Hope in the Face of Hate.

As the nation comes to grips with the tragic shooting of Trayvon Martin in Florida, another national story that relates to racially-motivated violence has come to its conclusion. Last Thursday in Jackson, Mississippi three white men pleaded guilty to the charges of killing James C. Anderson, an African American man, based on his race. The three were charged with one count of conspiracy in addition one count of violating Mr. Anderson’s civil rights, which they all pleaded guilty to. Deryl Dedmond, 19, was the one who admitted to driving his truck over Mr. Anderson deliberately in an effort to kill him, to which he was successful. He was given two consecutive life sentences with no chance of parole.

In looking at this senseless case and looking at the shooting of an unarmed seventeen-year-old African American minor it can be easy for someone to make the argument that racism, particularly violent racism, has not been completely abandoned. It is indeed tragic that despite all that we have accomplished as a nation these kinds of events still occur from time to time. However, to believe that we can completely eliminate racism is like believing we could fully eradicate crime and hatred, which while ideal, is impossible. Instead what we can only continue to do is to try and teach the younger groups that such hatred should be prevented as much as possible. Another area we must change is how our law enforcement addresses these incidents. In both the shooting of Martin and the killing of Anderson law enforcements were reluctant to tackle these cases from a racial standpoint and did not proceed with adequate aggression until after protests from the general public in the Anderson case. As of this day Trayvon Martin’s shooter has not been arrested or charged in his death. Clearly, both of these cases show we need to readjust how law enforcement and public prosecutors handle incidents with racial and ethnic undertones, or in the case of Anderson blatant overtones. Fortunately, in the Mississippi case served as a testing for new federal hate-crime laws passed in 2009 which broadens the definition of hate-based crimes and better facilitates cooperation between federal and state governments in handling these incidents.

Finally, what I found most interesting in the case of Mr. Anderson’s death was his family’s request that Desmond not be executed for the murder. The family, who oppose the death penalty, has hoped to use this case, namely Desmond apparent remorse for his actions, as a chance to promote greater racial unity. While I do not agree with their position concerning capital punishment I cannot help but admire their ability forgive and hope for using such a tragic occurrence to help heal themselves, their community, and hopefully society as a whole.

You can find the story concerning the Mississippi trial here.

As the nation continues to deal with the tragic and unnecessary killing of a young African-American teenager at the hands of a self-appointed neighborhood watch captain, we must also question the handling of this story by the media and how it relates to, if it does at all, with race relations in America. Before tackling that for any reader not already aware of the situation currently unfolding in Sanford, Florida George Zimmerman, the self-appointed head of neighborhood watch, on February 26 Zimmerman followed Trayvon Martin, a seventeen-year-old African American. Zimmerman believed Martin was armed and was a threat to the security of the neighborhood so he followed and proceeded to interrogate him, which led to supposed altercation that left Martin dead as a result of a gunshot. Police arrived on the scene and it was discovered that Martin had on his person a bottle of iced tea and a bag of skittles. Not surprisingly outrage and criticisms have poured in from all across the nation, from popular liberal activist Reverend Al Sharpton to even the Occupy movement, the brunt of the anger and critiques have been directed at the Sanford Police Department in its handling of the situation, specifically that Zimmerman has yet to be arrested. Zimmerman claims he was justified in his actions by Florida’s ‘Stand Your Ground’ law, a law that allows individuals to use aggressive force when confronted by an assailant without having to attempt retreat first.

As the legal, social, and political battles surrounding this tragic occurrence unfold one part of this story that is most interesting is just how late most of the major news media outlets are to the party. It has been almost three weeks since this story first broke out, I first read it on Yahoo.com, yet CNN, Fox News, the New York Times, and others have really only spent adequate time on this story this week. It seems odd that in this world of immediate twenty-four hour non-stop news that it would take about two weeks for a story of this volatile nature to become major national news. It seems that the media has handled this situation much in the same way as the Sanford Police Department. The main question we must ask is there a racist component to this lack of interest, to which I would answer no there is not. While it may seem strange I do not believe there was any lack of caring for the life of Trayvon Martin just because the story was ignored for two weeks, just merely a lack of journalistic interest, which is unfortunately an entirely different subject. Certainly though there are many who would disagree with my assumption. Just yesterday on my way too school I was doing what I usually do, which is listen to the radio, I was listening to the Bert Show on Q100, and there were discussing the story. When they proceeded to take calls the first caller criticized the Bert Show for only addressing this story on Thursday when it has been a major since Monday (of course we know that it occurred much earlier than that). The caller then said that the show was hypocritical in claiming that they claim to cater to a diverse audience, yet seems to show little interest in this case. Jen Hobby, who usually does the show’s brief news segments, took immediate offense to that, first correcting the caller that they had mentioned the story everyday that week though admittedly only for a short amount of time, she then began to become emotional believing that the caller had accused her of being racist. Ms. Hobby the proceeded to claim that being called a racist was ‘one of the worst things she could be called’. Looking at this we must ask ourselves what is racist, what is not. Shooting an unarmed teenager simply because he was a young, African American definitely has a racial element to it, a morning radio-talk show talking about the story briefly is not.

You can find the story on the New York Times here.

Race and Redistricting

It seems difficult to believe but two years have already passed since the 2010 census, but it has indeed long since passed. As always the census provides a wealth of data that social and demographic scientists can spend an indefinite number of hours slaving away in deciphering. While not everyone may find this interesting or relevant to their lives, one consequence of the census with far-reaching outcomes is the redistricting process. After every census the Congressional districts for the House of Representatives are reshaped in accordance with each States’ population. As the populations of each state rise and fall, so too does the number of representatives for that state. Therefore to accommodate this change the congressional districts must be redrawn, a process which oftentimes is used by political parties to further solidify their chances at maintaining dominance. This political issue can also become tied in with race, especially considering that ethnic minorities tend to favor one party over another, in particular the Democratic Party.

Currently that process of congressional redistricting is going on and one state in which race and ethnicity is a key component is Texas, the state that outgrew other states and gained four additional congressional seats alongside the thirty-four it already had. Most of that growth, about eighty-nine percent of it, came from as a result of minority populations, specifically Latinos. Therefore, minority interest groups made the case that the redistricting should reflect that growth, which shows African Americans and Latinos out growing Whites at a higher rate. However, the state map revealed by the state judges in San Antonio showed that of these four new districts two had a white majority and the other two had a Latino majority.

This has led to the start of legal battles over these maps, both between Republicans and Democrats as well as various ethnic minority groups. One group who has felt the hardest hit are African Americans who gained no viable district in which they were the majority, despite Latinos getting two and Whites also getting two. This has even led to a schism between ethnic minority interest groups, such as the League of Latin American Citizens, who approved of the map, and the Texas NAACP, who feel that this map would severely dampen the political autonomy of African American and deny them a majority district in which they could consistently elect a representative with their best interests.

Of course this situation asks a lot of questions concerning race. How does the race of a candidate or a representative effect how they act in favor of their constituency, especially if it’s an ethnic minority? Can a White or Latino congressperson adequately represent African Americans? Is there an inherently conscious racial component to congressional redistricting or is it merely an unintended consequence? This situation demonstrates how race is perceived in politics to many minority groups, that a member of their ‘group’ is the best to have them represented in the political sphere. This also shows how a seemingly political issue has social consequences, whether intended or not. Finally, the schism between Latino and African American interest groups is a political example of Edna Bonacich’s split labor market theory, in which a dominant group pits the subordinate groups into competition with one another. This prevents the subordinate groups from challenging the dominate group. In the case of Texas’ redistricting this could have an enormous impact on both state and national politics.

You can find the New York Times article concerning this here.

Trailblazing

I will begin this post by saying I am not a sports fan, and that sports are not an area I am particularly knowledgeable in. As a child in little league baseball was the player who could never hit the ball and had to use a tee, and I also was the player always in the outfield looking at the clouds or playing with dirt. Now getting past that I can safely say that despite my lack of athletic ability or knowledge I am still aware of the growing craze sweeping the country: Linsanity.

To those of you even more out of the loop than I Jeremy Lin is the talented new point guard for the New York Knicks, aside from his exceptional skills on the basketball court Jeremy Lin is also described as having a good personality. This combination of talent and likeability has made him into an instant sensation. Of course there have been some bumps along the way, namely dealing with the fact that Lin is a Taiwanese-American. Of all the various ethnic minority groups in the United States Asian Americans as a whole is one of the most underrepresented in the media, especially sports. Aside from Chinese national Yao Ming it becomes difficult to list another professional basketball player of Asian descent, although Lin is American and was born in America and has lived in this country his entire life so comparing the two would not be accurate since their stories are drastically different.

What is a fair statement is that Lin is something of a trailblazer, an inspiration to any aspiring young person, athlete or not, and this includes Asian Americans. A recent story in the New York Times covered an Asian-American basketball tournament in New York. While some may assume that the recent Linsanity has spurned an interest in the sport among young Asian Americans the truth is that many of the leagues have existed for decades, created out of a lack of space in other leagues. Mike Mon, coach of the Fastballs who were participating in the tournament, believes that these leagues have continued is because of a ‘shared heritage’ between the players. While the cultures, nations, and traditions may be different most of these players share the common experience of being viewed as Asian American and thus through this lumping together that American society has done they have forged a real connection with one another.

For many of these players perhaps seeing the successful rise of Jeremy Lin further cements in the mind that they can achieve in both the sports world and beyond. One player noted that he had grown to become a fan of Lin despite earlier concerns of how the media was setting him up as the model for all Asian American players. However, he later acknowledged that Lin serves as an important symbol for future Asian American athletes, both professional and amateur.

The New York Times article can be found here.

Interracial Marriage's Acceptance and What it Means

In recent years there have been incidents in places such as Louisiana and Kentucky in which either a judge or a church refuse to legally acknowledge or accept an interracial couple, either to get married or become members of said church. Usually these stories immediately become national hot topics that spur debate and outcries. To some interracial couples, both married and just dating are seen as the ultimate sign of achieving racial equality. For years there was a legal prohibition on interracial marriage in several states, but now it seems that the opposite situation has occurred, and this change in attitude may have larger implications in regards to the future of race relations in America.

In a recent finding from the Pew Research Center an increasing number of Americans hold a favorable view of interracial marriage. What once was practically a taboo has now become acceptable to many Americans, a significant shift from 1986 in which only a rough third of Americans viewed such unions as acceptable. Now in 2010 about fifteen percent of recent marriages are between two people of different ethnicities. While this may not seem like much this still reflects a major improvement in regards to how people view both their race or ethnicity as well as to how separate or intertwined these should be, if at all.

Now some may look at this and simply believe this shift to be natural, or not significant, or both. However, this increase is very important if one wishes to predict what direction race relations in the US are heading. With an increase of people feeling comfortable enough to date, and even marry someone not of their own ethnicity suggests that the person in particular does not factor race and ethnicity in selecting a potential partner. This also suggests for a large number of these people their family and peers are at least accepting, if not supportive relationship. In 1925 sociologist Emory Bogardus created a scale of judging the social distance that existed between various ethnic groups in the United States. This scale listed a number of social contexts which Borgadus would ask subjects to answer whether or not they would be willing to accept a person of a different ethnicity in that context. At the lower end of the scale was the context which, arguably should have been the easiest to accept and at the other end was the social context that Borgardus believed would have been the most intimate and therefore most difficult for someone to accept a person of a different ethnicity into. For Borgadus that context was having a close family member be married to someone of a different ethnicity. The fact that interracial marriage is on the rise speaks volumes of just how much progress has been made, but we must remember that these relationships are still in the vast minority and therefore leave much greater room for improvement.

You can find the New York Times article here.