“The exciting aspect of these dialogues and conversations… is that they have a quality of testimony.” -bell hooks

“Dialogues” is a series I’m going to do here for a few weeks. Essentially it started after I read Breaking Bread which is a book that consists of dialogues between bell hooks and Cornel West. I read it and thought, “I wish I could do this.” Then I realized, I have awesome, inspiring, and enlightening conversations everyday. They inspire me to write blog posts so I figured instead of writing a post, I’ll give you the raw footage so to speak of those conversations. This first is with my good friend A. M. Harris. I hope you enjoy.

Politics

Michelle Huxtable | Adam, you have a blog called Poetic Intellect. Tell us what that means.

A. M. Harris | Poetic Intellect is more or less a sense of romanticism in intellect, in saying that intellect is poetic and it is beautiful. I, growing up have always been a poet, writing about suppressed feelings and anxieties I couldn’t share, and my incorporating the poetic language into internalized thoughts and idealisms was the genesis of the name.

As a counter, I should ask about the pen name “Michelle Huxtable,” though we’ve heard it described before in many different ways, how would you describe it to the first time reader?

Michelle Huxtable | Michelle Huxtable is as the tag line says, a little Michelle Obama and a little Claire Huxtable. What that means changes every time I explain it. The Michelle Obama part could mean the classy, political side. Political as in crafty about how you handle your business. Being the First Lady, you could easily rub dignitaries and other foreign leaders the wrong way which would be bad for US-foreign relations. The flip side is that Michelle Obama is from south-side Chicago. I think you could probably infer what that means. She can handle her own.

Then you have Claire Huxtable, a matriarch of sorts. Lawyer by day, mother day and night, she handles the business on the home front. While she may be motherly and caring she was quick to put her children (and other people’s children) in their place.

I guess a much shorter way of saying that is Michelle Obama is the political, observant of how I appear to others side who can also get down and dirty, while Claire Huxtable exhibits the more loving side, if you will.

A. M. Harris | In discussing the Michelle Obama aspect of your alias, I’d like to ask about your personal political views and where you align?

Michelle Huxtable | My political views and alliances have been burgeoning literally within the past few days. As far as my political views, it depends on the issue. I am not, nor have I ever been a straight-ticket voter. I don’t vote for the Democrat solely because he or she is the Democratic candidate or vice versa. As of now I lean towards Democratic Socialist.

A. M. Harris | Understandably so, I too have leanings in the Democratic Socialist mindset. I have found a fundamental grounding in my religious beliefs that have developed my a postieri views of socio-economic and political situations.

Religion

Michelle Huxtable | My leaning to Democratic Socialism is definitely also influenced by, if not completely based on, my spirituality. Going off that, do you believe that our religious beliefs should play any role in how we vote? For example, if because of your religion, you believe that homosexuality is a sin; would you then be led to vote against gay marriage?

A. M. Harris | It shouldn’t necessarily play a role in how we vote, to an extent. What we hold morally upright in our Christian beliefs, do not necessarily constitute our moral human belief in choice. Someone should not be subjected by another person’s views and/or moral standards in their existential decision making. A Sartrean mindset would imply that one person’s choices reflect their view of what everyone should choose, as to say how they should act; however, I believe that the choices of one are merely a reflection of that person own spirit and internalization. Therefore, while I believe homosexuality is wrong, as described in the bible, I would not say that should prevent a human of that orientation from marrying another.

Michelle Huxtable | As a fellow Christian, you clearly believe in the Bible so I will choose to quote from there. In Acts 16:6 Paul heard what is now called “the Macedonian Call”. The call of, “Come over and help us.”  Paul interpreted that as the call from God to help people who do not know the gospel of Christ. Do you not think the “Macedonian Call” is relevant to our current society?

A. M. Harris | Well, personally, I know more than a few gay and lesbian brothers and sisters who are deeply religious and entrenched in the “don’t ask, don’t tell” mentality of the black churches. For example the stereotypical Choir Director, etc. So to say that because they are gay or lesbian they do not have Christ is to make an a priori assumption. Though they are committing a sin by their orientation, as the bible says “For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God…” we have all sinned and continuously sin, our repentance for our sins and knowledge that there is a God we should worship is what constitutes our ascension to Heaven or descension to Hell.

Michelle Huxtable | Essentially, we should love the sinner, hate the sin because we are all sinners?

A. M. Harris: Essentially, yes.

Michelle Huxtable | Separation of church and state isn’t a negative thing, but a law that allows a conducive atmosphere for freedom of choice?

Education

A. M. Harris | Exactly. Freedom of choice is essential to the functioning of any form of democracy, even our flawed capitalistic one.

But on the subject of rights and freedoms–education, do you believe education is a fundamental human right?

Michelle Huxtable| Education is absolutely a fundamental right. The fact that our country does not treat it as such is unfortunate. As President Barack Obama said in the State of the Union address last week, “No one should go broke because they chose to go college.” Unfortunately, that is not the case.

What would you propose the best methods of solving the higher education crisis in our country would be?

A. M. Harris | First, I would start by saying I completely agree with you. Second, my proposition would be the move towards a free higher education system, at least in the public sector. Schools would still be able to uphold their standards for acceptance, and private institutions would still be able to charge for their services but it would create a more competitive market–much like the Postal System. The initial government spending this would require would be repaid by the social productivity and individual thought that comes with a college education.

Michelle Huxtable | Well said. Speaking of a competitive market as far as universities go, do historically black colleges and universities truly compete with predominantly white institutions? If so, why don’t they garner the same attention or reputation as these PWI’s?

A. M. Harris | Some HBCU’s do garner the respect and attention that PWI’s do such as Howard, Morehouse, Hampton, and Spelman.

Michelle Huxtable | I don’t know if I agree with HBCU’s competing on a purely surface level reputation level because if that were so, wouldn’t Morehouse for example receive the same proportion of white applicants as black ones?

A. M. Harris | Not necessarily, because when a school is and has been represented as an HBCU for so long, it remains that way. For us, by us.

Michelle Huxtable | Is that true, though? While we refer to HBCU’s as Historically Black Colleges and Universities aren’t PWI’s simply a misnomer? Predominantly White Institutions gives the impression that they have always been accepting of all and by happenstance they turned out mostly white due to demographic or applicant pool. Shouldn’t they be labeled as Historically White Colleges and Universities as well? The point is, they were historically white, for them, by them and yet now black applicants, and other races, frequently and almost always apply to those as well.

A. M. Harris | It gets back to the white normative standard, in saying that in order to ascend to greatness you have to become one with the dominant class, in this case the white race. As a race Africans in America have always strived to be seen as equals, a fight that is far from over. Therefore, acceptance to their institutions is a sign of furthering equality, while the matriculation of white students to HBCU’s would be metaphorically seen as taking a step down. Even though you’d be receiving the same degree.

Michelle Huxtable | Okay, okay. I agree.

A. M. Harris | As stated by you in previous conversation, your first choice University for post-secondary schooling was an HBCU, but you ended up at a PWI. What is your reasoning for this decision?

Michelle Huxtable | I wanted to attend an HBCU for many reasons. Wanting the Black College experience that my parents had was a major reason. I applied, was accepted, and got little to no financial aid. Therefore, I chose a different school, a PWI that gave me plenty of scholarship. While some people might see that as me going against the movement because I’m perpetuating the cycle, I do think it was the best move for me.

A. M. Harris | And by cycle HBCU’s, your meaning?

Michelle Huxtable: Well, if you look at my reasoning for not going, it is because as we discussed earlier, higher education is entirely too expensive to even attempt to bear the load on my own. Therefore I applied for financial aid in hopes of getting a scholarship. I didn’t get any and then went to a higher paying school. The cycle, from the beginning, starts at the endowments. Schools can give scholarships when they have these billion dollar endowments.  Anyone want to guess why Historically Black Colleges and Universities do not have the same endowments at Predominantly White Institutions? I’m going to say the s-word that turns people off and enrages others. Slavery. To idealize higher institutions and imply that slave money did not have a hand in their funding would be absurd. HBCU’s however did not have the “luxury” of benefitting from slavery. Because they cannot give as many scholarships, as many students aren’t going, paying tuition, graduating, and therefore aren’t donating as alumni.

A. M. Harris | I agree fully. In discussing slavery, I would like to hear your opinion on the epithet it birthed, for analytical purposes, the word “nigger.”

Michelle Huxtable | Oh boy. Haha. You definitely know my stance on this. If I were to have a one sentence law that I could put into effect it would be, “Nobody anywhere under any circumstances should use the n-word.” Easy. I know some people feel black people should use it and, “Oh see. We took it. And we flipped it! And we made it ours!” But no. Not at all. If you can’t say it around white people don’t say it. All of my friends or acquaintances know that I am the last person to use that word around. I know the history of hatred so how could I ever see it as a term of endearment or fraternity? I love Hip-Hop so I understand the idea of music simply being a mirror to the socio-economic status of our culture. However the n-word even in that music has rarely been used as a form of social commentary that says, “This is life. This is how we should change it.” Brother Cornel West refers to rap music as a thin opposition as opposed to a thick opposition because while it “makes gestures towards thick opposition–redistribution of wealth”, there is never any solutions offered in the form of a political movement or otherwise. That’s a conversation for a different day, though…

A. M. Harris | I definitely echo that sentiment. Though, I do have one disagreement, when you say “how could I ever see it as a term of endearment or fraternity?” I believe it can be deeply endearing, when internalized by brothers and sisters who know the history of the word and what it means amongst one another. That being said, I believe we have lost control of the word, and it has no relevance in modern society. I’m sure both of our grandmothers or great-grandmothers would have told us if we were to ever use the word in dialogue, that “you have no business using that word!” (After they supplied a sufficient whooping that is).

Michelle Huxtable | I see what you’re saying. I just can never be called that. Ever. The intention can be endearing but that’s also the explanation behind women calling their friends b-etches. Which I also refuse to be called. However, I feel intention isn’t relevant in the social sphere. While the connotation of the word may be “endearing”, if the denotation is still “ignorant black person” then that is the interpretation that bystanders are going to hear. For example, if you and I decide that sh-t head is going to be our new word for “buddy” or “amigo” and we decide to go use that in church. Will others immediately say “Aww cute. They’re friends!” or will they throw holy water on us? By nature, communication is supposed to be clear. If everybody doesn’t know what it means, is it successful communication?

A. M. Harris | Well, I could deviate and say successful communication is subjective and that Yiddish was successful communication, amongst the purveyors of it, but to those bystanders who heard it–it sounded like gibberish. Take for example “Des es di tata,” the loving sentiment that to the untrained ear would sound like pure nonsense.

Michelle Huxtable | My opinion on communication clarity was in addition to the fact that I don’t believe you can change the history of a word when it has such deep and hateful roots.

A. M. Harris | Point taken.  I’d really love to explore the role hip-hop music plays in the race discussion in America, but the Academy calls! Look forward to discussing it with you soon, Sister Huxtable.

That was the first of the “Dialogues…” I hope you enjoyed it. Feel free to discuss the content, format, or anything that comes to you. We’ll be back next week with another!