After
devoting much of my life to serious academic study, I have reached a conclusion
about what this country needs most in order to make continued progress in all
spheres of its multi-dimensional and institutional democracy: a buzzer.
Yes,
a buzzer. And not just any kind of
buzzer but a very special buzzer. You
see, this buzzer would give off a tiny electric shock and would be used only
under the following conditions: whenever any person, male or female, black or
white, young or old, said or did anything that was full of prejudice, that
person would have to wear a buzzer!
Every new act of prejudice would automatically lead to the buzzer
delivering a small zap.
Moreover,
even the president would have to wear one.
The next time he goes to say “it’s okay to bomb people of a different
color” anybody in the country could reach for a buzzer and give him a little
shock of electricity. Eventually some
may succumb to the temptation to over-zap him, but this buzzer would be so
technologically advanced that it will not allow for that: only a genuine act of
prejudice gets zapped!
Check
out how history might have been different had we all been wearing buzzers a
long time ago:
There’s the Grand Wizard
of the KKK and he’s about to light a torch and deliver another hate-filled
speech demanding violence against Black people when, all of a sudden, out of
the blue ZAP! he gets a major shot of
electricity since mass-zapping would be allowed for persons who are
particularly obnoxious in their
prejudices . . .
There’s the mighty growers of
California’s vineyards and agricultural lands--the land and yearly output of
foodstuffs is literally worth billions--and a whole roomful of growers around a big conference table are sitting and saying
“Oh those Mexicans don’t deserve any higher pay because . . .” when big
multi-wired units of zap energy unload their electric charges and every one of
them growers would get ZAPPED!!
Why
that room would be so charged with electrical energy it would be dangerous for
a stranger to try and to walk through it!
Or
how about some of those Black Muslims when they screech that idiotic crap at
us like they’re holy saints and all non-Blacks and non-Muslims are pieces of
dirt? I mean, LIGHTING BOLT-SIZE ZAPPERS
would be crashing all about them, not from the little electric zapper, but from
the Almighty Himself who detests liars and hypocrites more than any other kind
of deceitful fools!
A
Black Muslim says “All white men are the devil” and as soon as anyone says
“that’s not true” or “that remark contains prejudice” what do the Black
Muslims do? Like all reactionary
elements before them, they accuse the
other party of being the racist. Now why is that? How racist is the party of the prophet
Muhammad if that kind of twisted, inverted, and sick piece of reasoning passes
mustard?
Well,
if someone says the Black Muslims don’t believe that, they used to be that way but not
anymore, how about letting us hear one of their spokesmen say so? Or is that too minor a philosophical shift--from virulent racism to something only slightly more tolerant--to bear
mentioning in public?
Would they be
ashamed to say something like: “Not
all members of a group are the same; there’s good and bad in every group; you
can’t judge a whole group by the actions of a single member . . .”
. . . and so forth, ideas most of us are all
very comfortable with--would it too insulting to Islam to say something like
that? I mean, even Malcolm X talked
about how on his trip to Mecca he broke bread with a man- whom he came to look
upon as a brother- who had blue eyes and blond hair.
Or are the prejudices of Black Muslims a form
of racism particular to our own nation alone?
I mean, do they agree or disagree-- accept or reject-- what Malcolm X
was telling them when he made this statement?
Some
may think that as a matter of religious toleration, we must put up with this
Black Muslim racism. I, for one, most
vigorously disagree. Americans should
never tolerate racism but actively combat it, as the people of any democratic
nation must.
The Grand Wizard of the KKK should be opposed because he is a racist,
not because he is a member of a Christian denomination. We are
not opposing the religion but the racism. There is a world of difference between these two approaches.
Louis Farrakahn is a racist and his racism
must be condemned as we would anyone else for uttering such racist remarks,
regardless of what religion they proclaim, or none at all.
The
Grand Wizard and the leader of the Black Muslims are, if you’ll pardon the
literary idiom, one and the same person or at least cut from the same cloth
and drifting into the same sea of chaos that the insane bitter dregs of racism
always bring to the deteriorating minds of those who prefer violence to peace
and hate to love.
Let
them wear the buzzer and let the people decide who gets zapped the more
often!
-Roger R.
San Jose,
California
October 26,
2002
No comments:
Post a Comment