yes, patricia arquette’s speech was non-inclusive, non-intersectional in a bizarre sort of way. she probably meant well but she could have broadened the idea of equality. she was good in “boyhood” tho. there’s something direct and uncompromising about her which i like. i have a question about common’s speech. here’s the transcript:
First off, I’d like to thank God that lives in us all. Recently, John and I got to go to Selma and perform “Glory” on the same bridge that Dr. King and the people of the civil rights movement marched on 50 years ago. This bridge was once a landmark of a divided nation, but now is a symbol for change. The spirit of this bridge transcends race, gender, religion, sexual orientation, and social status. The spirit of this bridge connects the kid from the South side of Chicago, dreaming of a better life to those in France standing up for their freedom of expression to the people in Hong Kong protesting for democracy. This bridge was built on hope. Welded with compassion. And elevated by love for all human beings.
when he talks about “those in france standing up for their freedom of expression” does he mean the “circus of hypocrisy ” led mostly by privileged white war criminals or does he mean those who were charged, arrested or detained right afterwards for “not being charlie”? the racist and imperial implications of the CH debacle don’t quite fit the parameters of the civil rights struggle. just saying.