A three-hour Friday night class for a minor in political science may be one of the least likely places to be introduced to a weighty topic such as assimilation. But that is the beauty of college, there are always learning opportunities if one is willing to explore them.
Our professor asked whether it was more desirable to subtly blend, or assimilate, into the American political culture like an A. Philip Randolph, or fight against it like Marcus Garvey did.
Six years after that “Blacks in the Political Process” course, I still lack a concrete answer for either position.
This was not one of those rhetorical questions that thrown out there to keep people from walking out of class to enjoy their weekend. We were expected to provide nuanced answers that added historical and current perspective with our position.
It’s been something I have masticated on for the past two months after reading up on Texas history.
Apparently it’s worth celebrating that a band of people who were invited to live on land, with minimal or no taxes, and thought they were morally superior to the state could revolt and start their own republic. Despite running up huge debts, they wanted to be bailed out — or annexed, if we are going to be historically accurate — by an emerging superpower, whose beliefs and morality were in closer proximity to theirs. (Keep in mind all that startling history occurred in just 25 years.)
Texas is not unique. American anthropologist W.W. Newcomb argued:
“The same sequence of events has occurred repeatedly in man’s history; in invader with superior cultural equipment supplants and replaces a technologically inferior group. If the inferior culture survives it frequently does so in marginal areas not coveted by the invader.”
The “superior cultural equipment” of this century is money, and more specifically access to it. Thousands of people protesting the actions and perceived greed of banks over the past month is proof that point.
There have always “haves” and “have-nots.” In the past it was easier to blame -isms and phobias for the segregation. Racism, sexism, xenophobia and homophobia still exist but the moneyed class is smart enough not to spew venom toward those groups publically, or in a forum that might become public.
For generations people have come to America seeking new opportunities because their easel was empty, so to speak, and they could color it anyway they chose.
But as we become a country that looks down on those with less money than us — and let’s be honest, as individuals, our words whisper compassion while our actions scream self-absorbed—we are segregating ourselves from those who simply want to take in the complexities of a culture, understand it and eventually succeed in it.
I made the connection between that conversation about Randolph and Garvey and today’s greed because both Randolph and Garvey had considered self-sustainment a foundation their political theory. That 2005 discussion also led me to ask: are people trying to emulate and assimilate into the corporate culture, or is there a genuine want to fight the greed that has been inherent for centuries?
It’s my belief that too many in the moneyed class want to curb access to education, so people cannot create successful businesses, no matter how small, to compete with them.
If we really want to occupy Wall Street and the corporate culture, we have to look at our consumption habits. Or as one Facebook friend put it: “If you really want to occupy Wall Street do your holiday shopping at a small independent merchant.”
Bank of America and Wells Fargo are likely apathetic to picketers. However, if those same protestors switched their banking to credit unions and smaller, more localized banks, the corporate offices in Charlotte and San Francisco might not be as dismissive.
The same rings true for retailers. Yes, it is likely more convenient to purchase a product online, or at a mega retailer. Yet, statistics have proven that when money is spent at local and independent retailers it circulates throughout the local economy, and stimulates local or regional growth, as opposed to New York stock prices.
Considering the banks and business lobbies pay billions to advocate in Congress and Legislatures across the country, it’s not a stretch to believe that if people spoke with their wallets instead of their mouths, things might be different.
Or as Mandela would say: “rhetoric is not important. Actions are.” The question now, is which actions will we take?
Laughs and liveliness,
-Wb
