Sunday, June 25, 2017


My Masters Thesis was entitled "The Juridical Methodology of the Supreme Court."  After spending a year reading nearly every Supreme Court decision, the Constitutional Minutes, Blackstone, and a lot of Kings Bench decisions referenced by Blacktone [always go back to the primary source when it really matters] I saw a pattern in how the Court moved on social issues and even issues of commerce based on the changes in society.  I created a working analytical model and then plugged in the evidence to support my thesis.  As you can tell this is where I am in my element.  My brain runs a million miles an hour, so as someone mentioned to me the other day, it must be hard on me to not be endlessly active.  It is.

"California has issued a ban on state-funded and state-sponsored travel to four more states that it says have laws discriminating against LGBTQ people."

Source: CNN

A lot of this is easy for me because I have extensively studied Marx's understanding of the dialectic and how it brings about Revolutionary change.  Marx had a theory through the natural process of the dialectic process and based on his understanding of society and change, capitalism would eventually morph into socialism and then socialism into communism.  The key to Marx is the dialectic.  It is also important to understand Marx knew you could not force the change.  The change had to come through change by the people in how they feel about capitalism and its social injustice.  Key here is support by the people.  I have no idea if our society will move towards his, not the fake western liberalism, model of socialism, but how change comes about and the role of the people has been proven correct every time their is a shift by the people in terms of social or economic change.

This is why I belong in the classroom.  I am loving typing this post.


""For dialectical philosophy nothing is final, absolute, sacred. It reveals the transitory character of everything and in everything; nothing can endure before it except the uninterrupted process of becoming and of passing away, of endless ascendancy from the lower to the higher."


I love this source because it allows you to click on the primary source to see what Engels said in total.


Teaching itself is a dialectic process.  If you look at the above quote it supports evolution.  In teaching if I were to teach the above quote to first year college students I would lose them.  What I do is teach.

You begin with a thesis, the way things are right now.  Then you have a challenge to the status quo, known as the anti-thesis.  In time the anti-thesis morphs into the the thesis for a new status quo thesis.  Then the cycle begins again.  You cannot end there, which is what an incompetent instructor does.  You must related it to the times.  Now in an advance course I would begin with the above quote and ask the students to write one or two pages explaining the quote.  No grade, just an exercise in thinking and informing me of their ability to understand the material.


Until Reagan brought the Religious Right into the Republican Party none of this was a major issue. The battle for equality had begun.  And I mean street battles. Reagan needed to beat Jimmy Carter and he could only do that by giving the Religious right a voice within the Republican party.  Until then for the most part while there were many discriminatory laws already on the books, the movement was basically ignored.

From the 20's until the emerging of the Religious Right within the Republican Party, being openly gay among your fellow actors was the norm. The press considered it a private issue and stayed out of it.  Raymond Burr [Perry Mason]  was with the same man for 33 years, before his death.  

HIV brought Hollywood out of the closet.  The press openly discussed the great Hollywood macho actors who were in fact gay.  This empowered closeted gays and caused the people to rethink their position.  Did they all of a sudden hate a beloved actor or family member upon learning they were gay? Nope, with some exceptions


I can write an entire book on the endless elements in the anti-these which brought about the change we see today, even within the gay community.  When I started to be part of the movement in about 84' or 85'.  I along with others were blasted by the Dallas Gay Alliance for wanting to change the name to the Dallas Gay and Lesbian Alliance.  In time the bigotted all Anglo male organization changed because they had to.  

We were lambasted by the DGA for boycotting the clubs which funded them, over the policy of not allowing blacks or browns as bartenders.  Yes the DGA did not like me and so many others because we stood for equality for all, and not just some.  Yes the DGA hated us trouble makers for boycotting the clubs which looked for excuses to keep women out.  At the time exclusively lesbian bars did not exist.

Yes were were condemned by the DGA for creating the Dallas Chapter of  Parents and Friends of Lesbians and Gays.  They said Dallas would accuse us of recruiting children.  It was a support and educational group for Parents and Friends, not gays and lesbians.  Well we were received by the press with flying colors, and the DGA came begging for inclusion.

I can go on and on, but my point is change not only came from the society at large, but also from within the narrow minded Anglo Gay's who claimed to be the only and rightful leaders, which is why during a gay parade in Dallas to accommodate the Religious Right they banned drag queens, and men in leather clothing.  The fact these were the people in the streets fighting for equality during Stonewall, meant nothing to these bigots.  And yes, I and a lot more people boycotted the parade that year and finally ended all association with the then DGLA.  


Can you tell I love teaching this stuff.  My head is killing me and I do not care.  I am having so much fun.

But what I just did was put Marx's concept of the dialectic into perspective in terms of what is happening right now and is very germane among our youth.  This is how a real teacher teaches.

Nothing happening in terms of power and change is new.  We are just seeing it applied to gender and sexual identify.  Look to North Carolina.  When they passed their discriminatory bathroom law, boycotts and loss of revenue forced then to change course.

California is a big state.  Their boycott of Texas shows the power of the left in Texas extends beyond our borders.  Californian and other like minded states will force change in Texas.

Texas cannot use federal law to stop California in the passage of its laws or boycotting states which do not comply with their laws concerning discrimination.  Texas cannot stop corporations from not relocating to Texas because of its discriminatory stance on so many issues.

The biggest impact the California boycott will have on Texas is in sports.  Texans love sports.  When the first major national sporting event is cancelled in Texas, Texans will react.  Texas is not anti gender and sexual equality.  The polls are meaningless.  People fear if they say they support equality the person asking them the question will assume they are gay or something.

The right of California as a state to pass anti-discriminatory laws and boycott doing business with states which support discrimination is a States' Right [meaning the people, because the right belongs to the people and not the political entity] and there is nothing the Religious Right or the Republicans can do to stop California.

Oh, before I hear it, I am old guard.  In the beginning gay meant everyone who was not straight [whatever that means.  Fact - if every man could perform fellatio on themselves they would - straight men especially included.]

Look the spectrum of  human and gender identity is so large no acronym will ever include everyone. LGBTQ leaves out so many groups.  So by saying gay I mean everyone.  I understand the need of each group having their own identify in order to get recognized and effectuate change.  But the acronym would then become a million letters and numbers long.  There is now a newer acronym which is a lot longer.  It is time we stop defining ourselves by an acronym and move on to embracing ourselves as humans who simply love one another in different ways.  It is my contention the labels we assign to ourselves are used as a weapon against us.

Why is it if your family lived in Texas while it was still part of Mexico you have to live by the term Mexican American.  In New York people do not say they are Irish or Italian American.  They know their heritage, but are not labeled by it.  People keep the term Mexican American alive to diminish their ties as US born citizens.  Labels are bad.

No comments: