Sunday, July 22, 2012

The Betrayal of Jeremy Lin

The Jeremy Lin saga on the New York Knicks is officially over. Popular discourse over Linsanity - the sensation, the betrayal, the drama - have left an overwhelmingly sour taste in my mouth because of the denial of Jeremy Lin's right to simply exist as a human being with a history, a present and a future.

Since February, Jeremy Lin has been a symbol of Asian-American masculinity, a source of Taiwanese and pan-Asian nationalist pride, an example of model-minority exceptionalism, a hashtag, an archetype to polarize and demonize Black masculinity, a media darling, a good Christian.. and a number of other permutations of complex racial/gender/social narratives which ultimately reduce his humanity to an object of discussion, debate, adoration and animosity.

via deadspin.com



During Linsanity

It was love at first sight. Or at least infatuation with a mix of obsession and possessiveness. Jeremy Lin seemingly came out of nowhere and swept us off of our feet. With a string of extraordinary performances and the full-on amplification of mainstream and social media, he brought hope and excitement to a long-suffering Knicks fan base that hadn't seen a championship since the Nixon administration.

But Linsanity the phenomenon was bigger than "the big apple."

via bleacherreport.com
To the Asian American community, Lin provided a star athlete who was relatable in a way Yao Ming never could be. Yao represented the "other" - a 7'4" giant from red China who speaks with a heavy accent. Jeremy was one of us. The memes and hashtags, the homemade posters, the t-shirts, the tabloid headlines, the puns. We knew it was exoticizing and likely harmful but we laughed and high-fived through it all because for once we were loved, and perhaps finally overcoming the perpetual foreigner stereotype, we belonged.

To mainstream America, Lin was the classic underdog story. The tale of a regular guy who wasn't offered a major division I scholarship, who went undrafted and was cut from two NBA teams before landing on the Knicks, who slept on a teammate's couch because his spot on the team wasn't guaranteed, who endured, and who ultimately shined when given an opportunity. All nicely reinforcing the narrative (myth) that in America, no matter who you are, if you believe in yourself and work hard, you can achieve anything.

Most disturbingly, Jeremy Lin's clean cut (read: white friendly), "good" Christian, Ivy-league persona was used as a buffer against Black masculinity. In professional sports, star athletes are regularly described with words like "thug", "beast" and "killer instinct", evoking racist narratives of Black men as predators and savages. If we were to pause for a moment to think about professional sports as a plantation - white male billionaire owners, Black and brown bodies bought and traded as chattel, player drafts as the auction block - we would be disgusted with words and images in sports commentary daily.

Asian masculinity has been constructed as a historical counter to Black masculinity, allowing white masculinity all the wonderful neutral space in between. (Similar is probably true for constructs of Asian, Black and white femininity, but that's another discussion for another day.) Star athletes have mostly been Black and white bodies and larger-than-life personalities, and Jeremy Lin's phenotype and regular-ness do not register. So despite the record setting and hope kindling run, Jeremy Lin still seemed oddly more Napolean Dynamite than Rocky Balboa to the Knicks and to many of us. (I'm compelled to point out that I couldn't think of adequate Asian pop culture references, for obvious reasons.) This context makes the backlash by oft-vilified Black athletes like Floyd Mayweather (and later Knick teammates Carmelo Anthony and JR Smith) understandable and actually inevitable.

All of this pressure to represent, to uphold, to deconstruct and to exemplify, often from dissonant perspectives and self-interests, leaves very little room for Jeremy Lin to simply be.


The Lin Betrayal

In the aftermath of Linsanity and as it became clear that the Knicks would not re-sign him, a starkly different narrative emerged. All of a sudden, Jeremy Lin was painted as lucky, selfish, disloyal and once again an outsider.

via espn.com

As if Linsanity was a fluke, NYC sports media and Knick fans alike focused their energy on who Jeremy Lin was not, rather than who he is. "He's turnover prone.. can't play defense.. was scared to play in the playoffs." These declarations came not only from Stephen A Smith, but also from friends of mine who are lifelong Knick fans. Even when the statistics prove these statements false, lack of athletic prowess is so deeply rooted in familiar narratives of Asian masculinity that agreed upon prejudices become the truth.

Furthermore, statements like "Jeremy Lin is lucky to be in the league at all" and should have "known his place" reek of the same old stereotypes of Asian folk as foreigners who don't belong and are not welcome. The Asians-as-foreigners stereotype plays out in some simple and some complicated ways. For example, the white woman who wrote "Go back to your country" in red lipstick on my mother's car (this actually happened) is a pretty simple example. More subtle but still harmful stereotypes of Asian people as untrustworthy foreigners and lacking the "it" factor necessary to lead and shine manifest in strange ways. Jeremy Lin's place is expected to be in the accounting department, not as the starting point god of the New York Knickerbockers. I was disappointed but not surprised that Knicks ownership essentially told Lin "thanks for bringing in all those fans and selling all those jerseys but you're crazy if you think we're gonna pay you 'star player' money." Asian bodies are not valued for that purpose.

As an Asian-American who grew up loving the game of basketball, I want to cry for Jeremy Lin. I too know the feeling of wanting to be part of team that did not value me, of being told that I have no place on a basketball court (among other places), and of being judged unworthy despite my best efforts. I feel his rejection and I cloak the subsequent shame with the more masculinely acceptable feeling of anger mixed in with some analysis.


Two Sides of the Same Coin

It is important to recognize that the lovefest during the height of Linsanity and the betrayal that followed stem from the same fundamental contradiction - Jeremy Lin was objectified and reduced to a number of disparate symbols and for profit-driven motives rather than humanized as a human being. For Asian folk (and actually all people of Color), we cannot relish in praise built upon objectification without also submitting to its dehumanization. We can't buy into the hype even if it feels good in the moment. Especially in the moment. When it seems Jeremy Lin can do no wrong, we must remind ourselves that he is human, as we all are. That he has needs, aspirations, insecurities and brilliance. That he has a history that has shaped who he is today and that will continue to guide his growing to be done. And in allowing for Jeremy Lin to exist as a whole person, we grant ourselves and others space to do the same. We must dictate the terms of our own humanity - through reflection, struggle and praxis - while working towards the reclamation of our stories and our communities.

via egotripland.com


Thursday, September 1, 2011

Everybody's Protest Politics... Are Boring As F*ck

The "protest" novel, so far from being disturbing, is an accepted and comforting aspect of the American scene, ramifying that framework we believe to be so necessary. Whatever unsettling questions are raised are evanescent, titillating; remote, for this has nothing to do with us at all, it is safely ensconced in the social arena, where, indeed, it has nothing to do with anyone.
- James Baldwin from Notes Of A Native Son
Why do we need a permit from the police to protest the latest incidence of police brutality? Why did the press event that took weeks of planning and turning out people get only four lines on the last page of the local paper? Why do radical individuals or groups invest so much in campaigns pushing for liberal change? Or why the majority of nonprofits are funded by foundations with names like Rockefeller, Annenberg, Ford, Walton, Gates - the same rich white oligarchical "titans of industry" that they supposedly organize against?

The revolution will not be televised. It will not come with slogans and propaganda. People will not march down the street. And it is not coming through the ballot box or electoral college.


The current model of community organizing has run on the same treadmill for the past 30 years - and it's going nowhere. Over those 30 years, the racial wealth gap has grown exponentially, wars of aggression continue, and climate change brings increasingly devastating disasters. People are losing their homes and jobs; leaders are being jailed, co-opted, and assassinated; the roots of imperialism have grown so deep and so intertwined that people can no longer imagine a different kind of world.

Press conferences and protests are played out – Rupert Murdoch does not care about your two-hour police-controlled civil disobedience protest in the lobby of his London office (he was in Miami). Your politics are boring.

Community-based organizations still follow the Saul Alinsky-model of organizing to "building power strategically". Readily accepting and working with the system. Working with an electoral campaign or drafting legislation with the hopes that bank/government/whatever-the-fuck accountability will bring about some real change this time around. Your politics are boring.

Organizers and activists are forced to aim for reform or short-term gains. To "save" a closing school - what about the public school system that is systematically failing poor students of color? Or to publicly shame a corrupt politician - what about the structure of electoral politics that allow organized money to push broad-scale political agendas? To put out fires but never to disarm the arsons. Your politics are boring.

(editor’s note: this is not to say short-term gains are not important - they are because oppressed people are forced to operate on survival mode directly because of structural conditions of concentrated power and wealth.)

It’s easy to point at problems. Most folks could wax about all the fuckery in the world. And many do, regularly. To criticize safely from the sidelines. But what does all of your analysis and critique build towards? Your politics are boring.

The difficult part is creating solutions, viable alternatives, liberated and liberative spaces. Solutions that provide for basic needs and rights – food, shelter, education, work, dignity – apart from the system. And in the process, (re)cultivating (re)creating and (re)building community. Models of such structures exist all about us, we just have to look for them.

The Zapatistas have liberated the state in Chiapas.



The Black Panther Party created the Free Breakfast For Children program.



Freedom schools have educated students all over the country for the past 50 years.



* * * * *

It's abundantly clear to me now that truly liberative organizing comes from the ability to bring folks together to build their own means of sustenance. The same old protest politics are going nowhere. The revolution we dream of is in our hands - it is our responsibility to create the world we need.

When there is no need for "the man" or the state; when we can disengage from capitalism or existing systems of oppression and domination; when we no longer need the system to take care of our needs; when we are no longer cogs in the matrix. Only then are we free, self-determined and autonomous.

Whether it means alternative food systems, collective housing, worker-owned cooperatives, freedom schools... the revolution of daily values and the building blocks of community. To hold our glass up to theirs rather than just merely call their glass dirty. This is the means by which we liberate ourselves and each other.

Monday, July 4, 2011

What Would Frederick Douglass Say


“At a time like this, scorching irony, not convincing argument, is needed. O! had I the ability, and could I reach the nation’s ear, I would, to-day, pour out a fiery stream of biting ridicule, blasting reproach, withering sarcasm, and stern rebuke. For it is not light that is needed, but fire; it is not the gentle shower, but thunder. We need the storm, the whirlwind, and the earthquake. The feeling of the nation must be quickened; the conscience of the nation must be roused; the propriety of the nation must be startled; the hypocrisy of the nation must be exposed; and its crimes against God and man must be proclaimed and denounced.”


– Frederick Douglass, July 4, 1852.

Thursday, June 2, 2011

Obituaries: Gil Scott-Heron and Geronimo Pratt

The force of personality of Gil Scott-Heron and Geronimo Pratt are unique and irreplaceable. I'm saddened by the loss of their beautiful spirits. But am inspired to carry on their truth, their light and their strength. Rest in love, peace and power to two titans of our time..


Gil Scott-Heron (April 1, 1949 - May 27, 2011)



Elmer "Geronimo ji-Jaga" Pratt (September 13, 1947 - June 2, 2011)

* * * * *

The love that once was born can not die
For it has become part of us, of our life,
Woven into the very texture of our being.
Each of us would wish to leave some part of ourselves,
So here and now we bear witness to the one we knew in life,
Who now in death bequeaths a subtle part, precious and beloved,
Which will be with us in truth and beauty,
In dignity and courage and love
To the end of our days.

- Algernon Black

Sunday, May 15, 2011

Know Hope


"Take these broken sounds and mend them into minor symphonies. And this will be the soundtrack to our times. In these busted surroundings and these vacant spaces will transform into telescopes through which we can see both the elsewhere and the anywhere."

- Know Hope

Friday, May 13, 2011

On Love and Light


A Return to Love

O
ur deepest fear is not that we are inadequate.
Our deepest fear is that we are powerful beyond measure.
It is our light, not our darkness, that most frightens us.
We ask ourselves, Who am I to be brilliant,
gorgeous, talented, fabulous?
Actually, who are you not to be?
You are a child of god.
Your playing small does not serve the world.
There is nothing enlightened about shrinking
so that other people won't feel insecure around you.
We are all meant to shine, as children do.
We were born to make manifest the glory of god that is within us.
It is not just in some of us; it is in everyone.
And as we let our own light shine, we unconsciously
give other people permission to do the same.
As we are liberated from our own fear,
our presence automatically liberates others.

- Marianne Williamson

Sunday, May 8, 2011

bell hooks on Education


"Educators who have dared to study, and learn, [and practice] new ways of thinking and teaching so that the work we do does not reinforce systems of domination, of imperialism, racism, sexism or class elitism have created a pedagogy of hope."