the bullets have arrived

• tying all the readings together, it seems the general idea is to recognize how capitalism has constructed this notion of racism as we understand it today and that the two are dependent on each other. but the reading (i believe Manning Marable's work) also discusses how racism has become such an accepted institution in America that it goes beyond capitalism and the arguments of ensuring a steady labor supply. is it limiting to analyze and critique racism only within the context of capitalism?
  
• slavery, its roots, the reasons are analyzed throughout our readings, but in what ways does this notion of "slavery" still occur or manifest itself today, domestically and globally?
  
• slavery and freedom is described as the central paradox of American history, yet it was purposely and knowingly instituted. while the definiton of slavery and freedom might be paradoxical, but is the definiton of slavery as it occurs in America and freedom in America truly paradoxical? or necessary and a parasitic relationship?
• Jefferson's phobias, distrust of landless urban workman and debt.
  
• Reading Manning Marable's work was troubling for me. Like reading Power and Powelessness (especially the third dimensional power structure) I want to believe in what the author is stating. it is almost easy to buy into the argument, but thats what concerns me. To be more specific, I feel it is limiting to view African Americans as completely powerless agents within this racist/capitalist structure that is America. or perhaps it is his argument that socialism is the answer. either way I hope to discuss this reading further in class.
  
• globalization or imperialism. whatever way you see it, underdevelopment and development is repeatedly argued to be existing only with the existence of the other. through the various measures that Arturo Escobar believes to contribute to the exploitation of the south by the North how is culture an effective resistance?
  
• even though the slave owners were in constant fear of revolt by the slaves, who so clearly outnumbered their owners, didn't do so because for so long were not aware or could even conceive of the possibility of revolt. third power structure? how does this tie into today's political and social movements?
  
• "We Desire Only a White Population in California" was an extremely interesting article especially the examining of the difference between the Mexican Ranchero class (the elite that claims European ancestry) and the Mexican working class. the systematic assimiliation of the ranchero class into this Anglo society until it was powerless is both a divide and conquer strategy and an issue of class and the accessibility it grants. how does this strategy work in today's society? examples
• the face of poverty is powerful. it is one that is entrenched in the notion of "difference". the construction of difference can not occur without the existence of "normal" and "natural". we can discuss this and how it ties into keeping the south underdeveloped, but also if there was to be a movement to create fundamental change in this structure how do we work with these differences (constructed and real)?
  
• i think in almost every one of our readings the authors make an attempt to include a reference to the systematic disenfranchisement of women, sexism and the problems assosciated with gender. but i think its been simplified. the experience im sure is different. and while we are talking about racism, i don't think i can understand it fully and its complexities without deconstructing the heteronormative nuisances in the readings and intersectionalities of racism and sexism.
  

to the discussion leaders and class,

I apologize first for any spelling errors, lack of coherence and any general wtf's. this is definitely a work in progress and a very general outline of my ponderings. i will hopefully be clarifying my ideas and questions as i come to have a more healthy relationship with the text. zhai jian.

Course

I just wanted everyone to know that I have dropped this course and therefore will not be meeting today at 3 nor sending in a response paper.

Thanks guys-- it was a pleasure.

cultural production

During Wednesday's class we discussed cultural production and I realized my thought process about it has been limited to a top down kind of approach. I have been convinced that the people who have the power to influence cultural values are the people in power. However, our last class really made me think about who exactly has the power to produce cultural ideas. Before the readings and discussion last week I had only thought of culture being produced by a ruling/dominant group of people. There might not be intent on behalf of any individual to reproduce racist/sexist/heterosexist aspects of our culture for mass consumption, but the groups in political and economic power are the ones with control of the major media of culture (movies, tv, news, newspapers, magazines, books, etc). I never thought of the idea of one person constantly participating in cultural production on an everyday basis, and I had never considered the ways in which activist groups can use cultural tools to further their purpose and build unity. The reading about the Civil Rights Movement emphasized this for me. The leaders of the movement used songs not to change mainstream America's opinions, but instead to develop unity among the people they were trying to lead. This is an aspect of cultural production that I had overlooked before. The focus doesn't necessarily have to be on changing everyone's way of thinking, but things like songs (books, zines, blogs!) can be used to unify specific people behind a cause.