1. do all native american groups navigate the question of who is and is not a memebr in the same way?
could churchill not have been accepted as part of a given community, prompted to identify with that community?
if so, then how would you square this type of identification with the strange category of "ethnicity"? who gets to adjudicate such a question? certainly not fox news, certainly not right media....certainly not you, kma.
2.
registering ethnic data does not have a great history. the consequences of collecting such data are an immediate association with previous explicitly racist nationalist regimes. that your understanding of affirmative action would lead you to wonder about whether the system would work better if everyone had to register according to bloodline...well it would seem to me that you have a quite problematic understanding of the matter.
or maybe not--maybe the problem some with the notion of ethnicity that one is forced to work with. maybe you just follow the dominant logic here.
either way, it looks as thought when you apply it to yourself, this question becomes quite vexed and vexing, but when you apply it to ward churchill, suddenly things are clear to you. this must be a service fox provides its viewers. this illusion of clarity.
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear
it make you sick.
-kamau brathwaite
Last edited by roachboy; 03-25-2005 at 08:38 AM..
|