As do White people.
People like to say that Kaepernick still doesn't have a job in the NFL cause he's Black and was protesting the National White Supremacist call to arms (ie the US national anthem).
I say you are not incorrect, but the true reason is because he betrayed one key thing:
He was the light skinned House Negro that was accepted in to the homes of White America (which is a historical truth as us dark-skinned Negroes were out far back in the fields) and then spit in the master's food and slept with his wife.
Back in the day that would've gotten him castrated and/or lynched (or both cause White folks were/are real sadists). Now he's just unemployed.
And to tell the truth, to be an unemployed Black man in Amurika in 2017 is almost like getting your balls cut off.
We have all this talk about the 'alt-right' and 'right-wing extremist' in their nazi garb and shaved heads looking like Edward Norton from American History X. But, to tell you the truth, I don't fear those folks, nor do I think those are the people we, as Millennial Militants and People of Colour, should be worried about:
It's all those White supremacists in suits, in boardrooms, in classrooms, in the legislature, flying planes, cutting cheques, in operating rooms, and taking my taxes, that I worry about.
Don't let the rhetoric fool you to who is the real threat.
There are the local arguments that I've seen about race, incarceration rates, and possession of marijuana.
But I look at this globally and with a North-South lens.
All this big companies in Canada are going to make piles of money on the production and sale of weed.
Meanwhile, you've got the Caribbean, with the perfect growing conditions (literally can grow weed like a weed), and no one is having conversations about the global trade in marijuana.
This could be a form of reparations.
Open up the trading routes for weed from former slave states in the Caribbean, tax the shit out of it. Meanwhile it creates jobs (and an entire economy) and pumps money back in the region.
This could be a mini sugar revolution.
We just have no choice.
A lot of folks will use the economic argument that hockey is too expensive compared to sports like soccer, athletics, or basketball.
Which is true. There is no secret that Blacks are lower on the socio-economic ladder than Whites.
But there's something else that mainstream society, particularly in Canada, doesn't want to admit:
Hockey is pretty damn racist.
In fact, I would argue that hockey in Canada is the prime of example of "hidden" racism in our country.
Check how our national sport is actually a colonized appropriation of an Indigenous sport (lacrosse).
Check how violence is a "part of the game" - again, how physical, ideological, and systemic violence is embedded in the fabric of Canadian society.
Check how exclusionary and class-based the game is. From rink fees, to skates, to rep and traveling teams. Hockey is about exclusion and not inclusion. Again, if you look at our society that is the norm.
(Sidenote: Check how sexist the game is. Ask any girl or woman if they are treated equally in this sport.)
And then we have PK Subban.
I can't wait until he retires and speaks the truth about how this country has tried to stereotype and exclude him for being better than the good ol Canadian (White) boy at his own game.
White people have been at war with Blacks in the Americas since the 16th century.
I don't even know what the hell that means, Omarion.
I like my chicken baked, curried, fried, BBQ'd - I pretty much like chicken as long as it is cooked.
I love my Blackness like I love life itself.
I need my Blackness like I need air to breathe.
I am unapologetically Black.
The reason I say this is because we, as Black people, have been taught to hate ourselves. And hate each other.
You've got Samuel L. Jackson out there throwing his Black shade on one of the most popular films of 2017. And the highest grossing film by a Black director. It's that type of shit that shows how hardwired we are to hate.
Hate not ourselves, but what Whites taught (and continue to teach) us to be.
Depends if (White) people want to fix it.
Depends if the dominant groups in society are willing to a) admit that the reason they are dominant is because they have oppressed darker skinned peoples and b) willing to give up said dominance.
It all depends.
I need to officially big up Obama. In the years I've been doing this blog I don't think I've written a post on him.
And you know what?
I've had my fair share of haterade to throw at him, I will admit that.
But I will also admit that he was/is a fantastic leader. And history will show that he was one of the best.
Hats off to Obama. And waiting to see Michelle be the first female US President soon enough.
It depends on the context.
If you were just describing someone, for instance you are trying to meet someone for the first time in a crowded place, yup that's cool. However, be sure that it is a descriptor and not a classifier.
Just like how you would point out someone that wears glasses or has red hair.
"I'm looking for this person, he is wearing a brown jacket, a blue hat, about six feet tall, and is South Asian."
The big difference is if the person's race is the only thing that you describe and usually in a negative way.
"Some stupid Brown woman cut in front of me in line at the grocery store."
All about the context, delivery, and purpose.
Probably. Most likely. At least have quite a bit of disdain towards him. Bare minimum wouldn't agree publicly that they like him.
With the exception of Omarosa.
(I wonder if she was born in the United States with a name like that. Time for Birthers to get on a new project).
Moral of the story: if you are Black and you bow down to massa, he may throw you a bone.
Or shoot you.
Things haven't changed much since slavery, eh?