Apologies for the lack of posts recently. I'm just trying to settle into life after University, and at the moment there's so little time for blog posts! To be honest, this blog also needs a major overhaul, the subject matter is just not working for me. I'm on a hiatus for a while, just until I get some ideas together. Sorry about that!

-Khia

Review: 'No Place Like Home: A Black Briton's Journey Through the American South'

It’s taken me a while to write this review of Gary Younge’s book ‘No Place Like Home: A Black Briton’s Journey Through the American South’ largely because of other obligations and, admittedly, forgetfulness. Since finishing this book I just needed to write a review, and have been sitting on this for a few weeks now.

The book focuses largely on the journey of the Freedom Riders, a group of black and white activists who decided to challenge a decision by the United States Supreme Court. Despite the decision, that stated public buses were no longer segregated, the law remained unenforced in most states, especially in the Deep South. A group of black and white activists decided to challenge this non-enforcement by embarking on a journey, via public bus, through the Deep South. They refused to “correctly” use segregated facilities, from the seating areas to the facilities in bus stations. The reaction they received was beyond anything they could have imagined. They were mobbed, violently beaten, hospitalised, their buses were set on fire and eventually they were arrested.

Journalist Gary Younge decided, 36 years later, to retrace their route, visiting key sights and interviewing a variety of people along the way. More than just a simple historio-travelogue, ‘No Place Like Home’ has entrenched within its pages a political polemic about racist practices today in both America and Britain.

Younge was born in Stevenage, Hertfordshire, to Barbadian parents, and grew up in the care of his mother, who instilled in him a deep sense of racial identity. Younge devotes his opening chapter detailing his own upbringing right up to an incident on a bus in Brighton, where, as part of a group of black youth visiting Brighton, his bus was attacked by skinheads. As he decides to embark on his own Freedom Ride, he recalls this memory that had been previous buried deep in his memory.

This mini-autobiography prefacing the rest of the book isn’t mere indulgence on Younge’s part. Not only

does it allow us to see what sparked Younge’s interest in the Freedom Riders, it also gives us an idea of British racism, as the book uses America and the Freedom Riders not just to polemicize against American society, but towards Britain as well. My favourite quote happens very early on, when he notes why race is such an issue in America and seemingly non-existent in Britain (by that I mean, not really outwardly spoken about):

“In Britain you are encouraged to keep your racial identity under lock and key; in America you are a slave to it”

In Britain, we don’t talk about it. A colleague describing Younge would use every word except “black”. In America, meanwhile, McDonalds post adverts in African-American magazines promoting the contributions of its black workers.

The problem of this sense of “lacking” in Britain is that you feel like you have this big secret, and whenever you mention the topic of race you’re “bringing up the race thing” you’re “forcing it down their throats”. This doesn’t mean America is so liberal in its attitude. In America, your race defines you; segregation occurs on a much larger scale than in Britain. You are told “you are black, here is where you live, this is where you work and this is what you like”.

Amongst many things, Younge’s book really helped me verbalise my thoughts on the Trayvon-Zimmerman trial. Many people around me acted as if the shooting of an unarmed  person of colour and the acquittal of the murderer could only happen in America. I actually wrote an article entitled “The British Trayvon Martin: Muhammed Asghar”. This was a similar case, where a man clearly in the wrong was acquitted with murder on “self-defence” grounds. Click the link if you wish to find out more.

The question of black people in Britain appeals to me in particular, as in Britain, my race does feel a bit like a secret. I am white in appearance, and when I tell people I’m mixed race they are just startled and avoid asking the question that’s burning in their minds: “why do you look so white then?”. Younge’s book got me thinking, what would it be like if I was American? Would I be able to openly say “I’m mixed race” without feeling like I’m “shoving it down people’s throats”? Would I be able to comfortably delve into black history and reggae music without people accusing me of acting something they insist I am not? What would be the price of this apparent “freedom”?

‘No Place Like Home’ provided me with a thoroughly intriguing and entertaining read, and certain phrases and occurrences will remain ingrained on my memory for a long time. Still, a few weeks after reading it, I find myself asking questions and debating internally some of the arguments Younge presents. Finally, if you are looking for something to compliment the book, I recommend the documentary “Freedom Riders” on the PBS website (possibly could be found elsewhere). I think it’s important to have a visual representation of events, and the documentary certainly does this with interviews and pictures.

-Khia Reynolds

Introducing...me!

Hey! I realised recently that my blog doesn’t really show you what I’m up to, and who I am. Surely if you’re reading my blog you wanna know who the hell you’re reading about? Don’t worry, this won’t be too much like an “about me” page on LinkedIn, but more like my motivation for writing the articles I like to write about, and a little what I’m up to and what I’m planning in the future.

So, as I’ve already mentioned a million times, I am a graduate, about to embark on the rocky path to employment. You may notice I write a lot on race, and I do so because issues concerning race cause the strongest reaction. I am half Jamaican, but my father was born in Yorkshire, and is without a doubt, the most Yorkshire man you’ll probably meet. Basically, all he’s just missing is his flat cap and whippet.

I don’t deny I am “white-passing”, which means you’d probably mistake me for being white and as a result, I can “pass for white” if I chose to. Despite this, I have still experienced racism. I’ve been casually called “n*gger” more than once, had people downright refuse to believe I’m mixed race, someone saying my mother must be “as white as a ghost”, even been made to overhear a group of classmates talk about, amongst other racist topics, killing mixed race children on arrival.

I have even had mild institutional racism thrown at me, take for example, the time I was told I need a special helper at school because of my Afro-Caribbean heritage. All children of African or Caribbean descent were offered helpers, who sat in at least one lesson. Funnily enough, she sat in on an English lesson, where I was top set. I went on to achieve a 2:1 degree classification in English and Film. Let’s just say, she was a little bored and never came back.

I think it is important to emphasise that I don’t pretend to know what it is like to be black. I know how privileged I am, the most racism I experience is when I tell people I’m mixed race. However, I think my experience is important to take note of, because it shows how this “colour blind” notion, that assumes race is just about skin colour, is actually a load of rubbish. If I, an undeniably white-looking woman, can still experience racism, then how can racism simply be about skin colour? A blind man can still be racist, as he is still in contact with society and can form judgement based on what he hears and feels. There is a Dave Chapelle sketch that illustrates this quite well actually.

So, enough about race for a while, if you wish to know more, please ask me in the comments, and I’m more than willing to answer. I quickly want to mention I am a feminist, as I think most politically-aware/interested women should be. I used to be completely anti-feminism, right up until A Levels. What is important to understand about anti-feminists, is that the vast majority of the time, they do not know what feminism is. For me, I assumed feminism was an out-dated movement, trying to be equal to men when we already had everything we needed. I was made to mention it in class once, and even as I spoke I couldn’t form a legit answer as to why I hated feminism.

These two previously mentioned factors, as well as being your average, politically-minded unemployed graduate motivate me to write. I don’t feel that I have anything ground-breaking to announce to the world just yet, as my opinions are still growing and forming. However, the best way for me to understand my opinions is to write them down. Maybe nothing will happen, I’ll get a job with a furniture company and write about chairs for the rest of my life. Or maybe I have the possibility to become like my favourite journalist Gary Younge, who is a highly successful black British journalist in America, and has written a few books. Don’t get me wrong, my plans for the future involve marketing and advertising, but I like to keep my career options open.

So, what you can expect from me in the future is hopefully more on this blog. I am throwing myself into writing this summer, and have already written tonnes for Wireless Magazine and Grads blog. I am three quarters of the way through ‘No Place Like Home: A Black Briton’s Journey Through the American South’ by Gary Younge, so I plan on writing a review of that, as well as more book reviews.

I also want to try and implement a weekly news round-up, where I sum up my take on the week’s news. I tried doing this before, but then the Wendy Davis filibuster happened, along with the Minority Voter's court ruling, possible UK student fees privatisation and a whole lot of important events. I ended up writing a huge article before realising there was too much happening at once. If I do start that, it will be on a Friday evening or Saturday.

Lastly I want to include something about my time here in Switzerland, where I’m learning German. However, I’m not sure how to implement that, so we’ll see later how I fit some of that in.

Anyway, I hope this wasn’t too lengthy and vague, but I just fancied a change of tone. From now on you’ll see a lot more of “me” in my articles, not some cold opinion pieces from somebody you don’t even know. I really hope this “new tone” breathes fresh air into this place, and brings in some more readers!

Thanks for reading!

The British Trayvon Martin: Mohammed Asghar

George Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin could have been British. Many people I know, British people, write off the case’s outcome as another failing of the American government. Comments such as ‘America is a joke’ and “I hate America!” are thrown around by most. What people fail to mention is that institutional racism also takes place in Britain, and recently too.

Here is a list compiled by the Institute of Race Relations (IRR) documenting deaths with a known or suspected racial element. One in particular caught my eye because of its similarity to George Zimmerman’s case; Mohammed Asghar. Here is his entry:

07/00, MOHAMMED ASGHAR, 43, HUDDERSFIELD

Stabbed to death outside his restaurant. In May 2001, an all-White jury found Jonathan Fairbank not guilty of murder, accepting he had acted in self defence.

The striking thing is, a search of his name followed by "huddersfield murder" has brought up just two articles about this case, and not from any mainstream news outlets, but from the Socialist Party and local paper the Huddersfield Examiner. The articles expand on the above, talking about Fairbank’s racial abuse of Asghar that took place over several weeks. Fairbank returned one day with a knife and plunged it into Asghar’s chest, killing him almost immediately.

What happened next is amazingly similar to the acquittal of Zimmerman. Everyone, including Fairbank’s lawyer, were convinced he would be charged with murder. However, the jury was also made up of white people, and he was also acquitted because he was acting “in self-defence”. The case also prompted protest, albeit, smaller and more locally-based.

Lee Rigby, victim of the Woolwich attack

It’s hard to quickly summarise why Trayvon Martin received more attention than Mohammed Asghar. Perhaps it is related to the scale of the reaction? The black civil rights movement in America is rather strong and influential, raising awareness for a case like this is not beyond them. Another aspect could be to do with the “war on terror”. This would explain why the racist backlash to the Woolwich murders has been scarcely reported, whereas Channel 4’s decision to broadcast the call to prayer outraged many.

In trying to summarise the reason the two cases received different levels of attention, I tried to explain the differing nature of British and American racism towards differing minorities, but the number of complexities and historical information that I could and should write about could lead to a whole book. In the end, the question is not really important. If people are being murdered because of their race, why should we bother explaining these intricate details that make our oppression different from somebody else’s?

What we should be asking, is when are British people going to respond to the troubles closer to home? It’s important to protest against corruption in other countries, but shouldn't we also be battling against the corruption in our own society? Millions know Trayvon Martin’s name, but how many know of Mohammed Asghar? 

US Supreme Court leaves Minority Voters Unprotected

So much has happened recently, that I couldn’t decide what to write about for this blog post. The Wendy Davis ruling managed to get a few paragraphs written about it before I changed my mind. The privatisation of student loans nearly received a mention, but I think it’s a little too early for me to say anything concrete. I haven’t read enough on the “concentration camps” in Greece to write much, and the Stephen Lawrence/police spies overwhelms me a little. So I decided to write about something not so big here in the UK, the supreme court ruling in the US that meant a 50-year-old civil rights law was struck down by the supreme court, which will leave minority voters unprotected.  

If you’ve never heard of the law and don’t know what this means, like me until a few days ago, let me quickly explain. The 50-year-old law, which some say was the most important civil rights law ever passed by congress, prevented states with backgrounds of racial discrimination from making any changes to electoral rules without seeking permission form the federal authorities. For example, this meant they could not suddenly introduce literacy tests that would prevent many minority voters from registering .

The reason given for striking down the law was that racial discrimination in the south was just not significant today. On a completely unrelated note, loved and admired Southern TV chef Paula Deen admitted to using “n****r” more than once, and expressed a wish to throw a plantation-themed wedding party, complete with black slaves.

Gary Younge wrote an excellent article for the Guardian, where he puts into words so succinctly something I’ve been trying to express for a long time now; “racism is now more subtle, not that it has disappeared. They have taken down the offensive signs but continued the offensive practice”. I keep trying to tell people, just because the USA has a black president, and black people aren’t being lynched anymore, it doesn’t mean racism is effectively over. Replacing these old, racist practices are more subtle ones. You don’t call people “n****r” these days (unless you’re Paula Deen of course), now you introduce cuts and withdraw laws that just so happen to affect minorities as a by-product.

The impact of this issue has been rather cushioned by the Wendy Davis filibuster. Of course, it’s obvious why. Nobody stood on a podium and argued for minority rights for 11-hours, the offending party (the republicans) were not defeated. Here in the UK, the ruling barely made the news because it quickly happened with no opposition. Simply: “by the way, minority groups are no longer protected, racism is over, have a nice day” and that’s all the attention the case receives.

I can possibly pin down the reason for my being so annoyed as a result of my recent reading. For my dissertation I started reading Caribbean literature and about the experience of black people in the UK. As a result I’ve read about events like this new ruling happened again and again that were supposedly not racist. I’m annoyed because no matter how many times people say it, racism isn’t over. We can’t just forget what happened in the past, as I seem to see many people claiming in their “but slavery was ages ago!” speeches.

I did want to write about the Wendy Davis filibuster, as it was a big step in the feminist movement. However, I feel the minority ruling was so important to talk about, not because of any difference in importance, but because I felt that the media attention that case has received, and continues to receive, is already sufficient. Now, if Rick Perry goes ahead and somehow passes the anti-abortion law anyway, people will know about it. I feel that because the minority ruling deserves more attention, as I’ve seen very little about it here in the UK. If a state suddenly excluded a minority group from voting through a change in electoral rules, we’d probably not know about it unless we were the victims of it. And that, is a rather sad state of affairs.

-Khia

Disrespect, anti-Islamic sentiments and the British media-Woolwich Murder

By now, everyone must have heard about the Woolwich murder. Two men brutally murdered a man in the street, both collectively having several weapons, including a machete and hand guns. As usual, British people have turned to online media to express their opinions. Some are condolences to the family of the victim, which are to be expected. However, a much larger proportion are arguing amongst themselves about Islam after one of the murderers, straight after their crime, said to somebody filming “We swear by almighty Allah we will never stop fighting you. The only reason we have done this is because Muslims are dying every day. This British soldier is an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth”. 

This backlash reminds me of the Mick Philpott case, the father who burnt down his house with his children in it. Because of his reliance on benefits and his 17 children, the case was cited by politicians as an example of the “evils” of benefits. It was a disgusting example of poor taste, using the deaths of children to further vilify benefits-claimants. I am reminded of this because the Woolwich murder has also seen people using a tragic event to further a hateful cause, all in poor taste. The worse perpetrators are EDL members and BNP leader Nick Griffin. EDL members have burnt down mosques, clashed with police after staging rallies in Woolwich, while Nick Griffin has claimed it was the result of “mass immigration”. Social media has been alight with people further stirring the anti-Islamic feeling, many calling for stricter immigration policies.

A man’s tragic death has become a cause. Not just a cause for two isolated, so-called “Muslims”, but for tides of ignorant racists throughout Britain, and indeed, the world. A family, who may not feel the same hatred towards Muslims, now see their loved one’s death become a spur to attack Muslim people. The man’s death won’t become a moment of quiet remembrance as he deserves, but a loud, angry protest inspiring others to bring tragedy to much more people. How many more people will be killed not in the name of Islam, but in the name of “defence”?

Of course, let’s not let the media walk away blameless. Their treatment of these cases is very interesting when you look at race. For example, when a white man commits any kind of murder, the case usually follows a similar pattern. They will gain testimonies from those that knew the murderer, all saying how he is psychologically instable, and later on investigations will be made into his past. All will serve to prove that this one man is a lone individual, not representative of all white people. A great example of this is Anders Breivik. Throughout his case it was fiercely debated whether Breivik was insane. In the end, he was declared sane and sent to prison. The press coverage of Breivik’s possible insanity seemed largely in favour of him being insane.

Now take any other attack committed by a non-white individual. All that has to be said is “Muslim” or “gang member” and that’s the extent of the media’s interest. Of course, some investigation into psychological background and the attacker’s history takes place, but without the desperation of other cases. The main focus will be on their punishment. It’s too early to say anything, but a look at the men’s skin colour and the word “Islam” signals to me the same, tired treatment by the British media of people of colour.

That’s all I have to say on the matter for now. I’m interested and at the same time terrified to see how this event will unfold. To the family of the victim I send my condolences and to any British Muslim reading this, stay strong and stay safe.

'Lincoln' vs. 'Django Unchained'

If you didn’t notice, two rather huge films were released recently, both dealing with the issue slavery. ‘Django Unchained’ I was anticipating for a long time, especially as a half-Jamaican girl with a keen interest in slavery. On top of that I was left wanting more after Inglorious Basterds, and Tarantino certainly delivered. 'Lincoln' was released quite recently (in the UK at least), and didn't really stir my interest.

No matter what critics say about possible racism in the ‘Django Unchained’, I always find myself in defense of the film. Sure, a film about slavery by a white man is going to be filled with flaws, and slavery is usually done wrong when dealt with by the mainstream. However, ‘Django Unchained’ is definitely far more progressive in dealing with slavery than Spielberg’s film ‘Lincoln’. 

Not often does a film leave me feeling disgusted and angry afterwards. For ‘Lincoln’ it wasn’t the fact that it was an incredibly boring dross, but the gross historical inaccuracy in painting Lincoln as some saintly leader who single-handedly freed the slaves. Lincoln was not a fierce fighter for equal rights. Lincoln frequently used the n-word, expressed racist sentiments and in fact wasn’t as fiercely opposed to slavery as we are made to believe. He wanted slavery to stop spreading, but didn’t want it completely abolished, in fact, he was in favour of sending the slaves to work elsewhere. He only became a fan of abolition when he saw how it benefitted white Americans in the civil war, as slaves could join the army.

In the film, the slaves play no role in their own liberation, once again an example of the portrayal of black people as passively waiting for a white saviour. This, like so many representations of slavery, blatantly ignores the fact that time and time again the slaves rose up. The slaves didn’t just sit twiddling their thumbs, they fought for their freedom, wrestling it from the unwilling hands of the state. This was what put pressure on the government to do something about slavery. Actually, slave revolts were rife (one example being the largely unrecognised Black Seminoles revolt in 1835-1838) and abolitionists lobbied much harder than the undeniably racist Lincoln ever did.

So while you could pick apart ‘Django Unchained’, at least we get a slave who actually gets up and takes action, as opposed to just waiting for Waltz to save his wife for him. In ‘Django Unchained’ they are undeniably in a partnership, both contributing equally to their cause. ‘Lincoln’ simply rattles a stream of lies about  the end of slavery and a massively flawed president. Of course, ‘Lincoln’ will pick up all the awards and be lauded as a classic because it draws upon the known patriotism of its American audience. Meanwhile, history will be rewritten to further obliterate the role of black people and racism will continue to preside in our society.