| OCR Text |
Show Hinckley Journal of Politics Autumn 1998 question whether we should expect Scott's theory to apply sensibly to the case of the MMM. We raise this question because the situations and relationships that Scott uses to test his theory are extreme, to say the least. Relationships such as those between masters and their slaves, guards and their prisoners, and dictators and their subjects are only a few of the relationships to which Scott applies discourse theory. In each of these cases the means by which the ruling class enforces its power over the oppressed, are significantly more drastic than what we see in American democracy-because they have to be. The relationship between slaves and masters is an example. In this case, there is an inherent, conflicting set of ideologies between the two. The masters' dominant ideology regards the slave as a piece of property to be treated in accordance with the wishes of the ruling elite. The slave exists only to serve the master, and any resistance to this ideology is met with violence. In direct contradiction, slaves regard themselves as human beings with the same rights and needs as their masters. They harbor an internal hatred for the system by which they are governed and resist it both publicly (which is usually met by a swift, definitive reaction by the ruling class) and through infrapoliticking. The conflict between the maintenance of the power elite's status quo and the demand for freedom and human rights is extremely volatile, and naturally calls into play many parts of discourse theory. For example, there is a need for masters to portray themselves as powerful and unified in order to prevent a revolt. There is a need for slaves to communicate in hidden social sites, lest they incur the violent wrath of the masters. In summary, there is a need for both sides to follow the official transcript. Otherwise, there is likely to be an open, violent confrontation. This is not a problem found in a democratic society such as America, where ideally, there is no true struggle between a ruling and subordinate class. So how can the discourse theory be at work, complete with its intricate workings of hidden transcripts and resistance to outright oppression, in a seemingly mild form of protest such as the MMM? The answer is simple. What all of these examples have in common, whether they result in something as openly violent as a slave revolt or something as politically subdued as the MMM, is the presence of a hegemonic ideology that is regarded as oppressive and provides a rallying point for the oppressed class. As a minority group in America, Black men are outnumbered in population, representation in government, and socioeconomic standing by their Caucasian counterparts. With African-American men having far less direct representation in Congress, and substantially less socioeconomic standing to influence government decision-makers, many of their prevailing interests will go ignored by American government. Instead, the interests of the Caucasian male, the group which occupies the bulk of Congressional seats and makes up most of the United States' upper class, will stand to be represented much more frequently. An example of this can be seen in the 1994 Republican revolution in Congress. After the GOP took power, its leadership began to preach and act upon ideologies which work against the interests of lower- to middle-class Blacks. Added to this are the frequent negative portrayals of Black men by the media in shows such as "Cops" and "NYPD Blue," which often stereotype the Black man as an uneducated criminal, and it is evident that there is a definite, although subtle, hegemonic ideology which is working against the interests of Black men. This is the starting point to set discourse theory in action. This ideology encouraged discourse in hidden social sites. It encouraged subtle forms of infrapoliticking. It encouraged Black men to analyze the system, which revealed that politicians were indeed engaging in the use of euphemism and stigma to disguise an inherently anti-Black agenda. True, we are not studying southern slave plantations nor Nazi prison camps, but the presence of a conflict between a dominated group and a hegemonic ideology is all that is needed to set discourse in action. To this point, we have only touched upon this anti-Black ideology. In the following section we further explore this facet of the hegemonic ideology and how it is acted out by the "ruling class." This is intended to make it easier to understand how and why Black men resist it, and how that resistance resulted in the MMM. An Anti-Black Hegemonic Ideology In calling for the march, Farrakhan outlined what he perceived to be the oppressive ideology. This ideology formed the basis for resistance through discourse among members of the Black community. The points he raises are supported by actions of the U.S. government and judiciary systems, and can all be combined into a singular, working public transcript which the majority of the Caucasian male "ruling class" regards as the norm. Farrakhan's first point attacks the Republican "Contract with America." He asserts that the Contract "is turning back the hands of time, depriving the Black community of the many gains made through the suffering and sacrifice of our fellow advocates of change during the '50s and '60s" (Farrakhan 1995). Certain provisions of this Contract support his interpretation, particularly in the Contract's section on crime control. Violent, gun-related crimes continue to plague male Black youth in inner-cities throughout the U.S., and the Contract with America takes a traditionally conservative approach in dealing with them. There is a chapter which endorses stronger prison sentences, making certain crimes federal, and toughening the system's treatment of illegal immigrants. Nothing is said about gun control (Contract). This formula is in direct contrast to the more liberal political ideology held by many Black representatives in Congress, which states that this type of crime is best dealt with by improving the socioeconomic conditions in which Black males are forced to live-not a popular sentiment among the Republican leadership. The Contract also contains cuts in welfare and other entitlement programs which benefit poor inner-city residents, such as financial aid for higher education and a national () |
