October 2012

A new survey about racial attitudes conducted by researchers from three universities, Stanford, the University of Michigan and Chicago, reveals that they have not improved over the last four years. Slightly over half of all Americans, 51%, expressed attitudes against blacks. In 2008 the percentage was 48. The researchers asked questions to assess both explicit and implicit attitudes. When questions were asked looking for implicit attitudes, the percentage was even higher, 56%. In 2008 that figure had been 49%. The research was conducted online where more people are believed to answer more truthfully than when answering someone face to face, and while there was a higher percentage of republicans with negative attitudes towards blacks, democrats did not fare that much better. Tacitly, or maybe not so tacitly, many of these sentiments have been reflected in the presidential election. Paralleling this, the election is also underscoring that by a wide margin negative ads are effective. Another strand comes from the mega millions poured into the campaign from individuals and groups of either party who seek an outcome favorable to their interests, money that could go to scholarships, the arts, the hungry, youths at risk… When these three strands are seen together as important elements of electoral dynamics, one has to conclude we have a long way to go, a very long way, before we can learn to vote for the person best qualified to solve our problems as opposed to voting for one who mirrors our limitations and prejudices.

When several international clothing firms boycotted cotton from Uzbekistan as a protest against the child labor they were using, the government instead drafted ordinary citizens including medical personnel such as surgeons and nurses. Every year during cotton picking season they are to report to the given rural areas and have to meet their quota: pick 60 kilos (about 120 pounds) of cotton per day or be fined. Picking cotton is painful, difficult work but none is spared. People with illnesses like asthma are drafted, only pregnant women and those who are nursing can be exempted. News from Uzbekistan is hard to come by, but according to a BBC report, of the countries where forced labor is found, Uzbekistan is the only one where it is orchestrated by the government. International labor organizations have not been able to verify that children are indeed no longer involved. As a result of the boycott, fifteen is to be the cut off date but where there might be a need, many believe, some below that age have been enlisted. Although internationally Uzbek cotton only represents 4% of the total, it is 45% of their exports. It may be unimaginable in the 21st century, but government orchestrated forced labor is happening.

This presidential election campaign, as those in the past, is between two political parties, but this one seems to have something those in the past did not, acrimony, so much acrimony it is difficult to think of both parties as belonging to the same country. The campaigns have come to sound as if the two parties are enemies, as if it is more like a war than a political contest. Yes, each side represents radically different values, but ought it not to be possible to present varying visions without framing the choice as one between good and bad guys, between good and evil? I wonder if this sentiment doesn’t come from the top, perhaps not from the candidates themselves but more accurately from those working the campaigns, the mass of invisible brains called the handlers as well as from their desire to please the religious fervor of some. I wonder too if it is not related to the way campaigns are now waged, catering to the 24-hour news cycle, with polls, consultants and an army of talking heads dissecting every aspect of events and speeches whether or not what they say has value, adds understanding, deepens our divisions, maybe because of long held notions that conflict brings better ratings and arguments add interest. Campaigns no longer are an exercise in citizenship, enlightening listeners and viewers about the positions of the candidates or the issues of the election. Now, positions and issues are given lip service, it’s who’s ahead, who’s lost, which side got the better of the other, its’ suppositions and conjecture, opinions and of course an endless rehashing of whatever knee-jerking reactions they and others have said somewhere else. There has to be a better way, and the quicker we find it the quicker we can reclaim being citizens of one country.