Who's to Blame?
If to imagine the face occupying the position of blame...Is it a group? or, is it
an individual?  "The Man" would likely be the term applied in reponse to the
inquiry and most
would probably envision an individual affiliated with some
form of equally reviled institution.

If among 'the privledged',  this may seem a primitive tactic to deflect any
personal association with the oppression  represented.  If the beholder
perceives of self to be among the 'victims', the vision may be a caricature of
one who would symbolize  a perpetrator to whom emancipation has yet to be
secured.
In vain will the search be for the face that personifies he/she that is to
blame. Perhaps the more helpful question would be...: Who is in charge
of 'the fix'?... Who? The answer to both questions is found in consultation
with the nearest reflective surface. Our mutual interests will be best
served if we respectfully and fervently disagree about how it all should be
accomplished.  
 Perpetual impassioned debate keeps at bay the
disastrous consequences of appeasement in service to the lesser cause
of peace.
Distinctions assume negative significance when traced to irrational responses nested in the
base-fears inextricably linked to
mere-survival.   Service to the primary needs- while excluding all
others- rarely equates to any form of meaningful existence.

It was not a matter of 'who' but 'what'. The search for 'who' is much easier to find. Unfortunately, the
placement of a face upon which blame is projected merely adds obstacles to discovery and address of
root cause. Our development as an evolving nation and society within a greater humanity will only be
obstructed if we remain stalled at a point exclusively seeking a face, rather then cause to address in
accountability.
Not Who...

Seeking a face to blame for any social ill, real or imagined, is invariably a futile pursuit.
Such a sentiment functions only as a concession that one has little, to no, capacity for
positive influence as a player in the affairs of his/her own humanity. Assuming a
definition dictated by external circumstances, individuality acquiesces to an identity
prescribed  through group representation to which- consensus even in the belonging-
presents as nothing more then an illusion.

The intentions of most groups are fundamentally benevolent.  The nature of that so often lost is the
beauty of the individual when the collective focus becomes necessarily limited to perpetuation or mere
survival- the inevitable product of segregation.
left
right
If to find a face to blame for past and present racial tensions would not we all feel the better? Who is to
blame for the presence of inequality and all its inherent woes?...Who?
It is easier to affix blame-and even a hierarchy of blame- if we view problems to originate along the lines
of race. Through perceptions-by-association, purely arbitrary delineations emerge, liberated from the
necessity of continued search. This process has the appeal of convenience but of course is profoundly
erroneous through the limitations of unfounded assumptions.  The consequences soon to follow
manifest through wildly distorted and erratic applications.

But, What?

Most would agree, True equality among humans is the point of origin from which justice originates. Any
dilution or addition to this foundation facilitates the allowance of favored privilege to one individual over
another. If unchecked any two entities can eventually justify harming the other based upon a collection
of traits.  These perceived attributes are typically negative and founded upon truly arbitrary distinctions
of which, little was there any individual could have done in the choosing.     
left
right