September 22, 2006
"The Devil Is In The House"News
Here in New York the UN General Assembly is in session, and even from the relative safety of my garret in Harlem, it’s impossible to avoid the Sturm und Drang as world leaders, their critics and sycophants perambulate around the city, block avenues for protests or motorcades, and pop up in the media. On Wednesday Shashi Tharoor, undersecretary-general of the UN on leave and India’s candidate for the top spot, was on WNYC commenting the speeches; his is such a mellifluous, Britishized diplomatic voice that I was lulled into paying no attention at all, so I can’t tell you what he had to say. You can listen here. All I know is that Kofi Annan’s voice is a hard act to follow, but if the criterion is cosmopolitan polish, Brother Shashi got it goin’ on.
There’s interesting stuff happening at the UN this month but you won’t hear about it: like every other conference, the UN meetings are ones where the real action — private discussions between enemies, mediation of civil wars, horse-trading of all sorts — takes place in the hallways and back rooms, not in the auditorium. So we owe a huge debt of gratitude to Hugo Chavez, the irrepressible president of Venezuela, for livening things up yesterday when he stepped to the podium and said this:
The devil is right at home. The devil the devil, himself, is right in the house.
And the devil came here yesterday.
Yesterday, the devil came here. Right here. Right here. And it smells of sulfur still today, this table that I am now standing in front of.
Yesterday, ladies and gentlemen, from this rostrum, the president of the United States, the gentleman to whom I refer as the devil, came here, talking as if he owned the world. Truly. As the owner of the world.
Now, I have no interest in getting into a discussion of the relative merits or flaws of Messrs. Bush and Chavez; last night I went to a show where a singer called politicians “all lyin’ sacks of shit” and, armed with my graduate training in political science, I can’t say I disagree. But as literature, as television, as performance, as art, this is really fantastic material.
In his new book, The Greatest Story Ever Sold — and indeed in most of his weekly columns for the past few years — Frank Rich analyzes the success of the Bush administration in getting its way through well orchestrated staging and performance. Chavez is no different and just as effective, though his is a brilliant, slightly demented one-man act compared to the US administration’s ensemble piece.
As you may also have heard, Chavez performed with his own props: early in the speech, he brandished a 2003 book by Noam Chomsky, Hegemony or Survival: America’s Quest for Global Dominance, advising that the people of the world, beginning with Americans, read it posthaste. And someone is listening: as various papers have reported, in the last 24 hours Chomsky’s book jumped into the top 10 at BN.com and Amazon, where as I write this it thrones in first place (followed by Rich).
This morning on the BBC, Tariq Ali, the Brit-Pakistani critic and a self-described friend of both Chavez and Chomsky, was asked to comment on the “Hugo’s Book Club” effect and had absolutely nothing of substance to say, other than he was sure Chomsky was pleased with the plug. Somewhat more usefully, the New York Times confirms that Chomsky, whom apparently Chavez said he regretted not meeting in his lifetime, is in fact very much alive and had these comments:
Mr. Chomsky said he was glad that Mr. Chavez liked his book, but he would not describe himself as flattered.
We should look at ourselves through our own eyes and not other peoples eyes, he said.
Mr. Chomsky said he had taken no offense at Mr. Chavezs remarks about his being dead.
Most American papers, and some Venezuelan ones as well, have weighed in to condemn Chavez’s speech. Meanwhile, in a supreme display of irrelevance, Jesse Jackson sat down with Chavez and asked the kids to play nice: “My appeal to him is to get beyond the anger.” But from the US government, nary a peep. Walrus-man John Bolton said Chavez’s comments “warranted no reply.” Perhaps that’s the wise course of action; perhaps it’s chicken. But all the world’s a stage, and the audience must not be disappointed.
siddhartha on September 22, 2006 11:39 AM in News · T·r·a·c·k·b·a·c·k address · Direct link · Email post
Apparently, after the most recent straw poll, ST came in a close second after the South Korean candidate.
Hugo looked, to me, especially after Latino version of blessing himself (kissing the thumb at the end) and the hand gestures after saying "...y todavía huele a azufre!", like an evangelical minister.
This has indeed been a very theatrical session of the GA... one charismatic "minister", one man brandishing coca leaves, and the little man from Iran in the wind breaker (or did he wear a suit?).
oil giveth and oil taketh. tith a sticky meth.
Sometimes I feel like this is the only real qualification needed to move up the ranks at the UN. I used to be a big fan of strengthening international institutions like the UN, but I think my mind is slowly changing. Having done some int'l enviro work in the past couple years, I realize that there is so much bureaucracy and so much of a disconnect between said institutions and folks on the ground, it's really difficult to get anything done that has concrete results. Of course, it is also important to have a forum in which representatives of different countries can gather, especially in times of crisis.
As for Chavez, like Ahmedinijad, I just can't take him seriously. They are obviously speaking to a very specific audience, and they provide entertainment value, but I don't see either one of them being a part of a constructive solution to the political, economic, and military crises that the world faces.
Another scene to be included in this play is the one where Chavez made Pelosi play into US patriotism:
Plus, I love how Chavez provides cheap oil for Bronx residents to defray heating expenses. This all makes for sad theater. I'm surprised Bolton didn't start in on the "Hugo, your mamma is SO FAT" jokes.
Can't we move this stage out of NYC. Traffic is a bitch during these GA meetings. We should also consider stopping the funding for this boring play.
I second that. Only in US of A my friend.
We can have people come in from other countries and criticize our president..i love it!
Yeah, Rangel too. I was very dissappointed. Just when I started thinking the Dems may pull defeat out of the jaws of victory, they wisen up.
plus, rangels comments are almost surreal, he basically said you can't criticize the president on US soil if you are a foreigner. My guess is this is how he thinks conservatives think. Great theater.
I would pay to watch that! I don't remember the name of that MTV show that Fez was supposed to host with these kind of jokes. We can make it a reality show on a pay per view channel.
I am sure Murdoch is already planning something along these lines.
This Chavez guy is a complete buffoon! I think we should not care what he says.
Also,I heard that in Venezuela you are not allowed to criticize the president. I am not sure where I heard this. I could be wrong.
I am sorry but the conservative spokesman (Hannity and O'Reily) do say this. They were upset that Natalie Maines criticized the president on foreign soil. (I know these are not exactly the same but they are very similar.)
You're so right, Manju! That silly Rangel, what was he thinking? I'm glad that you and I know how conservatives really think, buddy; namely, that conservatives don't believe in criticizing the president at all. Being a foreigner doesn't matter, since conservatives just blindly accept Bush's justifications for attacking, murdering, and torturing others. Doing anything else would be un-American and certainly pinko liberal hogwash, right?
i was listening to an interview on the BBC a few months ago with an american (i didn't hear the beginning), and i didn't know who it was. the interviewer began to go on about how oppressive the US gov. was, and how civil liberties were being heavily curtailed. the american got very irate, and pointed out that american civil liberties are still superior to what one has in england and what not. the american? noam chomsky (as i found out as the interview was nearly over).
Great post, Siddhartha.
People, please watch the video. It's priceless.
To me, Chavez's storytelling is right out of the Borgesian-Marquezian tradition. It's not that American politicians lie (of course they do), it's that public morals have killed-off the power of storytelling. To be considered "colorful" is now the political kiss of death.
What I'm yet to see, though, is anyone approaching this from the point of view that the Devil, so to speak, doesn't exist. Everyone takes it at face value. Chavez believes there's actually a devil (I love that pungent detail of sulphur), and that he's identical with George Bush. The preznit of the US, meanwhile, also believes that there is a devil, "the Devil himself," but that he's most definitely not it. You're the devil! No I'm not!
Oh religionists. When will we recognize these childish metaphors for what they are? Being called the Devil is like being called the Grinch, or being called Rumpelstiltskin.
Razib, if you defend Chomsky, you will give your friends on the right headaches from the contradition.
Personally, I'm glad that Manmohan Singh is as dull as he is. Maybe he should have more flamboyance, more pizzazz, but I like a politican who has read the books he refers to and who actually has something of substance to say.
Less long-winded version (what's wrong with these South American strongmen?), see this.
'Plus, I love how Chavez provides cheap oil for Bronx residents to defray heating expenses'
Now now! Just write an endearing letter to Chavez teeming with anti-Bush diatribe ( you shouldn't have a problem there, right?) and he'll send all of Brooklyn free heating oil too.
'Also,I heard that in Venezuela you are not allowed to criticize the president'
Damn right.
'I am sorry but the conservative spokesman (Hannity and O'Reily) do say this. They were upset that Natalie Maines criticized the president on foreign soil.'
You are right Nara on this. O'Reilly and Hannity are idiots ( though O'Reilly has begun to see a little light lately ). But I don't think they speak for all Republicans/Conservatives/Libertarians. Even though I might not agree with Natalie Maines, I don't think she need to apologize at all for what she said. And those ignorant bastards who went stomping on Dixie Chicks' CDs after her remark well they should apologize.
Last night Sharpton on TV was saying he doesn't like it when Bush calls other nations evil either. This needs to be cleared. Bush has never called the Iranian people for example evil. He is calling their regimes evil which is not totally untrue. By the way it is Danny Glover who organized the Chavez lovefest in Harlem. This is the same guy who a few years ago went on a campaign against cab drivers ( mostly South Asian ) for ignoring Black fares. He should know a thing or two about root causes and look into the data of how many South Asian cab drivers have been mistreated, mugged and murdered by people who look like him.
JJ is pure political performance art. B/f the afghan war he claimed the Taliban wanted to meet him to discuss a peace deal. The taliban said they never called him. Now, i don't think there is a group of people more despised by americans than the taliban. But when a poll was conducted, a majority of americans said they belived the taliban's account.
when mlk was killed, JJ was at the same hotel but not present at the time. he somehow managed to get king's blood on his shirt. the next day he appeared on tv, wearing the same shirt, and implyed he held the dying king in his arms. The king family never really trusted him after that.
At least Chavez (or I guess the translator) used the correct word for where he was speaking from. What is popularly known as a podium is actually a rostrum.
Razib, if you defend Chomsky, you will give your friends on the right headaches from the contradition.
i've defended chomsky plenty, though that's because we agree on cognitive science :) (or, i tend to agree with him, more than not)
Boss Hugo speaks w/ Democracy Now.
BB: you have much more in common w/ rush, ann, and sean than you think.
Well if nothing else it makes for an entertaining GA. After all, "politics is the entertainment wing of government"
Sriram, here I have to quote Shashi Tharoor - who when faced with a similar comment replies "If the UN didn't exist, someone would have to invent it" - and say that I have to agree with him there. As imperfect as it may be (and what large organization with 190 disparate members is perfect?), I don't think the baby should go out with the bathwater.
I've definitely been caught up and delayed by the motorcades this week (and saw Dubya), but, the UN being in NYC is a great source of income, and every time someone (like Germany) comes a-courtin', the Mayor's office gets involved to make all the right noises about how welcome the UN is here.
I gotta admit, aside from the traffic nightmare, it does make the East Midtown area very colorful and there is a certain frisson from all the cops and secret service around. The mind boggles at the logistics of hosting so many heads of state on such a densely packed space, especially from a security point-of-view.
Chavez's comments may have seemed inflammatory to many at the UN as well as our own grandstanding 'leaders' across the nation. However, to any person whose life has been ravaged by extremely horrible US foreign policy measures-- nuestro 'presidente' nunca se parece como angel!! No se si es el diablo....pero no se todavia...
sorry, i'm a bit of a ditz here and there-- but isn't the UN area of NYC technically an international zone? and if so, can our stupid politicians stop saying things like "don't insult our president on US soil?" sigh...
Nara, and JiltedManhood --- that's not true. As far as I know. Venezuela has a pretty free press.
Here's quoting Greg Grandin on Democracy Now yesterday :
This is also what the Irish film-makers of "The Revolution Will Be Televised" (about the anti-chavez, allegedly-US-condoned coup) said.
For Dem lovers like me who are absolutely giddy with excitement about the Dems taking over the house, the above quote is a reminder of the enemy within. This clown will be the chairman of the influential ways and means committee. What a buffoon! This is the most pathetic pandering by a Democrat since Tipper Gore launched her jihad against lyrics.
Chavez defends his rants
I didn't mean to imply that the UN is irrelevant and should be dissolved. I'm just saying that the problems within the UN go beyond imperfection and stretch to ineffectiveness on several fronts. There are many arguments to be made as to why that is, lack of U.S. cooperation, the inherent problems of bringing together disparate interests, etc. But, I do agree with people like John Bolton when they say the UN is in need of some major reform, starting with the Security Council. I mean, why should a country like France have a permanent seat when India does not? Nowadays when I see Mr. Annan speak on the news, I can't take his words that seriously because he needs to balance so many interests and ideologies that his words just seem like a bunch of diplo-policy wonk gobbledy-gook.
Yes, they do all look alike, don't they?
I am just so freaking outraged by Rangel's comments. This is the same kind of insanity which led Romney to deny free state escorts to Khatami.
I'm not sure it's pandering as many of his constituents probably disagree with him.
Charles Rangel is well aware of the fact that the Reps are scaring their base with the thought of Rangel as chairman of ways and means committee or Pelosi as speaker etc. etc. if the Dems win the house. This is an attempt by him to show the other side that hes not crazy and so to de-motivate the Rep base from showing up.
'Yes, they do all look alike, don't they?'
Oops! You got me!
'Nara, and JiltedManhood --- that's not true. As far as I know. Venezuela has a pretty free press'
I'd like to read an editorial or two critical of Chavez in the Venezuelan press to believe that. I don't doubt that he has been elected democratically though. He embodies extreme populist politics.
ylrsings, that's what I thought too. But apparently, it is still US soil. The Wiki entry, for instance, reads
So, it's like someone standing in a foreign embassy in the US and saying something.
Wow. The irony of this statement is astounding. You just demonstrated why Golver might have felt a need to campaign in the first place. We should pay for comments like these.
Ask and you shall receive. If you'd bothered to click on the link in my post where I refer to some of the Venezuelan press being critical, you would have found this:
From the paper's website:
The rest of the editorial is behind the subscriber wall but this should make it pretty clear where they stand and how vociferously they are prepared to say so. (In case it isn't obvious, the paper is taking the words that Chavez applied to Bush, and applying them to Chavez.)
its called FREEDOM of speech. he has the right to say it and we have the right to disagree with it. I do disagree with him. I also disagree with Bush trying to remove Hugo from power. No wonder Hugo hates Bush.
But I like Bush anyway as he is a good bloke who did what he could to pound the terrorists after 9/11. OK Iraq is a mess. But at least NYC is no longer....
... I was supposed to say at least NYC is no longer a mess like it was after 9/11. We have not been attacked in teh United States since 9/11.
You can be critical of Bush but that is a victory of sorts.
I dunno Al. I'm from NY so I see Rangel up close and he's usually a straight shooter, so for once I don't think it's a case of a politician being so calculated. This is the same guy that introduces a bill every year in the House to reinstate the military draft just so his fellow pols will vote against him. Don't always with him, but always entertaining.
Also I think he misspoke out of passion. He's a vet so you could understand the argument, no one gets to demean my president 'cept for me.
sirc, I agree with you on #40 and disagree with you on #32, in that I think plenty of Rangel's constituents and supporters would agree with what he said. For exactly the reasons you put forth in #40. Just because folks are uptown, Black, and Democrats doesn't mean they can't be touchy on subjects like these.
ylrsings,
You are correct, the land and building that houses the United Nations is in fact an international zone. More here
Chavez could have a great career a dialog writer for the WWF... if he survives long enough to retire from office.
Ethnic,
It's indeed an international zone in some sense, but it's still not wrong to say it's "US soil".
The U.N. might be international territory but if any of you commies wanna use any of our other vaunted cultural institutions you asking for a bytch slap.
RUDY 2008!
While Chavez is colorful, the bit about the devil was new and exceeds his past language. Though all in all, how predictable. Hugo says something childish at a grown-ups session, gets childish reaction from supposed grown-ups.
This bible-based name-calling isn't all Boss Hugo though. When US chief of state throws out 'axis of evil' for a few countries, sure, its fair game for some counter-name-calling even if its not done by reps from the axis of evil countries. If he's being a baffoon, the baffoonery was begun not by him, and some time ago might I add.
Right now this is what some people on the globe see - a nation with resources led by fanatics who take law in their own hands and abduct innocent citizens from their land to torture and incarcerate them without due process.
This UN gathering made for a sad display of the decline in diplomatic gravitas.
Kurma,
I didn't see the wiki entry before posting the link, you are correct in saying that it is still on U.S soil, I had no idea that about Journalists, when reporting from the complex, can't NY as the identification of their location and also Chavez has suggested that the headquarters be moved to Venezuela:)
'Wow. The irony of this statement is astounding. You just demonstrated why Golver might have felt a need to campaign in the first place. We should pay for comments like these'
Irony? Unless you are just as profound a reader of my last few innocuous words as Kraptastic is in comment # 30.
These cab drivers don't land in America with a preconceived bias against Blacks. If anything they may carry the colonial baggage and probably some resentment towards the White man. These people haven't been schooled in sensitivity or political correctness. Most who work late night shifts in rough urban areas make spur of the moment decisions ( sometimes life and death ) based on their own and their colleagues' experiences. And the fact remains that they usually suffer more at the hands of members of the African American community than from people of any other ethnicity. Are they wrong to treat all Black people ( the great majority who are harmless) as if they were going to be harmful? Yes they are. My larger point is Glover and others of his persuasion who usually look hard for grievances ( particularly among the less educated underclass ) to explain violent or hateful behavior failed to look compassionately at the plight of these immigrant cab drivers and rushed to asking the city to penalize them.
'We should pay for comments like these'
I hope you reserve a little from your vast reservoir of compassion for some of your blog's commenters as well. No need to jump your PC meter before you find out what one is really trying to say.
Actually, my problem with the UN goes beyond ineffectiveness. I'm a pretty ineffectual person in the grand scheme of things, but no harm done, right? The UN, on the other hand, often makes matters worse by legitimizing points of view, people, and policies via a so-called democratic process. Now, I'll agree that the UN has done a lot of noble things like their World Food Program and their fight against AIDS, TB & Malaria, but everytime they pass some ridiculous UN Resolution picking on some country (Turkey, Morocco, and most notably, countless resolutions against Israel such as demanding they give up their nukes) they are making matters worse. Fortunately, they have no real power but if they did, it would be a classic example of majority rule without minority rights. The policy making arm of the UN is actually a very effective forum -- for lending legitimacy to a plurality of countries who want to pick on the odd man out.
Yes they do. Almost all Indians do (so do most Chinese, Japanese, etc.). All of my relatives, all of my friends relatives, almost everyone I have ever come across in my entire life who has come from the "old world" harbors a preconceived notion or two. So do many people that grew up here. I have sat in the back of more than one cab driven by a South Asian driver where I heard racism coming from the front seat. Now who is being PC? This is the most PC comment I have ever heard on this blog.
If anything...
Siddharth, that's why I said many and not most. Also, the free oil complicates the issue here. I realize Black + Democrat doesn't always yield "typical" leftist position, i.e. Prop 187 in California.
Also, I really do hope
Da FuhrerRudy does run, so he can be pummeled.The problem is not in the above.
The problem is here.
If you had said "mistreated, mugged and murdered by black people" that would not have been a problem either.
Instead, you said something that indicates that consciously or not you think all black people look the same. I have respect for your argument up to that preposition in the middle of your final sentence. If you don't get now why the last few words are a problem I doubt that you ever will.
'If you don't get now why the last few words are a problem I doubt that you ever will'
I totally get it. However you are reading my words very superficially. I should have put them in context; Glover started this campaign when he and his daughter had a hard time hailing a cab in NYC. To the cab drivers they looked Black. They were the same color they had come to associate with danger. Unfortunate but I am asking for an understanding of the cab drivers' behavior from people who will usually have some compassion for even the most heinous human behavior.
Thanks for the link. Yes it does look that the Venezuelan press can be very critical of Chavez. I concede that. However that doesn't qualify the press to be free. Venezuela is complex. The poor masses adore Chavez, many in the military and many rich Venezuelans ( who own the media ) hate him and want him out.
Slow down folks. People who are not black, and people who don't look like Danny Glover, also mistreat, mug and murder people. Let's be careful with the alliterative tarring here.
I think there's a couple of casual assumptions being made.
One is that most violent crime is by blacks. But that's not true. Yes, the per-capita percentage is (troublingly) higher, but not the absolute number.
Secondly, and most importantly, there seems to be a misunderstanding of what's really happening in most refusal situations. I actually think the heart of it is not race or crime but neighborhoods, e.g., not wanting to drive to a poorer and/or quieter neighborhood because you might not get a return fare. Anyone who regularly takes cabs in Manhattan will tell you that there's a strong bias in favor of lower Manhattan by cab drivers. These are working men, and their first concern is to spend as little time as possible looking for the next fare. I've read of up to 42% of cab driver's time being spent looking for the next customer.
The third assumption has been dealt with by Abhi. To suggest that Indian immigrants arrive here with no bias against blacks is wishful thinking. The muttering about "kala" this and "kala" that isn't over, by any stretch of the imagination. The bias is there, it's strong. But I don't think it's what primarily drives passenger refusal. Someone should do a study (as one of a number of possible control experiments) of what the refusal rate is by black cab drivers for people who are travelling uptown.
jilted_manhood, your call for compassion is heard, loud and clear. No once could disagree. But you probably need to get your own household in order first, before you preach to others.
Personally I'm still reeling from those comments. I can't stand Bush but it's outrageous of Chavez to stand on American soil and rile up my city with his crude remarks as if he should have some bearing. WTF is he giving free oil to the Bronx? Aren't there other needy people elsewhere in the country? And where does he get off trying to help them? Between him and Musharraf this is one CBS Monday night movie in the making.
And Danny Glover and Jesse Jackson and all the photo op lovefest irrated me to no end. What the hell does JJ do these days except show up for photo ops and make a couple of speechs and disappear? Pathetic.
Kobayashi with all due respect this is exactly the kind of PC responses that sush out any other opinions and sometimes the truth by implying the person stating them is racist.
The truth of the matter is cabbies don't go to poorer quieter neighborhoods not because there isn't a return fare but rather they won't even pick up someone that looks like the person might be going into a dangerous neighborhood. In order to not go to a neighborhood the cabbie needs to ask someone where the person is going and cabbies who are scared won't even stop.
In fact it is illegal to ask someone where they are going to decide whether to take the fare. Not saying it doesn't happen. I've been refused a ride into Queens but lets keep perspective when it comes to what j-m was saying. We can spin it and call it something else in the name of being politically correct but lets get real.
61% of murderers in NYC are black; 28% are Hispanic; 7% are white; and 4% are Asian. Population-wise, NYC is 25% black, 28% Hispanic, 35% white, and 11% Asian. Here are more stats.
If you aren't associated with the drug trade in this city the chances of you not being a victim of a crime is significantly lower than anyone else in any other city in this country making this city actually safe. Meaning if you are a law abiding citizen you will stay out of trouble for the most part.
Young black men lack opportunities and are persecuted everywhere no one is denying that but they also make up for a huge % of Rikers. And fear stems from not racism but reality that cabbies face on a daily basis. We can accept that as fact instead of racism.
Oh, that damn devil's sulphur
Chavez is a very smart cookie, he is trying to fit in the Castro's shoes for the Pan Latin leadership. If the massive reserves of Venezueluen oil was not that heavy (dense) and high in sulphur, he would be calling shots in more powerful manner. There are very few refineries in the world that can do something with Venezuelean oil - therefore, close business relationship with USA.
Is this the first time?
No, The GA sessions has a long history of histronics - some examples come to mind are Khurshev, Castro, and Arafat. It is like a free speech alley, and it should be.
'One is that most violent crime is by blacks. But that's not true. Yes, the per-capita percentage is (troublingly) higher, but not the absolute number'
Ah and as if that's a mystery! Blacks are only 11 % of the American population. So for the absolute number to be higher, violent crime by Blacks has got to be way too out of proportion to their numbers!
I concede to Abhi that yes many Indians do land in America with preconceived biases against Blacks. But probably just as many don't. Is the bias just because they are darker looking people? Or is the bias because they have been fed horror stories ( small parts of general conversations and many times true )by their relatives/friends in America of Blacks mistreating, mugging and murdering ( alliterative whatever ) desis. Unfortunately most of these people once they have settled in America perpetuate that bias by self-segregating and not mixing with other kinds of people ( particularly Blacks ). Those who do, begin to discover that most Blacks don't fit their preconceived perceptions. Many America hating Muslims in the Middle East and Pakistan will also hopefully shed their strident anti-West feelings once they start living in the West. But assimilation is the key. That's why I am for both immigration and assimilation. It's the best solution to the problems of hatred among the peoples of the world.
Mr K, I try to tell the truth here. You ignore the following statement I made. And I mean it. I don't say it just because I don't want to come across as some racist;
""Are they wrong to treat all Black people ( the great majority who are harmless) as if they were going to be harmful? Yes they are.""
And it also takes courage to say that more Indian store owners, cab drivers even graduate students on campus have been victims of violence committed by members of the African American community than that of any other ( and not just by a small shot ).
"jilted_manhood, your call for compassion is heard, loud and clear. No once could disagree. But you probably need to get your own household in order first, before you preach to others."
Now this is ironic. I was just hoping people like you who routinely exhibit empathy for the oppressed peoples of the world who carry out violent attacks on civilians, will at least have some appreciation for actions of desi cab drivers who non violently neglect certain fares.
Among said stats is the one you didn't mention: the racial breakdown of murder victims. 60% black, 27 hispanic, 9 white, 4 asian, in other words almost the exact same breakdown as that of murderers. the article also says that 3/4 of murders involve a killer and victim of the same race.
You yourself point out, very validly, that anyone not involved in the drug business is actually safer from violent crime, statistically, in NYC than in other major cities.
This conversation is an opportunity to debunk the myth of the black male predator, which is so widely implanted in the psychology of non-black people, including (but not limited to) South Asian immigrants/cab drivers as Abhi correctly pointed out.
JOAT, I thought we were talking about cab crime, not murders. The relationship between the two is slender, but thanks for your sensational stats. You might have added that a small percentage of murder victims are white or Asian, and that most murders are drug/gang related. Statistics is a funny old game, and not one I much enjoy playing.
As for the rest of your comment, let's just say I respectfully disagree with your take. My initial comment is there for everyone to see. I assserted that racism is a serious problem but refusal isn't primarily race driven. How that's a PC position, I don't understand.
Data, please?
Kurma, #44, indeed, and the US is often referred to by the UN as the "host country".
Absolutely Siddhartha I'm not saying this myth should not be debunked and I'm not saying I haven't come a long way on my own biases having lived in the city for 20 years however we simply cannot disregard the fact that the crimes against cabbies in recent years, we had a bloody year last year, is a result of crimes perpetuated by and large by black youths hence leading many cabbies to fear black men.
My point is as I see j_m put it that there is a reason why this behavior came about and it comes from fear and not pure racism stemming from superiority issues.
Kobayashi you said:
You stepped away from the cabbie discussion by talking about violent crimes not happening at the hands of blacks. I gave you stats to say otherwise.
I'm not disagreeing with you but by saying "cabbies are being racist by not taking black riders into their cabs" is A. not acknowledging their reasons whether you like them or not and B. assuming it's racism and not fear. Yes on the surface it is racism but one needs to understand the reasoning behind it.
on the chavez thing, anyone familiar with boston will be amused at this parochial angle...
JOAT, stop it. Stop it. It's not funny anymore. When did I say that? Read both my comments (#56 and #62) again. This time carefully.
Are you even listening? Don't make assumptions based on what you expected me to say.
cabbies who read SM should step forward and answer the charges of bias :) they should know the statistics so that their fears are debunked and they can be more sensitive to racism. after all, if i sitting in my office can raise consciousness, why can't a cabbie who works 20 hours a day?
Data please??
Kobayashi relax I only put the quotes to imply the flavor of what I'm understanding from you. And yes I read it very carefully. This is the gist of what I'm getting from you. Cabbies are not taking fares to poorer neighborhoods because they don't have a return fare...cabbies already have preconceived notions about blacks. And to me that disregards the reality of fear that many feel that these actions stem from. And all I said was try to understand where that is coming from. To me that is how I read j_m's comments as well. Didn't think he was encouraging the racism as well which again I can't help but think you seem to think is happening.
I agree with you, janeofalltrades.
Many women I know would not give a male hitchhiker a ride in their car, particularly late in the evening. They may, however, be more responsive to a lone female hitchhiker. Are these women being sexist, given that an overwhelming majority of men are not criminals/rapists?
Look for it under the sand where your head must be buried. Or in De-Nile which isn't just a river in Egypt. :)
Kobayashi's relazed. But this is a most peculiar business, since I've stated the opposite twice. And very clearly each time.
Is "flavor" the new "truthiness"?
Sakshi, I've got an even better idea. Let's have a national registry, and anytime a black person enters a non-black neighborhood, they have to sign in. You know, the way boys have to sign in when they visit a girls' dorm. You can't be too careful with these things.
I smell rudeness here.
I agree with people here who are pointing out the obvious truth that the Negros are more likely to kill us than anybody else. I feel afraid of being mugged by a negro when I get off my expensive SUV to go to a gas station, the SUV of course being a result of the graudate degree which I got due to my hard work ethics which were of course instilled in me by my hard working Indian parents. I wish some of 'our' ethics could rub off on the negro race.
You can't be too careful with these things
yes you can. the reality of acknowledging the high rates of black crime in relation to non-black crime in the united states does not negate the liberal injunction to treat people as individuals. and race isn't the only parameter. sex, age and dress are all relevant. similarly, the fact that many brown people are particularly racist against black people does not mean that all brown people are racist against black people.
Thanks for the hyperbole. But I am still not sure whether you think this female attitude is sexist or not.
I personally feel that when it comes to self-preservation, people should be given some legroom and allowed to make their own decisions.
JOAT,
I think Kobayashi is right. While it may seem that the cabbie issue is too anecdotal to justify the term "racism", when you compare this statement of yours-
to say grocery stores, I think the same principles applies. There are no grocery stores in ghetto's (at least where I live in Bay Area). Now you can say that its a function of market mechanics, the grocery stores don't open in the ghetto because there isn't a return on investment; likewise, the cabbies don't go to ghetto's because there isn't a justifiable ROI + fear of being victim of a crime. For society as a whole, both conditions represent a loss of efficiency, although a more pronounced one in the grocery store example (ie. lack of produce in the diet and a reliance processed foods and meat increases the risk of all sorts of ailments including diabetes).
My point is that while self-interest may be at play here, the result is that an inequality becomes informally institutionalized in society, which gets reinforced by fear, racism, and other normative attitudes. The fear may or may not be legitimate but you can see how the cycle spirals downward more easily than the effort it takes to correct such inequalities.
Permit me to geek out for a hot minute. I didn't have a dog in this fight, but a little quick research produces material that suggests that Kobayashi's original point makes a lot of sense. He argued that the primary driver of cab driver refusals to pick up a passenger is not racial but economic:
Here is a 2005 report by the US Dept of Justice called "Robbery of Taxi Drivers," intended as a resource for local police departments to address the issue. There's plenty in the report but I came across this point which speaks to our conversation here. I'm providing a long quote (from pp. 31-32) so that the context is clear.
The footnote to this last graf reads as follows:
Digging further, the analysis on which this hypothesis is based covers data from the 1980s and 1990s (Koch through Giuliani administrations), so perhaps it needs updating; but it's a cogent theory, and eminently testable.
nice cite sid.
but seriously, don't we all know cab drivers??? *look around*
No von Mises
i wonder why this is? you'd think the roi would be higher in the ghetto than the rest of a city b/c of lower rents. is there less demand? The bodegas seem to strive.
needless to say, dems in chicago w/ their "big box" ordinances--basically driving out the targets and walmarts in favor of the more expensive (to consumers) mom and pop biz--do not exactly have working class people on their mind.
thanks a lot dude - means a lot coming from a data-driven mofo like you. as to your second point, got me thinking. where i live, people of all races have no trouble getting transportation; they have trouble finding transportation to get home. that's because we (uptown + the boroughs, in NYC) are served by "gypsy"/livery cabs, not "yellow"/medallion cabs. the livery cars will take you most anywhere, plus or minus a little third-world-style negotiating. yellow cabs, however, prefer to stay south of 110th st or away from the outer boroughs. the result is a segmented marketplace with self-reinforcing tendencies.
i walked through a blizzard in brooklyn in the middle of the night in late january. you don't have to tell me about messed up transporation as cabs kept driving by me ('car services').
true. within the livery zone, some areas are better served than others. some parts of the city are underserved, period.
i told everyone before that you live in wealthy neighborhood. Taking cabs in NYC. Puh-lease. the subway is great, and safe. and i live on the east side where i have to walk 15 minutes to catch one. you pampered harlemites.
why am i not surprised?
In New York, I have met with African American cabbies who are reluctant, to put it mildly, to pick up African American fares.
heh. heh. Just for that I'm gonna go the the carlyle hotel tonight for a martini and jazz. but i be walkin' there.
And this anecdotal evidence you provide us from your meeting with African American cabbies, what exactly is it meant to illustrate? Let me provide you with an anecdote as well. In Delhi, I have met with Indian rickshawallahs who are reluctant, to put it mildly, to pick up Indian fares. Quite frustrating.
To get this post back on thread, I propose we determine who the Devil is, as far as Sepia Mutiny is concerned. Cause this place sure smells of sulphur.
For the most consistently devilish performance in a Sepia-related role, the nominees are...
1. AC
2. Evil Abhi
3. Spoor Lam
4. Shallow Thinker
5. Pardesi Gori
6. Kritic
7. Vinod
And the winner is...
d00d, where's the luv??? howz come i'm not on the list.
Manju,
i wonder why this is? you'd think the roi would be higher in the ghetto than the rest of a city b/c of lower rents. is there less demand? The bodegas seem to strive.
Grocery stores have become standardized in their "boxiness" and since the success of the suburban model, have adopted minimum threshold in terms of size so they can save money by purchasing and transporting in volume. While rent is certainly low, grocery stores have developed formal and informal partnerships with city councils and other franchises that favor bundling of a variety small shops with the grocery store before ground is broken (ie. ice cream shop, Subway, Starbucks, Kinko's or a UPS Store, etc. So it requires a lot more money, city planning and guarantees of revenue streams to develop a mini-strip mall rather than a solitary grocery store.
More:
The economic forces fueling hunger often seem unwieldy and hard to fix: low wages, unemployment, shrinking social service dollars. But, say anti-hunger advocates, another force underlies the others.
It's what one advocate calls "the next civil rights movement"; what another describes as "a food desert"; and what another calls "the issue you can't ignore if you work or live in a low-income area."
The issue is food redlining, large-scale supermarkets abandoning lower-income communities for their more affluent counterparts, leaving entire communities little or no access to affordable, quality food.
Food redlining can be just as crippling as financial redlining, its not so distant relative. A study in Pennsylvania (PDF) shows a correlation between access to supermarkets and the prevalence of diet-related diseases, like diabetes and obesity. Other studies have linked hunger to the delayed brain development of children.
To combat the problem, advocates say, communities first must understand it.
Crossing the 'food desert'
The trend, Andy Fisher says, began in the 1960s, when the middle class began to trickle out of cities and into the suburbs. Since then, grocery stores have been leaving inner cities in droves.
"In virtually every American city today, you will find a food desert," says Fisher, executive director of the L.A.-based Community Food Security Coalition. "Communities without access to milk or vegetables, without the things suburban shoppers take for granted."
Food redlining forces low-income residents to spend more money, travel farther and accept lower quality, Fisher says.
Without supermarkets, low-income residents must rely on convenience stores that don't sell fresh produce and that typically charge higher prices.
West Oakland, Calif., for example, has one supermarket but 40 convenience and liquor stores. In Philadelphia, two of the top 10 food retailers are pharmacies.
Taking the bus to the nearest supermarket costs more, too, since it prevents shopping in bulk.
And the grocery stores that do exist in some lower-income neighborhoods sometimes sell leftovers, or "seconds," from sister stores in wealthier areas, Fisher says. Shoppers at these stores often encounter run-down buildings, poor service, wilted produce and even spoiled meats.
Hardest hit by these practices are children, who are more vulnerable to diet-related diseases and whose cognitive development can be impaired by chronic malnutrition.
Food redlining impairs economies, too. Supermarkets attract customers for smaller stores nearby that often are locally owned and provide jobs, recycling money through the community. When the supermarket goes, the smaller stores often go out of business, too.
"It's seen as an equity issue, in which these communities are not getting the same access to institutions, if you consider supermarkets to be an institution," Fisher says. "It's respect. People want the same respect they see their suburban counterparts having."
I've heard that in Oakland non-profits are organizing to develop a market-based, small-scale project where black farmers in the Central Valley can bring their surplus produce to poor parts of Oakland. The demand is certainly there, it's just a matter of undercutting the fixed costs of boxstore by being mobile (farmers markets) and transporting the produce from the Valley to the Bay Area. Nonetheless, its a tough program to maintain in a small-scale because you end up relying on a little too much altruism.
The Dept of Agriculture has a good report on this issue but from consumer perspective and how they can try to stretch their dollars under these conditions (and try to afford a better diet).
Anyhow, I echo Siddhartha that the cabbie issue and this issue are at the core economic incentive issues.
I wonder when would we stop coloring ALL SM discussions with black or white.
Sorry, screwed up the block quotes. Nevermind my threadjack then.
...the winner is...AC. Cuz I love the toilet humor and everything to do with bodily functions, all from a
desibrown perspective. Remember the Butt Mug!No von Mises:
interesting. thanks for the extensive reply. i got this from the link:
if this is true, and this is a big at this point, a free market solution would be obvious. but when the person saying this is running a non-profit, i get skeptical. given how dynamic the US economy is, there is no reason to rely on existing supermarket co's to provide service.
i believe ron burkle made a fortune with supermarkets in LA ghettos. So maybe there really is an opportunity here. it would be a shame if the black community in particular let it pass.
I think this is very good point. Non-blacks aren't the only ones who are racist. There's no shortage of black people who are also racist. This is partly because overcoming racist thinking is something that we must actively work toward -- without education, most people inherently lean toward race as a proxy for judging people.
Also, I've found that people from other countries (particularly less developed, less educated countries) are much more racist than Americans. Partly it's because America values diversity (unlike Europe and Japan) and partly because Americans are better educated on the race issue (than say Asians or Africans). Ironically, I've met some African Americans (immigrants from Africa) who hold very negative views of blacks in America and don't hesitate to drop n-bombs to describe them.
....brownz.
Kobayashi:
You're asking for it. I've stood idly by while you've supported terrorism, beastiality, and raising taxes. You sir, are an evildoer.
Atleast these guys didn't start banging their shoes on the podium like good ol Nikita Krushchev. What a bunch of buffoons.
Man, I need a new job where I can comment more. Anyway, my new take on the Chavez story is that the Devil was probably insulted to be equated with George Bush.