Y and Why

Don’t just change without knowing and understanding WHY it got this way!

Why in the World did anyone ever become Racist? A new born is not aware of itself therefore there is no OTHER to compare with so Race means nothing. It is selfish because that is all it knows. If you look and see the developmental progress there first becomes ‘other’ and then ‘other that is alive’, then ‘alive that helps me’, because I need. A little latter comes ‘Hurt’ and then ‘Fear’.

If you have forgotten this you can never understand ‘Racism’, ‘White Privilege’, ‘White Supremacy’, or any other flavor of ‘Supremacy’. The dictionary proposes that Supremacy is: 1. the state of being supreme. and 2. supreme authority or power. This centers on the first and the most important ‘Person’ in the definition. The first, the powerful, the best. A little thought would provide the idea that ‘the other’ is the real cause, or excuse, or need of any such word, idea, or concept. Without ‘the other’ there would be none of this. AND the emotion that is alive here is FEAR. Don’t get me wrong. It is not fear of an individual. It is not fear of a group. It is not even fear of ‘the other’ from our developmental time. It is fear of what ‘the other’ means or could mean or might mean or HAS meant and it is a ‘Concrete Background Memory’. Society does not usually retain this type of ‘thing’ as long as it has endured in America concerning ‘Black’ people. I feel, personally, that this is because the basic cause, or excuse, or need has never gone away.

To affect any of these you must effect a change in ‘the other’ memory that supports it. The memory that ‘I may not be safe from . . .’ has never been attacked and removed. OR even targeted. Locations that do not retain this memory or never developed this memory currently do not experience this Racism or a milder form, Prejudice. But be assured that this feeling against ‘the other’ is everywhere. Where this is a problem, the memory of the cause, or excuse, or need must be resolved to allow the ‘…ism’ to die a nature death.

As an example, in our local area there is a place called Rock Dale. When the region was settled this beautiful area was selected by a single group of German immigrants. As more immigrants came thru, the German speaking portion felt safe and comfortable. The Rock Dale expanded and grew a reputation.

There as also a beautiful area called Rocky Bottoms that was settled by Black immigrants from Southern Plantations when they were free to move north away from slavery that had lasted for several generations. The Rocky Bottoms expanded and grew a reputation.

The scenario played out in every town, city, area and settlement in every continent and country and in the US. It was and is not restricted because it is a natural spread of information. It only becomes a problem if natural change does not follow. Integration of diverse backgrounds does happen. The reputation becomes bad. And the reputation becomes attached to the people and not the place! Once this becomes attached to the people it spread with out limit and does not even require the place at all! When that people is a Race of People the effect is Racism. What started with a Rock Dale or a Rocky Bottoms is now everywhere.

Let’s not get confused or hung-up on details. The cause of the many instances of this Fear-Based condition comes in many shapes and forms and in many different degrees. It is the basis for Racism, Terrorism, Police-abuse, and even travel bands to areas of town or the World.

To pick one of these, such as Black Racism, and say it must be stopped without addressing the underlining causes (because there are usually many) is like pissing into the wind. It is difficult, messy, and not satisfying in the end. We need to correct the cause; replace the bad experiences with good ones; fix what caused the FEAR of the OTHER; remember that several good experiences do not negate many bad experiences. It must die not be killer.

I will continue this as soon as I figure it out! If ever!

Loading

An IF – No Else

The popular election is over. Now what? In a report at https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IF/IF11641

An objection to a state’s electoral vote must be approved by both houses in order for any contested votes to be excluded.  

If one of the tickets has received a majority of 270 or more electoral votes, the Vice President announces the results, which “shall be deemed a sufficient declaration of the persons, if any, elected President and Vice President.” If not 270 votes for a ticket, Congress is in charge and results are determined. This has happened several times in history. The president is not elected until congress accepts the results? 

For additional information, see CRS Report RL32717, Counting Electoral Votes: An Overview of Procedures at the Joint Session, Including Objections by Members of Congress, coordinated by Elizabeth Rybicki and L. Paige Whitaker.  

Loading

Level the BattleField

Levels of the BattleField

A Look from a Distance. Sometimes what we see is wrong but the need for safety from a perceived danger is ingrained in DNA from developing times. Danger is a personal feeling; Danger is a Personal attack. Being attacked requires Defending ourself. If/when the ability is present, return the attack. Flee, Fight, be confused and do nothing. Our survival has become complicated!

The first response to an attack is to assume the condition/action is Personal. And that is natural.

Levels of Battlefields

And not even close to correct in the CURRENT Times. The threat is most likely to our existence at a future time but made in such a manor require a personal response right now. Here are some examples:

Loading

Black Friday

What I remember verifies this account so I’ll keep it here.

UPDATED: ORIGINAL: 

What’s the Real History of Black Friday?

The retail bonanza known as Black Friday is now an integral part of many Thanksgiving celebrations, but this holiday tradition has darker roots than you might imagine.

The first recorded use of the term “Black Friday” was applied not to holiday shopping but to financial crisis: specifically, the crash of the U.S. gold market on September 24, 1869. Two notoriously ruthless Wall Street financiers, Jay Gould and Jim Fisk, worked together to buy up as much as they could of the nation’s gold, hoping to drive the price sky-high and sell it for astonishing profits. On that Friday in September, the conspiracy finally unraveled, sending the stock market into free-fall and bankrupting everyone from Wall Street barons to farmers.

The most commonly repeated story behind the post-Thanksgiving shopping-related Black Friday tradition links it to retailers. As the story goes, after an entire year of operating at a loss (“in the red”) stores would supposedly earn a profit (“went into the black”) on the day after Thanksgiving, because holiday shoppers blew so much money on discounted merchandise. Though it’s true that retail companies used to record losses in red and profits in black when doing their accounting, this version of Black Friday’s origin is the officially sanctioned—but inaccurate—story behind the tradition.

In recent years, another myth has surfaced that gives a particularly ugly twist to the tradition, claiming that back in the 1800s Southern plantation owners could buy slaves at a discount on the day after Thanksgiving. Though this version of Black Friday’s roots has understandably led some to call for a boycott of the retail holiday, it has no basis in fact.

The true story behind Black Friday, however, is not as sunny as retailers might have you believe. Back in the 1950s, police in the city of Philadelphia used the term to describe the chaos that ensued on the day after Thanksgiving, when hordes of suburban shoppers and tourists flooded into the city in advance of the big Army-Navy football game held on that Saturday every year. Not only would Philly cops not be able to take the day off, but they would have to work extra-long shifts dealing with the additional crowds and traffic. Shoplifters would also take advantage of the bedlam in stores to make off with merchandise, adding to the law enforcement headache.

By 1961, “Black Friday” had caught on in Philadelphia, to the extent that the city’s merchants and boosters tried unsuccessfully to change it to “Big Friday” in order to remove the negative connotations. The term didn’t spread to the rest of the country until much later, however, and as recently as 1985 it wasn’t in common use nationwide. Sometime in the late 1980s, however, retailers found a way to reinvent Black Friday and turn it into something that reflected positively, rather than negatively, on them and their customers. The result was the “red to black” concept of the holiday mentioned earlier, and the notion that the day after Thanksgiving marked the occasion when America’s stores finally turned a profit. (In fact, stores traditionally see bigger sales on the Saturday before Christmas.)

The Black Friday story stuck, and pretty soon the term’s darker roots in Philadelphia were largely forgotten. Since then, the one-day sales bonanza has morphed into a four-day event, and spawned other “retail holidays” such as Small Business Saturday/Sunday and Cyber Monday. Stores started opening earlier and earlier on that Friday, and now the most dedicated shoppers can head out right after their Thanksgiving meal.

https://www.history.com/news/whats-the-real-history-of-black-friday 

Loading

They Stole My Election

This Post Reflects information taken from this article by JEFFREY LORD. Please read the entire article to see the context.
“https://spectator.org/stop-the-steal-start-the-audit/”

It may be true.”Philadelphia did in fact keep poll watchers out.” The ‘Poll Watches’ are appointed as such from applicants and are officials.

Look at the ‘If’ part of the next claim – “If no social distancing is OK for social justice protests and election celebrations, then no social distancing is most certainly OK for poll watchers.” AGREED but not accepted. It is not OK!

Then look at this which negates the first argument and upholds the second, Not OK. “Quite clearly, once allowed into the polling place they were told they had to stand six feet away from the person doing the counting.”

 And then the last claim that – “Plain old-fashioned common sense says there is no way in the world anyone can thoroughly examine a ballot from six feet away.” And, Oh Boy, is that true! No ONE ‘thoroughly examines my ballot’ after I mark it and put it in the ballot box. How Stupid. And I stopped reading.


With early voting underway in a growing number of states and Donald Trump talking about a “rigged” election and warning about what he says will be voter fraud, there have been significant discussions about “poll watchers,” and concerns that certain individuals may try to intimidate their fellow voters.

But what are the rules governing polling places and poll watchers?

As it turns out, the US Constitution gives states the power to regulate the “time, place, and manner” of elections — which means, in practical terms, that most of the rules governing voting and polling places are made at the state level — and can therefore vary widely from one jurisdiction to the next

The general idea behind poll watchers is that they help promote transparency and openness — not through their actions so much as by simply being in the room. Most states (and the District of Columbia) allow at least some kind of observer in polling places, but the rules for how poll watchers are picked (and by whom) vary from state to state. 

1) Who/what is a poll watcher and why do states allow them?

Most importantly, poll watchers are not just individuals who show up at the precinct on Election Day; virtually every jurisdiction requires that official poll watchers be identified and approved in advance—usually at least two weeks beforehand. And to avoid conflicts of interest or the potential for implicit intimidation, most states do not allow otherwise eligible law enforcement officers or state officials to serve as poll watchers.

2) What are poll watchers allowed to do? What can’t they do?

As the name suggests, poll watchers are generally expected to watch what happens in individual polling places and not play an especially active role in the actual voting process.

Poll watchers generally have two functions: Ensuring that all votes cast in that polling place are counted correctly and reporting suspected irregularities to local officials, be it the poll workers at the polling place, the election board or some other body. This last point is the potential source for controversy, because most states’ laws allow poll watchers to challenge individual voters’ right to vote — not directly, but through the poll workers — which has provoked concerns about poll watchers trying to intimidate voters.

5) What should you do if a poll watcher or someone else at your polling place acts in a manner that you believe is inappropriate?

They wisely do not allow fire arms in a polling place. Enough Said.

Loading

My Ancestors

I come from European Stock. English, German, Swedish mainly. My grandparents came to this country as immigrants. That. is the only difference in the early history of the American States that may differ from yours unless you are one of the few wealthy families from the start. They worked, they were working class immigrants. Most of the country’s immigrants were also. They were not part of city life but being from cooler areas of Europe landed in similar climates in the new land. My parents were born here and stayed, more-or-less, in those same areas. Even when towns and cities formed, ethnic areas composed these because immigrants tended to settle with like family units; ie.English on the north side, Swedish on the southeast, etc.; for support and protection. After all the immigrants did displace the Indians who already here.

The people that I grew up with were also this type but based on Italian, Polish, Irish, Scottish, . . . There were not many African, Caribbean, Chinese, Mexican, Islanders, etc. immigrants because their paths did not came to or through what I call our area. And my ancestors had yet to fight the ‘Civil War’ to free the slaves in the south. We were not rich and I did not know we were poor. We controlled and helped our families. Our families were large and that was as close as we came to having slaves. We could never afford to take care of slaves because we were busy caring for our families. I remember being told very young, “Don’t give your word easily, but when you do, keep it”. Given this history I am sure you can see why I resent anyone implying that I owe someone from my past. This also makes it easier for me to feel ‘bad’ when someone implies I did not honor my responsibilities.

The first time this questioning came around in the 50’s and 60’s I was confused because I did not understand that ‘White’ referred to me. I did not know where ‘White’ was. ‘Redneck’ referred to my friends on the farm because they were not allowed to go shirtless. I was pretty dark at the end of summer. Even a few years ago I was ask ‘How much African-American I had in me?’ I had to say ‘None. It is Swedish.’ Lately I came to understand that that term referred to me and others as a majority term. I had turned ‘White’ when I wasn’t looking! I had always thought of myself as a ‘minority of one’, and fought for myself against friend and foe alike.

Language History – White people – Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org › wiki › White_people

Modern racial hierarchies. The term “white race” or “white people” entered the major European languages in the later 17th century, originating with the racialization of slavery at the time, in the context of the Atlantic slave trade and the enslavement of indigenous peoples in the Spanish Empire. As I analyze this definition 2 things stand out. “the racialization of slavery at the time” means that it was not that way before! AND “enslavement of indigenous peoples in the Spanish Empire” means it too was brought to America!

White people

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

White people is a racial classification and skin color specifier, used mostly and often exclusively for people of European descent; depending on context, nationality, and point of view. The term has at times been expanded to encompass persons of Middle Eastern and North African descent (for example, in the US Census definition), persons who are often considered non-white in other contexts. The usage of “white people” or a “white race” for a large group of mainly or exclusively European populations, defined by their light skin, among other physical characteristics, and contrasting with “black people“, Amerindians, and other “colored” people or “persons of color“, originated in the 17th century. It was only during the 19th century that this vague category was transformed in a quasi-scientific system of race and skin color relations. Prior to the modern age, no European peoples regarded themselves as “white”, but rather defined their race, ancestry, or ethnicity in terms of their nationality. Moreover, there is no accepted standard for determining the geographic barrier between white and non-white people. Contemporary anthropologists and other scientists, while recognizing the reality of biological variation between different human populations, regard the concept of a unified, distinguishable “white race” as socially constructed. As a group with several different potential boundaries, it is an example of a fuzzy concept

Various social constructions of whiteness have been significant to national identity, public policy, religion, population statistics, racial segregation, affirmative action, white privilege, eugenics, racial marginalization, and racial quotas.  The concept of whiteness has particular resonance in the Anglosphere: e.g., in the United States (White Americans), Canada (white Canadians), Australia (white Australians), New Zealand (white New Zealanders), the United Kingdom (white British), and South Africa (white South Africans). In much of the rest of Europe, the distinction between race and nationality is more blurred; when people are asked to describe their race or ancestry, they often describe it in terms of their nationality.

WOW. Prior to the modern age, no European peoples regarded themselves as “white”. Sooo, NOW they do? What happened to defining their race, ancestry, or ethnicity in terms of their nationality? Why would European peoples regarded themselves as “white”? Who designated “European Peoples” as “White” and designated “enslaved indigenous peoples” as “Black” then “negroes” then “Afro-American” then “Colored People” then “People of Color” then …? The people who would do such a thing are the same group of “??????? People” that benefit from the division; The same group that fears the power of the resulting combined group of “Victims”. Is it the same group that claims “No Responsibility” for anything? 

And finally as I see it: The term “white race” or “white people” entered the major European languages in the later 17th century, originating with the racialization of slavery at the time. The term “black people” came with it as an opposing term. These terms have no scientific standing. They are Social terms. As social terms their origins are slavery. “black people” understood this at a deeper level. For many individuals, communities and countries, “black” is perceived as a derogatory, outdated, reductive or otherwise unrepresentative label and it has been rejected in favor of “person of color”. Both of these terms, “white or  black”, perpetuate Slavery by their use

Loading