Someone on Facebook linked to this article. If you don’t want to read it, I’ll quote the headline: “Why aren’t we as universally outraged over Sandra Bland’s death as we are over Cecil the lion?” One immediately finds one’s self asking, “What do you mean, ‘we’?” According to the article “we” means all of us–but according to the facts given in the article, “we” means news anchors.
Are we supposed to ignore everything we know about the mass media under capitalism, what its role is, who it serves? Of course news anchors want to accent, increase, dramatize, highlight, and expand racial divisions. Racial divisions have been consciously used to keep working people apart in this country at least since the New York Draft Riots during the Civil War. What do you think Jim Crow was about? Hint: it wasn’t there because the Southern elite felt kindly disposed toward the white working class.
Everywhere I’ve looked, I’ve seen outrage–justified outrage–about the illegal arrest and brutal police murder (yeah, sorry, I still don’t buy suicide) of Sandra Bland. So, okay, we know why the anchorman for a reactionary TV Network doesn’t want us knowing how united we feel about this. But why are so many of those who call themselves leftists going along with it? What is their agenda? Why is it so important to the so-called Liberals and the well-trained pets who sit at their left hand that we believe “no one cares”?
Did you know the New York Times–the voice of American Liberalism–did a poll that showed most people believed there had been considerable progress in race relations, and also showed an increase in class consciousness? They released the results under a banner headline that read, “A Broad Division Over Race in US Is Found In Poll: Relations Seen as Bad.” Here is a good analysis of it.
Police murders, income disparity, domestic spying, health care, education, poverty–these things are bringing us together in our anger and hatred for the oppressors. The Ring Wing is quite reasonably doing everything it can to keep us apart. Why is the New York Times? The International Socialist Organization? The authors of the article on The Raw Story?
Because their agenda has nothing to do with eliminating social privilege; it is about expanding the privilege to include themselves–to give the upper middle class a “bigger slice of the pie.” They hate and envy the ruling class, but despise and fear the working class.
My agenda has nothing to do with giving the upper middle class greater social privilege; my agenda is the destruction of all social privilege forever. You can’t do both. What is your agenda? Or, as they used to say in Harlan County, which side are you on?