Hierarchical Patriarchy, Immoralists, Racists, Sexists, and the 2024 Election

Throughout the Vice President Kamala Harris presidential campaign we heard “save our democracy”.  This call suggested that VP Harris’ opponent was an existential threat to democracy and had to be stopped.  Constituents from various factions: conservatives, liberals, Republicans, Democrats, private sector, public sector, all appeared on countless media shows warning us of the danger.  Well, VP Harris did not win, yet many of the political media pundits were quick to extol the virtues of a democracy that “worked” because “the People” were the final arbitrators in deciding who would be president beginning on January 21, 2025.  If that is the case, then “the People” have a much bigger problem than saving democracy.

Being subservient to a hierarchical patriarchy is not

the only reason VP Harris did not win the election.  

She lost because so many of “the People” are racist, 

sexist, and immoralist.  Be clear these “People” come 

from all cultures, ethnicities, races, genders, ages, and 

political affiliations.  They come from lily white 

suburbs and chocolate inner cities.  It wasn’t the 

rhetoric of the opponent that was persuasive, it was 

too many of “the People” not allowing themselves to 

fill in the bubble for a Black woman.  Because of  that, 

women will have a greater struggle for quality health 

care, Putin will get Ukraine, Netanyahu will get Gaza, 

the rich will get richer, and the middle class will get

poorer.  Unfortunately, many of “the People” reside in 

the middle class.

There, simply, are too many people in this United

 

States society that cannot and will not support a Black 

woman for president.  The experts can analyze all they 

want.  They can say VP Harris should have done this, 

or the Democratic party should have done that.  It 

doesn’t matter unless someone figures how to make 

“the People” less beholden to a  hierarchical 

patriarchy and willing to change their divisive, and to 

some extent, destructive attitudes, and behaviors.  We 

must find a way to resolve the cognitive dissonance 

that “the People” have that won’t allow them to elect a 

Black woman even when the opponent isn’t qualified.  

If the Democratic candidate had been a White male, he 

would be the one entering the White House in January, 

2025 because the character of the Republican 

candidate disqualified him from any serious 

consideration.

Exhaustive analysis of why the 2024 election resulted 

in the way it did can be done from now until Kingdom 

Come.  Some will argue that certain demographics 

didn’t provide the expected support.  Others will 

suggest there just wasn’t enough time for the public to 

learn about VP Harris.  There will also be some who 

will believe that her opponent ran an “excellent” 

campaign.  When the whole story is told somewhere 

down the road, these reasons will only be ancillary.  

The real reason that VP Harris will not be president 

for the next four years is because “the People” could 

not let loose, not even for one day, their prejudice and 

bias.  That their reverence to a hierarchical patriarchy, 

and of their racist and sexist tendencies would not 

allow them to vote for a Black woman.  My, my, what 

a loss.

The Salad Bowl versus The Bowl of Gumbo

We have heard scholars, educators, and politicians refer to the merging of cultures in the United States as a “salad bowl”.  Others have used the term “gumbo” to describe this melding of cultures which is one of the greatest strengths of this democracy.

The recent 2024 national conventions by the Republican and Democratic parties were full of excitement and enthusiasm to nominate their respective presidential candidates, but there was a distinct difference in how that excitement and enthusiasm was presented. 

The Republican convention was more traditional  and reminiscent of conventions of the past.  It was presented as a bowl of salad: a variety of ingredients mixed together, not necessarily chosen to enhance one another’s flavor, but to compliment.  Salads are served cold, and are generally accompanied by dressing to add flavor.

The Democratic convention was fresh, inclusive, and upbeat.  It was presented as a bowl of gumbo: a variety of ingredients, specifically chosen to enhance the flavor of all of the ingredients while simmering in the roux.  A bowl of gumbo is expected to be spicy, flavorful, and hot, and the Democratic convention was all of that.  The speakers were diverse and inclusive.  The topics were varied and touching.  The entertainment was on-point and unprecedented.  All of the elements flowed together, each one enhancing the other.  It was a well-produced, well-organized television show.

So, I suspect there are many who left the Republican convention satisfied by what they experienced, and are still enthused and excited.  For them, the salad bowl experience worked.  I also suspect that there are many who left the Democratic convention full, enthused, and excited from their gumbo experience.  It will be interesting to see which dish prevails.  I’m not sure that a salad can stand up against the spice, heat, and flavor of a bowl of gumbo.

S. A. Miller

8.25.2024

The 1964 Civil Rights Act- Relevant and Necessary

July 2, 1964 is one of the most important dates in modern United States history.  That is the date that President Lyndon Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act of 1964.  CRA 1964 was passed by the United States Congress and had the purpose of codifying basic civil rights for Black Americans by: 

…enforcing the constitutional right to vote… to provide injunctive relief against discrimination in public accommodations…to protect constitutional rights in public facilities and public education, to extend the Commission on Civil Rights, to prevent discrimination in federally assisted programs, and to establish a Commission on Equal Employment Opportunity…

Source: https://www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/civil-rights-act#

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. Provisions of this civil rights act forbade discrimination on the basis of sex, as well as, race in hiring, promoting, and firing. The Act prohibited discrimination in public accommodations and federally funded programs. It also strengthened the enforcement of voting rights and the desegregation of schools.
Source: https://www.dol.gov/agencies/oasam/civil-rights-center/statutes/civil-rights-act-of-1964

The passage of CRA 1964 was not the first attempt by Congress to make it illegal to discriminate against freed African slaves and their descendants.  The signing of the Emancipation Proclamation did not make discrimination and bigotry disappear.  Instead, slave owners and their supporters made post slavery life extremely difficult for freed slaves, so forward-thinking members of Congress, who believed Black Americans should have access to the same rights as any other U.S. citizen, began crafting civil rights legislation.

The first Civil Rights Act was in 1866, a direct response to the Black Codes of 1865.  President Andrew Johnson vetoed the bill, but Congress was able to override the veto.  In 1871 Congress passed a Civil Rights Act that empowered the federal government to use military force against people and organizations that denied the constitutional rights of other citizens.  The enforcement of the Act was specifically targeted towards White supremacy groups that continued to terrorize Black citizens.

The Civil Rights Act of 1957 was the first major civil rights legislation since Reconstruction and authorized the prosecution of persons who violated any U. S. citizen’s right to vote.  CRA 1957 was initiated by President Dwight Eisenhower and established a Commission on Civil Rights to investigate civil rights violations, and also established a Civil Rights Division within the Department of Justice.  There also was the Civil Rights Act of 1960 that focused on retention of voting records.

The signing of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 offered hope for better days for Blacks in America.  For 100 years Blacks had fought and died to have the same basic rights that White Americans had.  Africans did not come here by choice, so when the law changed, and the chains were no longer legal, that should have been the watershed moment that opened up the doors to opportunity for Black Americans.  That did not happen, and ever since, it’s been necessary to fight those who prefer to relegate Blacks to second class citizenry.  CRA 1964 seemed to be the game-changer that would move the ball further down the field, but since its passage there have been continuous legal challenges and legislative manipulation designed to move the goal posts.  Despite the challenges, CRA 1964 still serves as a powerful piece of legislation.  The Act took elements from previous Civil Rights Acts to create a more comprehensive law.  It also served as infrastructure for subsequent legislation such as the 1965 Voting Rights Act and the 1968 Fair Housing Act which was established by the Civil Rights Act of 1968.

There can be no argument that the past 60 years have been marked by tremendous progress for Black Americans in education, business, politics, housing, and social engagement, yet in 2024 there are factions determined to not only thwart continued progress, but to actually revert back to a time when Blacks did not have legal protections under the law.  Fortunately, Black folk have not been sleeping, and are using an enlightened and creative spirit to develop effective ways to squash challenges.  It is understood that protecting civil rights is an ongoing endeavor..

Some would suggest that it is fear that drives many Whites to cling to their intense desire to diminish the Black community.  They want to return to the era of Jim Crow because of a fear of being left behind as Blacks continue to gain economic, educational, and political power.  It is true that over the last 60 years Blacks have not just survived, but thrived despite relentless attacks on civil rights by neo-segregationists.  Blacks understand that past progress does not guarantee future success, thus it is necessary to remain vigilant against those who are scared.

It is both right and proper to recognize the significance of the Emancipation Proclamation, and there is no question that Juneteenth should be recognized and celebrated, but we must make sure to recognize and remember July 2^nd, 1964, the day the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was signed into law.  That date empowers us with the civil rights that have gotten us to this day, and will be the catalyst that allows us to defend and protect civil rights in the future.

The Holiday Challenge

The holiday season is based in Love, Joy, and Peace.  We celebrate the power of giving, which is the essence of Love.  We recognize and appreciate the Blessings that are bestowed upon us every day which bring us Joy.  But obtaining Peace can be more elusive because of the challenges we sometimes face.  Those challenges become more manageable we remain ever Faithful.

The holiday season provides us the perfect opportunity to practice our Spiritual Faith.  Despite the challenges we face, or have faced during the year, when we choose to engage with others, we leave the challenges to our Faith.  When we share food, toys, or clothing, our focus shifts to others, and not ourselves.  Faith allows us to unselfishly share time and compassion with those who need it, because we Believe the Spirit to take care of our own needs.  Sometimes a kind word, or a smile, or just taking the time to listen, can be the most meaningful gift, and Faith allows us to do that.  The more you put your Faith into practice, the more you approach Peace.  This Holiday Season, take the challenge and rely on your Faith to bring you Peace.

IT’S TIME TO CANCEL THE CHAOS AND CONFUSION SHOW

Over the last 75 years NBC, CBS, and ABC have been the primary broadcast television networks in the United States.  Known as the “Big Three” of broadcasting, the networks have always played a vital role in dispensing information about American culture.  Early television distributed thousands and thousands of images of cowboys heroically “taming” the wild, wild west.  In the 50’s and 60’s television reinforced the perceived cultural norms of white men as the head of the nuclear family, and white women as the domestic counterpart.  In the 70’s, 80’s and 90’s broadcast television became more diverse in its programming and talent as images of Blacks, women, and ethnic minorities become more commonplace.  During all of these eras, “The Big Three” remained the primary source for national news.  The “Evening News” was destination television, and viewers received a daily dose of what was important and worthy of their attention.  Consider the impact of television news coverage on the Civil Rights Movement and the Viet Nam war.  The “Big Three” didn’t just provide the images, they provided the commentary that they believed best served the public interest.

As the turn of the century approached, network news began to see some of its influence start to dwindle.  The Internet and cable television were emerging as influential, though not always accurate, sources for news.  With cable television and the Internet, access was on demand 24/7, so there was no real need to be in front of the television at 6:30 pm.  Additionally, Internet and cable television news products focused as much on entertainment as it did on news.  This format was appealing to many viewers and drew them away from the “Big Three”.  In order to compete, the “Big Three” began changing their focus from simply fair and accurate news to more entertainment style reporting.  Shocking stories about misbehaving celebrities and politicians began receiving as much airtime as a natural disaster.

Today, that trend continues.  Broadcast news organizations seem more interested in distributing controversy over facts, which explains why there is so much coverage given to “The Chaos and Confusion Show” that is paralyzing Washington, D. C. “The Chaos and Confusion Show” stars dysfunctional politicians who spend most of their time complaining and dispensing false information instead of working together to solve the myriad of problems facing the United States.  The “Big Three” news programs give way too much oxygen to the nonsensical statements and actions of these elected officials.  Some might suggest that the “Big Three” broadcast “The Chaos and Confusion Show” in an attempt to provide balanced news coverage, but balanced news coverage does not require the broadcasting of divisive and mean-spirited commentary.  The bottom line is that by broadcasting the ridiculousness of those who traffic in chaos and confusion, the “Big Three” are complicit in creating discord and divisiveness in our society.

I recommend that the “Big Three” make the conscious decision to thwart the purveyors of chaos and confusion and cancel “The Chaos and Confusion Show”.  It is time to return to presenting substantive news and leave the drama and ridiculousness of D. C. politicians to the Internet and cable TV.  And while some might argue that the “Big Three” have to run “The Chaos and Confusion Show” in order to compete with audience share, I submit that there is still a very large and lucrative demographic who grew up on network news, and have no interest in subscribing to what is offered on cable TV or the Internet.

Make no mistake, even with continuous competition from the Internet and cable television, the “Big Three” news organizations still wield a lot of power.  They are still respected by the industry, and trusted by the public.  Consider how often you hear ABC, or CBS, or NBC mentioned as the source for a particular story that is distributed by another news outlet.  The sooner the “Big Three” refrain from broadcasting the chaos and confusion, the sooner they will be able to use their superpower to influence and encourage viewers to become a more compassionate, respectful, and caring society.

S.A. Miller                                                      11.7.2023