Last Friday, I came home from school, plopped down my backpack and ran up the stairs into my room. Why, you ask? To read. Yes. I came home on a Friday to read. The book I was reading is called The Perks of Being a Wallflower by Stephen Chbosky. I finished it that night. It's basically the opposite of Atlas Shrugged in length and craft, but it is a spectacular book, well worth the read. It's about a boy's progression through life in high school. Though high schoolers would relate the most with this book, any reader can take something from it. I feel like I have a personal connection with Charlie, the protagonist. There is so much I have in common with the sensitive dude. It also seems like he has the answer to my social questions. I'm really grateful that the book was suggested to me.
The next day, I felt like driving wherever the road took me. Something about this book has inspired me. I have been pondering a lot lately about it. The Perks of Being a Wallflower has made me consider whether or not I'm a wallflower like Charlie, whether I'm a bystander or a doer. I'm not sure why I said these things, so I'm going to end it here with a recommendation: read this book. It is well worth your time.
Monday, February 27, 2012
Wednesday, February 22, 2012
My Top 5 Favorite Ice Creams/Custard
Like virtually every American omnivore, I am a huge fan of ice cream. There is something about its creamy consistency, variety and versatility that makes it one of the best treats of all time. I have tried several different ice creams/custards out there and have managed to come up with a list of my top five favorites. Note that I haven't tried every ice cream in the world, so don't give me beef for leaving out an important one.
5. Homer's Ice Cream - Homer's Ice Cream, originating from Homer's hotdog stand in Chicago, has one of the most wonderful consistencies I have ever tasted in any ice cream. It has a certain elasticity to it that gives the ice cream a delicious chewiness. I personally love this kind of consistency for ice cream.
4. UW-Madison's Daily Scoop - UW Madison students in the agricultural science building have their own cows to gather milk from. They send this milk to the Student Unions, where it is crafted into delectable ice cream. The consistency is like Homer's ice cream, but the flavor is even better because the milk is local and very natural.
3. Cathy's Ice Cream (Kemps Ice Cream) - Cathy's Ice Cream and Candy Shoppe in St. Germain, Wisconsin serves Kemps ice cream, which not only provides a variety of flavors to choose from but also great taste. The Cookies n' Cream flavor is to die for. It tastes so sweetly fresh.
2. Scooter's Custard - Ahh, yes. Scooter's Custard in Chicago is the epitome of deliciousness. Not only is the consistency wonderful, but the added richness from the eggs gives the custard a kick. It's like heaven in your mouth: so rich, so sweet, so tasty.
1. Dairy Queen - Last but not least is Dairy Queen, quite literally the queen of all ice creams. Yes, it's an ubiquitous ice cream, but in my opinion, it's the best one out there. Ever since I was a toddler I have loved that non-creamy consistency and the fact that the ice cream is more like ice milk. It may not be everyone's favorite, but it's definitely mine; I have an emotional connection to this ice cream.
5. Homer's Ice Cream - Homer's Ice Cream, originating from Homer's hotdog stand in Chicago, has one of the most wonderful consistencies I have ever tasted in any ice cream. It has a certain elasticity to it that gives the ice cream a delicious chewiness. I personally love this kind of consistency for ice cream.
4. UW-Madison's Daily Scoop - UW Madison students in the agricultural science building have their own cows to gather milk from. They send this milk to the Student Unions, where it is crafted into delectable ice cream. The consistency is like Homer's ice cream, but the flavor is even better because the milk is local and very natural.
3. Cathy's Ice Cream (Kemps Ice Cream) - Cathy's Ice Cream and Candy Shoppe in St. Germain, Wisconsin serves Kemps ice cream, which not only provides a variety of flavors to choose from but also great taste. The Cookies n' Cream flavor is to die for. It tastes so sweetly fresh.
2. Scooter's Custard - Ahh, yes. Scooter's Custard in Chicago is the epitome of deliciousness. Not only is the consistency wonderful, but the added richness from the eggs gives the custard a kick. It's like heaven in your mouth: so rich, so sweet, so tasty.
1. Dairy Queen - Last but not least is Dairy Queen, quite literally the queen of all ice creams. Yes, it's an ubiquitous ice cream, but in my opinion, it's the best one out there. Ever since I was a toddler I have loved that non-creamy consistency and the fact that the ice cream is more like ice milk. It may not be everyone's favorite, but it's definitely mine; I have an emotional connection to this ice cream.
Wednesday, February 15, 2012
Race in America
To me, the problems of race in America—heck, the world—will never go away despite our best efforts to eliminate them. It's a depressing opinion, but true to the human condition. Today, there are still articles being published regarding race, proving that the problem persists. In "Noose Sparks More Protests at UC San Diego," the title explains the premise of what happened: some ignorant student hung a noose on a bookcase in the library, causing people to storm into the office of the UC San Diego Chancellor in protest. In "Why many Americans prefer their Sundays segregated," the writer explains that despite efforts to integrate, churches nonetheless are mostly segregated. Blacks that attend church said, "I need a place of refuge [...] I need to come to a place on Sunday morning where I don't experience racism." Heck, there are even some convoluted white men that believe blacks were better off during slavery (article: "Blacks better off during Slavery?"). It is no surprise that racism still exists today. My opinions and thoughts on racism haven't changed in the past few weeks.
One article that intrigued me was "Whites in U.S. Edge Toward Minority Status." It is estimated that within forty years or so, the number of minorities will outnumber the number of whites in America (funny, because the article still addresses them as minorities when hypothetically in this case, they're majorities). That prediction does not surprise me. It already seems like Spanish is America's main language as opposed to English. And at the rate that minorities are flowing into this country, it would only make sense to predict that. But who knows? Maybe America won't be around in forty years to see if that prediction comes true...
One article that intrigued me was "Whites in U.S. Edge Toward Minority Status." It is estimated that within forty years or so, the number of minorities will outnumber the number of whites in America (funny, because the article still addresses them as minorities when hypothetically in this case, they're majorities). That prediction does not surprise me. It already seems like Spanish is America's main language as opposed to English. And at the rate that minorities are flowing into this country, it would only make sense to predict that. But who knows? Maybe America won't be around in forty years to see if that prediction comes true...
17 Years of Untruth
In 1995, a man named Tirell Swift was convicted for a rape and murder that he never committed. After repeatedly trying and failing to convince the authorities of his innocence, he lied by saying that he did commit the crime. Swift was sentenced to fifteen years in prison. Fifteen years later, DNA evidence finally proved that he was not responsible for the crime, and just a month or so ago, he was fully exonerated. Back in 1995, Tirell Swift was 17 years old. Today, he is 34 years old. So far, he spent half his life behind bars.
It's quite shocking to listen to a story like Tirell's. Here's a man, totally innocent, that is convicted for something he never did, and somehow, the Illinois legal system does not see this. For seventeen years! As a most extreme hypothesis, perhaps the court did know of his innocence, but they kept him in prison just to avoid more work on the case. If that were true, that's pathetic. And even if it's not, it's still pathetic that a completely innocent man was blamed for something he never did, and as a consequence, wastes half of his life rotting in a cell. Tirell's story shows that states' legal systems in America are not perfect with their convictions; in fact, they are far from perfect. I'm not really sure what could be done to fix this problem though besides allotting more time for the analysis of court cases and having more people involved with the analysis. Of course, to do that would take lots and lots of time and money. Yet no matter how much this problem is seemingly fixed, I don't think courts will ever make consecutive flawless convictions; nobody's perfect. It's a shame that there are so many wrongful convictions out there, so many years of untruth.
It's quite shocking to listen to a story like Tirell's. Here's a man, totally innocent, that is convicted for something he never did, and somehow, the Illinois legal system does not see this. For seventeen years! As a most extreme hypothesis, perhaps the court did know of his innocence, but they kept him in prison just to avoid more work on the case. If that were true, that's pathetic. And even if it's not, it's still pathetic that a completely innocent man was blamed for something he never did, and as a consequence, wastes half of his life rotting in a cell. Tirell's story shows that states' legal systems in America are not perfect with their convictions; in fact, they are far from perfect. I'm not really sure what could be done to fix this problem though besides allotting more time for the analysis of court cases and having more people involved with the analysis. Of course, to do that would take lots and lots of time and money. Yet no matter how much this problem is seemingly fixed, I don't think courts will ever make consecutive flawless convictions; nobody's perfect. It's a shame that there are so many wrongful convictions out there, so many years of untruth.
Monday, February 13, 2012
Affirmative Inaction
As Proposition 209, which prevents racial, ethnic, or gender preference in education, employment and contracting, is now being challenged in court (click here for the full story: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2012/02/13/state/n010134S40.DTL), it would make sense for me to speak out my opinion about affirmative action. In short, I blatantly disagree with the idea of affirmative action. In long, here's why.
Let us first take a look at the concept of affirmative action. Affirmative action is the notion of taking race, gender, sexual orientation and ethnicity into account when it comes to things like college admissions, job opportunities, and contracting. Those in support of affirmative action would say that it benefits "underrepresented" minorities when they would otherwise be at a disadvantage. They would also claim that affirmative action creates a broader sense of diversity in the American environment. Now, let's create a scenario here: you are a successful white male high school student applying to a prestigious school. You exceed the minimal requirements of getting into that school, and you are almost certain of being admitted. A couple months after applying, you receive the letter. You open it excitedly, only to discover that you have been rejected. Somehow, sometime later, you learn that in your place, a male was admitted that did not even meet the minimum standards of the college, and the main reason he was admitted is because he is black and thus "underrepresented." How would you feel about that? Do you believe it is fair that someone who did not work as hard as you did was admitted over you because of the color of his skin?
It is far from fair, just as Jim Crow laws and segregation were far from fair before 1964. What affirmative action is, is discrimination. It is a failed attempt to "integrate" different cultures. It is against the American principle of individualism, the idea that with hard work, you will be rewarded. In the scenario, you worked your butt off, and in your place is a man who did not work as hard but was admitted because of the skin color he was born with. A college is an institution of learning, a place allowing for the free expression of ideas and expansion of the mind for those with the aptitude of doing so. Trivial things like race and ethnicity have absolutely NOTHING to do with learning. And then of course, people reading this will probably get angry that I don't say that diversity has something to do with learning. To me, diversity comes naturally, just as most political and economic systems work when the government doesn't manipulate them. Diversity is just a plus; it enriches learning. However, when institutions such as college boards make such a big deal out of diversity and purposely try to manipulate the system to force it, it causes problems, simply put. The proof that diversity can be achieved by leaving it alone is in the article "'Race-Neutral' University Admissions in Spotlight UC, Florida..." by Mitchell Landsberg, Peter Y. Hong and Rebecca Trounson. By eliminating affirmative action policies, The University of California "[...] has increased the percentage of admitted African American, Latino, and Native American students from 18.8% in 1997 - the last year of race-based policy - to 19% in 2002." Also, "Since scrapping its affirmative action program in 1996, the University of Texas system has seen a 15% increase in the number of black students and a 10% increase in Latinos." So by getting rid of affirmative action, by admitting students that are academically qualified to be admitted into these colleges, by having diversity not be a top priority, they actually gained diversity. It just goes to show that when you don't have authorities fiddling with the system and gaining political power, society works better.
People such as Time Wise typically refer to history instead of the present day when it comes to racial issues like affirmative action. Wise is predominantly known as an antiracist, but to me, he's racist against whites. He asserts in his article, "Whites Swim in Racial Preference," "Yet few whites have ever thought of our position as resulting from racial preferences. Indeed, we pride ourselves on our hard work and ambition as if somehow we invented the concepts. As if we have worked harder than the folks who were forced to pick cotton and build levies for free; harder than the Latino immigrants who spend 10 hours a day in fields picking strawberries or tomatoes; harder than the (mostly) women of color who clean hotel rooms or change bedpans in hospitals, or the (mostly) men of color who collect our garbage." First of all, most of these examples are a part of the American past; nobody is forced to pick cotton anymore. It's like saying that a lowlife black man in the city is a hard worker because his ancestors were once slaves. Everyone knows that America is the land of the free, and with the right attitude and ambition that man could work his way up, just as Oprah did. But you can't say that this lowlife black man knows what hard work is, and the same goes for the white man living in his mother's basement! There are people out there, regardless of race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation and/or national origin, that truly understand what hard work is, just as there are some that don't. To me, by addressing and grouping people in "underprivileged" and "privileged" sections, Wise is really creating more stereotypical divisions. His argument is also based off of revenge, an irrational notion: we did it to them, so we should let them do it to us. America has developed so that virtually every individual has an equal opportunity to succeed, and it should stay that way: no handicaps for the so-called "underrepresented." It is ignorant people like Wise that imply what is said in Orwell's Animal Farm: "All men are created equal, but some are more equal than others."
Let us first take a look at the concept of affirmative action. Affirmative action is the notion of taking race, gender, sexual orientation and ethnicity into account when it comes to things like college admissions, job opportunities, and contracting. Those in support of affirmative action would say that it benefits "underrepresented" minorities when they would otherwise be at a disadvantage. They would also claim that affirmative action creates a broader sense of diversity in the American environment. Now, let's create a scenario here: you are a successful white male high school student applying to a prestigious school. You exceed the minimal requirements of getting into that school, and you are almost certain of being admitted. A couple months after applying, you receive the letter. You open it excitedly, only to discover that you have been rejected. Somehow, sometime later, you learn that in your place, a male was admitted that did not even meet the minimum standards of the college, and the main reason he was admitted is because he is black and thus "underrepresented." How would you feel about that? Do you believe it is fair that someone who did not work as hard as you did was admitted over you because of the color of his skin?
It is far from fair, just as Jim Crow laws and segregation were far from fair before 1964. What affirmative action is, is discrimination. It is a failed attempt to "integrate" different cultures. It is against the American principle of individualism, the idea that with hard work, you will be rewarded. In the scenario, you worked your butt off, and in your place is a man who did not work as hard but was admitted because of the skin color he was born with. A college is an institution of learning, a place allowing for the free expression of ideas and expansion of the mind for those with the aptitude of doing so. Trivial things like race and ethnicity have absolutely NOTHING to do with learning. And then of course, people reading this will probably get angry that I don't say that diversity has something to do with learning. To me, diversity comes naturally, just as most political and economic systems work when the government doesn't manipulate them. Diversity is just a plus; it enriches learning. However, when institutions such as college boards make such a big deal out of diversity and purposely try to manipulate the system to force it, it causes problems, simply put. The proof that diversity can be achieved by leaving it alone is in the article "'Race-Neutral' University Admissions in Spotlight UC, Florida..." by Mitchell Landsberg, Peter Y. Hong and Rebecca Trounson. By eliminating affirmative action policies, The University of California "[...] has increased the percentage of admitted African American, Latino, and Native American students from 18.8% in 1997 - the last year of race-based policy - to 19% in 2002." Also, "Since scrapping its affirmative action program in 1996, the University of Texas system has seen a 15% increase in the number of black students and a 10% increase in Latinos." So by getting rid of affirmative action, by admitting students that are academically qualified to be admitted into these colleges, by having diversity not be a top priority, they actually gained diversity. It just goes to show that when you don't have authorities fiddling with the system and gaining political power, society works better.
People such as Time Wise typically refer to history instead of the present day when it comes to racial issues like affirmative action. Wise is predominantly known as an antiracist, but to me, he's racist against whites. He asserts in his article, "Whites Swim in Racial Preference," "Yet few whites have ever thought of our position as resulting from racial preferences. Indeed, we pride ourselves on our hard work and ambition as if somehow we invented the concepts. As if we have worked harder than the folks who were forced to pick cotton and build levies for free; harder than the Latino immigrants who spend 10 hours a day in fields picking strawberries or tomatoes; harder than the (mostly) women of color who clean hotel rooms or change bedpans in hospitals, or the (mostly) men of color who collect our garbage." First of all, most of these examples are a part of the American past; nobody is forced to pick cotton anymore. It's like saying that a lowlife black man in the city is a hard worker because his ancestors were once slaves. Everyone knows that America is the land of the free, and with the right attitude and ambition that man could work his way up, just as Oprah did. But you can't say that this lowlife black man knows what hard work is, and the same goes for the white man living in his mother's basement! There are people out there, regardless of race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation and/or national origin, that truly understand what hard work is, just as there are some that don't. To me, by addressing and grouping people in "underprivileged" and "privileged" sections, Wise is really creating more stereotypical divisions. His argument is also based off of revenge, an irrational notion: we did it to them, so we should let them do it to us. America has developed so that virtually every individual has an equal opportunity to succeed, and it should stay that way: no handicaps for the so-called "underrepresented." It is ignorant people like Wise that imply what is said in Orwell's Animal Farm: "All men are created equal, but some are more equal than others."
Monday, February 6, 2012
"White Like Me - Privilege"
In his book "White Like Me" published in 2007, Tim Wise discloses the apparent privileges of being white and the disadvantages of being any other color in America. In the chapter titled Privilege, Wise claims that our efforts of multiculturalism shown by the media is really a "cover-up" of the still existing racial problems. He also uses personal experience to prove his point. "For me, white privilege was critical to my actually making it through school at all," Wise says. "[...]I relied on my whiteness to mark me as a capable person with lots of potential, even when I wasn't demonstrating much of it" (Wise 22). By having this "white privilege," Wise was able to skip class and break the rules without supposedly getting into too much trouble. "[...] there's something about being white in this country," Wise asserts, "that allows one, even encourages one, to take a lot of stupid risks, knowing that nine times out of ten everything will work out; you won't get busted and you won't go to jail, neither of which black or brown folks can take for granted in the least" (40).
Wise's assertions are perfectly valid and believable. I like how he writes in a narrative fashion to make it more connectable to the reader. His stories are engaging and thought-provoking. However, the catch is that almost all of these stories take place more than twenty years ago, and a lot has changed since then. For one, to me it seems silly that Wise believes that racist teachers nonetheless exist. He says, "While there are many dedicated and antiracist white educators out there, in my experience the vast majority of them, though dedicated, have no earthly idea what it means to be antiracist" (20). How does anyone not have an idea of what racism means? Teachers, being competent adults, are not stupid; they are educated individuals, hence the name of their job. Being the politically (in)correct society that we are today and the fact that virtually every teacher is a die-hard liberal, they are bound to feel pity for the minorities. That pity is expressed as an idea of how to be nonracist. I simply cannot believe that fully racist teachers still exist today. Something that actually angered me was when Wise talks about seeing Schoolhouse Rock Live performed by fifth through eighth graders, and how it's "borderline racist". He writes, "Among the lines in the song [Elbow Room] is one that intones, 'There were plenty of fights/To win land rights /But the West was meant to be /It was our manifest destiny!' Let it suffice to say that happily belting out a tune in which one merrily praises genocide is always easier for those whose ancestors weren't on the receiving end of the deal" (30). Give me a break! First off, these lyrics are based on historical fact, something you really shouldn't be offended by. And besides, is genocide the first thing you think of when you think "manifest destiny?" I think not. It's like having a choir sing a black spiritual (which our choir is actually doing) and an audience member being offended because it reminds him or her of the time of slavery. Come on! Man up! It seems like anything you say these days can be offensive. I can't even dress up as Pocahantas at my school because it depicts an Indian stereotype and may be offensive. Everybody in America is being divided into these groups: African-American, Chinese-American, European-American, Polish-American, which is supposed to unite us, but I believe it's doing the opposite. I believe it's dividing us; there are black-skinned Americans, there are white-skinned Americans, but we are all Americans. Anyways...
Something else that is outdated is when Wise asserts, "Had these house parties been in black neighborhoods they would never have been allowed to go on at all, as large as they were, even without a single illegal substance on the premises, and without a single weapon in sight. But for whites, in white neighborhoods, everything was different. Our illegality was looked at with a wink and a nod" (37). This claim seems like another reality to me. Maybe he was on Mars, but in my time and place, regardless of the skin color of the culprits, cops bust house parties pretty much every weekend. Heck, one time, I was at a clean cast party and a cop came because of a noise complaint. Contrary to Wise's beliefs, cops don't just excuse white people of crimes they commit. It may appear that cops bust blacks more than whites, but so? You can't just instantly assume that because more blacks are being punished than whites, it is racism. There just happens to be more black criminals at one time than whites, or vice versa. To add on to his claim, Wise says, "[...] there's something about being white in this country that allows one, even encourages one, to take a lot of stupid risks, knowing that nine times out of ten everything will work out; you won't get busted and you won't go to jail, neither of which black or brown folks can take for granted in the least" (40). I find this assertion to be plainly ridiculous. Do you think nine times out of ten I won't get busted for murdering a man? Do you think I am somehow encouraged to do something like that....because I'm white!? In my opinion, Wise is completely overanalyzing this whole "white privilege" thing. I believe that even since this book was published, improvements have been made. I think it's common knowledge for most people in America that no man is "more equal" than another. I don't deny the fact that racial problems still exist; I simply think that Tim Wise is exaggerating the whole thing.
Wise's assertions are perfectly valid and believable. I like how he writes in a narrative fashion to make it more connectable to the reader. His stories are engaging and thought-provoking. However, the catch is that almost all of these stories take place more than twenty years ago, and a lot has changed since then. For one, to me it seems silly that Wise believes that racist teachers nonetheless exist. He says, "While there are many dedicated and antiracist white educators out there, in my experience the vast majority of them, though dedicated, have no earthly idea what it means to be antiracist" (20). How does anyone not have an idea of what racism means? Teachers, being competent adults, are not stupid; they are educated individuals, hence the name of their job. Being the politically (in)correct society that we are today and the fact that virtually every teacher is a die-hard liberal, they are bound to feel pity for the minorities. That pity is expressed as an idea of how to be nonracist. I simply cannot believe that fully racist teachers still exist today. Something that actually angered me was when Wise talks about seeing Schoolhouse Rock Live performed by fifth through eighth graders, and how it's "borderline racist". He writes, "Among the lines in the song [Elbow Room] is one that intones, 'There were plenty of fights/To win land rights /But the West was meant to be /It was our manifest destiny!' Let it suffice to say that happily belting out a tune in which one merrily praises genocide is always easier for those whose ancestors weren't on the receiving end of the deal" (30). Give me a break! First off, these lyrics are based on historical fact, something you really shouldn't be offended by. And besides, is genocide the first thing you think of when you think "manifest destiny?" I think not. It's like having a choir sing a black spiritual (which our choir is actually doing) and an audience member being offended because it reminds him or her of the time of slavery. Come on! Man up! It seems like anything you say these days can be offensive. I can't even dress up as Pocahantas at my school because it depicts an Indian stereotype and may be offensive. Everybody in America is being divided into these groups: African-American, Chinese-American, European-American, Polish-American, which is supposed to unite us, but I believe it's doing the opposite. I believe it's dividing us; there are black-skinned Americans, there are white-skinned Americans, but we are all Americans. Anyways...
Something else that is outdated is when Wise asserts, "Had these house parties been in black neighborhoods they would never have been allowed to go on at all, as large as they were, even without a single illegal substance on the premises, and without a single weapon in sight. But for whites, in white neighborhoods, everything was different. Our illegality was looked at with a wink and a nod" (37). This claim seems like another reality to me. Maybe he was on Mars, but in my time and place, regardless of the skin color of the culprits, cops bust house parties pretty much every weekend. Heck, one time, I was at a clean cast party and a cop came because of a noise complaint. Contrary to Wise's beliefs, cops don't just excuse white people of crimes they commit. It may appear that cops bust blacks more than whites, but so? You can't just instantly assume that because more blacks are being punished than whites, it is racism. There just happens to be more black criminals at one time than whites, or vice versa. To add on to his claim, Wise says, "[...] there's something about being white in this country that allows one, even encourages one, to take a lot of stupid risks, knowing that nine times out of ten everything will work out; you won't get busted and you won't go to jail, neither of which black or brown folks can take for granted in the least" (40). I find this assertion to be plainly ridiculous. Do you think nine times out of ten I won't get busted for murdering a man? Do you think I am somehow encouraged to do something like that....because I'm white!? In my opinion, Wise is completely overanalyzing this whole "white privilege" thing. I believe that even since this book was published, improvements have been made. I think it's common knowledge for most people in America that no man is "more equal" than another. I don't deny the fact that racial problems still exist; I simply think that Tim Wise is exaggerating the whole thing.
Wednesday, February 1, 2012
"If I Were a Poor Black Kid"
In Forbes, Gene Marks recently wrote an article titled "If I Were a Poor Black Kid". Marks asserts that "...the biggest [racial] challenge we face isn’t inequality. It’s ignorance. So many kids from West Philadelphia don’t even know these opportunities exist for them." It is an optimistic viewpoint that any impoverished black kid in a city is capable of succeeding, that opportunities are still available despite their lack of wealth and the color of their skin. Marks goes further to give examples of the opportunities and thus embellishes his argument. Though I myself am a typical wealthy north shore white male, I absolutely agree with Marks' assertions. I have faith in the American dream, and I believe anybody can achieve it with the right mindset and work ethic. It's the beauty of our individualistic country; work hard, and you will be rewarded, regardless of your background or what you look like. I mean, Oprah Winfrey was born into poverty and with hard work, look where she ended up. We have a black president. There are countless examples of apparently oppressed blacks that rise to success. It's never easy for these people, don't get me wrong; if you start out in poverty, it's much more difficult to prosper. But it is possible; the opportunity exists whether you're black, white, asian, indian, et cetera.
There are a lot of people out there that would say Marks is clueless because he isn't a poor black kid but rather a middle class white man, which is a totally valid claim. I think that Marks may be exaggerating some of his many listed opportunities. However, that does not mean that all of these opportunities are nonexistent. There is simply no way. And surely Marks must have done some field work or research before writing this article. On the Time website, Touré blasted Marks' article and one of his arguments is, "If I were a middle class man writing about a poor black kid I would assume that anyone who knows the world in the way that I do would make the decisions that I would make so I need only share with them the knowledge that I have. I wouldn’t think about how their environment might impact their ability or willingness to use that information. I mean, everyone has access to the Internet, right?" Actually, yes. It's called the public library. There are computers in virtually every library available for use, AND they have Internet. Yeah, I will never know what it's like to live in the shoes of a poor black kid, but the opportunity for success is there.
There are a lot of people out there that would say Marks is clueless because he isn't a poor black kid but rather a middle class white man, which is a totally valid claim. I think that Marks may be exaggerating some of his many listed opportunities. However, that does not mean that all of these opportunities are nonexistent. There is simply no way. And surely Marks must have done some field work or research before writing this article. On the Time website, Touré blasted Marks' article and one of his arguments is, "If I were a middle class man writing about a poor black kid I would assume that anyone who knows the world in the way that I do would make the decisions that I would make so I need only share with them the knowledge that I have. I wouldn’t think about how their environment might impact their ability or willingness to use that information. I mean, everyone has access to the Internet, right?" Actually, yes. It's called the public library. There are computers in virtually every library available for use, AND they have Internet. Yeah, I will never know what it's like to live in the shoes of a poor black kid, but the opportunity for success is there.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)