32. "RE: Elders, Youth, Saul Williams and Black Revolution" In response to In response to 29
spirit, for the sake of not coming off like i'm trying to tell everybody what's going on in saul's head, i'm going to address the issues that you raise but try to keep saul's name out of it. the issues that you raise stand on their own regardless of whether saul williams brought em up or not. first, your idea of there being a solution for the problems in our present time. doesn't it kind of depend on how you expect the problem is going to be solved. what i mean is that different people have different ideas as to how problems can be solved and exactly what that solution entails. for example, solving the problem that you presented of the low number of minority owned broadcast properties could be "solved" in a few different ways: a)all the white owners of the broadcast properties could be killed, thus making the previously low proportion of minority owned broadcast properties into the only remaining broadcast property owners; b)all the white owned broadcst props could be boycotted, resulting in some of them shutting down, thus increasing the previously low proportion of minority owned brdcst props; c)all references and acknowledgement of distinct black and white races could cease to exist, which would mean the end to the idea of racial minorities, thus erasing the problem of who owns a greater proportion of brdcst props. and there's more stuff that i could make up. but my point is that presenting a solution to a problem often just addresses the outcome rather than engaging the inner workings of the problem. in the brdcst props example any increase in the number of minority owned properties could be seen by some as having solved the problem. yet the vast majority of solutions would not even attempt to address the society and conditions that produce the disproportion in the first place. but at the same time i don't think that such solutions are altogether useless because they at least address some aspect of the problem. i think the "we're all human" philosophy is meant to challenge the thinking that forces us to rigorously define oursleves along lines of black and white, as well as challenge those solutions which also fall along those lines. i don't think that it means to ignore the existing problems at all, or to preach that since we're all human we should just be happy and get along right now regardless of how things are. and there's also the question of whether "we're all human" means that we would no longer assume the existence of race. this would be very difficult. there's been alot invested in creating blackness and whiteness from jump. but at the same time i think that as a result of having so much put into it, the idea of race is pretty absurd. you can't really clearly define, yet there are so many things that rest upon it. i mean, yeah when you look around you you see people of various shades and think that such and such looks white and such and such looks black and understand them to be of that race. but we all know black folks who look white and there has got to be a lot of white folks in this country who have some kind of black ancestry in em and don't even know it. so who's who? i'm just rambling now...i don't know if i even addressed your questions directly. hope i didn't stray too far. looking forward to a response.