La Cucaracha by Lalo Alcaraz for September 24, 2014

Are these not enough?

So are you saying that Latinos should be shut out of more mainstream awards? The ol’ “separate but equal” gambit?

One of the reasons for having the various Latino awards (or other ethnicities/cultures’ awards) is because the “mainstream” awards ignore them.

Hmm, five people being honored this year, which I believe is about average for the Kennedy Center. Al Green (singer, looks black), Tom Hanks (actor, looks white), Patricia McBride (ballet dancer, looks white), Sting (singer-songwriter, looks white) and Lily Tomlin (comedian, looks white). Some of them may have uncommon ethnic backgrounds, I did not check their individual pages.*Of note is that the Kennedy Center page describes the women with the gendered versions of their job titles. But with only five slots, yeah, it’s going to be tricky to please anyone, let alone everyone.

Good God is this guy really as dumb as he seems or does he just have a persecution complex? Awards are given to people for the talents they have, at least in the USA they are given regardless of what you are. In Mexico how many people other then people of Mexican heritage are given awards at Premio Nacional de Literatura José Fuentes Mares? Not to many if any.

Much as I love Lalo and his strip, this attack on the Kennedy Center is puzzling. It might resonate a little better if last years Kennedy Center Honorees had not been 40% Latino (Martina Arroyo, Carlos Sanchez) and 60% minority overall (add in Herbie Hancock). Granted, there were very few Latinos during prior years, but how much of that is active discrimination and how much of that is due to the fact that 30-40 years ago (the time frame in which many of this year’s honorees began their careers) there were very few Latino stars that had achieved lasting mainstream popularity in America? Aren’t we likely to start seeing more and more minority honorees, including Latinos, as time goes by?

Awards should be based on actual excellence. If a Latino earns an award, he should have the personal satisfaction of knowing that he was the best, not the best Latino. Until ethnic background etc are irrelevant, an award is a rather backhanded compliment.

Since you self-identify as such, that’s why we call you that.

Lalo is trying to make money. Without controversy, what is he?

I would have thought that honoring Billy Joel would have been the controversy.

The thing is, indie, your initial argument was “Are these not enough?” Which is similar to Southern segregationists pointing to historically black colleges and saying, “Are these not enough?” The reason they’re there is because a population has been shut out of other institutions. It’s no reason to not try to open up those institutions.

Now, @jeffmccutchan decided to check the facts, and that paints a different picture of the Kennedy Awards itself, without resorting to a rhetoric of, “I’ve got mine, go get your own.”

So is it sad but true that those awards ignore the non-Latinos in revenge?

I’m curious why your worldview seems to consistently be filled with ideas of competition, bad intentions, and zero-sum games. And no, this is not sarcasm. And yes, it is genuine curiosity. I’m assuming there’s some underlying philosophy to it, and I’d genuinely like to know what it is and where it comes from.

IT ALSO IS SIMILAR TO MANY OTHER ARGUMENTS IN HISTORY. SO WHAT?…THAT’S HISTORY. OVER AND OVER (DESPITE HAVING LEARNED THE LESSONS OF THE PAST) WITH MANY INSTITUTIONS AND POPULATIONS.

So because powerful racists and xenophobes have used segregationist arguments in the past, it’s all fine and dandy? What exactly is your line of reasoning here?

IT’S ALSO NO REASONS TO START INSTITUTIONS AND CLOSE THEM IN RETALIATION.

Again, I’m curious as to why in your mind this was done in “retaliation.” In terms of awards shows, why couldn’t it be a way to make sure that worthy people who were not otherwise being honored got honored. In terms of historically black colleges, why couldn’t it be a positive move to try to make sure that black folks who were being systematically excluded from other colleges (like, 100% excluded) were actually able to get a college degree?

Again, I’m really curious as to why these things would seem to you to be part of sum zero-sum mean-spiritedness rather than attempts to try to build up communities who are being discriminated against? You know, an enterprising way to pull themselves up by their bootstraps in the face of a society that is actively denying them other opportunities. It’s simply puzzling.

FUNNY, THERE DOESN’T SEEM TO BE THOSE “I’VE GOT MINE, ETC.” WORDS HERE TODAY.

“Are these not enough?” This does, by reasonable interpretation, fall under the “I’ve got mine” rhetoric, as it’s effectively saying that Latinos shouldn’t strive for mainstream acceptance—that’s the purview of “us white folks.” This is reinforced by your continued and really rather shocking defense (or at least non-disavowal) of the rhetoric of “separate but equal.”

You’ve not answered my underlying question. I’m curious why competition, retaliation, etc. are such a large part of your vocabulary. Your assumption seems to be, based on what you’ve written, that this is what drives everything, including the setting-up of historically black colleges and ethnic awards shows.

I’m not asking about why you’re here. It’s well-established that you have a thing against La Cucaracha and that’s largely why you post to this forum specifically and none other. Fair enough. What I’m asking about is the underlying stuff. Your philosophy of the world, as it were.

I haven’t answered the gender question because it’s far less relevant to discussion here than is someone’s view of the world.

When I mention your use of the terms retaliation, competition, etc., I’m not doing it to feel superior. I’m mentioning them because you are consistently using them, and I’m curious as to why. The fact that you assume that these questions come from wanting “ammunition” to “win” an argument is an extension of this general outlook. (And by your saying that’s what I’m trying to do, you are also doing that mind-reading thing you profess to hate so much.)

The reason that I think you only post to the La Cucaracha forums is that your timeline bears this out. It’s quite possible you post elsewhere under a different monicker. But as indie, you do not. I suppose if I were enterprising, had haxx0r sk1llz, and didn’t mind breaking all sorts of laws and codes of ethics, I could possibly find out exactly who you are in real life and then track down from there any other forums you might post to. But with regards to this I am not, do not, and will not. So we’re left with the fact that you as indie only post here.

Oh, I never said that I’m white. I was just using that “us white folks” for illustrative purposes.

And you’ve still not repudiated the idea of separate but equal, which might lead many folks who read your posts to think that maybe, in fact, you don’t think it’s so bad.

You will probably read some of this as insults. But that would be a false reading. So my two questions for you remain, if you ever feel like answering them: What comics do you enjoy? And is your outlook fundamentally one of survival through competition?

I LIKE COMICS WHERE GENDER IS KNOWN.

Soooo…you like La Cucaracha? The genders in it are pretty clear-cut.

ME TOO. … WORDS SEEM TO BE THE BEST THING TO USE HERE. … etc.

And you’re way into non-answer answers?

OKAY, HOW ABOUT TOGETHER AND UNEQUAL?

And you still haven’t repudiated “separate but equal”?

I LIKE BETTER LIVING THROUGH CHEMISTRY.

And you’re a fan of DuPont?

Oh, I never said that I’m white. I was just using that “us white folks” for illustrative purposes.SO YOU DON’T LIKE INTERPRETATIONS?

I didn’t say I don’t like them. I said yours was wrong in this particular case.

See? This is fun!

Who’s copying what now?