The Trump administration’s immigration policies have invited numerous comparisons to nineteenth-century regulations of enslaved persons. These comparisons will continue so long as the state retains the power to circumscribe a person’s mobility and employment opportunities through the policing of their legal status.
Usually it is the Left that is stereotyped as tyrannical with its political correctness and assertions of rights, according to the standard Republican line. But really, it’s Trump coming for people’s land, stampeding over rights, and ignoring public opinion.
Khristie’s sustenance of racism hurts not only themselves and the Tiffanys of the world, but also rolls the clock back and provides an incubator for white supremacy that stunts the growth of all communities—more specifically communities of color, the same supportive communities that will “stick with her” through thick and thin.
Several years ago, during a tenure-track search, I asked two questions – two questions which I ask of every scholar applying for a position with our institution. The first is innocent enough: “How important is racial/ethnic diversity in your scholarship and teaching?” Not surprisingly, all enthusiastically answer in the affirmative. Then I ask my second question: “Which scholars and/or books from racial and ethnic minorities do you include on your syllabus and why?” Here is when the squirming begins, revealing the candidate’s lack of academic rigor.
The “court-industrial complex” is an ideology that forms the bedrock of Louisiana criminal justice. It will continue to sustain mass incarceration and municipal plunder despite the best efforts of reformers on the ground unless these carceral mechanisms themselves are undone. Until then, the Court will continue to “eat” the poor.
I started the Slants nearly a decade ago because I wanted to change people’s assumptions about Asian Americans. When you combine the great discomfort that people have when talking about racial injustice to the fact that the Asian American experience is rarely considered in these discussions, I realized that opportunities to do so would be extremely rare. I wanted to give racism a chance—a chance for discussing its existence in a way that would be compelling, honest, and yet, subversive.