I received an email recently from a director of a nonprofit inviting me to speak to some young people doing a residency at the site of the nonprofit. The owners of the property are well known to me and we have done various events together. We have had dinners together and long conversations on their kitchen table. I have helped in their fundraising and they too have come out in strong support for some of my events. It did not take much thinking to agree to speak to the youth and even potentially doing a food literacy workshop.
The director connected me to the events coordinator upon accepting the invitation. The events coordinator was pleasant along the whole process of setting up the date and hammering the details of the event.
The day of the event was finally at hand and I showed up for the event with my children in tow. I was ushered upstairs in an old rehabbed barn that has been turned into a beautiful meeting area decorated with shiny hardwood floors. Milling around the wide expansive hall were different groups of youth lightly engaged in light conversations. The youths were made of mixed races but predominantly White. We made it to the front of the hall and my host wasted no time in calling everyone to attention.
She briefly introduced me and yielded the floor to me. I did my usual disclaimer that my talks could be difficult for some people’s taste and that my story is based on my experience as well as my research. That doesn’t make me right or wrong but it is what my take is on the issues that affect me and the society I live in or have lived in previously. I added that there was nothing personal or against any particular person present.
I proceeded to speak about issues of food justice as well are racial justice. In my lecture, I stated the fact that I do not support the idea supporting any political candidate solely based on the color of his skin. In the same way, I do not support the idea of opposing any candidate solely on the basis of his or her race. I continued with my speech and discussed the various racial and social issues and how those issues tie to food. The things I said are public information and there was nothing that I said that is not either documented or where I explicitly indicated that it was strictly my opinion. Those bits I added were my own ethnic philosophy which is the basis I use in analyzing the various injustices that are currently affecting the U.S.
I can say what everybody thought but when I finished speaking, one young African American lady raised her hand and offered her feedback publicly. She said among other things that she had never heard the connection between food and power in the way I explained it before. She thanked me for helping her understand the power dynamics involved in food. Another young lady with Hispanic and African American background also made several remarks that were largely positive. One lady had a different opinion from mine regarding food pantry. She had worked in the food pantry and believed that she was making a positive contribution and that was fine with me. I had no issues with her position. It was hers and she was entitled to it to the fullest length, breath and weight.
The event was supposed to have had two sections but the question and answer section took a bit longer than expected and the cooking workshop that was supposed to have followed was deemed too much for the youth. I could totally relate to that but I was keen on meeting my end of the bargain. I therefore offered to return and complete the other section as per our agreement.
I later received an email informing me that there was some pushback regarding my remarks about BLM. I could not have been more surprised. I am Black and I gave my own opinion about how I feel about issues that affect me and someone has a problem with that? How does that even make sense? I am not sure if someone had a problem with me saying that I would not vote for anyone strictly on the basis of color or gender as I have seen the results of in many places.
I delved deeper into the topic during my lecture and explained that I have a problem with a demand that is not clearly articulated. I restated a statement I had made before that BLM has to be a philosophical statement first before it is a political statement. We have to articulate exactly what it is we want to accomplish and how we would see those goals achieved. Otherwise to get people to simply say hunger is bad in theory does not deal with the hunger problem, I explained.
Nobody owes me an explanation for not accepting what they paid for. That is their right to refuse anything whether they have paid or not. I however don’t have a right to refuse to offer services that have been paid for, so nothing illegal about that situation. I have some skin in that game because I am interested in adding my voice in matters that affect me directly. Racism in America is systemic and if someone thinks that the way to solve that problem is through the censorship of the same people who suffer from the same racism is synonymous with killing one disease by causing another equally virulent disease. So, why do through all that trouble for no gain at all?
The Democratic Party, which is the same thing as saying the majority White Liberal Party, has a checkered history in the South. A perfect example being the 1877 compromise between the two major parties that led to the end of reconstruction. That single act resulted in the withdrawal of the federal troops that had been stationed in the South following the end of the American Civil War to help protect the newly freed Blacks from retribution or harassment for their involvement in the war or simply due to their vulnerable situation. That single act delayed some of the promises that the emancipation was intended to bring for about 100 years. Many lost their lives and others have never recovered from the set backs that came about as a result of the compromise. Here is an example of how that checkered history can be projected into the future all while feeling as though progress is being made. It is also an example of what not to do if at all BLM is to become a reality.
If Blacks keep protesting as we always have without any significant change in tactic, we will take that act of protesting without real and serious changes as a great thing. It is therefore possible for us to be protesting just for the sake of protesting. We can't survive for long on the account of what we are against but for what we are for. Protesting for the sake of protesting is a positive reinforcement for a negative habit. For a white person to think that they know what is best for me better than I know for myself is one such consequence of protesting for the sake of protesting.