not, we are conditioned to accept the laws with the understanding that they will be administered fairly. One has to ask the question how can equal justice under the law be available when the people who have the responsibility to uphold the law also use their own judgment to determine what laws to apply? The attorney general in Louisville commented that the officers who fired the more than twenty shots at Taylor could not be charged with murder because there was no law that applied to their actions. So, does that mean that somehow no one can be held accountable for the death of Breonna? The actions of the officers firing their weapons were said to be justified because Taylor’s boyfriend, Kenneth Walker, fired the first shot, so the officers had a right to protect themselves. The fact remains that Breonna is dead and her death was the result of bullets shot into her body. The criminal justice agency of Louisville has yet to mention the death or cause of Breonna’s death as though it did not happen.
Facts and the truth are usually the elements that form the basis of most legal decisions, but sometime they seem to get in the way of the law. The police officer, Betty Shelby, who shot Terence Crutcher in the back while he was unarmed with both hands held above his head some ten feet or more in front of her was acquitted of a crime under the law. She later was allowed by Tulsa officials to teach a class in how officers can avoid charges when they shoot someone and what to do when they are bothered by anti-police groups. When the family of Crutcher complained to the law enforcement agency about Shelby teaching the class, they were ignored.
The case of Breonna Taylor seems to underscore the lack of meaning for the phrase “equal protection under the law” except when it involves a member of law enforcement. Then, it appears that the phrase is used to protect only those whose job it is to serve and protect others. So, when it comes to citizens of color, the phrase is good for absolutely nothing.

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,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, Correcting problems in the Criminal Justice System begins at the top

March 19, 2019 at 3:07 pm | Posted in African American, American Bigotry, American history, American Racism, Bigotry in America, blacks, criminal justice, Department of Justice, desegregation, education, entitlements, equality, ethnic stereotypes, Ethnicity in America, European American, European Americans, fairness, integregation, justice, justice system, law, law enforcement agencies, mass incarceration, Media and Race, Michelle Alexander, minorities, Oklahoma, police force, Prejudice, President Obama, race, racism, reforms, respect, segregation, skin color, skin complexion, social justice system, socioeconomics, white supremacy, whites | 1 Comment
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The announcement made recently about the decision to not charge the police officers who killed Terence Crutcher and Stephon Clark might have come as a surprise to some but was expected by others because of the history of criminal justice relative to African Americans and other people of color. The decisions to not charge the officers could have been easily made by someone blind and brain-dead. When Eric Holder served as Attorney General, he along with then President Obama made attempts to challenge law enforcement to change the practices, policies, behavior, and laws that discriminate against African Americans in particular and about all people in general. Since that time, many changes relative to criminal justice have been addressed in many locations throughout the United States. The focus of these changes and challenges varies from excessive fines for people who cannot pay them to redefining sentences of people of color whose only serious offense was the color of their skin. Once they get caught up in the maze of the criminal justice system, their lives are completely and forever negatively altered.

Oklahoma leads America, and in some instances, the world in incarceration especially of women. Efforts by many civic groups are working to reduce the numbers. Some of the efforts have been successful via bills the public supported and approved. While all the efforts of groups like the ACLU and others in addressing the problems in the criminal justice system, they have not yet focused on the primary problem of the system—the biased culture within the criminal justice system beginning with law enforcement and including the courts as well as officers of the court. That is, rather than focusing on the cause of the problems attendant to citizens who have been arrested, the majority of the efforts by interested and involved groups are on the problem of those incarcerated. In order to correct the many problems in the criminal justice system, we must look first at where the system begins—what puts the wheels in motion.

What determines the attitudes and actions of the law enforcers from the small towns to the large metropolises begins with the mayors, the councils and courts. They are the ones who make the laws and create the climate and culture that informs the police and other law enforcers. If change is to come to the criminal justice system in American then it must begin with those who administer the programs that represent the criminal justice system. Having the administrators and city or town council members undergo diversity training is generally a waste of time and money because that training does not address the issue of ethnic bigotry that is a part of the everyday cultural climate. We know this biased culture exists from the plethora of incidents that occur and are shown daily on social media. These incidents occur in spite of the diversity training these administrators, council members and court officers have received. We know this ethnic bias exists from the numerous police officers that have suffered no legal repercussion from having shot and killed a person of color.

One thing that needs to happen in order to make the criminal justice system applicable to all citizens is to educate the top administrators, council members and court judges and other officers to what democracy looks like from a perspective that recognizes the bias that presently exists and how they are implicated in the culture and climate that promotes, support, and maintains it. The fact that the majority of people incarcerated are people of color seemingly represents no call for action or consequence. The fact is that the number of people of color is adjudicated differently and more harshly than European American citizens seem to be viewed as acceptable represents a big problem that begs for attention and correction. However, if the people who administer and are the caretakers of the system of criminal justice are fine with the status quo then something needs to be done to alert them to the injustice they are delivering to American citizens who happen to be people of color.

If the problems of bigotry and injustice in the criminal justice system today are promoted, supported, and maintained through ignorance, then education, not training should help in remedying some of the problems. Other avenues of approach would be removal from office via election or for some judges, impeachment. The citizens should be made aware of the amount of money they pay out to citizens that receive judgments from the civil courts for the misconduct of police and other law enforcement officers. One would think that the officers found guilty in civil court should shoulder some of the monetary responsibility as well as the unions that support and represent these officers. That way the citizens would not have to bear the entire expense for the officers’ actions.

The American system of criminal justice is generally a good system when it is administered in a democratic and fair way; however, when ethnic and cultural biases are represented in the outcome negatively affecting people of color, then corrective action must be taken. Again, the actions of the many concerned groups addressing the problems that focus on incarceration are welcomed and, indeed, applauded and encouraged, but their efforts are focused on the citizens that are already incarcerated and part of the system. In order to impact positively the system of criminal justice, the focus must be at the beginning. Michelle Alexander noted in her work, The New Jim Crow, that “A study sponsored by the U.S. Justice Department and several of the nation’s leading foundations, published in 2007, found that the impact of the biased treatment is magnified with each additional step into the criminal justice system.” The evidence is clear.

The biased treatment of people of color in the criminal justice system is due to unconscious and conscious ethnic bigotry that infects the decision-making process of those entrusted with those powers. In order for the system of criminal justice to be fairly administered, those biases must be addressed at the beginning before the arrest is made. So, now that we know where to begin, if we are not part of the solution, then we are the problem.

Paul R. Lehman, Report’s data on states racial integration progress is suspect

February 1, 2019 at 5:25 pm | Posted in African American, American Bigotry, American Dream, American history, American Indian, black inferiority, blacks, democracy, desegregation, discrimination, DNA, employment, entitlements, Equal Opportunity, equality, ethnic stereotypes, Ethnicity in America, European American, European Americans, fairness, Hispanic whites, Human Genome, integregation, justice, language, law, minorities, Non-Hispanic white, Prejudice, public education, race, Race in America, racism, segregation, skin color, social conditioning, social justice system, socioeconomics, The Oklahoman, tribalism, U. S. Census, White of a Different Color, whites | 2 Comments
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

 

The intent is not to rain on the parade, but too much confusion exists in the article “Report shows state has made progress on race,” to let pass ( The Oklahoman 01/2018). The reference to race in the article’s title is confusing as to its meaning. Once we got beyond the title, the confusion continued. Relying on “A new report from finance site Wallet-Hub” the report ”ranked states based on’ the current level of integration of whites and blacks by subtracting the values attributed to whites and blacks for a given metric.’” The ranking of each state’s progress relative to integration was based on four areas: Employment & Wealth, Education, Social & Civic Engagement, and Health. Oklahoma, according to the report, ranked 13th in racial integration out of the fifty states according to the four areas examined.

Without going into the meat of the report, we determined the data to be questionable in that no definition of terms used was given. Therefore, the reliability of the data is suspect from the beginning. For example, the term race is used in the article’s title, but no following information is offered to explain what is meant by race. If the reader has to rely on assumptions regarding the meaning or intended meaning of race, then what good is the data? Another problem is produced if the reader assumed the reference to race was intended to refer to the human race. The problems continued once we look at the objective of the Wallet-Hub report.

We read that the Wallet-Hub report focused on the “level of integration of whites and blacks”….Again, we are not informed as to the meaning of the terms white and black, but each term was treated as a monolith. We know historically that America at is formation socially constructed two races, one white and the other black, with the white being thought and treated as being superior to the black. But, this report was viewed as being current, and our knowledge of the false concept of two or more races is no longer acceptable. Without a clear definition of the term white any data offered would again be suspect.

The report also used the term black, but provided no definition or clarification as to its meaning or usage. One of the problems that the absence of a clear meaning or definition produced was the question of what black people provided the data for the report in that no specific culture, ethnicity, religion, language or geographic location was presented? So, who are the blacks? The same question exists for those people labeled as white.

When we turned to the U.S. Census Bureau for information the confusion increased because the bureau confused ethnicity, race, and origin. The bureau still operates under the assumption that multiple biological races exists. The bureau list the race categories as” White,” “Black or African American,” “American Indian or Alaska Native,” “Asian,” Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander,” and finally, “Some Other Race.” So, all the scientific date relative to the human race and DNA is seemingly of no concern to the bureau.

We do not know how or why the Wallet-Hub report decided to use the two terms, black and white, but from the 2010 Census information relative to race the question of what is race still remained. The Census Bureau stated in its 2010 data what it meant by race. Noting that their data is based on self-identification, the language reads as follows: “The racial categories included in the census questionnaire generally reflect a social definition of race recognized in this country, and not an attempt to define race biologically, anthropologically or genetically.” More specifically, it continued: “People may choose to report more than one race to indicate their racial mixture, such as “American Indian and “White.” People who identify their origin as Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish may be of any race.”

If this information is not confusing enough read what the Bureau provided for blacks: “Black or African American” refers to a person having origin in any of the Black racial groups of Africa. It includes people who indicate their race(s) as “Black, African Am., or “Negro” or reported entries such as African American, Kenyan, Nigerian, or Haitian.” The information (biased and irrational) did not mention what selections were available to black individuals of mixed ethnicities—Puerto Ricans, Cubans etc…

Maybe the point of the report’s validity can be seen more objectively after reading the information from the Census Bureau. If race cannot be defined, and a person can select any race, how can the report provide accurate data about blacks and whites? Unnecessary confusion exists relative to terms like, race, ethnicity, origin, and nationality. One rule of thought exists regarding these terms, only one, the term race, has to do with biology, and that is only with respect to the human race. The other terms are all products of various cultures.

One other term used in the Wallet-Hub report was integration, but it, like race, black, and white was not defined or explained. The word integration became popular during and after the 1954, Brown v Topeka Board of Education case. Many people confuse the words desegregation with integration, but they are clearly not the same or interchangeable. When public schools were desegregated, that meant African American children had a seat in the room. Integration occurs when African American children sit in same the room as the European American children but also learn about their history as well. We still have some distance to travel before we reach integration and share the benefits of our diverse American cultural experiences.

As mentioned at the start of this piece, the intent was not to spoil the seemingly good news of the report concerning Oklahoma’s “progress on race,” but to bring some clarity and facts into the mix. One wonders why a group of “experts” would not be more attentive to the problems with the terms used in conducting this study. Good news is always welcomed relative to the plethora of societal problems involving America’s ethnic populations. When good news comes, we just want it to be accurate.

Paul R. Lehman, Bigotry in our language is a not so hidden secret we can afford to ignore

September 3, 2018 at 6:44 pm | Posted in Africa, African American, African American hair, American history, American Racism, Bigotry in America, black inferiority, blacks, Civil Right's Act 1964, Constitutional rights, criminal justice, Declaration of Independence, discrimination, DNA, equality, ethnic stereotypes, Ethnicity in America, European American, European Americans, fairness, Hair, Human Genome, identity, justice, justice system, language, law, Media and Race, minorities, Negro, Prejudice, race, Race in America, racism, skin color, skin complexion, Slavery, social conditioning, social justice system, socioeconomics, white supremacy, whites | 2 Comments
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The objective from the very beginning was division and on a permanent basis as the reason the founding fathers invented two races, a black and a white. Unlike the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution that said we are one people, the concept of race has kept us separate and unequal. Subsequently, if we continue believing in the concept of races we will continue to be separate and never fulfill the objective of our democracy. If we are to ever have one nation, we will have to change the way to look, speak, and act towards one another. We also need to understand that the language we use helps to keep us separate. For example, as long as some people view themselves as black and white, they will not come together because of the historical significance of those words. They were meant to keep us apart.

Many well-meaning civic groups actually work against themselves by choosing a name that creates a negative and defensive feeling in others towards them. Take, for example, Black Lives Matter, a group that has an objective that is in keeping with the concept of democracy, but because of the word black in the name, it creates a defensive reaction in the minds of many European Americans.

We also have groups that use words like white, Aryan and caucasian that they believe makes them different from people who do not look like them. Their pronounced goal is to save or preserve the so-call white race. They need to visit history to learn what happens to people who are separated or separate themselves from other people; they become extinct, like for example, the Australian Tasmanian Aboriginals, and in America, the Eire people and the colony of Roanoke.

When civic activists call for unity among people of color, they miss the opportunity to enhance their programs by not inviting all concerned people. We as a society have been conditioned to identify ourselves based on our so-called differences when our objective should be for all to use the same identity. We are all Americans, so why is it necessary to use color or ethnicity as part of identity? When visitors come to America, they come using their cultural identity. When Americans get a passport they provide a picture, but no racial or ethnic identity, because our cultural identity is American, not black or white, Hispanic or Asian etc.

We do ourselves a constant disservice by identifying ourselves as separate groups which have been our legacy since slavery. We have to grasp the reality of our situation understanding that the concept of biological races is a myth, invention, social construction, and lie. Prior to the Human Genome Project, everything about races with the numerous divisions, classifications, and characteristics was conjecture and opinion. We now have scientific proof, validation, and evidence that all human beings are more alike than penguins, and the skin complexion, eye shape and color, and hair texture are not unique to a select group of human beings. We are of one race of beings whether we like it or not.

We might think that language does not play so great a part in our lives and our behavior, but studies old and recent underscore the fact that when the words black and white are used in a sentence referring to an identity, a measured reaction occurs. The reaction for the European American, usually an increased heartbeat, is observed when the word black is used because of the social conditioning associated with the word. African Americans do not experience a similar reaction when the word white appeared in a sentence because they are conditioned to seeing it and without feeling threatened.

The media in American society contributes greatly to the separation of ethnic groups by the way they use inappropriate identity language. For example, if a bank is robbed and the robber was apprehended, nothing pertaining to the robbery is gained when the ethnicity of the robber is identified. Except, in American society today the identity of the robber is omitted if he or she happens to be European American, but the identity is almost always given when the robber ‘s identity is a person of color. The effect of the naming the identity of the ethnic person serves to strengthen the negative stereotype society already has of the person of color.

Another way in which the media contributes to the negative stereotypes and biased attitudes held by some Americans relative to people of color has to do with the mentioning of the geographic location of an incident that is readily identified as being in a location where predominately people of color reside. Again, the mere mention of the location adds to the negative stereotype held by many people familiar with the location.

Today, with all the problems America is facing relative to our government and the various policies being addressed both positively and negatively, we need to take the opportunity to add our concept of race and identity into the mix and deal with it once and for all. We continue to talk about racism as if it was legitimate rather than bigotry which is what has been and continues to be practiced in society. Yes, our language uses the word racism to talk about social biases, but simultaneously serves to keep the concept of races alive and our society separate. We need to decide what kind of society we want to live in as well as our children and grandchildren. Once we make that choice, we need to get to work and make it happen. We have been talking about racism for three hundred years to no avail because we are still talking about it without a change in the daily behaviors of people. Racism is not the problem, we are because we refuse to accept the fact that we have been living in a false reality. What we cannot continue pretending to not see is the rapidly changing demographics that will force changes in society relative to cultural and ancestral identities.

We currently have an opportunity to make great strides in addressing our oneness as a society by debunking the myth of race and working to make America what it was meant to be a democracy. We will not and cannot get to where we want, and need, to be if we do not change from using our misleading ethnically biased language of bigotry.

Paul R. Lehman, The power of language continues to enslave American society

August 21, 2018 at 3:58 pm | Posted in Africa, African American, American Bigotry, American history, American Racism, Bigotry in America, black inferiority, blacks, Civil Right's Act 1964, democracy, desegregation, discrimination, education, employment, entitlements, equality, ethnic stereotypes, Ethnicity in America, European American, European Americans, fairness, Genealogy,, identity, integregation, justice, language, law, lower class, Media and Race, minority, Prejudice, race, Race in America, racism, skin color, skin complexion, Slavery, social conditioning, socioeconomics, Stokely Carmichael, the 'n' word, the Black Codes, white supremacy, whites | Leave a comment
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

One of the constant conundrums challenging America today is race; the reason for it being constant is because while we experience and observe it, we can only describe it, not defines it. We cannot define race because it is a concept based on conjecture and myths.  Since the Greeks and Romans did not know why the sun rose and set every twenty-four hours, they made up a story about it. The story had some facts in it relative to the movement of the sun, but the facts were surrounded by fiction. Apparently, they thought that Apollo drove his chariot around the heavens riding up to the center of the sky in the morning, and down to the horizon at night. Fortunately, scientists came along to give more precise information about the sun and its relations to the earth. Today, the world knows the actual movement of the sun as well as the other celestial bodies in the universe and no longer need to invent myths. Unfortunately, we have not arrived at that point with the use of the term race. The myth continues because we have not decided to rid ourselves of its power to control our mind and bodies.

Language is the most important tool used in transmitting not only information but also a controlling influence over society. When the slave masters took away the slaves’ identity, history, and culture, they forced on the slaves a language that was meant to keep them enslaved. The language was such an important tool that the slaves were forbidden to learn to read and write it. The punishment for anyone caught teaching a slave to read or write were heavy fines, whippings, or imprisonment, depending on the state in which it occurred. The slave owners knew that language as a tool could be used to control minds, but they also knew that it could also be used to liberate minds as well.

One way in which language was used to control society was when it constantly reminded European Americans that they were superior to all people of color, and it reminded people of color that they were inferior to European Americans. Once the captive Africans arrived in America and were stripped of their identities and past; they were forced to accept the reality of slavery. The language they used always pictured them as inferior and European Americans as powerful, privileged, and in total control of society. The African captives knew that they were not Negroes, blacks, or other terms associated with their identity, but they were defenseless to do anything about it for fear of repercussions, including death. After years of social conditioning in which the language constantly reminded the African Americans that they were Negroes, blacks, colored, and a host of other denigrating terms, their actual identity became less of a concern than their civil rights as citizens.

In the early 1960’s language was used as a tool for protest by African Americans who combined identity with the fight for civil rights with the phrase “Black Power.”  Africans were forced to wear the identity of black from the beginning of American slavery and it was used as a derogatory and denigrating term. Even African Americans used the term as derogatory within the African American community. However, when the phrase “Black Power” was used by Stokely Carmichael during a 1960’s civil rights rally, it gained legs and moved throughout the national African American community as well as society at large via music and media. The reference to “black” was used to engender a new sense of pride and positive value to what was once viewed as insulting and denigrating to African Americans. The power of language to influence worked to change the negative concept of blackness as an identity for African Americans to one of positivity, pride, and beauty.

While the language shift worked to provide a new sense of self for the African Americans relative to a black identity, it accomplished little for the European American since no change occurred in their conception and use of the word black as derogatory. The major misconception of the African American community nationally was that the word black would somehow be transformed to represent a new identity. The problem with that happening is that the space the word black occupied in the language could and would not be replaced simply by repetition. Although European Americans could use the word white for their identity, it carried no negative connotations, just the opposite.  Many Europeans abandoned their cultural identity to accept the white identity because of the power and prestige it provided them. African Americans because they did not use their cultural or ancestral identities were forced to be identified as blacks and Negroes. Two reasonable identity choices are African American or people of color, but only for ancestral identities. The cultural identity has always been American.

Many people of color in America accept the word black as a form of identity without realizing that the words black and white are adjectives, not nouns; that is, as nouns they represent colors, but as adjectives, they usually precede the noun race. Therefore, if the word black is used as a noun, it serves no purpose as an identity because it represents no cultural or ancestral ethnicity. If the word black is used as an adjective proceeding race, then the identity is based on a false concept of a black race that is viewed as a monolith which is also incorrect. In other words, the use of the slave masters’ language still represents some control over society’s identities.

The late Malcolm X learned that language as a social tool could provide an element of power and influence. So, he worked hard to become proficient in the use of language, and as a result was able to educate, enlighten, inform, irritate, and intimidate his audiences. Partly due to his early death he had not gained the level of understanding that would have helped to unlock the door of ignorance relative to how language managed to retain control of the concept of race. He did, however, recognized that the identity given the African captives upon their arrival was not their true identity and so he rejected his family name (usually taken from the slaves’ former owner or master) and replaced it with the letter X which is symbolic for the unknown.  American society’s challenge now is to recognize how language has been used to control us so we can set about the business of freeing ourselves. We cannot resolve a problem if we do not recognize that it exists.

 

Next Page »

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.
Entries and comments feeds.