Race and the City

Last month, I blogged about Atlanta's Mayoral Election. In the election 3 weeks ago, none of the candidates received 50% of the vote, so the city is headed to a runoff election on Tuesday, December 1st. Kasim Reed, an African American State Senator, and Mary Norwood, a White Atlanta City Councilwoman, are battling it out to become the city's next Mayor. In examining voting patterns from the election 3 weeks ago, nearly all Whites that voted supported Norwood, while nearly all African Americans that voted supported Reed. I must admit that I am proud of both candidates for not exploiting the city's racial tensions as other past elections have done. Unfortunately, the same cannot be said for some of the city's citizens, who are determined to create division, distraction, and fear-mongering.

I have been amazed by the comments that have played out in the media over the last month. For example, ABC News's Nightline featured a story about the Mayor's race and the possibility that Atlanta could elect its first White Mayor in almost 40 years. In the segment, a young White woman was interviewed and stated that we needed a White Mayor so the city wouldn't be known as the "ATL" anymore, wouldn't be a city just for rappers, and could become a city that White people could relate to again. Say What!? As horrible as her comments were, I truly believe that they reflect the opinion of a segment of the population who have witnessed the city drastically change over the last 20 years. Atlanta has become more multicultural and has even been nicknamed "Black Hollywood" in some circles. In the hip hop music world, Atlanta has stepped into the spotlight with cities such as New York and Los Angeles. Some are uncomfortable with this new identity and fear that the political structure is fostering this change. Some view electing a White Mayor as a last chance to reverse this change.

On the other end of the spectrum, many African Americans have claimed that the Atlanta Mayor's office can only be held by someone who is Black. Some Black Atlantans believe that electing someone White as Mayor will erase their influence as well as 30+ years of political gains. Frankly, some of the fear-mongering and "the sky is falling" mentality is unnecessary, if it is based on race. As I said before, mandating that all African Americans vote for an African American candidate solely based on race is just as bad as Whites only supporting White candidates. People need to be allowed to think for themselves and support the candidate of their choosing. Just recently as this week, unsubstantiated claims have been made that some of Mary Norwood's Black supporters have been harrassed by other Blacks for not supporting Kasim Reed.

Hundreds of comments have been posted on numerous newspaper blogs regarding this runoff election. Unfortunately, the majority of these comments have displayed a level of ignorance and insensitivity that reflects poorly on our city. I wonder if people are posting some of the comments just for shock value or do they truly agree with what they are posting? It makes you wonder if the year is 2009 or 1959.

Unfortunately, the fact that race has to play a backstory around a city election shows that Atlanta is not quite ready for primetime. As the city's demographics continue to change as a result of gentrification, I fear that the voting public will continue to create an atmoshere of name calling and racial pandering instead of a mature discussion of candidate qualifications during future election cycles. Atlanta, what happens in 2013 and 2017 when it is election time again? Will we behave maturely or will the dialogue become even more hostile? I sincerely hope that the winner of this year's runoff election will do his or her part to bring this city together. We need each other more than ever to solve very serious issues.  

Choose to Discriminate? You May Just Go Bankrupt!

During the summer, the Valley Club in suburban Philadelphia garnered national attention for allegedly discriminating against 46 Black and 10 Hispanic campers who were invited to swim there. The families of the campers claim that the Valley Club revoked the children's pool privileges because of their race and as a result of complaints from some members of the club. What really makes this sad is that some of the children reported overhearing club members make insensitive remarks. Since then, the club has been sued for racial discrimination, and last week, the club's board of directors voted to file for chapter 7 bankruptcy protection.

Suddenly, members of the club are expressing dismay about how their club has been portrayed. What they should be expressing dismay about is how some of their members behaved. Or maybe they should be expressing dismay about the lack of diversity in its membership ranks. Numerous news sources have stated that the club had no African American members among its ranks for atleast the last 2 years. The Valley Club could have used this instance as a teaching moment. They could have made an effort to improve the diversity in its ranks. Or even better, they could have instituted a zero tolerance policy toward racist comments. They may not have the chance to at this point.

The lesson here for everyone is that when you perpetuate discriminatory policies, you have a strong chance of being sued. And as we are well aware, getting sued can cost big bucks as well as cost many entities their reputation. If you don't believe me, take a look at the many large U.S. corporations that have had to shell out millions of dollars to settle discrimination lawsuits and repair their public image over the last decade. A multimillion hit to an entity's profit line is certainly one way to get it's attention.

I'm glad the families of the campers did not let allow the Valley Club to slide as a result of what happened. Each of us must challenge institutions that choose to allow discrimination in any form. Are you willing to do your part? It seems like a very small step, but this small step can go a long way toward avoiding millions of dollars in legal fees.   
For more on the Valley Club bankruptcy and lawsuit, click here.

Morehouse College's New Dress Code

A couple of weeks ago, historically Black male college, Morehouse College, garnered attention when the school instituted a dress code that bans sagging pants, wearing pajamas in public, and the wearing of women's clothes. The ban on cross dressing was perhaps the most controversial portion of the new dress code. Morehouse Senior Cameron Titus applauds the change in a recent CNN.com article in which he states "the policy is just saying that you have to show more respect in how you dress and there are things that are just not acceptable at Morehouse. We have a legacy that we are trying to uphold." On the other hand, some believe that the policy is discriminatory and infringes on the individual rights of the student body.

Morehouse College's reputation is amazing. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr and Spike Lee are among the distinguished alumni of the college. After living in Atlanta for 13 years and knowing many graduates of Morehouse during my life, I can tell you that Morehouse guards its reputation fiercely and has high expections of its students and their image. In most cases, the students know what to expect as well as the legacy of the college once they become a part of the campus. I think it is okay and perfectly acceptable for a college to have certain standards of behavior and dress, especially a college that is an institution within the nation's Black community. As long as students are aware of the policy, I am not sure that there is a huge issue. Many will paint this policy as a so called example of how the Black community is insensitive to gay people. I completely disagree with this line of thinking. All races and segments of the community need to work equally toward an environment where gay people are treated with greater respect and acceptance- no race has a greater responsibility than the other around this topic. To believe that certain races are less accepting of the gay lifestyle is a distraction and doesn't help the argument.

In the workplace, most companies have dress codes and certain standards of attire that employees must follow. If anything, this will further prepare students for what to expect once they graduate from Morehouse. I applaud Morehouse for taking a stand on this issue and helping to ultimately advance the image of the Black male and male youth.

For more on this issue, please click here for the CNN.com article or click here for an article from TheRoot.com.

Race and the 2009 Atlanta Mayoral Election

It's campaign season in Atlanta. In less than a month, the city will elect a new Mayor to replace current Mayor Shirley Franklin who is limited to 2 terms. Unlike prior elections, this election is garnering attention for completely different reasons - urban gentrification and a controversial memo.

The population of Atlanta has shifted dramatically over the last 10 to 15 years. Even though the city's population remains majority Black, the White population has increased as more Whites have moved from the suburbs back into the city to avoid the traffic congestion. As a result, many intown neighborhoods that were majority Black have become more diverse. On the flip side, the Black population in Atlanta has declined as more Blacks have moved to the suburbs as property taxes skyrocketed. It's not beyond the realm of possibility that Atlanta's population shift will continue over the next decade. Atlanta in 2020 may not racially resemble Atlanta in 2009. In the near future, I plan to post a separate blog regarding gentrification.

Since the historic inauguration of Maynard Jackson as Mayor in 1974, the city of Atlanta has had African American Mayors - 4 to be exact. This year, the front runner according to most polls is Councilwoman Mary Norwood, a White female. In some circles around the city, this has been a surprise as well as a source of worry. Some believe that the election of a White Mayor will turn back many of the strides made by Black leadership in the city since the early 70s. Others believe that an election of a White Mayor will mean that Blacks and other minorities will be shut out of the political echelon. Unfortunately, this issue received nationwide attention recently when a memo was circulated by a group named The Black Leadership Forum, urging the public to unite behind one Black candidate and encouraging the other Black candidates to drop out of the race. The candidates for Mayor denounced the memo, while others believed that the memo was not out of line and deserved consideration. In a Wall Street Journal article, Bob Holmes, Professor Emeritus at Clark Atlanta University, stated "For a certain number of people, they do look at things through that prism. They remember the history."

I find sentiments like those in this memo insulting to both Black people as well as White people. The memo essentially assumes the worst in both races. It assumes that Black people have to think the same as well as vote alike. It assumes that we are not allowed to think for ourselves and decide who we want to run the city. It assumes that White people could not possibly consider voting for a non-White candidate. I would be naive to believe that there are not Atlantans that will cast their ballot solely based on race. Yes, I realize this does happen in some circles, but I would hope that most intelligent people would vote for the best candidate regardless of race. 

Around the country, many cities, states, and Congressional districts see their election cycles dissolve into a mess of racial animosity, bigotry, racial pandering, and immaturity. I really hope that this is not the path that Atlanta's future elections will take as the city's racial makeup changes. How this city chooses to addreses its changing demographics will be an important chapter in its future.
 
For more info on the Atlanta Mayoral election, please visit the Wall Street Journal or the Atlanta Journal Constitution. 

What Do Our Social Circles Say About Us?

From time to time when I go out in my city or cities that I have traveled to, I often find myself looking around the room in an effort to notice if there are any multicultural groups there. I do this at restaurants, lounges, sporting events, concerts and plays. In fact, I probably have had this habit for nearly 2 decades, since I first took an interest in diversity programs and helping others create a society that values differences. It has often been said that we may interact and socialize across cultures in the workplace, but after the workday ends, we return to our own self-segregated corners of the universe. Why is that? Do we socialize cross-culturally in the workplace out of necessity and choose not to when we have a choice during our own time? Are we just more comfortable with others that look like us? Most of my life, I've had friends that represent every segment of the population that you can imagine. I can remember one instance in college when a group of long time friends and I were out for dinner and drinks in Memphis. The backgrounds represented at our table were African American, White, Korean, Indian, and Thai, and we noticed all kinds of stares from others around the room- not hostile stares but more curious stares. It was almost like we were on display in some science museum, where patrons can view experiments that they normally do not see. The same thing happens from time to time when I go out for lunch with my volunteer group. We even have made the joke that we can often find each other in a large room of people because 99% of the time, we will be the only multiracial group in the room!

When my wife and I got married last year, our guest list was the most multicultural one that I have ever seen at a wedding. Neither of us did this by design. It just happened that way based on the people that we care about and desired to have with us on our special day. I remember two guests commenting to me about this, describing how unique it was to them to see so many cultures represented in one place. It was the norm for me, but for others, it was very different.

In my opinion, people generally have dinner, socialize, and attend various events with people that they have chosen to invest the time in developing a relationship with. Do we tend to only invest that time with people from our own race? If so, why is that? Would we welcome the opportunity to broaden our social circles?

President Carter's Take on Race and the Obama Administration

A little over 2 weeks ago, former President Jimmy Carter unleashed a flurry of controversary and conversation when he stated "I think an overwhelming portion of the intensely demonstrated animosity toward President Obama is based on the fact that he is a black man". Unfortunately and sadly, I feel compelled to agree with the former President.

New York Times op-ed columnist Maureen Dowd recently noted in a column just days before President Carter's comments that "some people just can't believe a black man is president and will never accept it". Pretty much since his inauguration in January, the President has been subjected to a level of disrespect and hatred that certainly has racial overtones. Repeatedly, throughout the summer, the President's place of birth has been called into question with the intent to paint him as a non US citizen and delegitimize his Presidency. During many of the recent Congressional town hall meetings on health care reform, numerous people have displayed racist signs and images portraying the President as "Curious George", an African witch doctor, or showing him hanging from a noose.You would have to be living under a rock to not realize that this kind of imagery reminds many Black and White Americans of a time when we had federally mandated segregation and crushing Jim Crow laws throughout the South. Last month, thousands of parents refused to let their children hear an address from the President to the nation's students because they feared that the President would indoctrinate their children with "a liberal agenda". Was that really the reason or was that a smokescreen for something for socially unacceptable? And let's not forget the outrageous outburst by South Carolina Congressman Joe Wilson during the President's address to a joint session of Congress last month. The level of disrespect shown by Congressman Wilson was almost unprecedented. It was almost like he was attempting to remind this young, Black President of "his place" in society.

Disagreement on important issues is fine. As a society, we should never be expected to agree on all issues, but what happened to being respectful with our disagreements? To deny that the animosity that the President is facing has racial overtones is simply not being morally nor intellectually honest. Immediately after President Carter's comments, he was denounced in many corners for injecting race into the public square. Unfortunately, race was already injected months ago when many decided to use stereotypes, imagery, and language laced with bigotry. What is really sad is that many of the people that are behaving in this manner have no clue and do not realize the lack of racial sensitivity that they are displaying. In fact in many cases, they do not even care, and their actions are deliberate.

More people must stand up and speak out against this type of behavior. As I said earlier, it is okay for us to debate important issues, but there is no place for the level of racism that is being displayed. More people need to denounce this behavior and call it what it really is instead of tip-toeing around the issue. Our country really needs to have a serious conversation on racism, bigotry, and stereotypes.

Has the Segregated Cafeteria Moved Online?

We have all heard about or seen the segregated high school cafeteria used to decry the racial divide among our young people. A recent study conducted by a social media researcher at Microsoft and fellow at Harvard's Berkman Center for Internet and Society claims that self-segregation is "rampant online. What do you think?

Click here for this interesting story from the website The Root.

ABC News Show Poses Tough Questions

Earlier this year, my wife and I were fascinated by a program on ABC named What Would You Do? In this show, individuals are confronted with ethical dilemnas, while a hidden camera captures all. Many of these scenarios deal with racial issues. A recent scenario featured 3 White teenagers (actors) vandalizing a car in a New Jersey park. (Click here to watch the segment). Repeatedly, dozens of people walked by the car without saying a word, merely dismissing the activity or choosing to ignore what was happening. Amazingly, only 2 people stopped and challenged the youth and only 1 call was made to the police. Ironically, on the other end of the park, 2 Black teenagers were sleeping in car, and several people contacted 911 about them!

Later, the producers of the show turned the tables by having 3 Black teenagers (actors, again) vandalize the same car in the park. This time around, passerbys in the park immediately contacted 911 and several of them confronted the youth. Nearly a dozen calls were made to 911 when the Black teenagers were vandalizing the car, while only 1 was made to authorities when the scenario featured the White teenagers.

To me, it seemed that the White young men were actually given the benefit of the doubt or completely ignored, which was apparent from the lack of reaction that they received. On the other hand, the Black young men immediately had the police called on them. One person that called 911 even stated that she would not allow the Black youths to "come into her neighborhood" and vandalize cars "in her backyard". Her statement was very telling. Because the Black teenagers looked like they didn't belong, they immediately had suspicion cast upon them and were viewed as criminals. On the other hand, the White teenagers were perceived to belong in the neighborbood, and their antics were dismissed by some as teenage, bad behavior. With both scenarios, one would hope that the reaction from others would be the same. One would hope that the reaction would be to contact the police immediately when a crime is being committed - regardless of the race of the perpetrator.

Stereotypes played a major role in the reaction of people to the actions of the teenagers. Would the juvenile justice system also show bias and be influenced by similar stereotypes? Is is possible that the reaction of the police would be influenced by similar stereotypes? These were the questions that I asked myself after seeing this segment. Are perpetrators committing similar crimes judged differently because of their race? What would you have done?

Longest Journey Begins with One Step

For a little over a decade, a big part of my life has been committed to facilitating diversity and tolerance programs for high school and college students. During this time, I also served as a board member for the Georgia office of the National Conference for Community and Justice (NCCJ) - one of the nation's premiere social justice organizations. Suffice it to say, these are issues that I have a great deal of passion around. Over the years, I have discovered that there are very few forums where adults can openly discuss topics around diversity and tolerance. Are we afraid that we will be judged? Are we concerned that our opinions may be antiquated? Are these conversations too uncomfortable?

For a little over a year, I have pondered creating a gathering place committed to fostering open and honest dialogue, and as the old saying goes "there is no time like the present". Our nation has become more multicultural, and the evolution that experts are predicting between now and 2050 will be quite dramatic. The ability for us all to co-exist together will become even more important. I plan to share my viewpoint on many of the current issues of the day around diversity and invite subject matter experts to guest-blog from time to time. We may not always agree, but I do welcome your comments.

I hope that you will join me on this new journey. We have a lot to learn from each other.

- Gregory