A lot of meat in those observations, and I'll attempt to sandwich it in this reply..
First, @Distant Lover
, since I interpreted your reply as the most presumptuous. The flaw and
fallacy of 'affirmative action' is NOT the inclusion and diversity,
it's that the "inclusion" is more adaptation and morphing assimilation
which ignores the aesthetics of the candidate's background, believing by
the "benefactors"-patronizingly, and maybe paternalistically-that the
"candidate's" goals and purpose are for the same tangible and intangible
aesthetic means and ends as the (so-called) "host", who continues
blithely in their cultural zeitgeist, as if they had NOTHING to learn
from the recipient of their largess. The candidate now confronts a job
that is essentially incongruous to their own ideal[istic] and admittedly
naive expectations. They strive in their now self-imposed pressure,
performing outside or below standards and/or decorum that leads to
observations and comments, such as yours.
For @ace's n 8's
, your subject is one who's reconciled (aka, abandoned his cultural
background) to accept and conform to having 'made it' in the world as a
Black/POC skinned, white behavioral masked operative, who for the white environment is the example of of a successful cohesion with the homilies of the 'melting-pot'-bootstrap success. One only has to point
out Bill Cosby, Herman Cain, and OJ as high profile minorities whose
fate came from the 'means of entitlement' they presumed would be
theirs -immunity from what they had culturally estranged themselves.
The ACLU anecdote is not totally surprising, since the predominant cultural ethos of "moral flexibility" in one's business-for-the-sake-of business is 'what built this country'.
For we whose progenitors, if not ourselves, were the indifferently
abused as collateral damage in the way of the path of the 'Manifest
Destiny' that 'made this country great', face the ethical and moral
dilemma of wanting the 'apple of desire' at the expense of the
physiological or psychological damage and scars we hope don't become our
fate.
[In full-disclosure, though I was anticipated and expected to be a
conforming role model of AfAm cohesion to the mores of my Ivy League
college by the school and my parents,
who'd achieved, greatly, within the then confines of segregation and
the later "liberalization" for aspiring decorum-abiding Negroes. Mostly
by circumstance (#36 in the 1969 Draft Lottery), but by
mid-winter of 1970 I saw it would be a cruel joke on my life, if I
WASN'T of a more contrarian, counter-cultural ethos for myself. It's an
economic sacrifice of security, conveniences, and comforts only a few
could legally and ethically navigate. The temptations for either
thinking oneself a 'sell-out' or being a scofflaw, petty criminal, at
the least, was/is always there for the experience of wanting to have 'a
taste of the apple' of ethical betrayal.]
----------------------------------------------
Those seeking a graphic, audio slideshow version of this text, contact this 'OP'.
A lot of meat in those observations, and I'll attempt to sandwich it in this reply..
First,
@Distant Lover , since I interpreted your reply as the most
presumptuous. The flaw and fallacy of 'affirmative action' is NOT the
inclusion and diversity, it's that the "inclusion" is more adaptation
and morphing assimilation which ignores the aesthetics of the
candidate's background, believing by the "benefactors"-patronizingly,
and maybe paternalistically-that the "candidate's" goals and purpose are
for the same tangible and intangible aesthetic means and ends as the
(so-called) "host", who continues blithely in their cultural zeitgeist,
as if they had NOTHING to learn from the recipient of their largess. The
candidate now confronts a job that is essentially incongruous to their
own ideal[istic] and admittedly naive expectations. They strive in their
now self-imposed pressure, performing outside or below standards and/or
decorum that leads to observations and comments, such as yours.
For
@ace's n 8's , your subject is one who's reconciled (aka, abandoned his
cultural background) to accept and conform to having 'made it' in the
world as a Black/POC skinned, white behavioral masked operative, who
for the white environment is the example of of a successful cohesion
with the homilies of the 'melting-pot'-bootstrap success. One only has
to point out Bill Cosby, Herman Cain, and OJ as high profile minorities
whose fate came from the 'means of entitlement' they presumed would be
theirs-immune from what they had culturally estranged themselves.
The
ACLU anecdote is not totally surprising, since the predominant
cultural ethos of "moral flexibility" in one's business-for-the-sake-of
business is 'what built this country'.
For
we whose progenitors, if not ourselves, were the indifferently abused
as collateral damage in the way of the path of the 'Manifest Destiny'
that 'made this country great', face the ethical and moral dilemma of
wanting the 'apple of desire' at the expense of the physiological or
psychological damage and scars we hope don't become our fate.
[In
full-disclosure, though I was anticipated and expected to be a
conforming role model of AfAm cohesion to the mores of my Ivy League
college by the school and my parents, who'd achieved,
greatly, within the then confines of segregation and the later
"liberalization" for aspiring decorum-abiding Negroes. Mostly by
circumstance (#36 in the 1969 Draft Lottery), but by
mid-winter
of 1970 I saw it would be a cruel joke on my life, if I WASN'T of a
more contrarian, counter-cultural ethos for myself. It's an economic
sacrifice of security, conveniences, and comforts only a few could
legally and ethically navigate. The temptations for either thinking
oneself a 'sell-out' or being a scofflaw, petty criminal, at the least,
was/is always there for the experience of wanting to have 'a taste of
the apple' of ethical betrayal.]
A lot of meat in those observations, and I'll attempt to sandwich it in this reply..
First,
@Distant Lover , since I interpreted your reply as the most
presumptuous. The flaw and fallacy of 'affirmative action' is NOT the
inclusion and diversity, it's that the "inclusion" is more adaptation
and morphing assimilation which ignores the aesthetics of the
candidate's background, believing by the "benefactors"-patronizingly,
and maybe paternalistically-that the "candidate's" goals and purpose are
for the same tangible and intangible aesthetic means and ends as the
(so-called) "host", who continues blithely in their cultural zeitgeist,
as if they had NOTHING to learn from the recipient of their largess. The
candidate now confronts a job that is essentially incongruous to their
own ideal[istic] and admittedly naive expectations. They strive in their
now self-imposed pressure, performing outside or below standards and/or
decorum that leads to observations and comments, such as yours.
For
@ace's n 8's , your subject is one who's reconciled (aka, abandoned his
cultural background) to accept and conform to having 'made it' in the
world as a Black/POC skinned, white behavioral masked operative, who
for the white environment is the example of of a successful cohesion
with the homilies of the 'melting-pot'-bootstrap success. One only has
to point out Bill Cosby, Herman Cain, and OJ as high profile minorities
whose fate came from the 'means of entitlement' they presumed would be
theirs-immune from what they had culturally estranged themselves.
The
ACLU anecdote is not totally surprising, since the predominant
cultural ethos of "moral flexibility" in one's business-for-the-sake-of
business is 'what built this country'.
For
we whose progenitors, if not ourselves, were the indifferently abused
as collateral damage in the way of the path of the 'Manifest Destiny'
that 'made this country great', face the ethical and moral dilemma of
wanting the 'apple of desire' at the expense of the physiological or
psychological damage and scars we hope don't become our fate.
[In
full-disclosure, though I was anticipated and expected to be a
conforming role model of AfAm cohesion to the mores of my Ivy League
college by the school and my parents, who'd achieved,
greatly, within the then confines of segregation and the later
"liberalization" for aspiring decorum-abiding Negroes. Mostly by
circumstance (#36 in the 1969 Draft Lottery), but by
mid-winter
of 1970 I saw it would be a cruel joke on my life, if I WASN'T of a
more contrarian, counter-cultural ethos for myself. It's an economic
sacrifice of security, conveniences, and comforts only a few could
legally and ethically navigate. The temptations for either thinking
oneself a 'sell-out' or being a scofflaw, petty criminal, at the least,
was/is always there for the experience of wanting to have 'a taste of
the apple' of ethical betrayal.]
Comments
Post a Comment