Thursday, September 20, 2007

Fighting Racism With Racism

Fighting Racism With Racism
Jena Six refers to a group of six African American teenagers who have been arrested and charged with crimes related to their alleged involvement in the assault of a white teenager in Jena, Louisiana, on December 4, 2006. The incident is one of many racially charged events that have occurred in the town since what has been called a prank involving the "white tree" on the Jena High School campus. Critics of how the case was handled, including civil rights leaders Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, have claimed that the arrests and subsequent charges were racially motivated.
Many residents of the town, both Caucasian and African American, have expressed the view that the current problem is more the fault of outsiders using racial politics to influence the justice system. Additionally, U.S. Attorney Donald Washington, who is black, has expressed the opinion that although discipline was mishandled by the school, he found no reason to believe that there was any unfair judicial action.
Now, I usually won't bother with world news, however, I felt this was something important
to talk about. I'd also like to see how you all (my blog fam) felt about it.
Racism, I think we all have it in us, Whites because it's in the blood, Blacks because it is in the pain. Americans seem to be quick to want to hate someone for any reason.
Me personally I have a love /hate relationship with all people, the color of one's skin has nothing to do with it.
Should I see a Hispanic mother not attending to her child, I will find myself looking down on her for that. Does this make me a racist?
Where I grew up, which was mainly a hospital community (KU), (a good place for my Mom to raise two boys who loved to get injured) the surrounding area was very diverse at the time. But the shortcut to the projects were just a stones throw away.
I made my first real friend in Frank Rushton Elementary, Fredrick Lamonte Wade AKA "Freddy B" (R.I.P). He would be one of the first of many Black friends I would make growing up.
In my neighborhood, I was excepted for who I had become, no kwams from any of the colored kids about me using the slang "Nigga" or "My Nigga" as a term of endearment.
But then I grew up , moved from that area and found that not everyone was going to except that coming from me. I know what I am (not that Black folk should use this term to address each other either) , But I respect the fact that it is it inappropriate to speak this way.
Racism, Hate , Media, Misunderstanding, these are key elements in the role that is taking place in our society.
What's Happening in Jena, Louisiana , I have mixed emotions about.
People are violent by nature, the youth are bored, lost and misinformed.
I believe that this kid who got beat down, may have deserved a good ole ass whupping', but what if it had been a couple of white kids who turned on him? In defense for their black friend(s).
would they be under the same scrutiny?
And don't get me wrong, those who are guilty for a crime need to be punished.
Any of the kids involved with hanging the noose from that tree, should be charged with a hate crime. And punished (if only to have a footnote of that persons character, in the case of any future hate crimes).
And the alleged Jena 6 did commit assault, so there should be justice punishable by law.
I know I know, "Justice Is Blind"...
you know the more I think about it the more it untangles in my brain and makes me think of so many times in my life that I have encountered racism.
When I was growing up there was not a billion white kids listening to rap, compelled by what all of these great Black artists were accomplishing, following the trends, mimicking the moves, reciting the words, those who know me, know...
I've Taken some licks myself, I've been Jumped, Assaulted, Attacked , & Robbed, by Black people who I thought were my friends, I never hung no noose from no tree.
And sadly from it, I struggle now to not judge a group by a whole.
But that wasn't me then, and I can't allow that to be me now.
It's about people who are raised properly, but here's my path...
I grew up with no father, and a drug-addicted mother who spent the majority of my childhood in and out of prison, and I'm not a success in life, but I am not a failure either.
I dropped out of school and I raised myself, I work a mediocre job , I live check to check, Ive got a daughter (15 in Nov) and a step daughter (9 next week), and I'm as lost and confused as ever.
But, I'm alive and kickin'............(I'm an aggressive driver , but I'm so working on that)
The hate runs too deep....
Respond if you like, if not, Fuck You , I still love you.....

Wednesday, September 19, 2007

Dr's Art

I don't have much to say quite yet so I am just throwin up some random stuff to check out.
Here's some of my various works of art, just for fun, I claim to be no artist.


The Blog Cabyn is gonna have to be the place that I vent......Like Who The Eff is Listening.
Brace Yourself

Where ideas come from?

Given the fact that the human mind in mature life is in possession of such universal ideas, or concepts, the question arises: How have they been attained? Empiricists and Materialists have endeavoured to explain all our intellectual ideas as refined products of our sensuous faculties. Plato conceives them to be an inheritance through reminiscence from a previous state of existence. Sundry Christian philosophers of ultra-spiritualist tendencies have described them as innate, planted in the soul at its creation by a Deity.
Man has a double set of cognitive faculties - sensuous and intellectual. Aisthesis, the "sense", as a faculty, apprehends changing phenomena, and nous, "thought", "reason", "intellect", is presenting to humans the permanent, abiding being. All knowledge starts from sensuous experience with no innate ideas : external objects stimulate the senses and effect a modification of the sensuous faculties which results in a sensuous percipient act, a sensation or perception by which the mind becomes cognizant of the concrete individual object, e.g., some sensible quality of the thing acting on the sense. Because sense and intellect are powers of the same soul, the latter is now wakened, as it were, into activity, and lays hold of its own proper object in the sensuous presentation. The object is the essence, or nature of the thing, omitting its individualizing conditions. The act by which the intellect thus apprehends the abstract essence, when viewed as a modification of the intellect, was called by the Schoolmen species intelligibilis; when viewed as the realization or utterance of the thought of the object to itself by the intellect, they termed it the verbum mentale. In this first stage it prescinds alike from universality and individuality. But the intellect does not stop there. It recognizes its object as capable of indefinite multiplication. In other words it generalizes the abstract essence and thereby constitutes it a reflex or formally universal concept, or idea. By comparison, reflection, and generalization, the elaboration of the idea is continued until we attain to the distinct and precise concepts, or ideas, which accurate science demands.
It is important to note that in the "Scholastic theory" the immediate object of the intellectual act of perception is not the idea or concept. It is the external reality, the nature or essence of the thing apprehended. The idea, when considered as part of the process of direct perception, is itself the subjective act of cognition, not the thing cognized. It is a vital, immanent operation by which the mind is modified and determined directly to know the object perceived. The psychologist may subsequently reflect upon this intellectual idea and make it the subject of his consideration, or the ordinary man may recall it by memory for purposes of comparison, but in the original act of apprehension it is the means by which the mind knows, not the object which it knows — est id quo res cognoscitur non id quod cognoscitur. This constitutes a fundamental point of difference between the Scholastic doctrine of perception and that held by Locke, Berkeley, Hume, and a very large proportion of modern philosophers. For Locke and Berkeley the object immediately perceived is the idea. The existence of material objects, if we believe in them, can, in their view, only be justified as an inference from effect to cause. Berkeley and idealists generally deny the validity of that inference; and if the theory of immediate perception be altogether abandoned, it seems difficult to warrant the claim of the human mind to a genuine knowledge of external reality. In the Scholastic view, knowledge is essentially of reality, and this reality is not dependent on the (finite) mind which knows it. The knower is something apart from his actualized knowing, and the known object is something apart from its being actually known. The thing must be before it can be known; the act of knowledge does not set up but presupposes the object. It is of the object that we are directly conscious, not of the idea. In popular language we sometimes call the object "an idea", but in such cases it is in a totally different sense, and we recognize the term as signifying a purely mental creation