Issue
Number 14 - October 17, 2002
Printer
Friendly Version
Note:
The size of the type may be changed by clicking on view at the top of
your browser and selecting "text size". The document will
print in the size you select.
To our great relief,
was spared from commenting on the "Barbershop" furor. Only
one reader wrote to us about the movie, and his was a novel contribution
to what has been a very shallow debate.
Carl Harris' letter
made us leery, at first. It was addressed to "Honored influential
loving leader," causing heads in our office to swivel, as in, "Where?"
We're still not sure if Harris is a skilled satirist, or blessed with
the rare quality of sincerity. You decide.
"Barbershop"
has scenes mentioning Rosa Parks and Dr. Martin Luther King in a manner
that some feel is negative. Some suggest editing out those scenes.
An alternative synergistic solution exists, and you can influence
a positive solution. "EDITING
IN" scenes is recommended. I recommend that the film stars create
a serious scene emphasizing the importance of registering to vote,
voting, and the roles that Rosa Parks and Dr. Martin Luther King played
in facilitating voting rights in this free democratic society. After
this change, leaders like you can urge potential viewers to "reverse
boycott" the movie and seek qualified registrars to "sit
in".
Your ability to
influence many is greatly appreciated. Will you please use your many
resources to insure that the right people get this message and that
action, as you deem appropriate, is taken? Thank you kindly.
Harris provides
complete instructions for a "'Barbershop' Reverse Boycott - Sit
In Voter Registration Drive Apology," to be undertaken jointly
by the movie's producers, writers, and actors, and the "honored
influential loving leaders" who are so concerned about the current
version of the film.
I believe that
it was implied that Rosa Parks was just tired when refusing to give
up her seat on the bus in Montgomery, Alabama, an action that lead
to the Montgomery Bus Boycott, precipitating many other civil rights
actions. I also believe that Martin Luther King's "alleged"
philandering was made light of.
If time is allocated
in every showing of "Barbershop" with the cast seriously
informing viewers of the power and importance of voting in the United
States of America, this could make a very big difference in this democracy,
particularly this November. An additional campaign soliciting qualified
registrars to "sit in" at every showing of the movie having
materials available to register viewers could have a huge impact on
the political system in this free and democratic society.
Far greater than
an apology, I recommend that Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Incorporated, Ice
Cube and others participating in the movie "EDIT IN" a message
for all current showings and future digital video device and
video released versions of the movie. This message, asking all viewers,
especially the African-American ones, to register to vote and actually
get out and vote, communicating that voting is "cool", could
reach many. Qualified registrars could "sit in" and potential
viewers can be urged to "reverse boycott" the newly edited
version of the movie by community leaders like you.
Harris thanks the
"leaders" for their "valued time." Harris deserves
thanks for his wit, and for providing us with an opening to briefly
discuss the "real" Rosa Parks: the fully conscious, never-tired-of-struggle,
knew-exactly-what-she-was-doing activist who has been buried in mythology
while still alive.
It served the civil
rights movement's purposes to depict Ms. Parks as a kind of "face
in the crowd" of racial oppression, just another middle-aged Black
woman who one evening decided to sit down and rest her feet with dignity
in the "white" section of a bus. The character had great appeal
- to white liberals, especially - but it was a fictional character.
In reality, the
Rosa Parks of December 1, 1955 was a veteran mover-and-shaker who stepped
on that Montgomery, Alabama bus fully intending to light the fuse of
history.
We thank Evelyne
Laurent-Perrault ([email protected]),
Coordinator of Multicultural Programs at Haverford College, for forwarding
to us a review of a Penguin Books biography of Rosa Parks, the disciplined
and conscious change-maker:
For example, "while
the NAACP executives made dinner speeches and attended national conferences,"
Parks, as the local NAACP secretary, "balanced the ledgers, kept
the books, and recorded every report of racial discrimination that
crossed her desk. She also did field research, traveling from towns
like Union Springs to cities like Selma to interview African Americans
with legal complaints, including some who had witnessed the murders
of blacks by whites in rural areas."
In 1945, on a
trip to a NAACP leadership-training seminar in Jacksonville, Florida,
she met and became good friends with Ella Baker, the legendary womanist
who in the 1960s encouraged young civil rights activists to organize
the Student Non-Violent Coordinating Committee (SNICK). In the spring
of 1955 she refused to go along with a petition drawn up by her closest
associates for a partial desegregation of Montgomery buses because
she thought it "demeaning" to demand less than outright
desegregation.
Shortly thereafter,
over the objections of Raymond Parks, her beloved barber husband,
she decided to take two weeks off from her job at the Montgomery Fair
Department Store to learn new techniques for activism at the Highlander
Folk School. At Highlander she met Septima Clark who had studied with
W.E.B. DuBois at Atlanta University. "Some of her great courage
and dignity and wisdom may have rubbed off on me," Parks would
say later.
Grace Lee Boggs
reviewed "Rosa Parks: A Penguin Life," by Douglas Brinkley.
The book details how "black men and especially black preachers
were not used to sharing the spotlight with women. So, out of envy,
male colleagues like E.D. Nixon and Rev. Ralph Abernathy began making
Rosa's life miserable by belittling her and her husband...."
It's long past time
to shout it loudly and proudly: Rosa Parks was a radical soldier in
the struggle long before she sat down on the bus. Perhaps Carl Harris,
the originator of the reverse-apology-sit and edit-in, can convince
our "honored influential loving leaders" and movie moguls
to produce "The Real Rosa Parks" - with voter registrars manning
the theater snack bars.
The price of
silence
At times it seems
we can almost hear the roar of approaching war - but little outcry is
heard from the national office of the NAACP. Sadu Nanjundiah, a physics
teacher at Central Connecticut State University, is more than disappointed
with the nation's oldest civil rights organization.
I am a subscriber
to Black Commentator and appreciate the views and news of the African-American
community. I am sorry that the NAACP has not taken a strong stand
against the impending Bush war against Iraq. It is illegitimate and
immoral, given the terrible innocent casualties that will result from
bombing. When the U.S. Army is sent in, African-American soldiers
will be on the front line in great numbers bearing the brunt of any
battle.
The National Security
Adviser, Dr. Rice, is wholly unrepresentative of the feelings in the
community. I was aghast when she received the NAACP Image Award recently.
Even worse is the silence of the NAACP in face of the targeted attacks
against African-American Congressional Representatives like Ms. Cynthia
McKinney and Mr. Earl Hilliard.
NAACP officials
we have talked to stress that the organization is a non-partisan, democratic,
deliberative body that has not had the opportunity to discuss the imminent
hostilities at a full meeting of the board. On the syndicated TV program
America's Black Forum, NAACP Chairman Julian Bond voiced his personal
opposition to a unilateral U.S. first strike against Iraq. "I don't
think that a majority of the American people are for that," said
Bond, adding, "I speak only for myself."
NAACP Executive
Director Kweisi Mfume, of course, has a long way to go to make up for
giving the Image Award to Condoleezza Rice, who is now the African American
female image of aggression.
The organization
cannot avoid its responsibilities much longer. "The NAACP can no
longer afford to be hypocritically silent as African-Americans are used/recruited
to conspicuously perpetrate injustices abroad, as we cry for relief
from similar injustices at home," wrote Rev. Curtis Gatewood, president
of the Durham branch of the NAACP, in a letter to Mfume.
Gatewood was reprimanded
by the NAACP national office last year for calling upon Blacks to refuse
to serve in Afghanistan. At that time, Mfume issued a statement: "This
is a time for all Americans to stand united and defend the ideals of
a free and open society where terrorism has no place."
The Durham activist
has all but dared Mfume to strip him of his chapter presidency, declaring
that the national office's silence is "keeping us side-tracked
and artificially united around the flag of patriotism that is deceitfully
waved in the clouds of racism.
I'm saying the NAACP should pick up the banner and be on the front line
for world justice, not just American justice."
Welcome to The
New American Century
reader Phil Goldvarg is a poet. In response to our commentary, "Black
America and Bush's New World Order," Goldvarg dropped us a line,
and wrote a few to George Bush.
Thank you for
your strong voice. With respect, I wanted to share this poem with
you.
In Glen Ford's October
3 Letter to the Readers, he drew attention to a report of the Project
for a New American Century, entitled "Rebuilding America¹s
Defenses," the apparent blueprint for Bush's war-without-end. Jim
Thompson, editor of the Jefferson Post, in Jefferson, North Carolina,
forwarded his own editorial response to the global war plan.
Is the rush to
war against Iraq really about Saddam Hussein - or is that just an
excuse to seize control of the second largest oil reserves in the
world? Does the Bush Administration plan to turn space into a battleground?
Do they really believe the United States should seek to dominate the
world by military power? Other nations have tried, and all have failed
disastrously. There is no reason to think we would succeed.
The American people
have a right to know the answers to these and other questions. It
is the average people who will be asked - or forced - to make the
sacrifices to fulfill this nightmare of attempted world domination.
The Bush Administration needs to distance itself from The Project¹s
imperialism before the rest of world decides we are a rogue nation
- and acts accordingly. They might remember the words of Dr. Martin
Luther King Jr.: "We must learn to live together as brothers,
or we will perish together as fools."
Caesar Howell has
a more theatrical take on the players who strut the world stage:
I have noticed
a few things concerning the "staged" scenarios that are
occurring since last year's events and after the administration had
a meeting with the movie industry. Follow me as I connect The Republic
and the Star Wars series. It is not so far fetched considering what
is happening. In Plato's Republic, the plan for domination is spelled
out and following the present path. As for the connection to the Star
Wars Saga, the Emperor (George W.) has taken advantage of a situation
of danger and exploited it to his advantage (Episode I). Next the
Senate (U.S. House of Reps and the UN) are arm-twisted to solve a
crisis and give up their better judgment in a battle, real or imagined
(Episode II). And as soon as the world gets a little wiser to the
global domination and loss of rights, the Emperor plays his card to
dissolve the Senate (the U.N. - "You are either with Us, or Against
US!").
Does that sound
familiar? If the UN does not capitulate to what the US wants, what
do you think will happen?
Nelson Mandela
has spoken about it. What are we doing over here?
David Shaffer-Gottschalk
took note of our comments on the public opinion polls, which show that
the War Party is made up of "youngish, white, affluent, well educated,
churchgoers."
Thank you for
that insightful analysis. I happen to be one of those white church-going
people, but one who does not support the God of War. You have
boldly said in your letter about the Bush administration what I have
been trying to say (in vain, I might add) to those around me, and
you have said it more eloquently than I have been able to.
Brother Sekou also
writes eloquently, yet concisely:
Thank You for
your insight, foresight and endarkenment. As a Vietnam Vet,
I have learn't my lesson about war, and who is the real terrorist.
And, from Jerry
A. Stanley:
You did a great
job of presenting the issues in this article. Keep it up!
The Billionaire
Trojan Horse
Bob Johnson may
speak for half of the Black billionaires in the U.S., but most
readers don't appear to think highly of him or BET. In our last issue,
we called Johnson "the most powerful Black Trojan Horse in the
nation, by virtue of his wealth," and described his ongoing collaboration
with the Bush White House on social security and tax issues. Adrienne
D. Dixson registered her contempt for the man-called-mogul:
I am appalled
and thoroughly disappointed that this man will sell us out
for his personal gain. He should be ashamed of himself. As much as
I enjoy watching videos on BET (yes, I'll admit to that), I refuse
to watch the network anymore. It makes me wonder how much further
he will sink? I am saddened that we cannot trust that those who have
benefited so much from our loyalty will truly look after the entire
community and not just his own.
Thank you also
for providing the links so that reader's can do their own research
on Mr. Johnson and his cronies.
Dr. Cecilia Bowie
is spreading the word around on Johnson.
Thank you for
such an illuminating article on such a deceitful individual. I'll
be passing this type of information along to my colleagues.
continues to be one of the most informative documents ever.
Johnson gathered
almost 50 rich African Americans, including a number of Black media
manipulators, to endorse elimination of the Estate Tax on the wealthy.
Attorney Leroy Wilson, Jr. handles rich people's money, all the time.
Wilson knows greed when he sees it.
Since Bob Johnson
is one of the wealthiest African-Americans, I wonder how much of his
wealth is passed on to charity as a percentage of his net worth, when
compared to Bill Gates and Ted Turner? I select these latter two because
I know that they have made substantial contributions to worthy charitable
causes. Of course, Walter Annenberg's $50 million contribution to
UNCF is still unparalleled, I think.
The New York Times
(910/6/02 at page 33) reports that Mr. Annenberg left half of his
fortune to his family, an art collection to the Metropolitan Museum
of Art and the rest to charity.
Perhaps if Mr. Johnson and others knew of the estate and income tax
advantages that they could get by using charitable giving in their
estate planning, they would give some of their wealth away to benefit
those who are not members of their immediate families. On the other
hand, they may also use the tax laws to make gifts to their families.
Bill Gates' father and Warren Buffett spoke out very forcefully on
this subject. In fact, they argued that a repeal of the estate tax
would cause a lot of charitable giving to dry up. Bob Johnson makes
a mistake however, when he characterizes (as I remember) his wealth
as being generated by him. He seems to forget that he accumulated
his wealth on the backs of the Fannie Lou Hamers, and others, including
those who provide the talent for his shows.
Clarke R. Watson
rates Johnson as a plague on Black people. Watson also caused pain to
the billionaire's pocket.
What you don't
understand is that Bob Johnson will eagerly sell out Black folk for
a dime.
Remember, it was
his glorifying gangsta' rap that launched his BET career. I had his
local cable channel 50, here in Denver, yanked off the air a decade
or so ago. He flew all the way out here from DC to chastise me about
the 1st Amendment.
Nevertheless,
it stayed off the air. As an African American I think Bob Johnson
is as dangerous to our interests as the KKK.
Stewart R. Hubbard
wrote far too long, so we told him to shorten it up or accept our edit.
This is what was left.
I truly feel that
we should not penalize people because they have obtained wealth, whether
if they are black or white, or some other race. If people took the
opportunity to invest their money wisely, then why should they have
to support people through their taxes who do not go out to work? It
is not right, regardless if we were all the wealthy people and whites
were the poor ones, it would be wrong for them to expect handouts
either.
Mr. Hubbard accused
of not understanding economics.
Gary Spencer knows
all about Bob Johnson's rightwing ways, and seems irritated that we
did not detail them all.
You act as though
we should expect something better from Bob
Johnson. Isn't he the one who assisted in the elevation of "booty-shake"
with BET all of those years? Isn't he the one who couldn't be bothered
with any serious African-American cinema during that ownership? Why
should we expect anything else?
We could have mentioned
Johnson's firing of superb commentator Tavis Smiley, his union busting
at BET - the list is long. Billionaires can do a lot of damage. We can't
afford this one.
Zimbabwe Guest
Commentary response
Last issue's e-MailBox
column featured a headline: "Anglo-Saxons Beware." This did
not sit well with Charles B. (Ben) Cranston, a professor at the University
of Maryland.
As a white Anglo
Saxon of British descent I wonder why I was put onto this mailing
list. Up until now I have refrained from complaining because the material
was interesting and awareness-raising. However, this quote, which
was under the head "Anglo-Saxons beware", is somewhat alarming.
[Cranston disagrees
with
reader Clifford E. Bell, who wrote.]
Professors
Metzler and Derman are knowingly or unknowingly supporting the psychological
warfare, which is anti any/all African programs for SELF Sufficiency.
The two 'scholars' are of a western, institutionalized orientation.
They are promoting the idea that Anglo Saxons have the right to be
on the land [as well as own land] in Africa. The two 'scholars', knowingly
or unknowingly, are pro-western, criminal propagandists.
Given the history
of colonialism in Africa I can certainly understand that historical
land ownership situations might be considered suspect, however, I
draw the line at the assertion that Anglo Saxons might not have the
right to own land (assuming it is fairly acquired). To argue otherwise
is just reverse racism. I do believe in some form of affirmative action
(i.e., just declaring the playing field level and walking away is
an insufficient response to historical racism), but to declare differential
land ownership rights based on race seems to me to be the wrong remedy.
replied:
The "Anglo-Saxons
Beware" headline was, like many of our headings in the mail section,
tongue-in-cheek. One would think that a person of your [British] background
would get the wry humor - and we believe you did. You certainly don't
write as if you are unduly alarmed.
On the subject
of "reverse racism" - Mr. Bell has no power, and can't enforce
any of his pronouncements regarding conditions in Africa. "Racism"
has no effect in the absence of power; there is no "reverse"
of it in the U.S. as measured against the actual thing, which has
killed so many millions.
Privilege comes
in many forms. The white "farmers" of the former Rhodesia
did gain the land by privilege, in relationship to the indigenous
population. That must be addressed. Mugabe's cronies shouldn't be
privileged, either - although the real soldiers who fought in the
bush should be rewarded. They died in many thousands.
In our October 31
issue, activist and scholar Dr. Chris Lowe will take yet another look
at land tenure in Zimbabwe.
Keep writing.
Rosa Parks Book
List from the website of the hometown paper of the city she helped make
famous.
http://www.montgomeryadvertiser.com/1news/specialreports/rosa/120100_rosabooks.htm
PDF of Project for
The New American Century report.
http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf