Land of hypocrisy
http://newshound.de.siu.edu/voices04/ | TOMMY CURRY
On Tuesday, MTV aired an interview via satellite between college students from Iraq and Kent State, Ohio. I was impressed by the stance the Iraqi students took in regard to the United States' occupation of their country. They seemed to be well aware that the United States' presence was not well planned and was definitely not in the interests of securing their so called freedoms, as one white female from Kent State insisted. In fact, one student from Iraq adamantly expressed her disgust for the U.S. occupation arguing that it not only made her home a battle ground for terrorists, but that it also infringed on her state's right of self-determination.
The reality of the situation is that the Nov. 15 agreement is a joke. The Coalition Provisional Authority and the Iraqi Governing Council have not secured any means of conducting elections by January or meeting the security level assumed by the June 30 withdrawal. In fact, two prominent political scientists, Larry Diamond and Kenneth Pollack, argue that the withdrawal of the United States within the next year would spiral the country into civil war. The United States has destroyed the economic and political viability of Iraq and forced the transition to democracy to be bloody and violent, as most democratic transitions are.
What was most insightful about the Iraqi students' anti-U.S. sentiment was the exposure of the ideological and intellectual obeisance Americans show towards the Bush administration's interventionist and realist policies. I believe that the Iraqi students are correct. Most Americans are stupid, and operate under the assumption that because they are American (white Americans) they have the right to interfere with and dictate the social and cultural practices of other countries, and buy into the false reasons given by the U.S. government. However, I believe people of color are more skeptical of the U.S. government because we are well aware of its treachery and historical tendency to lie and manufacture the consent of the white population for domestic and foreign policies.
As Sura, a 19-year-old female student in Iraq, asked "how would we (the United States) like it if another country occupied the United States? I mean, Iraq did not have weapons of mass destruction, so the only other argument by 'just war theory' would be human right violations, but is the United States not guilty of the same charges?"
Beth Lyon, a lawyer at Washington College International Law Clinic says, "The 1993 UNDP Human Development Report revealed that white U.S. residents enjoyed the highest quality of life in the world, while U.S. African Americans were 31st on the list, on par with Trinidad and Tobago; U.S. Hispanics were 35th. In contrast to most other industrialized countries, the United States has no federal constitutional and scant state constitutional protections for substantive economic and social rights, such as the right to housing or adequate nutrition."
She continues to argue that the United States ratification of the Convention for the Elimination of All Racial Discrimination in 1994 places a duty on the United States to eliminate the disparate impact of protected classes regardless of governmental motive.
As such, the challenges the Bush administration raised against affirmative action could be considered a direct contravening of the international norm on human rights. In fact, the deprivation and murdering of the minority population, the racial economic gap and the continuance of capital punishment against minorities and the mentally ill have all been cited in European Union protocols to the U.N.
So should Americans be anxiously awaiting the occupation of the E.U. countries that recognize the international consensus of human rights which include economic and social constitutional protections?
For African Americans and other people of color, I believe this is a demonstration of two profound moments of clarity. First, there is not a gauge through which we can measure progress on the race issue, because the United States only interprets racism to be in the existence of political rights, and not the social and economic consequences of discrimination. And second, that the United States' eradicate ratification of international human rights treaties and its challenges regarding affirmative action show that the government and it white constituents have a stake in making sure minorities stay poor and lack the access necessary to assert their political rights.
Tommy is a graduate student. My Nommo appears every Thursday. These views do not necessarily reflect those of the DAILY EGYPTIAN.
http://newshound.de.siu.edu/voices04/ | TOMMY CURRY
On Tuesday, MTV aired an interview via satellite between college students from Iraq and Kent State, Ohio. I was impressed by the stance the Iraqi students took in regard to the United States' occupation of their country. They seemed to be well aware that the United States' presence was not well planned and was definitely not in the interests of securing their so called freedoms, as one white female from Kent State insisted. In fact, one student from Iraq adamantly expressed her disgust for the U.S. occupation arguing that it not only made her home a battle ground for terrorists, but that it also infringed on her state's right of self-determination.
The reality of the situation is that the Nov. 15 agreement is a joke. The Coalition Provisional Authority and the Iraqi Governing Council have not secured any means of conducting elections by January or meeting the security level assumed by the June 30 withdrawal. In fact, two prominent political scientists, Larry Diamond and Kenneth Pollack, argue that the withdrawal of the United States within the next year would spiral the country into civil war. The United States has destroyed the economic and political viability of Iraq and forced the transition to democracy to be bloody and violent, as most democratic transitions are.
What was most insightful about the Iraqi students' anti-U.S. sentiment was the exposure of the ideological and intellectual obeisance Americans show towards the Bush administration's interventionist and realist policies. I believe that the Iraqi students are correct. Most Americans are stupid, and operate under the assumption that because they are American (white Americans) they have the right to interfere with and dictate the social and cultural practices of other countries, and buy into the false reasons given by the U.S. government. However, I believe people of color are more skeptical of the U.S. government because we are well aware of its treachery and historical tendency to lie and manufacture the consent of the white population for domestic and foreign policies.
As Sura, a 19-year-old female student in Iraq, asked "how would we (the United States) like it if another country occupied the United States? I mean, Iraq did not have weapons of mass destruction, so the only other argument by 'just war theory' would be human right violations, but is the United States not guilty of the same charges?"
Beth Lyon, a lawyer at Washington College International Law Clinic says, "The 1993 UNDP Human Development Report revealed that white U.S. residents enjoyed the highest quality of life in the world, while U.S. African Americans were 31st on the list, on par with Trinidad and Tobago; U.S. Hispanics were 35th. In contrast to most other industrialized countries, the United States has no federal constitutional and scant state constitutional protections for substantive economic and social rights, such as the right to housing or adequate nutrition."
She continues to argue that the United States ratification of the Convention for the Elimination of All Racial Discrimination in 1994 places a duty on the United States to eliminate the disparate impact of protected classes regardless of governmental motive.
As such, the challenges the Bush administration raised against affirmative action could be considered a direct contravening of the international norm on human rights. In fact, the deprivation and murdering of the minority population, the racial economic gap and the continuance of capital punishment against minorities and the mentally ill have all been cited in European Union protocols to the U.N.
So should Americans be anxiously awaiting the occupation of the E.U. countries that recognize the international consensus of human rights which include economic and social constitutional protections?
For African Americans and other people of color, I believe this is a demonstration of two profound moments of clarity. First, there is not a gauge through which we can measure progress on the race issue, because the United States only interprets racism to be in the existence of political rights, and not the social and economic consequences of discrimination. And second, that the United States' eradicate ratification of international human rights treaties and its challenges regarding affirmative action show that the government and it white constituents have a stake in making sure minorities stay poor and lack the access necessary to assert their political rights.
Tommy is a graduate student. My Nommo appears every Thursday. These views do not necessarily reflect those of the DAILY EGYPTIAN.
