PC Tempest In A Teepee
"Political correctness is tyranny with manners. Telling us what to think has evolved into telling us what to say, so telling us what to do can't be far behind".--- Charlton Heston (Harvard Law School (1999)
[Proposed Saturday Night Live Skit]
(ETHNIC STUDIES PROFESSOR)
“Officer! Arrest that man…and his kids!”
(PC POLICE OFFICER)
“Why? What’s he done?”
(ETHNIC STUDIES PROFESSOR)
He’s letting his kids play cowboys and Indians…wearing feather headdresses, carrying tomahawks, and… OH NO!...building a teepee! This is an OUTRAGE!”
(PC POLICE OFFICER)
“What’s wrong with that?”
(ETHNIC STUDIES PROFESSOR)
“Because he’s anti-essentializing himself through cultural appropriation!”
(PC POLICE OFFICER)
(…gun drawn, shooting position…)
“WTF! Freeze kids….drop those tomahawks!
With headlines around the globe dripping in blood from beheadings, incineration, mass rape, and child mutilation, torture and death, civilian slaughter at museums and schools what’s the buzz on college campus debate these days? Teepees! This past week on the campus of Santa Barbara City College, a group of art professors and their students voluntarily took down a replica of an indigenous Indian teepee they erected at a public lawn area of the campus. Made from re-cycled wood the art students thought they were being very politically correct and demonstrating their respect for 'diversity. For a few days, the exhibit was appreciated for the art project it was. Boy, did they get it all wrong. It seems that some (the exact number is not reported) native Indian students complained to the administration that the teepee art project is an example of ‘cultural misappropriation’ and, therefore, ‘offended' them. Since the teepee offended them, they wanted it taken down. Thankfully, instead of ordering the teepee taken down the administration rationally had the objecting native Indian student(s) ‘negotiate’ its removal with those who set it up. The minority ruled the majority. All hell broke loose on the campus when word of the incident spread. Soon, the ‘all-campus’ email pipeline was clogged with expressions of support and opposition for the teepee removal. Many emails pathetically and profusely apologized in advance if perhaps their views ‘offended’ anyone anywhere in the known universe.
(The 'offensive SBCC TeePee)
“I OBVIOUSLY FEEL THIS IS WRONG ON MANY LEVELS AND WANT IT TAKEN DOWN, BUT I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO TRULY EDUCATE OUR COMMUNITY ABOUT WHY THIS IS WRONG,” COMMENTED HERAS. “IT MADE ME FEEL LIKE I WAS THE ABNORMAL ONE FOR THINKING AND FEELING IT WASN’T OKAY AND IS WRONG. I JUST WANT PEOPLE TO KNOW THE NEGATIVE IMPACT ON NATIVES AND NON-NATIVES THAT THIS CAN HAVE BY CONTINUING THE LONG TRADITION OF NEGATIVE STEREO-TYPES OF AMERICAN INDIANS — INTENTIONALLY AND UNINTENTIONALLY.”
And on the same page you find this:
“When I saw the photos I was totally disgusted. Here is another example of inappropriate use of culture by non-Native people,” commented Corine Fairbanks, director of American Indian Movement – Southern California.
Few people have every heard about ‘cultural misappropriation’. However, if they have heard about various cultural minorities protesting the names like “Washington Redskins”, then it will come as no surprise to hear that it’s the latest political correctness crime in academia, ‘cultural misappropriation’. Taught mostly by liberal ethnic studies professors (sorry, that’s redundant) this latest crime on the books of political correctness is being institutionalized in American higher education. Then it seeps into American business and social life. Soon, very soon, it will be a political crime for any non-Italian to write, produce, direct, or act in any movie or otherwise even depict anything ‘Italian’. Pizza is for Italians only(despite the fact that pizza was invented in New York). Any non-Italian cultural appropriation is strictly forbidden. Conceivably, it’s a ‘feeling crime’ for any non-Italian to even work in a pizza parlor lest any ‘authentic’ cultural Italian find out and have their feelings hurt. Pizza could become a controlled substance. Remember, there is no 'slippery slope' fallacy if, in fact, the slope is covered with grease.
And what seems to be the crux of the matter? Some academics insist that at least one person has the power to remove an art exhibit, cancel a lecturer, film, censor a picture, suppress a joke, ban an idea, or even get someone fired if only their individual feelings are offended. Feelings, being what they are, have no way to be validated for their offended authenticity. Knowledge of other minds still remains an unsolved philosophical and neurological enigma. The perp can be acting out of malice, revenge or simple stupidity. They may be a stooge for a tenured anarchist professor. It doesn’t matter. If they put on a good enough act, make a lot of noise in protest, stamp their feet, and throw a tantrum or run down the street pulling out their groin hair, then bingo they get their way and a minority of a few rules the majority of many. Fine lesson in democracy, that eh?
How did this kerfuffle originate? You guessed it, a social science professor. In this case, Professor George Lipsitz, an ‘American Studies’ professor at UC Santa Barbara His Wiki entry is this:
George Lipsitz is an American Studies scholar and Professor in the Department of Black Studies at the University of California at Santa Barbara…The term "cultural appropriation" or "cultural misappropriation" usually has a negative connotation. "Appropriation" is often used to describe instances when the subject culture is a minority culture or subordinated in social, political, economic, or military status to the appropriating culture; or, when there are other issues involved, such as a history of ethnic or racial conflict.
Cultural and racial theorist George Lipsitz outlined this concept of cultural appropriation in his seminal term "strategic anti-essentialism." Strategic anti-essentialism is defined as the calculated use of a cultural form, outside of your own, to define yourself or your group. Strategic anti-essentialism can be seen in both minority cultures and majority cultures, and are not confined only to the appropriation of the other. However, Lipsitz argues, when the majority culture attempts to strategically anti-essentialize themselves by appropriating a minority culture, they must take great care to recognize the specific socio-historical circumstances and significance of these cultural forms so as not to perpetuate the already existing, majority vs. minority, unequal power relations”. [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_appropriation]
Here is the only serious attempt to be found explaining anti-essentialism http://www.tariqmodood.com/uploads/1/2/3/9/12392325/anti-essentialism.pdf. Good luck!
Well, there you have it. Whenever we ‘culturally misappropriate’ any artifact from a ‘subordinated minority’ culture we are, in fact ‘anti-essentializing’ ourselves as the majority (and, of course, oppressive) culture. Notice the key words and phrases here. “Subordinated minority’ to a ‘majority culture’ entail that not all of us can be guilty of this crime. Conversely, not all of us can be victims of this crime. This is a crime only committed by those in the majority culture and only on those in the subordinated minority. So, by this definition, if you’re Irish American you can’t be victimized by displays of drunken leprechauns on St Paddy’s day because, so the Lipsitz-minded professors maintain, the American Irish are part of the ‘majority culture ‘suppressing minorities. Who gets to define a suppressed minority? Only approved minorities. Who gets to define cultural misappropriation? Only approved minorities. Who gets to pay for this neo-Marxist dictatorship of the minority? Every taxpayer.
People are being beheaded because they have the ‘wrong’ idea about Islam. Christian children are being burned alive in cages. The planet is smoldering with the fires of war with a barbarism not seen since the medieval period. Global leadership is either dysfunctional or incompetent as humanity slips into darkness and despair. American foreign policy has only one gear...reverse. Yet, in American colleges and universities ethnic studies professors pollute the minds of our children with this cultural misappropriation toxin. If that’s not undemocratic enough, they openly seek to suppress the free speech of all Americans who tell jokes, wear funny hats, imitate various dialects, cross-dress, get cultural artifacts tattooed on their bodies and generally enjoy the full and free life protected by the United States Constitution. An ancient axiom (culture unknown) has it that “Whom the Gods would destroy, they first make mad.” Done!
The verb "offend" needs to be clearly defined in terms of constitutional rights, i.e...what is an offense, and when is an act or a name or a teepee NOT an offense but rather one's right of free expression.
ReplyDelete