This past weekend, it was the 100th anniversary of Ronald Reagan's birthday. Personally, I wasn't too impressed with the tribute. Why? Former President Ronald Reagan isn't a favorite of mine. I would not have voted for him knowing what I know now about him. Some of the things he voted for and were against, well, I didn't agree with most of them. Furthermore, it was the things that disturbed me more that I don't like.
1) He vetoed the Anti-Apartheid Bill
2) Reagan claimed that the Voting Rights Act was a "humiliation to the South".
3) He supported a university that had an anti-interracial dating policy, Bob Jones University. He supported it by granting this private university a tax exemption.
4) He sided with Barry Goldwater, who opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Let me tell you something about apartheid in South Africa. It was a dictatorship in which the majority Black population in South Africa was put under many restrictions in comparisons to the White population. Black people were restricted to living in "homelands", they couldn't vote, many people died from the cruelty subjected unto them from the South African police. There were other restrictions too. There were 11 universities reserved for the White population. Only 3 were reserved for the Black population. Around 1976, Blacks made up 2/3 of South Africa's population. Sounds like a gross imbalance to me. Personally, I feel that apartheid should not have existed. It was a system that took the freedom of human beings away. His plan was to veto a bill that would put economic sanctions on South Africa. It was overriden by congress.
Reagan claiming the Voting Rights Act of 1965 a "humiliation to the South" is something I am indignant about. I, as an American citizen, demand and require the right to vote, not just for Black people, but for ALL people in the USA, regardless of your race or ethnicity. People like Dr. King went into the streets, protested, marched, and died for my right to vote. I don't see that as a "humiliation". I see it as African-Americans getting the rights they should have gotten in the first place, as USA citizens. If the state government fails to support your right to vote, then in my eyes, the federal government ought to step in and force the state government to behave and support your right to vote, no matter what race or ethnicity you are.
The Bob Jones controversy, well, this is how it was. The IRS started denying private universities tax exemptions if they practiced segregation and discrimination. I agree with this. I see this as a way to get rid of the "separate but equal" vestiges of the old days. Reagan wanted to give this university tax exemptions. Well, Bob Jones University practiced a policy of forbidding interracial dating. Sounds like racism, smells like racism, it is racism.
And Reagan wanting to work with the likes of Barry Goldwater. Let me tell you something about Barry Goldwater. He didn't support the Civil Rights Act or the Voting Rights Act. He felt like the individual states should decide that. Let me tell you this. If history is any indicator, this is what I have to show you: The Deep South state governments were vehemently against such measures to give African-Americans the same rights and privileges as White people. Isn't an African-American as much a citizen of the USA as a White American? The answer is YES. An African-American is as much a citizen as a White American and therefore, should be given the same rights that everyone else gets. Well, the states in the South during the 1960's were not for this. If my eyes, the federal government needed to enforce such measures to make sure ALL of its citizens regardless of race, have the same rights as everyone else. Reagan even went to the place where the 3 civil rights workers were murdered by the police, in Neshoba County, Mississippi, and said that he supported "states' rights". Honestly, I don't trust it. I support making sure the states behave.
That is my say about Reagan.
http://www.ontheissues.org/celeb/Ronald_Reagan_Civil_Rights.htm
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=1953700
Monday, February 7, 2011
Friday, February 4, 2011
What colonialism was really about.
I have been to a forum and there are many threads on that forum that suggest that Africa as a continent is some kind of lost cause, and also suggesting that Africa is the way it is because, well, I will tell it as I see it. There are people who truly believe that Africans are "inferior" or "inherently incapable of leadership" or some reason, persons of sub-Saharan African descent are often vilified, thought of as "inferior". There are people who ask such questions such as "why is Africa so poor" or "what is wrong with Africans?", I see the questions come up on forums and this kind of stuff, well, it is time that I have my say on this blog.
There are some people who will point to tribalism. There are some people who will point to the value system. Me, I like to do the research and look at the all of the factors and decide for myself. After doing my research, there is one conclusion I have come to: It is so complicated one must struggle to wonder where to begin. Well, this is where I am going to begin.
I am not going to rule out tribalism, because that stuff happens. You have a plethora of ethnic groups in African, all of them with their own languages and traditions. It makes it hard to build up and use resources in a nation. And Africa has alot of good resources, such as gold, oil, diamonds, copper, rubber,etc. However, it also didn't help the borders that you see were drawn without a say from the people. The local persons on the continent of Africa didn't have a say. The rulers from Germany, UK, France, Portugal, Belgium, Italy, and Spain drew those borders. The leaders from those nations drew those borders. This stirred up tension.
Looking at some of the history involved, I would say that Africa has inherited some things from its former colonizers. Some of those things include some of the stuff that was built. I will say that there was infrastructure built by the colonizers who ruled Africa. With that being said, there is something one must understand: It was not built for the people. It was only built for the purpose of building up empires for the most part. When the British empire expanded into Africa, railroads were built, but not to connect towns as in places in India. With the exception of South Africa, railroads were built to connect the resources to the ports. This meant an infrastructure that was lacking. It was also built via forced labor in which many people died building the railroads. Infrastructure in general was not built up to standards, and with decolonialization, much of the infrastructure left behind would crumble. Why? The people were not taught how to use it. Colonialism was about MONEY. It wasn't about bringing "civilization", It was about exploiting resources and then using them to help the governments far away. People weren't trained on how to build the infrastructure and how to use it. The role of the Black African was simply to be the laborer. No plans in teaching the skills needed. Well, the infrastructure left behind is rather outdated and not enough skilled workers to update it either.
Another thing to look at is the economies. In many places, cash crops were the main part of the economy. After a long time of growing these cash crops(such as cotton) for profit, the soil declined in quality. It would not yield the abundance it had before. The rule was grow what you don't use and use what you don't grow. This is probably why famines are happening in Africa.
Colonialism in Africa was about money. That is part of why Africa has so many problems. In addition to internal problems, the legacy of colonialism has made things alot worse than they might have been.
There are some people who will point to tribalism. There are some people who will point to the value system. Me, I like to do the research and look at the all of the factors and decide for myself. After doing my research, there is one conclusion I have come to: It is so complicated one must struggle to wonder where to begin. Well, this is where I am going to begin.
I am not going to rule out tribalism, because that stuff happens. You have a plethora of ethnic groups in African, all of them with their own languages and traditions. It makes it hard to build up and use resources in a nation. And Africa has alot of good resources, such as gold, oil, diamonds, copper, rubber,etc. However, it also didn't help the borders that you see were drawn without a say from the people. The local persons on the continent of Africa didn't have a say. The rulers from Germany, UK, France, Portugal, Belgium, Italy, and Spain drew those borders. The leaders from those nations drew those borders. This stirred up tension.
Looking at some of the history involved, I would say that Africa has inherited some things from its former colonizers. Some of those things include some of the stuff that was built. I will say that there was infrastructure built by the colonizers who ruled Africa. With that being said, there is something one must understand: It was not built for the people. It was only built for the purpose of building up empires for the most part. When the British empire expanded into Africa, railroads were built, but not to connect towns as in places in India. With the exception of South Africa, railroads were built to connect the resources to the ports. This meant an infrastructure that was lacking. It was also built via forced labor in which many people died building the railroads. Infrastructure in general was not built up to standards, and with decolonialization, much of the infrastructure left behind would crumble. Why? The people were not taught how to use it. Colonialism was about MONEY. It wasn't about bringing "civilization", It was about exploiting resources and then using them to help the governments far away. People weren't trained on how to build the infrastructure and how to use it. The role of the Black African was simply to be the laborer. No plans in teaching the skills needed. Well, the infrastructure left behind is rather outdated and not enough skilled workers to update it either.
Another thing to look at is the economies. In many places, cash crops were the main part of the economy. After a long time of growing these cash crops(such as cotton) for profit, the soil declined in quality. It would not yield the abundance it had before. The rule was grow what you don't use and use what you don't grow. This is probably why famines are happening in Africa.
Colonialism in Africa was about money. That is part of why Africa has so many problems. In addition to internal problems, the legacy of colonialism has made things alot worse than they might have been.
The reason the green energy industry would work for Texas,
If you know anything about the economy of Texas, you know that this state is rich with petroleum. Ask anyone in Midland or Odessa. Ask people in the Greater Houston area. You have a state that sits atop the Permian Basin, a large oil reserve in west-cetral Texas. Well, I don't believe that oil is the only industry to be striving for in Texas. There is another industry to look to for the future. Look to the green energy industry. It can work for Texas. We are talking about the second biggest state in the USA. One of the sunniest states in the USA. A state with alot of wind in its northern and western parts. Texas already produces the most amount of wind power in the USA. Quite interesting considering that Texas is among the most oil rich states in the USA. Wind power is a competitor of oil. I have heard that oil companies would try to stop the expansion of wind power. I say, expand wind power even more. Texas can do it. It is doing it now. I say do it MORE. Build some more wind farms. Build a plant to manufacture the stuff to build more windmills. Build some windmills out on the Gulf of Mexico. The nation of Denmark is putting windmills out on the North Sea. Why not more for Texas? Solar power can work on a phenomenal level for Texas. Some of the sunniest portions of the USA are in Texas, especially western Texas. With all of the solar radiation, why not?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
