The Smithsonian has a collection of photographs that are believed to be the first ever taken of the city of Jerusalem. The photos were taken in 1844 by French photographer, Joseph-Philibert Girault de Prangey.
In a 1947 report on communist infiltration in the movie industry, the FBI considered "It's a Wonderful Life" to be "communist propaganda." It shows rich people as "mean and despicable characters" and it "maligns the upper class"--yep, that's communist all right.
Bruce Reyes Chow is one of those people whom I've never actually met but whom I feel I know fairly well. Ah, the wonders of the internet and social media!
Bruce was moderator of the Presbyterian Church (USA) from 2008 to 2010. His new book is titled: But I Don't See You as Asian: Curating Conversations about Race. I caught up with him recently and he addressed some of the issues raised in his book:
(PI) OK, Bruce. What causes racism?
Bruce: There certainly is not one easily determined answer to this one. Some would say it's the history of slavery while others might say that it is a modern outgrowth of interactions between people of different cultures as the globe shrinks.
If I had to name one reason today, I would say that it is our collective inability to see one another as individualized human beings. Now this is NOT about being color-blind or wanting people to so give up culture, but I do believe that we too often see one another as A Black or An Asian or A White that we do not allow ourselves to be empathetic or understanding to what it means to BE Black or BE Asian or BE White. When we do this, we are less likely to appreciate the nuances and complexities of each individual's experience of their racial reality.
I would also say that another cause - can't just stop at one - is our failure to see how institutions and systems can perpetuate an ongoing culture that lives certain racial groups above others.
(PI) Racism has been called the "original sin" of America. Comment?
Bruce: I have not heard this much, but I can see how this is tied to our history of slavery and exclusion, mostly around African American and Native American and how so much of our economy and culture has been build on our history of slavery and marginalization of people of color...
I think this is an untapped area of discussion to be had because, in a day and age when we want things to be solved yesterday, we must find a way to see that the impact of generations of slavery and racial exclusion will not be solved quickly. Yes, there are always exceptions to every rule, but as a larger narrative for the United States, there is great opportunity in having this conversation.
(PI) What can be done to diminish racism?
Bruce: Contrary to what some may want, it is not to STOP talking about race. I am a firm believer that deeply conflicted relationships are not served by silence. Whether a marriage or a society, unless we keep talking about and through our disagreements, we doom ourselves to further withdrawal from one another and a building up of resentment and distrust. No matter how difficult we know it to be, we must keep talking about race.
Bruce is a native Northern Californian and 3rd generation Chinese/Filipino who writes and speaks extensively on faith, politics, race, parenting and technology.
Bruce graduated from San Francisco State University with a degree in Philosophy, Sociology and Asian American studies (1990), earned his masters degree from San Francisco Theological Seminary (1995) and was granted an honorary Doctor of Divinity degree from Austin College (2011).
A prolific blogger and sought-after speaker, Bruce's previous books include The Definitive-ish Guide for Using Social Media in the Church (Shook Foil Books, 2012). His writing can be found on his blog, www.reyes-chow.com, as well as The Huffington Post, Patheos and The Working Preacher.
Bruce is also a Presbyterian Teaching Elder having pastored multicultural congregations for nearly 20 years. In 2008 he was elected to the highest office the 2 million member Presbyterian Church (USA).
Bruce currently lives in San Francisco, CA with his wife, Robin, his three daughters, Evelyn, Abby and Annie and one very cute canine. But I Don't See You as Asian can be purchased here.
“[Expletive] the White House Correspondents’ Dinner.” —Hillary Clinton, responding to the suggestion that it would be suspicious if President Obama skip the White House Correspondents' Dinner on the weekend the Osama bin Laden raid took place, according to Mark Liebovich's upcoming book on D.C., This Town.
Bishop Robert Finn of Kansas City, last seen defending himself in a child sex abuse scandal, now cautions his flock not to pay any attention to those dastardly people at the National Catholic Reporter (NCR). NCR, a liberal Catholic newspaper, has its headquarters in Kansas City.
In the last months I have been deluged with emails and other correspondence from Catholics concerned about the editorial stances of the Reporter: officially condemning Church teaching on the ordination of women, insistent undermining of Church teaching on artificial contraception and sexual morality in general, lionizing dissident theologies while rejecting established Magisterial teaching, and a litany of other issues.
Some of that is even true. NCR has openly endorsed the ordination of women. They have probably undermined church teaching on artificial contraception as well, though I have no direct knowledge of it. Finn shouldn't want to go there. Church teaching on artificial contraception is already rejected by 80% of Roman Catholics anyway.
National Catholic Reporter is certainly not a cheerleader for the bishops, which is what "rejecting established Magisterial teaching" means. As for sexual morality, I doubt that NCR has done more to undermine sexual morality than the bishops have.
NCR also hosts the world's foremost Vatican journalist, John Allen, one of its better public theologians, Richard McBrien, and one of its most well-known advocates of social justice, Joan Chittister. They are three among many reasons that many Catholics would be more likely to take the word of NCR than that of many bishops.
How times have changed? In 1960, one of the great questions of the election was whether or not people would hold John F. Kennedy's Catholic faith against him when they went to vote. Would anti-Catholic prejudice be expressed through a vote against JFK?
As it turned out, the number who did so was negligible. It was only after the election that people asked the question of whether or not Catholics themselves voted for Kennedy because he was Catholic, which they did, incidentally, in quite strong numbers.
This headline asks: "Do black people support Obama because he's black?" The story then quickly appeared at major newsites, and many minor ones, all across the country.
To answer the question, probably a handful or so. Since Lyndon Johnson, black people have voted Democratic at the 90-95% level. President Obama got 95% of them last time, so, yes, it appears that 1-2% of black people may be voting for President Obama because he's black.
Or not: Are we ruling out the possibility that those 1-2% have been converted to the Democrats on the basis of the issues?
You wonder what number of white people might be supporting Mitt Romney because he's white. I don't have any particular yardstick for measuring what that number might be, but I'll bet it's something, perhaps even more than 2%.
Will we see similar articles that ask similar questions about other constituencies? Will there be an exploration, for example, of the voting patterns of Mormons, to wit: "Are Mormons voting for Mitt Romney because he's Mormon?"
Perhaps the nation might also like to know how rich people have voted historically, and their likely voting preferences in this election, to wit: "Are rich people supporting Mitt Romney because he's rich?"