US SOCIETY AND POLITICS GETTING FRACTURED ALONG ETHNIC LINES

 

Image credit goes to this link:

https://sites.psu.edu/sarahnicolegalang/2014/02/20/civic-issues-the-changing-face-of-america/

 

The very uniqueness of the grand social experiment that made the US of A the most successful in the history of mankind is now poised to tear its very fabric from its seams and across its breadth.

The coming together and gelling as one of the many diverse cultures and multi-ethnic groups produced for us the mighty and world power which came to be known as the US of A, the land that immigrants built.

Now, it is my belief that that very same unique and magnificent quality of the continuing grand experiment is poised to rend it to pieces.

There now exists many permanent vested interests, big and small, that threaten the suddenly fragile union.  Vested interests not necessarily defined along political ideologies, but built and strengthened along more identifiable lines like ethnicity and/or race.

Immediately our attention jumps to the series of recent alarming violent confrontations between African-Americans with whites and with police authorities.  Giving rise to extremely activist groups like BLM, Back Lives Matter.  Extend that to the ugly riots engendered by contentious issues of immigration, especially illegal migration, as is the case with Hispanics.  And during such events the showing of foreign flags like that of Mexico is commonplace.  We are witnessing therefore a society at odds within itself.

These are of course the extreme examples of deep fractures in its societal structures.  But there are more insidious and less perceptible ones that over time we have all come to accept and take for granted.  It ranges from the highly visible and accepted NAACP, or maybe like the somewhat clandestine RAZA, to the low-keyed almost unnoticeable social organizations identified by their hyphenated member appellations, like Mexican-Americans, FilAms, Asian-Americans, etc.   Many exist in relative obscurity, some as merely necessary aggrupation for certain social events like Cinco de Mayo, various independence days of various countries, etc.   How can one properly display and honor Philippine Independence if there is no FilAm group to handle it.

By and large, these are well and good, and benign and harmless.  Until we dig and excavate deeper, in society and politics.

In society, this issue could be a significant cause for hindrances to facile integration and ultimate assimilation into the mainstream American culture, which has kept the union intact, one that promotes and honors one society culled from many.

In politics, this could be cause for pursuing advocacies promoting the narrow interests and welfare of the group, rather than the entire community.  Organizations may wield their collective powers to bargain with politicians toward promoting their own narrow interests, again rather than the interests of the collective.   It is not unusual for politicians to promise these groups concessions in exchange for their patronage, concessions promoting the narrow vested interests of the groups which by and large exist for their narrow self-serving goals.

And it is here where its gets murky and thorny, when personal interests trump the pursuit of the general welfare; and in which typically the latter suffers in the exchange.  And this is as we see it in reality, a little cursory observation would tell you that.   A politician in exchange for some promises of some favored appointments or concessions will leverage that in favor of votes from the organization.   And this is multiplied and copied in many situations as to amount to wholesale horse-trading or what have you.

Over and above, we have a country with parts or sectors competing against each other in these greedy and myopic ways to the detriment of the entire polity.

It is a devout wish then to see the day when hyphenated Americans become extinct, and only Americans exist.

And amidst the rancor and mess, we are witness to a little bit of a sobering miracle which has been ongoing with scant notice, in continuance of the experiment started a long time ago.  The creation of one union, amidst diversity, not only in ideology but also in ethnicity. This materializes when ethnic groups intermarry and differing physical lines are blurred and ultimately erased.

The face of America is being changed, to one truly unique and distinctively American, and all simply showing only faint traces of the messy diversity that it emerged from.

And I see this in my own family, which in itself is an amalgamation of many different cultures and ethnicities -  from Filipino moslem and lumads, to Spanish and Chinese, to American Irish or Jewish, to Persian and African American.  And we have produced a wonderful admixture that is quite uniquely distinct from any other.

Is this the future of the US of A? 

We are seeing these inexorable changes in our very midst. Hopefully this quiet miracle is not overhauled by the violent and divisive upheavals we now witness in widening pockets of society and politics. 

 

 

 

 

 

Clinton vs Trump

 

How I view the world of cosmic differences of Clinton vs Trump, setting aside sex and bias and my/our personal self-interests.

Clinton is definitely a consummate politician, having spent her life so far in that tumultuous arena, and a seasoned lawyer, too.  As such she is much nuanced in all the known intricacies of the political game, both within and even beyond ethics or our perceived morality.  And she may even be perceived as unscrupulous or amoral in the dogged pursuit of political correctness (imagine her unequivocal support for late-term abortion).  Making use of all these means and more, she with her nuclear family have survived all “the slings and arrows of outrageous fortunes”.  And their collective past has been typified and littered with very dark and foreboding episodes, among them  the Lewinsky case, the humiliating impeachment, Benghazi, the stealthy maintenance of a private email server, blatant lies caught and revealed, etc.; and at times literally littered with dead bodies.   But they have weathered them all, and have even been generously rewarded with financial largesse.

Trump however is essentially a businessman, not a politician and thus an outlier, and maybe more an entertainer given his most recent pursuits and avocation; but, he is definitely all in pursuit of self-interests and self-satisfaction.  Given his orientation he is known to be brusque, brutish, unrefined in the eyes of polite society.  Political correctness is not in his vocabulary, maybe because his outsized ego will not permit it.

His track record is also laid bare and naked, a record also quite checkered in many respects.  Many public bankruptcies, associations with gambling and casinos, and the unhappy trails of many suits filed against him and his enterprises.  But he too weathered all of them, and as testimony he continues to swim in the lap of luxury and opulence. 

In both cases, the rule of law of men smiled at them.  And withheld harsh judgment, though whether justly or unjustly who is to say.

One defining difference in the comparison though is that Trump in all this pursued his own personal interests, while that of Clinton was all done under the noble shield of public service. 

Remember too in public service one tries to do great service to gain approbation, self-contentment, and of course, votes during elections.  But in business, the standard and measure is essentially how rich and influential one has become.

Being now in the same arena, supposedly all in the name of self-less and altruistic service, we will find Clinton so at home and comfortable in her own skin; while Trump unless he realizes the importance of this delineation, will flounder and not be easy on the eyes and minds of the electorate at large.  He has to take on the role and accoutrements required in the political game.  He chose freely to enter, as it were, into the lion’s den.  It is his to adjust and adapt, or be unceremoniously set aside.

Their married lives have also been grist for the mill in this campaign.  And what can one say.  Except both are so not in the ordinary, or are unusual and technicolored.  And neither one would be happy to discuss or revel in the subject during fireside chats with family and friends, especially conservative older folks.  

Though children ought not to be dragged in, but since both chose to bring them in, then they too became fodder for media and committed supporters.

Records would show that Chelsea has led a quite sheltered life, not having to go through any period of privation.  Went to excellent schools, and when done given a very cushy job with benefits that would pop the eyes of any jobseeker.  And when time to get married, everything in high-fashionable style and luxurious elegance, complete with a 10million dollar abode.  A very far cry from the humble beginnings of Bill Clinton in Hope, Arkansas.

Having married at least 3 times, Trump has several children.  The adult ones work under the Trump array of enterprises.  I suppose they all went to excellent schools, too, and when done immediately installed as critical players in their organization.  Listening to the ones who are in the public sphere, they appear to acquit themselves creditably in personality, manners, and cognitive abilities.  I add this because I know little of them, unlike Chelsea who has been in the limelight since childhood.

It is safe to say that probably it is a harder task being part of an organization that could either profit or lose, than just be employed in a big company or tag along with your parents during political sorties, or personal trips, or etc.

 Given all the above, where do our fears of selection stand?  And are they still valid and founded?  As I had declared earlier, between the 2, I favor Trump.  And it is not founded by fears for or against either, for any way we live with fears and uncertainties daily in our lives.  We ought to learn and manage and continue our lives in tandem with them.

What about their politics?

That would take a novel-size treatise.

So in a most microscopic synopsis.  Hillary represents the revolution started by Obama, to “fundamentally change the US of A”; and Trump represents all that the US was before, and going back would make “America great again”.

The details are all eschewed, assisted in no small measures by unscrupulous supporters essentially coming from one side assisted by water-carrying media.  And this technique has not only spawned the current fears, but the outright violence we see in the streets that articulates the divides between the races, and the haves and have-nots. 

The question then is:

Do we like what we see or do we want a return to what it was?