I apologize. I was unclear in articulating my question. I will first say why it really was I asked this; second, share the significance of my question and finally ask your honest opinion.
For a while, I had stopped engaging media and decided look around for answers. I observed very puzzling things. First – the issue of our current president. Thought I am aware of the cons, the ‘hope’ however false it gives people, is of merit. Yet, even with the powerful symbol of a black president, where notions of racism/elitism have apparently been ‘overcome,’ I see sects of society battling still. Gays, blacks, immigrants, etc. The masses needed to promulgate the system are still battling for full access to its resources.
I began reading, and noticed a pattern. From the [1600’s – present] after rebellion or social uproar that went unsuppressed, laws have been given to appease reactionary sects, giving social and cultural opportunities – opportunities that would advance – but oppress simultaneously. An African/Asian having opportunity to amass money but not wealth; justice awarded to one but not to the other. One group lives uninhibited while the other agonizes. The checks and balances of socio-economical injustices still cemented in the populous, despite being legally abolished.
Obvious conclusions are –
1. It never existed.
2. It is not ALL-encompassing/inclusive.
You are absolutely correct in refuting the construct. But…even Babylon must obey basic laws – denying light to an organism is detrimental not only to the organism but to the organisms surroundings. A prime reason why they allotted LAWS to the sects is to sustain them so they can equally sustain the system. But these ‘laws,’ are rife with loopholes and by-passes created for/by the oppressor. Therefore any gains made/will be made will be nullified – both in the sects’ gain and in the responsibilities of its issuers.
Seeing the overwhelmingly popular response for Barack’s presidency, the overwhelming agreement to “change.” The at-lat feeling of inclusiveness for a colored man to helm America – I was immediately struck with a thought. I imagined a law. One that would obliterate and over-ride/nullify all previous laws written, while keeping the basic elements, eliminate pretensions and place everything under one umbrella of Law. An inclusive bill/law that would legally and unequivocally make ‘all men equal,’ without challenge, without any rebuke.
No more AA, EO and GR. These laws enable, but still carry the hateful history of its occurrence. What if no more could one label another Black, or Gay, or whatever. My thinking may not be on the same level as many of the idren here but – legally speaking – I think this a contributing idea, a stone to the glass house of the oppressive construct.
One way I sight to attack racism and prejudice] is to sacrifice ourselves that the future generations have no baggage of it whatsoever. They should know what happened, but why should they continue to bear the oppressors hate and regressive tendencies?
It’s a shame we have to legally claim our humanity back but it is the first step I think, eroding their foundations then full on attacking the construct.
What do you think?
FAIR USE NOTICE:
This site may at times contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml