<!--QuoteBegin-ramana+May 1 2008, 02:25 AM-->QUOTE(ramana @ May 1 2008, 02:25 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->We can now see the whole Civil Rights movement in new light. The Selma march, the NOI, Black Muslims etc. What is interesting is that MLK was able to obtain some recognition only when he adopted non -violence which is not in either of the two paths available to blacks in US.
[right][snapback]81112[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
So you are saying that Gandhi exported the Eastern framework into the black struggle. If true, this would be quite significant.
Questions like what causes the differences in marching band styles of blacks and whites cannot arise out of the western famework alone; they have to be smuggled in from heathen sources (either pre-slave traditions or Gandhi). -Non-normative ethics cannot arise out of normative ethics-
It is like Ram Swarup remarking that Kancha Illaiha is still acting like a Hindu by making meat-eating the point of comparison between "lower classes" and muslims, rather than the sharing of theological beliefs. Wright no where mentions that Blacks and whites are ideologically non-racist and racist respectively. He examines the situation from the viewpoint of differences in culture, that is, marching band styles, quite heathenish actually.
Per Shelby, the blacks have only two options for action, situated in the white culture:
1. leveraging their mask of subservience (the bug-eyed self-caricaturing of Louis armstrong).
2. excessive combativeness
Both are unnatural and affected postures, especially if you are requierd to live your life like that at all times. (Whites have their own fake smile culture to complement this situatiion). Look at wright NAACP video. he does some bug-eyed gestures, but these are not subservient (?)
Obama is no where near the intelligence level of Wright. According to Shelby, Obama simply chose the "blackest" church he could find in an effort to rediscover his blackness which was denied to him growing up.
The danger, which cannot be overempahsized enough, is that we are overreading the events from our viewpoint; Wright may be doing nothing more than assaulting the western grand narrative (ie religion) of manifest destiny from the viewpoint of a religionist, in the same way that a muslim, for example, refuses to give obeisance to the false idol of a country or a flag. The western grand narrative fits in perfectly with white christianity, but for black christianity it is obviously problematic. That is he may simply be doing theology, rather than trying to explicate an alt framework.
There is no such thing as assimilation anxiety or fake smiles or masking, in the jati culture of asia.
[right][snapback]81112[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
So you are saying that Gandhi exported the Eastern framework into the black struggle. If true, this would be quite significant.
Questions like what causes the differences in marching band styles of blacks and whites cannot arise out of the western famework alone; they have to be smuggled in from heathen sources (either pre-slave traditions or Gandhi). -Non-normative ethics cannot arise out of normative ethics-
It is like Ram Swarup remarking that Kancha Illaiha is still acting like a Hindu by making meat-eating the point of comparison between "lower classes" and muslims, rather than the sharing of theological beliefs. Wright no where mentions that Blacks and whites are ideologically non-racist and racist respectively. He examines the situation from the viewpoint of differences in culture, that is, marching band styles, quite heathenish actually.
Per Shelby, the blacks have only two options for action, situated in the white culture:
1. leveraging their mask of subservience (the bug-eyed self-caricaturing of Louis armstrong).
2. excessive combativeness
Both are unnatural and affected postures, especially if you are requierd to live your life like that at all times. (Whites have their own fake smile culture to complement this situatiion). Look at wright NAACP video. he does some bug-eyed gestures, but these are not subservient (?)
Obama is no where near the intelligence level of Wright. According to Shelby, Obama simply chose the "blackest" church he could find in an effort to rediscover his blackness which was denied to him growing up.
The danger, which cannot be overempahsized enough, is that we are overreading the events from our viewpoint; Wright may be doing nothing more than assaulting the western grand narrative (ie religion) of manifest destiny from the viewpoint of a religionist, in the same way that a muslim, for example, refuses to give obeisance to the false idol of a country or a flag. The western grand narrative fits in perfectly with white christianity, but for black christianity it is obviously problematic. That is he may simply be doing theology, rather than trying to explicate an alt framework.
There is no such thing as assimilation anxiety or fake smiles or masking, in the jati culture of asia.