Tuesday, 25 May 2010

"What are parents of bi-racial children to do?"  I read that question in Monique Fields'  article at The Root.  But the question itself is full of misinformation and false beliefs and propaganda..

As the Human Genome Project of the US Department of Energy has found, "race" simply doesn't exist.  Skin color exists.  How can Fields possibly hope to explain something to her daughter when Fields clearly does not understand it herself?

Fields says that her daughter told her that "brown people drive old cars."  I think this observation shows that her daughter has yet to learn the color-aroused ideation that most adults take for granted.  Fields daughter has not been taught yet that people whose retina, liver, heart and lungs can be transferred across colors, and groups that can successfully mate, and produce offspring that are fertile are groups that, by definition, belong to the same species. 

The difference, as the daughter has observed, is one of skin color.  People who believe that differences of skin color equal "racial" differences are victims of four hundred years of color-associated propaganda  Fields' daughter has not learned the adopted the utterly false pseudo-science of "race" yet.  But, if Fields uses the "R" word over and over in discussions with and near her daughter, her daughter will soon believe that because she has a different skin color from her mother, that therefore she is from a different biological species/"race" from her mother.  It would be a shame if the daughter came to believe such arrant nonsense.

It would likewise be a shame if her daughter came to believe that because her father is white the daughter therefore comes from a different species from her father, as well.  I believe it causes harm to children when we teach them that they are alien to both of their parents.  Since "race" doesn't exist, it would be a shame to have the daughter eventually believe that she was bi-racial instead of the mono-chromatic offspring of a bi-chromatic mating.

And yet, Fields says that she and her husband are from two different "races," and therefore her daughter is bi-racial.  The truth is that she and her husband are in a bi-chromatic (two-colored) marriage and the child has ONE COLOR that has arisen from the mixture of two other colors.  THIS is science you can find in a science book.  "Race" is pseudo science that cannot be found anywhere in the animal kingdom except in discussions human beings who have different skin colors from one another.

You need not take my word for it.  Google the phrase "different race" and you will discover that this phrase is never used in biology except in pseudo-biological discussions of human beings.  Otherwise identical cats and dogs can have different fur colors without being from a different species.  Only humans are conclusively from different species that can be distinguished others based on having different skin colors.

I recently read an article about albino beavers born at a zoo.  Albino means that their fur and skin and even eye colors are different.  Nowhere in the article did I read that the albino off-spring of beavers are from a different "race" whose only difference from other beavers is the color of their hair.

I believe that all discussions about biological "race" occur between people who are delusional, however our society is so delusional that many of us can't identify delusion when we see it.  Is our society "divided along racial lines?"  When you bring the fallacy of "race" into a discussion of skin color-associated politics, ideation, emotion and behavior, the "race" word is to rational discussion like powdered cement to a pancake recipe.

Sunday, 23 May 2010

Lost Swimming Club Case Animates Rand Paul, Other Color-Aroused Antagonists

Dear Colleagues:

Please support Color of Change's initiative.

The high-profile Huntingdon Valley, whites-only Pennsylvania, swimming club case, in which whites lost their club to bankruptcy after discriminating against Black children, is the news that has color-aroused Republicans like Rand Paul animated and eager to repeal the Civil Rights Act of 1964.  The result in the swimming pool case has reminded color-aroused white antagonists of just how much they resent having to serve Blacks and eat next to us.  Now Fox News is using this issue to drive up ratings while color-arousing the electorate.

They don't want to live in fear that they will discriminate against us and then be forced to pay financially for it while Blacks cheer that our rights have been vindicated.  That is what is animating them.

Rand was/is saying that he doesn't agree with the result in the swimming pool case and he believes the public accommodations part of the 1964 Civil Rights Act should be repealed.  The 29% of America that supported George W. Bush to the very end are probably among those who agree with Rand.  It is they whom Rand and Fox News are trying to mobilize for election turnout this November and in 2012, when the Black President's name will be on the ballot.

It's like Hillary Clinton in South Carolina.  Republicans first and last choice of weapons against us is the color of our skin.

Francis L. Holland