LIVity

In the spirit of those lost in the Paris Riots
I can't even take credit for this theory so I'm going to go ahead and say that this is taken from Mumia Abu-Jamal's book We Want Freedom. Stripped down to basics, he says that most riots are an attempt for a group of people to either gain or maintain social status. In history, most riots initiated by Caucasians were meant to insure their status as the dominant race. Most riots initiated by those of African descent were meant to fight oppressive standards of living (this is happening in Paris as I write this). Mumia Abu-Jamal argues that the media has given the word "riot" a negative connotation and connected it with people of color. He argues that the word "Resistance" should be used instead. I agree. I think a clear distinction should be made between riot and resistance. If people are involved in nonsensical violence or violence used to oppress a group of people, it should be referred to as a riot. If people subjected to subhuman standards of living decide to force an enactment of equality, this should be considered a resistance. Can you condemn people for demanding to be treated justly?? How is this something to be viewed in a negative light??

About three days ago in the Washington Post, I read that FEMA is cutting funds to Katrina victims. The agency wants evacuees to start looking for permanent housing. It claims that spending the holidays in homes instead of hotel rooms will be more in the spirit of the season. Oh yeah, it also mentioned as sort of an afterthought that FEMA is spending too much money trying to house the evacuees. We need that money to fund wars against Saddam Heisen, Bin Laden, or whoever we're looking for this week. Shouldn't we be trying to help our countrymates before we go and destroy foreign towns and then pay to rebuild them. And what is with all the foreign children dying?? I'm sure they're insurgants too, right??

I keep hearing that America is not ready for a female president and I can't help but wonder what makes this statement true. Since America is supposed to be so progressive, it seems like we should be trying to decide if we're ready for a homosexual president. Maybe I'm asking too much from a country that can't decide how it feels about a woman's right to choose. Anyway, so we're not ready for a female president. I beg to differ. As much as I hate the fact that Condi Rice is on the wrong team, I cannot deny that she is a powerful woman. She has visited more countries during her time in office than her male counterparts and she has been accepted in unexpected places (i.e. countries that don't believe women should hold any type of power). She's getting her job done and getting it done well. If a woman like Rice was president, I guess America wouldn't be ready for her because she'd actually accomplish something.