|  
              In a transparent bid to boost Republican fortunes among Blacks, 
                billionaire Bob Johnson attempted earlier this year to convene 
                a secret meeting of prominent African Americans at BET headquarters 
                in Washington, DC.  obtained a copy of the invitation to the “retreat,” scheduled 
                for January 13 and 14 and ostensibly designed “for the purpose 
                of brainstorming ideas as to how we as African Americans can best 
                confront the political and demographic realities of the 21st century.” 
                None of the invitees were told the identity of the others and 
                the press was scrupulously kept in the dark, but we have learned 
                enough to report that the mix was high-powered and politically 
                diverse. (Click here 
                to view the Johnson invitation letter to the retreat. The page 
                may load slowly for dial up users due to the large size of the 
                image.) The stealth gathering was postponed for lack of a quorum, but 
                Johnson’s intentions were made clear in his eight suggested talking-points, 
                not one of which dealt with issues such as jobs, health care, 
                housing, social security, civil rights or war and peace. Instead, 
                the BET founder, who was an early backer of Social Security privatization 
                and organized fellow wealthy Blacks in support of George Bush’s 
                bid to repeal the Estate Tax, crafted an agenda designed to peel 
                African Americans away from the Democratic Party – his clear assignment 
                in Bush’s second term. “It seems to me he was suggesting more 
                cooperation with Republicans, or at least, less friendship toward 
                Democrats,” said one invitee, who asked for anonymity. With great cynicism but little guile, Johnson taps into the near-universal 
                desire among Blacks for actions that will lead to greater operational 
                unity and effectiveness – and attempts to channel these aspirations 
                in Republican directions. Of the eight Johnson “questions” listed 
                below, all but three implicitly urge collaboration with the GOP 
                or a boycott of Democrats. The remainder – on forming a Black 
                political party, running “favorite son” candidates, and fundraising 
                over the Internet – are window dressing to create the impression 
                of a broader agenda. 
                Should African Americans continue to vote overwhelmingly for 
                  the Democratic Party? 
                Should African Americans, in concert, make overtures to the 
                  Republican Party? 
                Should African Americans seek to form an independent party 
                  and vote accordingly? 
                Should African American-elected officials be encouraged to 
                  run as favorite sons in national elections? 
                 Should African Americans holding elected offices be asked 
                  to vote according to a multi-party system by using their voting 
                  power to leverage the Democrats against the Republicans and 
                  the Republicans against the Democrats in the best interest of 
                  African Americans?  
                Should African American voters be encouraged to vote for Republican 
                  or Democratic officials based upon the negotiated agreement 
                  with the respective candidates rather than based on party affiliation? 
                Should African Americans demonstrate our political cohesiveness, 
                  and therefore political power, by withholding votes from a particular 
                  candidate in a selected election? 
                Should African Americans invest in an Internet-based fundraising 
                  effort to form a totally independent source of political financing? Bob Johnson doubtless kept the invitees in the dark as to each 
                other’s identities, the better to control the direction of the 
                slanted discourse by curtailing opportunities for pre-meeting 
                discussions among invitees, such as, What is this guy up to? and, 
                How was this list put together? or, Why aren’t there any talking 
                points on the issues?  obtained, from a third party, a copy of NAACP Chairman Julian 
                Bond’s response to Johnson’s invitation. Bond declined to attend 
                “for scheduling reasons,” congratulated Johnson for his efforts, 
                then offered a valuable, point-by-point critique. On the question 
                of whether Blacks should “continue to vote overwhelmingly for 
                the Democratic Party,” Bond responded:
  
              ”This strikes me as the wrong question – the 
                correct one is ‘what party should we vote for, and what standards 
                should we apply to choose the beneficiary of our votes?’ In every 
                election in my lifetime from Franklin Roosevelt to George W. Bush 
                (with one exception in 1956) we’ve chosen the Democratic Party 
                by large majorities. That choice was rationally made between two 
                competing and general political philosophies – one which promised 
                an aggressive defense of civil rights and the prospect of economic 
                growth and security, the other offering the vicissitudes of the 
                marketplace and less vigorous federal protection of – and in many 
                cases a retreat from – civil rights. Using that general standard, 
                we’ve consistently voted for Democrats, and I expect that pattern 
                to be followed for the foreseeable future. In recent elections, 
                our choice has also been a matter of the Republican Party repulsing 
                us rather than the Democratic Party attracting us.”  
              Bond agreed that Republicans should be rewarded with votes if 
                they “adopt policies deemed favorable” to Black interests. “It 
                would be the height of idiocy, however, to suggest that having 
                given our votes to one party for so long we ought to give them 
                to the other for no reason except that we could,” said Bond. “The 
                old mantra, ‘taken for granted by one party; ignored by the other’ 
                isn’t remedied by giving our votes to a party that doesn’t make 
                any rational appeal for them.” The former Georgia state lawmaker engaged all of Johnson’s questions, 
                and suggested there should be discussion on subjects such as the 
                lack of urban issues in the recent election campaign, the folly 
                of holding the first primaries in the unrepresentative states 
                of New Hampshire and Iowa, and the unfairness of the Electoral 
                College. But the crucial question, says Bond, is: “Who decides?” 
                Who decides how monies raised for Black political campaigns are 
                disbursed? Who decides who is to “negotiate” agreements between 
                African Americans and the two major parties? Bond has confirmed 
                the letter  obtained is his. (Click 
                here to view the letter. The page may load slowly for dial 
                up users due to the large size of the image.) When  asked Johnson’s executive assistant, Michelle Curtis, about the 
                status of the “retreat” we were met with a harsh, “Were you invited?” 
                Informed that we were not, but that we thought the meeting to 
                be of interest to the Black public, Curtis stated, repeatedly, 
                “You weren't invited, so we have nothing to say.” Bob Johnson 
                has not responded to our inquiries. However, he has done Othello-like 
                service to George Bush’s state, parroting and even shaping the 
                Republican political line at critical junctures since the beginning 
                of Bush’s presidency. True to his class Johnson has a history 
                of rounding up prominent Blacks to provide a veneer of “diversity” 
                for the most reactionary Republican schemes. In 2001, in search 
                of federal help in a complicated deal that Johnson hoped would 
                deliver him a Washington-New York airline route, he became the 
                Black point-man for Bush’s assault on the Estate Tax – dubbed 
                the “Death Tax” by Republicans. Johnson gathered the signatures 
                of a who’s 
                who of African American wealth, endorsing repeal of a tax 
                that affected only half of one percent of Black people.  Meanwhile, 
                one hundred fabulously rich white people, including Bill Gates 
                Sr., warned that repeal of the tax “would enrich the heirs of 
                America's millionaires and billionaires while hurting families 
                who struggle to make ends meet." Johnson and his rich friends 
                were unmoved, and stood logic on its head:  
              “The Estate Tax is particularly unfair to the 
                first generation of the high net worth African Americans who have 
                accumulated wealth only recently. These individuals may have family 
                members and relatives who have not been as fortunate in accumulating 
                assets who could directly benefit from their share of an estate 
                as heir. Elimination of the Estate Tax would allow African Americans 
                to pass the full fruits of their labor to the next generation 
                and beyond.”  
              In other words, laissez-fair capitalism for the Black rich is 
                good for the other, 99.5 percent of Black America. No wonder Bob 
                Johnson wants to hold narrowly framed meetings about electoral 
                strategies with Black leadership, rather than discuss bread and 
                butter issues – he is so far to the right, he’s off the screen 
                of the Black Political Consensus.  President Bush praised Johnson at the April, 2001 gathering of 
                the U.S. Conference of Mayors: “As Robert Johnson, of Black Entertainment 
                Television argues, the death tax and double taxation weighs heavily 
                on minorities who are only beginning to accumulate wealth" 
                – a line that Johnson crafted in the interest of himself and his 
                own tiny class. The Estate Tax was effectively killed. A Pioneer privatizer "We're all on the Titanic as it relates to Social Security 
                and people are telling us it's the safest ship afloat. But we 
                are heading for a disaster.'' – Bob Johnson Only hard-core GOP Rightists shrilled like that in 2002 – back 
                then, the Republican National Committee specifically forbade its 
                congressional candidates from campaigning on the shaky ground 
                of Social Security privatization. But Bob Johnson was on a Bush-mission 
                to spread hysteria and confusion in Black America, and he performed 
                shamelessly. Johnson was picked 
                for a slot on Bush’s supposedly bi-partisan Commission to Strengthen 
                Social Security – as a Democratic member! Thus, Bush got 
                an African American commissioner who cared nothing for the interests 
                of the masses of Blacks or Democrats. And he got a mouthpiece 
                for the evolving GOP Social Security line for Black consumption. 
                “African Americans who contribute to the Social Security system 
                and payroll taxes also have one of the highest mortality rates, 
                so in the end, they may not receive the full benefits of what 
                they put in Social Security,” said Johnson, a message that would 
                be repeated on hundreds of Black radio 
                stations during the 2002 congressional elections. Yes, Bob Johnson is a true media pioneer – a veteran polluter 
                of the Black airwaves. His original “Black” rationale for Social 
                Security privatization is now a centerpiece of White House propaganda 
                – the context in which his call for a meeting of Black minds must 
                be viewed. However, it would be wrong to assume that Johnson is simply playing 
                at right-wing politics because the Republicans control the government. 
                He’s been hanging with the troglodytes since 1979, when he hooked 
                up with John C. Malone, of Tele-Communications Inc. To ease his way into cable franchises 
                in heavily Black cities, Malone needed someone to provide African 
                American programming. He bankrolled 
                Johnson for $500,000 in return for a 35 percent share in their 
                new baby, BET. (Johnson put up just $15,000 in borrowed money.) 
                Malone and Johnson have been joined at the wallet ever since; 
                Malone never gave up his BET stock. When Johnson sold BET to Viacom 
                for $3 billion in 2000, Malone’s company received $800 million 
                in Viacom stock. Johnson’s 
                partner Malone is on the board of the Cato 
                Institute – in the Right’s division of labor arrangement, 
                the point organization on Social Security privatization. This 
                is the political company Bob Johnson keeps, when he’s not using 
                his wealth to tease cash-starved Black leadership structures into 
                paying him undue attention.  A 
                disruptive bank account Donna 
                Brazile, head of the Democratic National Committee’s Voting 
                Rights Institute, would have attended Johnson’s meeting had 
                it come off. “Look, on questions of partisanship, 
                I am a strong and faithful Democrat,” she told  . “But, 
                I welcome a dialogue with those on the other side to see what, 
                if anything, they are willing to bring to the table.  In 
                the past, they have come up empty handed and with a stick to beat 
                Democrats down. Now, if Bob wants to have a conversation 
                with all sides, I am ready, but actions still speak louder than 
                words.” It’s not clear if Brazile considers Johnson to be on “the other 
                side” or not. Indeed, it’s hard not to be at the center of attention 
                when one comprises half of the total billionaire population of 
                Black America. Johnson, who is leaving 
                BET by the end of the year, will certainly enjoy a well-attended 
                “summit” of his own choosing – whether secret or public – if he 
                reschedules it wisely. But everyone in attendance should know 
                what the real agenda is: to lure Blacks into a relationship with 
                the Republican Party or, failing that, to cause splintering and 
                confusion in the ranks. |