The deplorable attitudes of the governing toward the governed in Las Cruces has been a theme of many of my blogs. Whereas those blogs discussed others, this blog focuses on the contrast between responses to me by various VIPs in Las Cruces and VIPs in McLean and Fairfax County, Virginia. The purpose of the contrast is not to elicit sympathy because local VIPs do not like or respect me, but to explain why I feel sorry for Las Cruces that its VIPs do so little to elevate the quality of the community and its political life.
Peter Goodman, blogger, local columnist, radio moderator and commentator, and pickleball player, has a certain shtick in some conversations with me. If I tell him that some VIP does not like me, he is sure to tell me—I can only guess why—that many people do not like me. He is right, as I know better than he, but he would be wrong to think me obtuse, oblivious, or in denial. I just do not mind, not because I am arrogant, but because I am confident about who I am. I am the same person here as I have been elsewhere as an activist, blogger, or columnist. Whether I am liked or respected depends on the character of the VIPs. Two of them surprised me by writing me in a way almost no one who has reached the age of discretion has written me.
One is Bobbie Green, president of the local NAACP chapter—which is odd. She knows that I have been a lifetime NAACP member since ’68—probably longer than she has been alive—, supported her when NMSU treated her shabbily, and agree with her on police reform and other issues. But my blog, “What Does Affirmative Action Affirm? A Personal View,” triggered her second of two vitriolic attacks though it did not criticize or even mention Green.
“It interviewed four women classmates, all less qualified than I, for the position” and “Few have been as well schooled as I was.” These are your words, and they wreak [sic: reek] of white privilege. While your sense of entitlement is typical, it renders you ill-equipped and unqualified to weigh in on affirmative action. The SUNY Albany English Department did its students a tremendous favor when they bypassed you.
I can only guess what explains Green’s ignorant and intemperate meltdown. There is no “white privilege” which she imputes to me. The four women are all white; knowing them, I can judge our relative qualifications. In one of the country’s best and, even then, integrated public-school systems, I received an excellent education, not “white privilege,” not a “sense of entitlement.” Even so, neither would prevent me from having an informed opinion about affirmative action; she simply denies the worth of my experience and reflections because they differ from hers. I suspect that my being an old, white, male, and a Jew to boot influenced her response to my blog. If not to vent her prejudices, I do not know what explains her response to my blog.
The other is Heath Haussamen, blogger. He was triggered by my most recent blog, “Political Acquiescence Reflects New Mexico’s Historical Legacy.”
“Years ago you attacked me by comparing me to Hitler. I ceased any contact with you at the time. You recently added me to your email list a second time. After I read this most recent, misinformed and racist email — an email that attacks my spouse, my daughter, my city, my state, and my culture — I again have no desire to be on your list. I appreciate you removing me from it immediately.
Again, I can only guess at a reason for this out-of-the-blue attack about a long-ago conversation (2011) during a lunch at Giro’s. I do not recall such a comparison; what I do recall is Haussamen making an antisemitic comment which prompted me to respond, not by comparing him to Hitler, but by identifying his comment as antisemitic and me, to his surprise, as a Jew. The conversation ended our relationship as blog editor and contributor. My reply to his email noted that his allegations that my blog is “misinformed and racist” are unsupported: no answer. Neither “misinformed” nor “racist,” it discusses historical and cultural influences on society. I added that, to be racist, it would have to state or imply that one group is inherently superior to another as a matter of character, intelligence, or morals; it does not. His comment that I attack “my spouse, my daughter”—how?—, “my city, my state, and my culture” (emphasis mine) implies that I, known by him to be a Jew, am an unassimilated alien who does not share city, state, or culture with him. I queried him with a simple “why”: no answer.
What did Green and Haussamen want their emails to achieve with their emails? Hurt my feelings? Cancel my views? Did they think that attacking me instead of addressing my opinions would change my mind? Their only messages to me are that they dislike me bigly and think themselves important enough that I would care.
Imagine how much more the members of past and present City Councils and other city officials must dislike me and, from their perspective, for good reasons. A recent blog identifying and criticizing councilors for their despicable remarks about citizens petitioning for a referendum on the “Realize Las Cruces” rezoning plan must have raised hackles. Previous blogs and speeches criticized Council for ignoring large-scale waste in Public Works operations at Brown Farm, doing nothing to address police misconduct and reform the LCPD, and operating a secret committee in defiance of the Open Meetings Act. I also won an IPRA case against the city which cost it about $150,000 before I filed a complaint with the New Mexico Department of Justice for its OMA violations (investigation ongoing). I have criticized Councils; Mayors Ken Miyagishima and Eric Enriquez; and Councilors Tessa Abeyta, Johana Bencomo, Becky Corran, Kasandra Gandara, Becki Graham, and Cassie McClure (in addition to City Managers, City Attorneys, and Police Chiefs). I have never criticized Bill Mattiace, but he no longer responds to my occasional email. Unlike Green and Haussamen, all others are too savvy to write to reveal their true thoughts and feelings about me. But their vibes have made clear their resentment and their hostility to me because of my speaking my truth to their power.
Their responses differ from those of VIPs in McLean, Fairfax County, Virginia, where I lived for 23 years. The residents of both city and county adjacent to the District of Columbia are highly educated, very articulate professionals in government, industry, and business; many are officials or activists in local affairs. Differences of informed opinion in smart discussions are common. Local governing bodies encourage citizen participation and are responsive to citizens.
While I lived there, I was a guest columnist and civic activist frequently writing about or speaking before the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors and the Fairfax County School Board. I was more often critical than commendatory of proposed or on-going programs or budgets; I did not often need to address successful programs or prudent budgets. My criticism of the school district’s computer program and budget led to my appointment to a committee to overhaul them; I devised their restructuring and was credited with saving the district $15 million. My continued criticism of the district’s initially popular merit-pay program from its inception led eventually to its termination. Yet even those whose feet I had held to the fire were among those electing me to the Fairfax Committee of One Hundred, a social honorary for VIPs in civic affairs.
So like me, dislike me—reactions of Las Cruces VIPs and McLean or Fairfax County VIPs to me or my criticisms reflect on their character and the communities which they represent. Which makes me a kind of touchstone of local government. Where they dislike me, they dislike others, and indulge and act on personal or self-serving political motives; where they respect me, they respect others and serve public interests. Indeed, what I have been able to do elsewhere is what citizens can do here if local VIPs deflated their egos, governed themselves, respected their constituents, and created conditions for their contributions.
The president of a company for which I was a consultant for 21 years operated on the belief that “all of us are smarter than some of us.” That inclusivity made the company a national treasure, and that belief, if acted upon, might do much to improve Las Cruces, a city very much in need of improvement.
No comments:
Post a Comment