As King Dubya continues to proselytize
his way across America on behalf of his destruction of government services,
continues to defend the principles of economic and social justice.
The
cover story in this issue is
our latest analysis of the hideous transformation of the USA into
a "failed
state" class.
Printer friendly King Dubya Privatization Plan cartoon. Don't be hoodwinked by outright lies
On February 10,
2005 Dr. Maya Rockeymoore,
Vice President of Research and Programs at the Congressional
Black Caucus Foundation looked at the corporate hard right's plan
from the perspective of Black history.
"...these are the people who have spent the last four years providing
tax relief for the wealthiest Americans while laying the groundwork
for dismantling the very programs that have helped blacks mitigate
the effects of centuries of deprivation."
From the The Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania Professor
Bernard E. Anderson called Ms. Rockeymoore’s article on ”Black
History Bush-style” a "10 strike!"
She pulled the cover completely
off President Bush’s
attempt to perpetrate fraud on the African American community
through his promotion of private savings accounts funded by Social
Security.
I want to suggest several additional concerns black people should
consider when listening to the President.
The critical question is whether the alleged benefits to black families
in wealth accumulation from private savings accounts is likely to exceed
the losses from cuts in retirement income, survivors annuities, and
disability payments that will be necessary to pay for the private accounts.
Weakening those features of the Social Security program, on which African
Americans disproportionately rely, will impose great economic harm
on African American families.
The retirement annuity for low wage workers is subsidized by the
Social Security program, under rules that adjust the monthly payment
upward to account for lower than average payments into the trust fund
during the working years. Any diversion of the FICA tax toward private
accounts will not only reduce the base for calculating the monthly
payment, but also the upward adjustment in the annuity. Unless returns
on the private account are greater than the recent investment returns
on mutual funds, about 6.0 to 7.0 percent, retirement income under
private plans will be less than low wage workers can expect under projections
for the current system. To make the payments better than workers can
expect under current rules, the return would have to exceed 12 percent
per year.
Thousands of African Americans, especially single woman raising families,
work in low and moderate wage jobs. They are unable to invest much
in private accounts, and thus would benefit little even if investment
returns are higher than average in the years ahead.
This benefit/cost assessment of private accounts demonstrates that
African Americans would benefit less than virtually any other group
form Social Security privatization. Which, of course, gives the lie
to the specious argument President Bush is trying to foist on African
Americans - suggesting that they can build wealth through private
savings accounts and have something to pass along to their children.
The argument that because of shorter life expectancy, black people
don’t live long enough to claim from Social Security as much
as they pay in, while true, is a non-sequitur as regards private
savings accounts.
As Maya Rockeymoore rightly observed, black folk don’t live
as long as others because of racial disparities in health conditions
and economic opportunity. Eliminating those disparities should be
the first priority for public policy if the President wants to do
something
useful in improving the economic status of black people. The fact
that Bush has proposed nothing to eliminate racial disparities further
demonstrates
his real intentions. He is far more committed to protecting the economic
interest of the rich than eliminating racial inequality in American
life.
I hope black people will pay close attention to the Social Security
debate, and not be hoodwinked by the President’s appeals, as
some black preachers apparently were in the last election with the
so-called faith-based initiatives. Black leaders, and the followers
should inform themselves by listening to scholars like Rockeymoore,
and reading your publication and other black oriented media to learn
about the misinformation, half truths, and outright lies that are
being thrust at them. The challenge is great, but the responsibility
is
clear to be well informed.
Blacks must confront unions The cover story of March
3, 2005 - "No Real Labor ‘Reform’ Without
Blacks" caused Lenny McBride of AFSCME Council 57 in
Oakland, California to join the conversation.
I just wanted to add my voice to this systematic exclusion of African
Americans from any power within the Labor movement.
I was the
affirmative action officer of a major local with a hotel and
restaurant employees union and had countless
battles on the role of blacks within that movement.
First and
foremost blacks had to sue to get higher paying bartending jobs
and when
we won, it took years for a black to get a position due to stalling
by
the Union.
I was part of that suit which was implemented in
1973 and I finally got a bartending position in 1977. Eventually
I was
hired
by the Union first to run the hiring hall and later to the
Action Officer position to enforce affirmative action within the
Union.
The position
was court appointed to insure that blacks were dispatched
and properly represented in the hotels and restaurants in San Francisco.
The
Union resistance was unbelievable and when I brought this
to the attention
of the powers to be, I was ridiculed and vilified. My efforts
were sabotaged.
I left this position in 1989 and when I was
there, African
Americans were roughly 11% of the membership and roughly
the
same on staff. Now the San Francisco local with a membership
of over 7000
members
and a staff of over twenty, has only one black on staff
and and less than 7% membership.
When I was on staff, I approached
several hotels
about the lack of black workers. They were willing
to work with me, but the Union nixed the idea saying
if the hospitality industry didn't want blacks on staff
then the union would basically reflect these numbers
on
the union staff, no matter how racist.
What really bothers me is that these
leaders
are
now national
leaders and in the forefront of pushing the consolidation
agenda. There needs to be confrontation and an explanation
as to how
they intend
to bring us to the table.
Thank you publicizing
this struggle as it's long overdue.
Making preemptive strikes more high tech
On March 16,2005, the Washington
Post reported the Pentagon
is working to develop a sub orbital space capsule within the next five
years. The capsule
would be
launched
from
the
United States
and
could deliver conventional weapons anywhere in the world within two
hours.
While on the topic of preemptive strikes, reader Selena needs help
figuring out Condi.
Perhaps an astute, insightful psychologist could give us some clue
as to the motivating factors that drive high profilers such as the
present Sec'y of State to commit the deeds that they seem impelled
to carry out.
How in the world does a woman from Alabama, privy to the outrages
of the murderous tyranny of white supremacy succumb to the lure of
power to the extent that she would actually advocate preemptive strikes
against anyone, let alone an entire region of the world?
Hope you will
consider this question and illuminate me and perhaps others, as
well. Thank you.
We cannot fathom the depth of Condoleezza's disease. For certain,
it's much more serious than the Stockholm Syndrome.
America is number one in mental illness David Podvin, writing for MakeThemAccountable.com took
the following view of a report by the World Health Organization on
mental illness.
The World Health Organization has released a study that verifies
the United States is the undisputed champion in mental illness, dominating
various pathologies ranging from anxiety to depression to poor
impulse
control. We easily vanquished underachieving Old Europe in post-traumatic
stress syndrome, bipolar disorder, and bulimia nervosa. Additionally,
our magnificent land trounced the supposedly productive Asian countries
in both senility and agoraphobia, while coasting past Africa in
pediatric hyperactivity. In fact, there would have been a gold medal
sweep for
America if Ukraine had not cheated by submitting doctored urine
to edge us out in substance abuse.
In retaliation for Ukrainian treachery, “Chicken Kiev” will
henceforth be known by every patriotic American as “Chicken Freedom”.
Distributing praise for America’s smashing victory requires
giving the devil his due. Although liberals abhor complimenting the
right wing, it is undeniable that without conservatives the United
States would not even be one of the hundred craziest countries. This
is especially true as it relates to the glamour categories of paranoia
and psychosis.
Any nation that aspires to lead the world in mental illness requires
a leader who is unabashedly mentally ill, and in this area America
is truly blessed…
How not to become a Guest Commentator
A person we will call only Q J has sent us his idea for a commentary.
Greetings, I am a 30 yr old African-American male working as a
private developer in Virginia. I am interested in writing a guest
commentary
on the recent increase of Blacks joining the Republican Party,
how and why this is happening. Is this possible?
Thanks for your consideration.
responded:
As you know, we are interested in the subject. Please be advised,
however, that is a political journal with a point of view.
There will be no GOP advocacy
in these pages, just as there is no socialist advocacy in the Weekly
Standard.
Having said that, please send the piece.
We have not yet heard from Q J.
Slavery and the Making of America
Carol J. Brown applauds for
publishing PBS producer Dante James' response to
the critique of his film by Jonathan
Scott.
I read Mr. James' response and was quite pleased with the content
and I applaud you for publishing it. I would deem it an honor if
you did publish my letter. Thank you - and might I add - I find your
website quite informative and thought revoking. Please keep it up!!!
I read Dr. Scott's critique of Slavery and the Making of America,
and the obvious attack of Mr. James as a filmmaker. Many people
understand there are time constraints when making a film. This film
had to tell
a story that expands over 200 years of singular and collective
events. Choices had to be made as to which story would make the most
impact
of the film's theme. Mr. James was telling a "story" from
the slave's point of view of how they endured and rebelled against
their enslavement. It was not a story of the "how's" and "why's" of
slavery. We know that story - it was a story of resilience, not
of passiveness; of an intellect that endured the absence of ones
own culture
and the education of a new world; and of strength to endure the
most horrid environmental, physical, and emotional conditions.
Not every
story could be told, and although, Bacon's Rebellion would have
been informative, the stories of Harriet Jacobs, Mum Brett, and
the Stone
Rebellion told the story well.
I just don't understand how Dr. Scott came away with the assumption
that Mr. James says “American Slavery was Natural.” I came
away with the knowledge that American Slavery was "Intentional.” The
film clearly shows how the exploitation of enslaved people both white
and black had a turning point in 1640 when slavery became a racial
institution not a merely a class issue. I would suggest that Dr.
Scott look at the film again not based on his agenda, but based on
the film's
intent and I am sure that being an English professor, he will then
find the knowledge and the beauty that the film so skillfully displays.
Thank you - and might I add - I find your website quite informative
and thought revoking. Please keep it up!!!
Professor Scott sent his rebuttal to James.
Danté James wrote in the March 17 issue of BC a rebuttal to my critique
of his PBS series, “Slavery and the Making of America,” in which
he said my piece (“PBS Says Slavery was Natural”) offended him. As
I noted in my article, James’s documentary does a great service
to Americans by recognizing that slavery was not an exception
to the
central line of Anglo-American capitalist development but,
rather, the foundation of it.
Thus, it is unfortunate to me that James seems
to misunderstand the gist of my critique. In fact, he attributes
to me a passage that
I never wrote. James thinks that my critique is a call for people
to acknowledge the suffering of European American bond-laborers.
He is especially bothered that I believe his series “ignored…the
plight of the poor and property-less European American.”
Yet I do not feel this way about his series, nor
did I write the words he attributes to me. My argument is empirical
and logical,
not moral. James argues in the series, and in his rebuttal
to my critique, that “There was a turning point in 1640 [The John Punch
decision] that made slavery a racial institution.” James and the
historians he features in the series are able to argue this thesis
only by erasing a monumental event of early American history—Bacon’s
Rebellion of 1676, in which two thousand African American bond-laborers
and six thousand European American ones took up arms together against
their common ruling class oppressor, the Anglo-American tobacco bourgeoisie.
For those such as James who want to see 1640 as the beginning of
racial slavery in America, a historical lobotomy must be performed
that removes completely any and all traces of Bacon’s Rebellion,
since it is logically impossible for one to claim 1640 as
the start of racial slavery when, in reality, a few decades
later,
the slave-owning
tobacco planters were overthrown, if only for a year, by
all bond-laborers who rejected in toto that particular system
of
rule.
James does not want to see that capitalist oppressors
will always seek mechanisms, such as racial oppression, that keep
under control
an oppressed group of workers. But unless those workers accept
the imposition of such a system, the mechanisms have no social, political,
and historical significance. Bacon’s Rebellion showed unequivocally
that all attempts by the planters, including the John Punch decision
of 1640, to impose racial slavery on the American bond-laborers had
been doomed to fail so long as the European American bond-laborers
worked side-by-side as equals with African American bond-laborers.
Bacon’s Rebellion, not the John Punch case, taught the planters this
lesson, and from 1676, down to the present, the Anglo-American bourgeoisie
has been engineering socially the inequality and segregation of black
and white labor, to avoid a repetition of this epochal American labor
uprising.
The machinations of Harold Ford
For
some readers, does not go far enough. Anthony Flahert, of South
Boston, Mass thinks this is the case with Congressman Ford ( cover
story, March 17, 2005).
Congratulations on pointing out the machinations of Ford. The only
mistake in your column is indicating that the machinations are obvious
to all.
Ford is dangerous to both black and white poor... and indeed,
a desired nation state of America. As does the republican media,
Rush
Limbaugh, et al - you have to continue to point out his chameleon
like legislative behavior.
responded:
We
meant that Ford's machinations are obvious to everyone on Capitol
Hill, the national news media, and those who consider themselves
stakeholders in a marketized Social Security - that is, the political
players.
It is our job to make it obvious to the rest of the folks,
which was the purpose of the article.
Lana Foyd wants to know how to stop Harold Ford.
In reference to your article regarding Harold Ford and not trusting
him, what as an African-American who was encouraged and thrilled when
she found this web page which speaks to me and advocates in a much
stronger and articulate voice my concerns, can we do to inform the
residents of Memphis, Tennessee about this back-stabbing, self-interested,
tom-tom before he has an opportunity to do something truly awful?
What can we do to make the anemic Congressional Black Caucus stand
up and call out these from among them who could care less about black
folks and what they can get?
Your voice is strong and apparently is being read, how do we "spread
the word" to let not only the folks in Memphis know about this
wolf in sheep's clothing, but aid us in identifying others who would
sell their souls and mine too for a buck?
Remain angry, impatient and militant. Speak out, organize and write
to members of the Black Caucus and everybody else. We write to them
every week. They all read BC.
reader Carlos Thomas has known Harold Ford for some time and agrees
with our "opportunist" label.
Kudos on your work about Harold Ford, Jr. I'm a native of Memphis,
Tennessee, and Harold and I have mutual friends. You are correct
in your assessment that he is an opportunistic fool that seeks only
to
forward his agenda. This point can be substantiated with a quick
analysis of his background.
Harold has not lived in Memphis since his 1st grade year at Double
Tree Elementary. After his father was elected to congress he spent
his formative years in Northern Virginia prep schools; then undergrad
at U of Penn; then Law School at Michigan. The day after he graduated
from law school he announced his candidacy for congress. Mind you,
he had not worked one day in the community of Memphis and arguably
was never "in touch" with his constituency.
I worked on his initial campaign and saw first-hand how manipulative
he is. He summoned all the 20-somethings from middle-class families
in Memphis together and gave a pitch that he was running to change
the community and help the people of Memphis and wanted us to be
involved in making immediate changes. I thought he meant grass-roots
community
service. Instead, it meant passing out yard signs and handing out
bumper stickers. Needless to say I didn't stay long.
....But the apple doesn't fall far from the tree. His father did
very little during his time in Memphis and his uncles are all buffoons
in the state
and city government. It is widely known that his father and uncle
both have open affairs with women from the community and have abused
their
power (like their white counterparts) while in office.
Harold is a well-spoken opportunist that wouldn't last a day in
the shoes of the common man in Memphis. Every time I see him
I get sick
to my stomach because he represents the failures of the Civil
Rights movement of the 1950s and 60s. To think that this is
what my grandfather
worked for?
I love your paper and please keep up the great work!
Putting what counts on the table
Yvonne Hilton reads this column and follows up on another reader's
comment.
The points made by the "white guy" who "loves what
you do" were well taken. Your response in analyzing how ineffective
blacks are within the Democratic Party was harshly accurate.
Nevertheless,
those of us who pay attention to progressive/environmental issues
do need to help black people see how our interests are impacted
when we
ignore progressive and "green" platforms. Maybe you've
hit on the beginnings of a solution in your statement of the problem.
If
we're going to support environmentally sound programs, we should
be up front and vocal about the fact that we're doing so as
black people.
And if we're going to be Democrats, then we need to put our
money, time and progressive opinions on that table, as well.
You do great work. Keep up the righteous indignation!
Our cover story, Bush’s
Grand Plan for Blacks - Put ‘New Leaders’ in Charge (March
10 2005) rang Douglas
Weeldreyer's bell.
Great article!
Pretty sweet deal, eh? You starve the government agencies and empower
Faith Based Leadership by passing the tax dollars and government access
through them.
Guess who has the power? Guess who you vote for. Why
Republicans of course. They're the ones who care about you. Passing
out
money and influence works for terrorists and the Mafia. Works for
the Republicans too. Sweet!
Now that you're beholden you will support
tax
relief for the embattled rich and all those other wonderful
compassionate Republican programs for the powerful corporations.
Keep it coming.
Radio BC You can visit the Radio
BC page to listen to any of our audio commentaries
voiced by Co-Publisher
and Editor-in-Chief, Glen Ford. We publish the text of the radio
commentary each week in this column.
Below is the script for the Radio BC audio
commentary of March 18 2005 entitled "To Kill a Vote".
Some people need to be scared out of their wits
before they will do anything. That’s a fact, and for that reason, I’m ambivalent
about what I’m going to tell you. Black people will not lose
the right to vote if provisions of the Voting Rights Act
are not renewed
when the issue comes before Congress in 2007. Black people
have had the legal right to vote everywhere in the United States
since 1870, when the Reconstruction Congress amended the Constitution.
But the Constitutional right to vote, and the actual ability to
vote, are two very different things. Reconstruction was halted
in 1877, and federal troops were withdrawn from the South. Blacks
still had the right to vote in Dixie, but they did
so at the risk of their lives. Rights don’t mean much, if you can’t
enforce them.
The Voting Rights Act of 1965 didn’t give Blacks the right to
vote. That was something they already had. What was lacking were
enforcement mechanisms, targeted at those states that had suppressed
Black people’s ability to vote for nearly a hundred years. The
case against these states was very clear. So clear, that the Voting
Rights Act requires they submit to the Justice Department any changes
in the way they hold elections. The burden is on those southern
states to show that they aren’t up to their old tricks, trying
to find ways to weaken the Black vote. That’s one of the provisions
of the Voting Rights Act that comes up in 2007. If it is not renewed,
Black folks won’t lose the right to vote, but the racists
will win the right to devise all kinds of schemes to make
the Black
vote, meaningless.
Ahh…but I hear you saying, the Bush regime has hijacked two
elections in a row, and not just by stealing Black votes in the
South, but
everywhere and anywhere they can, from whoever they can.
Why not make the Voting Rights Act national, covering all the
states of
the country? And that’s just what the Republicans want
you to say. Congressman Jesse Jackson Jr. is putting
out that word the Republicans
are preparing to endorse making the Voting Rights Act
national – a
very slick and cynical move, because a national version
of the Voting Rights Act would probably be struck down
as unconstitutional.
Remember, the legal basis of the 1965 legislation was
one hundred years of easily provable, systematic violations
of Black people’s
right to vote in the South. No similar record exists
for the nation as a whole. A idea of a national Voting
Rights bill is a Republican
dirty trick. It would likely be shot down by the Supreme
Court.
We will have a hard time keeping the Voting Rights Act, as it
currently exists. But the constituency for the Act now also includes
the millions of non-Blacks who saw their own votes effectively
stolen in 2000 and 2004. Jesse Jackson Senior, the Reverend, is
seeking one million signatures on petitions by August 6, the 40 th anniversary
of the Voting Rights Act. You can put your name on the petition
by going to www.RainbowPush.org. Do
that, now. There’s a lot more Voting Rights work to accomplish
in the next two years. For Radio , I’m Glen Ford.
We thank each of you very much for your readership. Please keep
writing.
gratefully
acknowledges the following Websites for sending visitors our way (listing
is in no particular order):
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info
http://iraqwar.mirror-world.ru
http://www.xanga.com
http://www.bartcop.com
http://membersf.blackplanet.com
http://buzzflash.com
http://www.democraticunderground.com
http://sideshow.me.uk
http://www.cursor.org
http://www.liberaloasis.com
http://blackcincinnati.blogspot.com
http://www.villagevoice.com
http://www.commondreams.org
Your comments are always welcome.
Visit the Contact Us page
to send e-Mail or Feedback
or Click
here to send e-Mail to [email protected]
If you send us an e-Mail message we may publish
all or part of it, unless you tell us it is not for publication.
You may also request that we withhold your name.
Thank you very much for your readership.
Back
|