|
Me,
We: Individuality and Social Responsibility That Knows No Boundaries
What direction should the multiracial
movement take?
By Daniel McNeil
"There is no such thing as society: there are individual men and
women, and there are families."
- Margaret Thatcher, British Prime Minister 1979-1990
As I have recently been embroiled in a debate on www.mixedfolks.com
that touches upon the issue of the individual and the(ir) community,
I would like to use this column to write about the use of individualism
in a multiracial movement whose leaders predominantly come from the
professional classes, as well as its sometimes contradictory partnership
with a desire for a community so "we can be as strong as other
groups" and/or "fully" become national citizens.
Much of the rhetoric I observe in articles on websites such as The Multiracial
Activist (www.multiracial.com ) and Interracial Voice (www.interracialvoice.com)
fails to be reflective on the privilege the authors hold. I refer not
only to the easy labelling of "(some) white privilege" but
the question of educational and middle-class privilege the class
word that is so easily ignored in the North American context. My own
context is one of a male, Black/mixed individual raised in a skilled
working-class family headed by a Catholic/humanist and socialist matriarch.
While I was also one of "Thatcher"s children" and grew
up in an area that was not particularly well tended by her economic
policies, I have had access to privilege in higher educational organizations
in Oxford and Toronto. In such institutions I have adored the chance
to learn and pursue wisdom but been somewhat disturbed in observing,
and on occasion succumbing to, a lack of care for others, privileging
of one"s own experience, and acceptance of primary definitions
of what an individual and community should be, as well as the anti-Americanism
prevalent in the UK and Canada that can ignore British and Canadian
limitations (or more precisely, justify their own position as "not
as bad as the US").
______________________________
My
own context is one of a male, Black/mixed individual
raised in a skilled working-class family headed by
a Catholic/humanist and socialist matriarch.
______________________________
While writing this piece on the American context I hope to engage in
a dialogue and not descend into easy anti-US sentiment. However, I accept
that I am not constrained by, or benefit from, an acceptance of the
US constitution and thus will not always look to whether work is in
accordance with earlier American ideals. I shall have links to the Founding
Fathers who denounced King George III in order to ask uncomfortable
questions of those who currently hold privilege and power as "just"
individuals who not only "do it" but have "made it",
like Nike, yet I will also look to a future with founding mothers and
founding Black or working-class individuals. With such individuals speaking
through supportive groups on a national forum, we may extend the debate
to build an inclusive worldwide community based on freedom for all rather
than security for privileged individuals, groups or corporations.
So, after such a preamble, j"accuse not only those who are rooted
in a political, ethnic or national community and speak for "victimized"
Others so as to obtain academic security, allay guilt, or who attack
lazy Others who (seem to/are constructed to) threaten their security,
but also those who seek to be free of any ties to community(ies). I
can accept the quest of individuals for their own voice to be a valid
response to the oppressive labelling of groups that insist that one
avoid debate and think of the group "above all else". Nonetheless,
I also wish to highlight the dangers of people dreaming to expand the
benefits of power for themselves as an individual and ignoring the ways
in which their identity is formed from surrounding political, ethnic
or national discourses, as well as failing to condemn those who attack
"problem groups" such as single mothers and the unemployed.
The anonymity of "problem groups" is perpetuated not only
by rugged individualists, but also by individuals forming along group
lines to trot out trendy Marxist maxims to blame capitalism and by individuals
situated as respectable figureheads of ethnic groups or "concerned
citizens" who can denigrate "welfare queens" in order
to praise the need for (nuclear) family values in America even
while slandering their own sister, as Supreme Court judge Clarence Thomas
did.
______________________________
The
multiracial movement in the US should neither seek to
obtain a Cape Coloured option nor intend to promote new national
citizens without tackling racism within America...
______________________________
By tying my concern to those who seek individualism through the (right
kind of) family and nation, or new community, we may call into doubt
the freedom of individuals to escape the influences of existing communities.
Why? Because we may observe the desires of individuals for security
through an acceptance of established terms regarding what one should
search for (e.g. family, ethnic group, nation). Here we are not simply
dealing with class privilege for individuals from various socio-economic
backgrounds seek security and group belonging but with fear and
definitions of the self not only like Others, but also against Others:
e.g. "we" (multiracial individuals in the US) are what "we"
are because we are not "just" African, European, Native, Hispanic,
Asian, Southeast Asian, Arab (etc) Americans. Again, such concerns are
entirely valid, but I don"t see how they can comfortably fit with
a wish to produce individuals free from all labels. A description of
"just" individuals certainly doesn"t work when one views
American individuals from outside the United States, as one can observe
that they are also individual Americans, who are not free from context
and a longing for security.
I feel we must attend to our own context and show that we are made up
of different communities. The multiracial movement in the US should
neither seek to obtain a Cape Coloured option (the Cape Coloured of
South Africa are individuals of mixed European and African descent who
during that country"s apartheid regime occupied a mid-range position
between Whites and Blacks) nor intend to promote new national citizens
without tackling racism within America or American imperialism combined
with numerous Americans" lack of knowledge about the rest of the
world. If one truly wants to be an individual, one cannot only be an
ethnic group and/or an American. To be an individual one needs to acknowledge
the various communities that shape(d) one's outlook and then look (and
listen) to individuals with divergent (national, regional, class-based,
gendered, racialized, ethnic, political, religious etc.) experiences
to one's own, on their own terms, with their own ways of conceptualizing
the world. One has to (valiantly search to) be a citizen of the world,
with all the problems of receiving and selecting information through
interpreters, along with habits formed to reject what contradicts our
established values and incorporate that which seems similar and therefore
"true". One should not merely look to Others who share one's
opinions in order to justify one's own position and simply read those
who challenge one's deeply held beliefs as irrelevant or failing to
hold "our" standards. In following such a course one can fail
to become an individual who effectively challenges the limits of one's
own "proud nation or ethnic group" or "respectable family",
as one relies on established group norms.
Are we individuals? Yes, we can selectively mould and interpret our
own world. Is that all we are? No, we have various group identities
(that help make us an individual). Should only our own identities provide
the basis we need for extra security and reference material? No, one
cannot privilege his or her own if we, as a worldwide (not simply Western,
privileged and often Eurocentric) community, are to form global, human
citizens not simply concerned with ourselves or "one of us,"
but justice.
This
article first appeared in The Multiracial Activist.
Daniel McNeil is a graduate student at the University of Toronto. His
research interests include observing how inclusive rooted or indigenous
Black communities are of newer immigrants from Africa and the Caribbean
and looking at the rhetorical use of ìAmericanizationî in
Canada and the US. He can be reached at daniel.mcneil@utoronto.ca.
This
website: Copyright © 2005 Dream
World Media, LLC. / Urban Mozaik Magazine. All rights reserved. The
opinions expressed in Urban Mozaik Magazine are not necessarily those
of Urban Mozaik Magazine and the publisher cannot be held responsible
for them. This website/publication, in whole or in part, may not be reproduced
without written permission from the publisher. |
|
|