CR #5: Distinguishably Doomed
What? James Baldwin uncovers new definitions of majority and minority in his piece In Search of a Majority: An Address. According to Baldwin, “the only useful definition of the word ‘majority’ does not refer to numbers, and it does not refer to power. It refers to influence” (p. 216). He gives examples of this definition of the majority by saying “you may far outnumber your opposition and not be able to impose your will on them or even to modify the rigor with which they impose their will on you, i.e. the Negroes in South Africa” (p. 215), but instead “[creates] the standards by which the country [lives] or which [creates] the standards to which the country [aspires]” (p.216). In contrast, in reference to the emerging culture of America, “because their influence was so slight and because it was their necessity to make themselves over in the image of their new and unformed country,” (p. 217) minorities evolved. With these definitions as the framework, the fear Baldwin talks about is a “fear of losing status” (p. 218).
So What? In the first chapter of Pathologies of Power: Health, Human Rights, and the New War on the Poor titled “On Suffering and Structural Violence,” Paul Farmer tells the stories of Acéphie and Chouchou Louis. Acéphie, a Haitian woman who died from AIDS, and Chouchou, a man from rural Haiti who died from torture, were both victims of modal suffering which Farmer says “[is] not the result of accident or a force majeure; [it is] the consequence, direct or indirect, of human agency” (p. 40). James Baldwin mentions how our social class can make or break a person, in both of the stories Farmer tells, being poor in rural Haiti created the less than ideal situations that Acéphie and Chouchou had to deal with. Furthermore, “while certain kinds of suffering are readily observable-and the subject of countless films, novels, and poems- structural violence all too often defeats those who describe it” (Farmer, p. 40). In both Acéphie and Chouchou’s situations, the Haitian military and paramilitary forces represented the fear Baldwin outlines. Farmer explains that “any distinguishing characteristic, whether social or biological, can serve as a pretext for discrimination and thus as a cause of suffering” (p. 46), because there is always the relationship of majority and minority and the fear of losing influence present that Baldwin describes. The scariest part is that “the suffering of the world’s poor intrudes only rarely into the consciousness of the affluent, even when our affluence may be shown to have a direct relation to their suffering” (Farmer, p. 31).
Now What? I believe the “fear” that Baldwin articulates is extremely prevalent in our current society regarding the political environment. When the Obama administration took over eight years ago, those in power feared that social reform would strip them of their power. Today, with white supremacy obviously still alive in America, minorities now fear that they will lose their influence in American government, to include, but not limited to, women, ethnic minorities, and the disabled. Some are even fearful for their lives. Given the population I work with at COM, the differently-abled, the concerns that are currently circulating are very relevant. The most important thing is that minorities continue to recognize their worth, and do not back down when it comes to their rights. During his presidential campaign, President Donald Trump mocked a disabled reporter showing a lack of respect for the community as a whole. With a man like this in charge of our country, my community has ever right to fret. In the wise words of James Baldwin, “…I want to suggest this: that the majority for which everyone is seeking which must reassess and release us from our past and deal wth the present and create standards worthy of what a man may be- this majority is you” (Baldwin, p. 221).
