Canada's first Afrocentric public school: One step forward

"A decision to create the first Afrocentric, or black-focused school funded by taxpayers in Canada's biggest city has sparked a heated debate." The aim would be to "use the the sources and knowledge and experiences of peoples of African descent as an integral feature of the teaching and learning environment."

Check out the BBC article at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7217212.stm

Our response: it is about time. The development of similar schools in the U.S. would be a bold step in the right direction. We welcome your opinions, as always.

Obama on the work we have to do

“The teenagers and college students who left their homes to march in the streets of Birmingham and Montgomery; the mothers who walked instead of taking the bus after a long day of doing somebody else's laundry and cleaning somebody else's kitchen — they didn't brave fire hoses and Billy clubs so that their grandchildren and their great-grandchildren would still wonder at the beginning of the 21st century whether their vote would be counted; whether their civil rights would be protected by their government; whether justice would be equal and opportunity would be theirs. . . . We have more work to do.”

— Barack Obama, Speech at Howard University, September 28, 2007

Comments are encouraged.

El Pueblo

Disculpen la falta de ortografia y tildes. Vaya, tampoco es necesario. Lo que es importante es empezar a crear un dialogo sobre la invisibilidad de los latinos en Amherst, Hadley y Northampton. No es nada nuevo, claro, pero seria interesante ver lo que los latinos de la zona creen sobre la idea de abrir un centro comunitario para celebrar nuestras culturas latinas que se encuentran aqui. Un centro que tendria musica, comida, eventos. Algo que pueda generar dinero para financiar proyectos de ensenanza de lenguas, de traduccion, para pagar abogados en casos de racismo contra "gente de color", para promover los negocios de duenos latinos, afro-americanos, asiaticos e indigenas. Esto seria una bendiccion a toda la gente que vive y trabaja aqui en la zona. Comentarios serian enormamente agradecidos (y mas ideas!!)

Interest Rates Cut by 1/2 Point

The market is plunging, people are losing their homes and even their jobs. How is this affecting our town? How are people in the area reacting to this?

Edwards Drops "Race"

Check this yahoo! article that reflects the way (the) race is being covered in other publications as well:

He finished second in the Iowa caucuses that led off the campaign, but he was quickly overshadowed — a white man in a race against the former first lady and a 46-year-old black man, each bent on making history. (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080130/ap_on_el_pr/edwards)

Well, well. A white man is "overshadowed" not because he is an inferior public speaker, not because of his lack of credientials, not because of an unsuccesful and unmoving campaign, not because of his dullness... But because he is white and a man. What does Amherst think about this article/view?

Music... please!

This town needs music! We have to end the binge-drinking-only-scene downtown. People want variety! People need an alternative. Amherst College and UMass should chip in and open up a center for the arts -- a place where students and local folks can go to enrich their lives with live shows from all over the world. Maybe there would be less drunk driving... Maybe it would create a more healthy nightlife in Amherst...
Maybe it would create new business... The possibilities are endless! So help us bring in the live music! Let us know of any ideas regarding funding for a center for the arts in Amherst as comments.

ESL Classes @ Jones Library / Cursos de ingles

The Jones Public Library is offering free, high-quality ESL classes. Click here for more information.

UMass takes on Xavier tommorow @ noon

Amherst, MA -- "The defending regular-season co-champions of the Atlantic 10 battle... as UMass hosts Xavier at high noon in the Mullins Center. The Minutemen and Musketeers both finished 13-3 in the league a year ago. Xavier (16-4 overall) is currently in first place in the league at 4-1 following a 69-43 win at #16 Dayton on Thursday night. UMass (13-5 overall) is 2-2 in the league after a tough 81-77 loss at Saint Joseph's on Wednesday in Philadelphia. Sunday's game will air on the CSTV Networks across the nation." (from umass athletics website: www.umassathletics.cstv.com)

Criticism of Amherst Life

We have been criticized on all angles after voicing our opinion that there is racism in Amherst, MA. The following appeared as a comment last night:

Amherst Life likes to make broad proclamations about the way things are in Amherst. The tone of the advocacy is idealogical rather than compelling on the merits. To me, the arguments are unconvincing because they make claims of fact without providing information, observations or experiences that inform the opinion and give it credence. Unsupported claims about unethical or immoral Amherst is an inherently self-righteous point of view, and frankly, it's easily dismessed. Here are some ideas. Write from the first person singular, from you to me. It's a more powerful voice. Write like your name is attached to the post. Speak to others like you care about them. Show them what you want them to see.

First, we are glad to see that people are reading and reacting to the blog -- that is the whiole point. Some of these discussions, when looked at beyind the context of an attack on Amherst -- are educational. Readers/commenters are brining their views to the table and there is dialogue. That is step 1.

Second, we'd like to address a few points in the commenter's critique. We may make broad proclamations and do our best to provide facts. Unfortunately, racism and acts of racism are not always documented. We must then look at issues from a broad perspective and then focus on things like: http://halogen.note.amherst.edu/~astudent/2001-2002/issue05/news/03.html

Developing a sensitivity and awareness regarding the multiple forms of racism in places like Amherst, MA is central to our mission. People who have that sensitivity, see the above link in a diferent context than folks who don't. Sometimes we need a broad understanding of race relations and racism to be able to see the effects of the above story (see the amherst.edu link in the previous paragraph).

And yes, we are dealing with ideologies and ideological constructions. Many of the topics we address are ideological and we try to explore them.

The commenter writes, "Unsupported claims about unethical or immoral Amherst is an inherently self-righteous point of view, and frankly, it's easily dismessed." In response, we'd like to say that, yes, there are elements in Amherst that are "unethical" and "immoral." Why is adressing those claims "self-righteous"? That remains a mystery to us. Perhaps the claims are easily dismissed to one party, but to another (as we see in the emails that constantly flow into our account), they are opening up a space for dialogue. Far too often people will say: there's no racism here, show me the evidence. When people feel it, it is there.

The commenter adds, "Here are some ideas. Write from the first person singular, from you to me. It's a more powerful voice. Write like your name is attached to the post. Speak to others like you care about them. Show them what you want them to see."

We appreciate your stylistic tips. However, We represent a collectivity and, as there are several of us, we prefer to express our views as a group. We write about topics that are very sensitive. Topics that have led to threats, intimidation, and "black-listing" (another word we should write about). As a group, we are willingy to confront what as individuals might be detrimental. And that directly reflects the state of things in this town.

And regarding the final point, "Speak to others like you care about them. Show them what you want them to see," we think you have a point. Some readers' comments have been quite agressive and we have responded agressively, often in ways that might make it seem like we don't care about people who have different opinions. In that sense, the commenter has every reason to remind us of our duty to do exactly what we want others to do; to show some respect and to listen to the "other" sides. We thank you for letting us see that, by responding to fire with fire, we may be contradicting ourselves and diluting our main purpose: to have dialogue. "To show them what you want them to see" means to have a space where multiple opinions can be expressed and respected. We thank you for those words.

Poetry Reading at the Jones Library in Amherst

Time: Sunday, Feb. 3rd, 4PM
Location: Jones Public Library, Amity Street (Amherst)

"Please join us for an afternoon of poetry featuring Lynne Thompson, reading from her 2007 Perugia Press Prize-winning book, Beg No Pardon; Nikky Finney, Poet-in-Residence at Smith College; Keli Stewart; Kim Rogers; Laurie Guerrero; and Karen Johnston. This event is co-sponsored by the Everywoman's Center, UMass."

Perceptions: Response to Reader's Second Point

The next point (point 2 in the “Town of Amherst: Reader Perceptions” post) is quite long, so we will break it up and answer each area that we feel needs some addressing.

Commenter: Calling someone a bigot is a good way to avoid addressing what they're saying.

Amherst Life: It is also a good way of expressing oneself, if in fact one believes that another person or group of people are truly “bigots” or racists.

Commenter: I'm not suggesting that there's any point in debating with Nazis, but you use the term "racist" very freely.

Amherst Life: We are not following your point on “debating with Nazis” and it needs some clarification. It seems you are tossing around words (as you accuse Amherst Life of doing) carelessly. We use the term racist freely, yes, because racism is pervasive. And, if you are sensitive to its practice, it is on the rise. Uncovering racism does not take much work, but once it is translated into the language of dominant groups -- into the range of perception of dominant groups -- it is amazing to see how uncomfortable dominant groups become. They declare reverse racism instead of addressing the real problem.

Commenter: An accusation of bigotry is a quick way to dispense of someone whose ideas you find threatening without ever actually engaging with what they have to say. Obviously there are real racists in the world, but throwing the term around lazily is anti-intellectual.

Amherst Life: Or it could be that an accuser has engaged what another person has to say and truly find that person to be a racist or a bigot. This is not out of the question and the person has a right to voice that opinion. You make the point for us: “Obviously there are real racists in the world.” And you make another good point: throwing around the term “racist” or “bigot” “lazily” or without grounds is problematic. But what happens when racism and bigotry is in fact there? What is “anti-intellectual”, as you call it, is racism.

Commenter: Your blog does far too much of this kind of name-calling.

Amherst Life: OUR blog (we are a group of Amherst-based writers) is not afraid of talking about racism and racist practices that we perceive on multiple fronts and in multiple forms.

Commenter: Take the parking issue. You may be right and the town counsel may be wrong, but this doesn't make them racists. In this context, it's an irresponsible accusation. Part of growing up is figuring out that not everybody who disagrees with you has nasty motives.

Amherst Life: We never said that the town’s “wrongness” on the parking issue is due to a racist elected body (we will look closely at that post and see how that could be interpreted, as it is not the opinion of the Amherst Life Blog ). We are not saying that “because they are racists, they don’t want to give a group of people a place to park their cars.” Their lack of action may reveal classism at its finest, but it des not show us that they are racists. That is revealed in other practices, such as WHO IS ON THE BOARD, who is given what licenses in town, who is required to do what to get those licenses, who is voting to discontinue bus service from Holyoke to Amherst, etc. Racism is in our local government, yes, but it does not appear to be a factor in the town’s lack of interest in letting people park somewhere, anywhere in Amherst.

Commenter: A related point: If everybody's a racist, then nobody is. When you throw the term around as loosely as you do, it stops meaning anything.

Amherst Life: if everybody is a racist, then everybody is! “Racism” may cease to have meaning to you, but it continues to have a great deal of meaning to those who are on its receiving end, to those who have to fight it on a daily basis while being told that it does not exist.

Town of Amherst: On Racial Tension and Racism

This post is in reference to the the first of eight points that one of our readers made (they can be found in the “Town of Amherst: Reader Perceptions" post). We hope other readers will respond to some of the ideas that the commenter raises and/or the ones that the Amherst Life Crew touches upon. We will begin by addressing the first point (we have re-posted it below), and will slowly but surely make out way to the last in future posts.

Reader/Commenter:
(1) I grew up in Amherst, and I disagree with your assertion that Amherst has "a long history of racism." What Amherst does have is a long history of racial tension -- which is not the same thing. This tension is due in part to the fact that it's considered socially acceptable in Amherst to imply that someone is a bigot if you disagree with them, even on issues only tangentially related to race. This tactic is effective because the white liberals who make up a majority of the town's population are terrified of being accused of racism. So such an accusation is a near-perfect trump card. In the long run, however, this sort of coercion is quite naturally going to lead to bitterness and mistrust on both sides (see, e.g., the West Side Story controversy).

Amherst Life:
--Several of the Amherst Life Blog writers also grew up in Amherst, so we hope that the commenter will not feel like we are calling him/her a “bigot” based on what he/she stated as a cultural norm in Amherst, MA (apparently, ideological differences “only tangentially related to race” often result in one or both parties being labeled as “bigots” or “racists”).

--A quick question on the distinction the commenter is drawing between “racial tension” and “racism”: does “racial tension” in Amherst arise from a context divorced from race, race distinctions, race relations, history of “race” as an ideology and cultural construction, and, of course, racism? We are not completely sure if you can separate these contexts.

--The observation that people are often labeled “bigots” when another person disagrees with them is interesting. First, maybe they are “bigots.” It is not out of the question, especially considering the history of “bigotry” in Massachusetts and in Amherst. People in Massachusetts put up more resistance to integrating public schools than in the South.... Is the commenter saying that people in Amherst are over-sensitive to racism? That people jump to conclusions? Maybe they should. Maybe the “white liberal” majority of this town (as the commenter calls it) are in fact racists and that is why they “are terrified of being accused of racism.” These are ideas. It would be interesting to hear our reader’s opinions on this matter.

--Regarding bitterness and mistrust on both sides: it’s already there. Whether Amherst folks call each other racists or not, those two elements are transformative.

--To conclude: if Amherst does not have a long history of racism, how do we explain the following: students and officials dress up in KKK garb in front of an “I love ALANA” poster at UMass and nobody loses their job; a store window is smashed and words of racial hatred are written all over it; the town name is celebrated and unchanged; police harassment of so-called “minorities” is rampant;local businesses are intimidating folks. In the history of Amherst, how many African Americans, Native Americans, and/or Latinos own/have owned businesses in the town? How many are on the selectboard? The answers are revealing.

These are not just the actions of kid “losers”, as the commenter suggests. There is malice, there is hatred, and there is racism in those acts. To deny it is to not see a situation from more than one side. And to give a voice to “other” sides is the point of this blog.

Town of Amherst: Reader Perceptions

Once again we have some interesting comments from a reader and (we hope the reader does not mind...) we'd like to share them with all of you. They open the door for much-needed conversation. We will answer each question one by one, and hope other readers will as well. Thanks again for posting your views. The comments are as follows:

I'm the earlier commenter. A few thoughts based on a very quick perusal of your blog:

(1) I grew up in Amherst, and I disagree with your assertion that Amherst has "a long history of racism." What Amherst does have is a long history of racial tension -- which is not the same thing. This tension is due in part to the fact that it's considered socially acceptable in Amherst to imply that someone is a bigot if you disagree with them, even on issues only tangentially related to race. This tactic is effective because the white liberals who make up a majority of the town's population are terrified of being accused of racism. So such an accusation is a near-perfect trump card. In the long run, however, this sort of coercion is quite naturally going to lead to bitterness and mistrust on both sides (see, e.g., the West Side Story controversy).

(2) Calling someone a bigot is a good way to avoid addressing what they're saying. I'm not suggesting that there's any point in debating with Nazis, but you use the term "racist" very freely. An accusation of bigotry is a quick way to dispense of someone whose ideas you find threatening without ever actually engaging with what they have to say. Obviously there are real racists in the world, but throwing the term around lazily is anti-intellectual.

Your blog does far too much of this kind of name-calling. Take the parking issue. You may be right and the town counsel may be wrong, but this doesn't make them racists. In this context, it's an irresponsible accusation. Part of growing up is figuring out that not everybody who disagrees with you has nasty motives.

A related point: If everybody's a racist, then nobody is. When you throw the term around as loosely as you do, it stops meaning anything. If you think the town counsel of ultra-liberal Amherst is full of racists (rather than, say, people who you believe are misguided or ignorant with regard to racial issues), what do you call David Duke? A super-duper racist?

(3) Terms like "minority" carry political baggage. I think this is part of your point, and I agree that it's worthwhile to question our preconceptions regarding these sorts of things. But the goal of language is not merely to set the stage for a glorious future. It also has a duty to represent what exists. I certainly wouldn't be offended if whites were referred to as minorities (as you note, it's technically accurate if we're talking about the world at large), but on a purely practical level it would be silly to do so in the United States today. And practicality matters. We should all aim to be as straightforward as possible in our speech. Obscurantism is bad, even if you're just trying to be inoffensive.

(4) People who break windows and write racist slogans on stores tend to be losers. The fact that some pathetic, thoughtless people (probably kids) did this in Amherst isn't evidence that Amherst is a racist community. They'll probably regret it in a few years -- and if they don't, they will be very, very far outside of Amherst's mainstream (certainly not the embodiment of community sentiment).

(6) The fact that somebody is offended by something is not an argument. Something can be both offensive and right. For example, it strikes me as very unlikely that the New Testament is literally true. Presumably this opinion is highly offensive to some people. But the fact that it's offensive to them doesn't make me wrong (or right), and it's no reason for me to stop being honest.

(7) Intent clearly matters. I think you might be more likely to recognize this point if the standard that you apply to others were applied to you. For example, if someone were to call you an anti-Semite because you think that Amherst is rife with racism, you could reasonably object that this accusation is unfair because what you've said isn't anti-Semitic at all, that in fact you never mentioned Jewish people, and that you hold no anti-Semitic beliefs. This would be a very reasonable defense. The fact that somebody is outraged by what you have to say doesn't mean they have any good ground to be, and the fact that somebody might call you a bigot doesn't make you one.

(Intent also matters for other reasons. Don Imus isn't Lester Maddox. This goes back to my earlier point about the necessity of making sure that words like "racist" enable us to distinguish between members of hate groups and people whose views we merely consider ignorant or misguided.)

(8) The world is a diverse place. People are offended by all sorts of silly things (religious fanatics in particular -- see, e.g., the Denmark cartoon controversy). I don't feel bound to avoid offending people who get offended for bad reasons, and neither should you or anyone else. We have brains for a reason. My opinions don't become wrong or unspeakable just because other people don't like them.

So instead of going after your ideological opponents with ad hominem attacks and accusations of racism, try putting yourself in their shoes for a moment and crafting an argument that might appeal to a person of good will. I think most people are basically trying to do the right thing. I'm not saying you ought to abandon your principles, but you'd be a far more effective advocate if you listened to your conscientious opponents and treated them with respect rather than dismissing them as bigots. Maybe you could even get them to see your side.

Town of Amherst: On the term "Minority"

One of our readers posted a question on Monday and it is an interesting one:

You note that white people are a minority in the world. This is true, and shouldn't come as a surprise to anybody, but what's your point? Of what significance is this to anything taking place in Amherst? Are you just complaining about the word "minority"?

Initial Response:

-Thanks for taking the time to comment on an important word, one that carries ideologies of power

-The point is that the word/concept/construct of "minority" is incorrect: the world's so-called "white" population is the "real" "minority." Is that a threatening denomination for "white" people? Imagine if it were connected to centuries of systematic cultural desctruction, human annihilation, and exploitaion. Would the word be even more of a threat?

-Amherst, MA has a long history of racism. PVTA bus routes were re-routed from Holyoke because "drug dealers" were coming into the Happy Valley; stores in the center of town had windows broken and words of racial hatred written on them. The very name of the town is connected to a figure who decimated Native American populations. Perhaps is we could talk about things like the term "minority", people would come out with a new perspective, one that re-contextualizes.

We have several more answers to this question but would like to hear from our readers. There is a lot inside of the author's comments that we can learn from.