In Which Kainenchen Is Naive About Political Realities.

This morning, as I have the day off to pack for DragonCon, I've been watching Under African Skies, a documentary about the making of the Graceland Album. And the most interesting thing to me is that, at the time the rhythms were recorded, the ANC protested it, because the UN had declared a cultural boycott of South Africa. And it made sense, from a degree, to have this boycott: South Africa was still under apartheid, and political wisdom was that the country ought to be shunned, so that no one in the world could be seen to support Apartheid, in any sense- economically, militarily, or culturally.

Thing is, this is the complete and utter wrong way to go about dealing with a nation which is abusing its citizens: to lock them away from the rest of the world, in the cesspit of their abuse. It's like saying that a person being beaten by their spouse should be shunned along with said spouse, and the two of them should be locked away until the spouse stops the violence. Isolation, I think, is the exact opposite of what you should want for an oppressed country- especially when they have such amazingness to offer, musically, artistically, and yes.

I was 6 years old when Graceland: The African Concert aired. My parents taped it, and I still have that tape to this day. What the people protesting the Graceland Album and the Concert didn't see, and couldn't see, was that little kids of all races, in all kinds of places would see this, and know "Bring Back Nelson Mandela," and about Apartheid at all, and about this music and the people who make it, rather than this music being locked away behind a curtain of evil. Music, and art, and literature help people relate to others. It's one thing to know, "yeah, they have no rights, and no citizenship, and no anything else- that's sad," and another to know, "OMG, these people who make these things that I love, are being treated this way."

When Ladysmith Black Mambazo came to New York to record with Paul Simon, they wanted to go to Central Park, and asked where they could get a permit. They had no idea that you didn't need a permit to go places. And it's frigging valuable, to learn something like that, that the way things are where you are, a culture of fear and terror aren't the way it is everywhere, or the way it has to be. It doesn't change anything right at that moment, but it never goes away, knowing that kind of thing.

Paul Simon was accused of cultural appropriation: of exploiting these South African musicians for his own profit. He argued, in return, that it was a collaboration. He and the artists he worked with created a hybrid, something that hadn't existed before, and showed they could work together and make an amazing, explosive album. And in the long run, I think I agree with him. He did the right thing, and so did the artists who worked with him. It's all well and good for people of color to make art for other people of color, but it's not... satisfying, not to me anyway, to be a colored person doing colored things in a colored corner. Maybe it's being mixed race, I want to share art from all of my various backgrounds with people from each of those. And I am not really jazzed hearing fear and hesitancy from my white friends and loved ones, because they're so afraid of messing something up, they don't want to engage with anything outside of their familiar.

And maybe that's their own problem, but I've always found that it's better, and more satisfying, to just roll with it, assume good intent, and be okay.

In the meantime, Miriam Makeba's voice still nearly makes me cry, after all these years. Nkosi Sikileli Africa... just yeah.

Occupied America Welcomes You.

These links are stolen from this post, and well... watch them. I think they're Good.



And



And Some Curious and Oh yeah, Apathy's always been a problem! Scenarios and Some predictable scoffing at the freaking out by the Super-Rich over being called on their bullshit.

And now, I tell you why I don't mind that the #OccupyWallStreet (et al) movement doesn't seem to have a coherent message. You see, neither has the Left, for any real amount of time now. Even through the Obama campaign, the message was pretty much, "Something's Gotta happen now/Something's Gotta Give," with no indication of what that Something ought to be. Because we all had different ideas, and part of the character of the left is at least trying to respect the differences in those ideas, at least as far as what we ought to focus on.

The problem with that, while it is ideologically correct, is that it makes it damn hard to have anything to sink your teeth into, and get excited about.

Enter #OccupyWallStreet, the Left-in-Microcosm: confused, unfocused, desperate, eager, willing to be loud, and ultimately wanting it to be over so we can go home and get back to doing things we'll enjoy. The point isn't to be the message. It's to hold up the problem so that the responses will generate something we can stand behind, and shout to the rooftops. It's a roundabout way to get at the generation of a message, but has anything else worked? And if this doesn't work, it's just one more try, and at least a wonderfully visible one.

For my part, I'll continue to send pizza and bagels to the protesters, and hope it continues-- at least, until it's no longer needed.

On Plutocracy, Anarchy, and bitterness.

If Socialist is going to be a bad word, I want Objectivist to be a word at least as bad. Objectivist and Plutocrat should be synonymous with Anarchist, in the way that I see conservative blogs conflating Socialism and Fascism. Yeah, Dichotomy. Yeah, how the worm turns. But look here-- we have right-wingers shredding government past the point of Monarchy-- who wants monarchs? No one. And they're managing to skirt around Fascism even, except in the case of religious politics, because a non-secular government can't help it. One Faith = One Party is kind of... accidentally mandatory. But that's another shade of teal deer.

I am here today because I am bitter as all hell. The tear-down of government-- as a tyrant, as restrictive, as evil and thieving-- angers me deeply. Who is making this argument? Would-be Plutocrats who are convincing those of us who are a little-bit successful that the Government is trying to rule and run our lives for us.

No, not ours. Yours. Why? Because you can afford to run our lives, and Government is there to stop you. So what do you do? You forment near-anarchy, because you know you'll be able to buy your way out of it. You're plugging for the pure economic tyranny of the USSR, except instead of the State, wealth and the Plutocrat will be revered. You are holding up as an idol the spectre of "Success".

I don't think that word means what you want us to think it means.

Anyway. I need to make another post here-- a personal link list of Andelku's posts about The Hedgehog.

You'll understand when you see.

Sometimes, there are certain restrictions which allow freedom. The Bill of Rights is this kind of restriction-- something which restricts the right of others to restrict.

Here is something which talks about this in the context of teh internets:



I believe this in the context of most things, and Religion in particular-- and I apologise if I'm harping on this one-- it is only in a secular state that the practise of religion is truly free. I can, in my very bizarre and personal-faithy way, not interfere with the practise of the Catholic mass or the Pentacostal anything or the Muslim prayers or any of those things, by law. And I love listening to the bells of the church across the street of a Sunday, as much as I'd like to hear the Muzzein call to prayer to mosques of a dusk, whilst reading my tarot cards on a café table. I realise that it is unthinkable to certain religions that anyone else might have answers, but it is imperative that that lack of ability to comprehend that kind of diversity not in fact squelch the same. Because while individuals may believe that They Know Truth, the segments that agree on said Truth are by far smaller than society as a whole, and are trumped thereby.