What did last month’s healthcare summit really do? Regardless of opinion, the broadcast was highly viewed. One could argue, at the very least, it shed a light on what often seems to be a mystical political process. Although, what would TV be without theatrics? From the numerous copies of the already-2,700-page bill stacked in front of Rep. Eric Cantor (R-Va.) to the Democratic arguments, millions watched the online streaming and TV broadcasts. So, does this current battle with the healthcare bill teach us anything about addressing other large issues, like gay rights?
Communist philosopher Karl Marx said the oppressed make the best oppressors. In the current healthcare debate, one wonders if the so-called tea-baggers without healthcare coverage have taken the time to read and understand the proposed bill. (At 2,700-some pages, it’s unlikely.) The same kind of questioning arises about gays who support political organizations that oppose civil rights for sexual minorities. The right claims that such initiatives (like the stimulus bill or the healthcare bill) are aligned with Marx and support socialistic agendas. Since, for the most part, our country has a negative view of socialism — and, for some, “liberal” due to gay marriage and other civil-rights issues — using such words evokes fear within mainstream audiences. Fear-mongering has become an effective method to rule a percentage of the populous conscience through stereotypes. Herein lies the danger of prejudice: It acts as a weapon of fear to self-inflict oppression.
When one begins to think of the tactics used to oppress the mind, it’s like the mystery of why things work the way they do in Washington, D.C. And one must ask, are such actions intentional or unintentional? It’s easy to forget that at one time in our country, it was legal to consider certain people as cattle or that people who possess the ability to give birth were not able to vote. The reality of such a painful history often bleeds into the same pain that keeps us from addressing all-encompassing legislative issues like healthcare. Those who are not afflicted — as well as those who are, but support otherwise — rely on their need to relieve their fear/pain through prejudice. Instead of listening to both sides of an issue, they only listen to information aligned with their current thinking. How does anybody learn anything like this? In this particular case, the tea-baggers question the role of government. While it’s always our right as Americans to question our government — and our duty — when it comes to providing civil liberties to all persons, the answer to anyone questioning the government’s role should refer to the document that originally established it.
As for the LGBT community, these same issues cause us to neglect painful realities that affect us, thus keeping all of us from vigorously addressing civil rights. Do we practice intercultural oppression? If we oppress internally, are we disqualifying our ability to determine identity or civil rights?
The current gay uprising into mainstream identity reminds me of the Harlem Renaissance. If we were to embrace our diversity and look at the road African Americans traveled to gain civil rights, maybe we could at the very least guide ourselves to address current and potentially future challenges. And perhaps Americans could use a similar strategy when assessing healthcare, examining other countries that have a more cost-effective, quality system.
Frank Harp, a former Eagle Scout and Air National Guard multi-media services specialist, is a member of the nonprofit 100 Black Men.