|
|
|
As
we prepare for Black History Month it is useful to note
that, at very select times
and under narrow circumstances, pervasive white racism actually
worked to the perverse benefit of at least some African Americans.
For example, a host of Black service businesses profited
from the captive market provided them by Jim Crow – although the same
cannot necessarily be said for their consumers. However,
since segregation also proscribed the possibilities of Black
business
growth, the net effect on Black enterprise was negative.
In
hindsight, there was one stubborn legacy of white racism that
redounded, ironically,
to the general benefit of African Americans as a whole. During
the 35-year interval between the signing of the Voting Rights
Act and the dawning of the 21st Century, African Americans enjoyed
a kind of grace period, during which the institutional Right
largely abstained from interference in the internal workings
of Black electoral politics. This was fortunate. The rich dominate
the political conversation of the nation through their think
tanks and interlocking networks of propagandizing organizations,
the structures through which they promote the public policies
and political personalities that the corporate media ultimately
present as the only “rational” choices for the electorate. During
the post-civil rights period, Blacks were spared deep political
penetration by the Hard Right. Bluntly put, the racist fat cats
could not tolerate Black company long enough to create effective
mechanisms of political subversion.
Until
the mid to late Nineties, rich rightwing foundations spent
relatively little
time or money to exert influence among masses of African Americans. They
virtually ignored the Black electoral arena – a thoroughly Democratic
landscape – largely confining their activities to ineffectual
sponsorship of a few hand-picked Black academics such as Thomas
Sowell and Glenn
Loury.
In
the middle of the last decade the Bradley Foundation, a hyper-aggressive
den of
rich conspirators based in Milwaukee, took the lead in creating
Black front organizations whose mission is to endorse the public
policy pronouncements of the foundations’ think tank networks. A
number of phony Black groups joined the likes of Ward
Connerly and Robert
Woodson in the parrots’ cage.
These
token corporate forays into Black America allowed the Right
to present its case
in blackface at university forums and on TV talk shows. However,
the right wing’s colored menagerie had little impact on the Black
body politic, which has long been centered on indigenous personalities
and organizations associated with the Democratic Party. Black
Republicanism is moribund – the last time a Black Republican
represented a majority Black district in Congress was 1935. The
Right found it extremely difficult to gain traction among African
Americans. Some of their Black Frankensteins have turned out
to be hugely unpopular. Ward Connerly is second only to Clarence
Thomas as the most hated Black man in American. A different approach
was necessary: slick, clandestine, and definitely minus the GOP
label.
For
the Right to achieve effective penetration of Black America,
it would have to take
the Democratic Party route. In 1992 Bill Clinton’s corporate
Democratic Leadership Council (DLC) took firm hold of the national
party machinery. Black Democrats were invited to plug into the
DLC’s boardroom networks – connections that also led directly
to the money men of the Republican Right. The stage was set for
the emergence of the Black Democratic Trojan Horse politician.
Racing for dollars
The
Trojan Horse offensive was launched in 2002. Backed by unlimited
rightwing dollars and
the massed power of the national corporate media, Denise Majette
and Artur Davis defeated Representatives Cynthia McKinney and
Earl Hilliard in Georgia and Alabama, respectively. Both outcomes
were heralded in advance as proof of the emergence of a new,
conservative trend among young and “middle class” Black voters – precisely
the impression the Right was spending tens of millions of dollars
to create. The facts proved no such thing: Majette garnered only 16
percent of the Black vote in McKinney’s Atlanta-area district,
and won by the same percentage. It cannot be assumed that even
this fraction of Black Georgia voters was motivated by conservative
ideology. Earl Hilliard was supported by more than two-thirds
of African American voters in his 58 percent Black Alabama district,
but lost to Artur Davis 54 to 46 percent. Both contests were
open primaries in which white Republicans crossed over to join
white Democrats in electing Black Trojan Horses. Yet corporate
media framed both races as referendums in which Blacks rejected “outdated,” “civil
rights style” politics – reasoning that is so transparently illogical,
it can only be sustained by constant repetition.
That
same year, the Right came close to putting its Black candidate
in the mayor’s
chair in Newark, New Jersey. Cory Booker, a one-term city councilman
who tapped into the Bradley Foundation’s network of corporate
wealth and media clout via the school vouchers racket, nearly
unseated Mayor Sharpe James. is
proud to have played a role in unmasking Booker, who tried mightily
to conceal his Hard
Right ties.
Booker remains a darling
of the DLC. Majette and Davis are newly-minted members. Tennessee
Black Congressman Harold Ford sought but did not get the support
of fellow DLCers in his bid to become Democratic Leader of the
House, in November
2002.
Overall,
however, 2002 was a good year for the Black Trojan Horses and
their DLC and
Republican paymasters. The historical respite from rightwing
interference in Black electoral affairs was over. Fat checkbooks
and the lure of contracts and consultancies now threaten to overwhelm
authentic Black political structures. Deep pockets buy a small
army of Black sycophants and wannabes in politics and media,
eagerly available to peddle the Right’s message that African
Americans are becoming more conservative.
Which
brings us to Jonetta Rose Barras, the subject of our January
8 Cover Story, “The
Serpent in the Garden: Spreading Lies About Black Voters.”
Click
to view entire Serpent in the Garden cartoon
[T]he
Sunday, January 4 edition of the Washington Post exhibited
a political fantasy
so bizarre and without foundation, that it carried a disclaimer
in the title. “Black
Votes – No GOP Fantasy,” announced the headline to Jonetta
Rose Barras’ opinion piece, which attempted to lend credibility
to “the GOP's announced goal of winning 25 percent of the
African American vote in 2004.” Barras then strung together
the same flimsy set of false assumptions and contorted logic
employed by other corporate hirelings to prove the absurd
proposition that in order to retain Black loyalties Democrats
must turn to the right.
Barras
is, to put it bluntly, a hack for the bipartisan businessmen’s project
to create the impression that political conservatism is on
the rise among a “new” and “emerging” class of educated,
upwardly mobile African Americans. It does not matter to
corporate media – and certainly not to hustlers like Barras – that
there is no evidence of such a phenomenon among the Black
voting public. Big media’s mission is to create their own
set of facts, treat them as if they are true, and convince
the rest of us to act accordingly….
If
she is in her right mind, Barras doesn’t believe the GOP’s
grand projections either. Her mission is to sow confusion among
Blacks in order to create space for an alternative, corporate-friendly
African American leadership within the Democratic Party.
That’s where the action is. Barras invokes the Republican threat
in order to portray Black Democratic conservatives as the wave
of the future, as opposed to the ”outdated” voices of the “far
left wing of the party.”
The
heroes and heroines of Barras’ story are – no surprise – Representatives
Artur Davis, Harold Ford, and the Bush-kissing, voucher-loving,
Black
DLC Mayor of Washington DC, Anthony Williams.
Ms.
Barras asked to respond to our piece. Here’s what she wrote:
I
recently read your article that attempts to analyze the op-ed
I wrote in the Washington Post. First, thanks for reading the
article. Initially I was excited when a friend told me you
had published an opposing view. But while I had hoped for a
debate, I was treated to a series of ad hominems. Further,
you did not even provide a link for your readers so that they
may judge for themselves the value of the piece I wrote.
I would like to respond specifically to a couple of charges you made:
1. The statistics I quote are not mine; they are not those of the Democratic
Leadership Council; nor are they those of Republicans. Rather they are from
the nonpartisan Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies. You took
exception to my statement that there has been a measurable rightward shift
among black voters. But the Joint Center study notes that "There has
been a noteworthy change in black partisan identification (away from the
Democrats)." Further, if you review the survey carefully yourself,
you will discern that there is a direct correlation between the drop in those
blacks not identifying themselves as Democrats and those identifying themselves
as either independents or Republicans. One last thing on the numbers:
What is interesting about this movement away from Democrats is that it is
charted in the two years after George W. Bush basically stole the presidency
and thousands of voters, many of whom were black, were disenfranchised in
the process. It is stunning (and maybe even scary) that the number of blacks
who identify themselves as Democrats would drop between 2000 and 2002 and
not increase, given the underhanded tactics used by the Republicans during
the 2000 election in Florida.
2. I am not a member of the Democratic Leadership Council. Since the early
1990s, I have been tracking changes in the black electorate and have written
extensively in several publications about this. I even wrote a book that
includes an analysis of this trend.
3. If you admit that black political leadership is trending toward Rep. Artur
Davis and Rep. Harold Ford as I suggest, then aren't you also agreeing that
the black electorate is moving to the right of the far left wing of the Democratic
Party. You can't have it both ways. You can't say African Americans are voting
for candidates like Davis and Ford, who clearly are centrists, but assert
that blacks are deep in the left, liberal pocket of the party.
4. I am neither Republican nor Democrat. I am a registered Independent. I
suggest you interview Dr. Lenora Fulani to ascertain the real independent
movement that is sweeping through America, and how important this population
has become in national elections.
Finally, what I found most troubling about your essay and analysis is that
it did not critically examine the Democratic Party. What is it doing that
is causing the disaffection among blacks, particularly young blacks? What
should it do or what can it do to become more attractive to this segment
of our community? Rather than stoop to a snake's level, you may have better
served your reader by delving into the issues of why blacks would want to
join the Republican Party or why they would want to opt out of partisan politics
all together.
Maybe next time you won't be a victim of your emotions.
Barras must have herself
been overcome by emotion (shame would be appropriate, but unlikely),
since she failed to see that her Washington Post story was
prominently displayed and linked on the 8th line of our piece.
Having dedicated so much space to denouncing her, we are disappointed
that she was incapable of the simple act of reading. We do
not enjoy beating up on unconscious people, no matter how loathsome.
Barras
says, “You
took exception to my statement that there has been a measurable
rightward shift among black voters.” Of course we did. The
drop in African American personal identification with
the Democratic Party, as recorded by the Joint
Center for Political and Economic Studies (JCPES) in 2002,
does not translate into a “measurable rightward shift.” The
JCPES makes no such claim. Instead, the Joint Center concludes, “Among
African Americans over the past five years, there have been
small shifts away from and back toward identifying with the
Democratic Party. However, African Americans have been voting
Democratic at their usual high levels.”
Barras fails or refuses
to comprehend the difference between voter identification and behavior.
For example, three out of ten self-identified Black Republicans
fail to vote for the party. Whatever their subjective idea
of what a Republican might be, these voters do not find actual
GOP candidates to be a palatable on Election Day. The shift
to the Republican identification column from 1999 to 2002 is
simply a doubling of relatively small, extremely subjective
numbers – from 5 to 10 percent, very close to what JCPES scholar
David Bositis considers the statistical margin of error. The
GOP identification phenomenon, if it exists, benefited
the Republicans not one bit in November 2002, just weeks after
the survey was completed. Indeed, as we reported, “The two
party black vote for the House went from 89 percent Democrat/11
percent Republican in both 1998 and 2000 to a 91 percent/9
percent split in 2002” – a two percent net gain for Democrats
among African American voters.
Repetitive
illogic
There
is nothing happening in Black America, or in the JCPES study,
that bodes well for
Republicans. The most significant subjective movement noted
by the survey was from Democratic to Independent self-identification – the
category that is least likely to vote, according to Dr. Bositis. As
any social science student could explain to Barras, the figures
are telling us that Blacks are increasingly alienated from
the Democratic Party, but the numbers do not indicate
that this dissatisfaction is rooted in Black conservatism.
Barras and her guiding lights on the Right eagerly jump to
the conclusion that African Americans are dropping the Democratic
ID because they perceive the party as too liberal or, as she
puts it, “left-wing.” If that were true, then we should observe
at least a modest upsurge in Republican voting behavior among
African Americans – but we don’t; the movement at the polls
is in the opposite direction. Viewed in the context of both
the historical and most recent voting behavior of African Americans,
it is far more likely that Black dissatisfaction comes from
the Left; folks feel alienated from the Democratic Party because
it is not sufficiently activist and “pro-Black.”
Barras
is attempting to transform a negative for Democrats into
a positive for the
Right – somewhat like assuming that because a spouse has become
weary of a marriage, he or she will automatically sleep with
the neighbor next door. In this case, the spouse has shown
repeatedly that he/she despises the neighbor. Barras and her
mentors shamelessly disrespect the Joint Center by forming
conclusions that are not justified by the numbers – and, by
implication, ascribing those conclusions to the Center.
Barras’ colleagues
on the Right perform the same exercise in purposeful illogic
when citing the survey’s findings on Black support for vouchers.
Although a majority of young voters responded positively to
the JCPES question on vouchers – a question we believe was
seriously flawed in its construction – Dr. Bositis concluded, "they
don't feel that the Republican Party is an alternative." Thankfully,
Barras did not revisit that canard.
Barras
tears into George Bush for stealing the 2000 election and “disenfranchising” thousands
of Blacks, then calls it “stunning” that the JCPES survey finds
fewer African Americans identifying themselves as Democrats.
The source of Barras’ confusion lies in her false premise that
African Americans are moving to the Right. Black anti-Republicanism
was confirmed in 2000 and expressed even more strongly in November
2002. Yes, it would be “stunning” if Blacks had become more
conservative in the interim. But they didn’t. Instead, logic
tells us that significant numbers of African Americans are
profoundly disappointed with Democrats for failing to fight
hard enough against Bush. Barras looks at reality upside-down
all day and wonders why she gets dizzy. (For an in-depth examination
of the JCPES study, see “Poll
Shows Black Political Consensus Strong,” November 21, 2002.)
We
don’t care about
Barras’ nominal party affiliation, or whether she pays dues
to the DLC. She serves their interests; that’s why they featured
an article of hers in the March-April 2003 issue of Blueprint,
the DLC house organ. It’s a PR piece for “new black leaders” Ford,
Majette, New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin (who endorsed the Republican
candidate for Louisiana governor, last year, but swayed
very few Black voters), Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick (DLC),
and Cory Booker – who is still earning his money from the Right
as a school vouchers activist while he prepares for another
run for Mayor of Newark. (See "The
Wal-Martization of Education,” in this issue.)
Barras
is a freelance propagandist in the Right’s campaign to establish an “alternative,” corporate-friendly
Black leadership. Whether she believes what she writes or not
is of no concern to us, although readers may find it interesting
that Barras is an acolyte of Lenora
Fulani.
Finally,
Barras challenges us to “critically examine the Democratic
Party.” does
that all the time – in fact, that’s we’re doing right now.
The DLC is the corporate wing of the Democratic Party, created
to diminish the influence of Blacks and labor. Through its “me
too” Republicanism, the DLC discourages large numbers of African
Americans from identifying with the party. Instead, it makes
common cause with the GOP project to unseat authentic Black
leadership by force of money and media.
Part of our job at is
to expose the Trojan Horse politicians’ ties to the enemy.
This is uncharted territory for Black America – after all,
the Right’s surrogate electoral offensive in the Black political
heartland is less than three years old. It took decades following
the Civil Rights Movement before the racist rich could bring
themselves to mingle with more than a few Blacks at a sitting.
Now they are deploying puppets in our midst with a vengeance.
But give us time. African Americans are the most sophisticated
voters in the nation. We will not be fooled for long.
“Aunts” and “Uncles”
A reader named Phil
regards Barras with contempt:
I
read your article entitled "The Serpent in the Garden" and found
myself filled with disdain and disgust for this "Jonetta
Rose Barras" person. Evidently, she and others
of her ilk seem to think that the only way to fit into the
political climate these days is to present a rosy picture
to those of the Anglo persuasion, while portraying African
Americans as not worth anything if they aren't believing
in the lie that is the Republican/Conservative party. I
guess we must have the burgeoning Uncle Toms (and Tomissinas)
to go along with whatever is most profitable and agreeable
toward these racist beliefs. She expounds on how the
Democratic party is playing "plantation politics," that
the new Black voter will need to forget the lessons learned
from past struggles, that the present administrative climate
is good for everyone, ad nauseam. In reality, it is nothing
more than a attempt from the right of nullifying any possibility
of cohesiveness and solidarity from the Black voter against
the present political climate. I find it extremely
sad that there are young voters who don't understand that
these individuals are more dangerous to them and their future
than anything that has been in our history.
B.
Gittens is in the business of creating fair and democratic elections – the
one business that should not revolve around money.
My
organization coordinates, manages, supervises and conducts
elections for
private organizations and hopefully, in the near future,
for municipalities. We supply the machinery as well as the
manpower and expertise to run a non-partisan, totally transparent
election. We regularly deal with voting equipment, proxies,
ballots, candidates and election rules and regulations
as they pertain to federal law. As far as I know we
are the only African-American company in New York that does
this (there are only 2 other companies in this city
that are in the same field). So I have a unique view of our
electoral system and how it is failing the people and how
it can be fixed. (We were not offered the contract for the
overseas votes of our military personnel nor were we told
that it existed. It was a no bid contract given to Halliburton – Dick
Cheney’s old company).
I
bring this up because of the recent article of yours that describes
certain people and their paymasters (Barras). It seems that
the majority of the problems we face from candidates or
anyone in politics (pundits) usually involves money in some
form or another.
We
have these problems
because our politicians and other spokespeople are not
obligated to the people of this country. If you can get anyone
to say anything you want because you are paying them,
then that is a problem.
The
current system is set up to allow candidates to accept money
from big business so therefore they are obligated to big business.
This process should be stopped. In every election that my organization
supervises, whether it is for a union, cooperative apartment,
condominium, college or corporate board of directors, each
candidates' campaign is paid for by the sponsoring organization
(the client) so each candidate has the same access to
advertisement. In other words it does not depend on the amount
of money the candidate has in their pocket or the amount they
can raise (where is it stated in the constitution that only
rich folks can run this country). Each candidate’s picture,
biography and campaign message is distributed equally and it
is not paid for by the candidate – it is paid for by the people
that want this election to take place.
So
with that in mind shouldn't the American people pay for American
election campaigns? This would eliminate big business
from the equation, it would give each candidate the same
amount of money to campaign and access to the same forms
of advertisement for the same amount of time. If one candidate
has a 30 minute spot on channel 2 all candidates should have
a 30 minute spot on channel 2.
It
makes candidates obligated to no one person or organization
(non-partisan). It makes them obligated to the people of this
country.
The
world’s elites are seeking to position their institutions and
nations as far from the American axis as is feasible, while
carefully avoiding economic catastrophe in the process. It
is like planning a divorce from an insane, violent spouse who
also has a key to the safety deposit box. The divorce will
unfold in stages – or, under further provocation from the U.S.,
in earth-shaking spasms. But there is now no doubt that the
U.S. is fated to shrink as the world withdraws from successive
layers of entanglements with the madman. Black America must
therefore prepare to marshal its collective assets for a long
period of retrenchment.
Gene Marner writes
with recommendations for additional reading.
A
powerful and insightful piece. The news is bad enough
but there's worse to come: the peak of oil and gas production. The
long, deep slide is longer and deeper than any of us can imagine. Sometime
this decade – sooner, rather than later, I believe – supplies
of both natural gas and oil will reach their production peaks
and start irrevocably and forever to decline. That will
put a permanent end to economic growth and a hundred thousand
other things. Please don't think that I'm trying to be
the more dire Cassandra but I do think that those who face
the future with neither optimism nor pessimism but with realism
have the best chance to survive the new low-energy world. Anyway,
Cassandra was right.
A new British website, Wolf
at the Door, offers a good introduction to this grim but essential subject.
An article of my own dealing with the subject is in the Online
Journal Archive.
Black Labor in a Wal-Mart world
Click
to view entire Wal-Mart Monster cartoon
There
are super-stores, and then there’s Wal-Mart, the Arkansas
family business that has become “so
big and so furtively powerful as to have become an entirely
different order of corporate being.” Wal-Mart’s presence
was almost palpable as Black labor leaders gathered in Orlando,
Florida earlier this month to map election strategies (“Black
Labor Seeks ‘Game Plan’ for Victory,” January 22). Tens
of thousands of southern California union workers are on
strike against Safeway and Kroeger, but labor’s grievances
lead directly to the Big Box:
Everybody
knows where the anti-union pressures are coming from. “This
strike is a Wal-Mart strike,” said Willie L. Baker, Jr., UFCW
International Vice President and field operations chief, addressing
fellow CBTU leaders in Orlando. “It’s really about how Americans
finance health care. Will it be every man for himself…?
Wal-Mart
is George Bush’s kind of company, the behemoth at the import end
of the domestic disinvestment loop that begins with the export of
U.S. jobs to the low wage world. From points south and west
across the Pacific the retail monster sucks up merchandise
for sale to families that formerly made such goods. Ultimately,
the abominable engine wipes the landscape clean of all competitors
and impoverishes its own customers. While Wal-Mart and its
corporate protégés lock their employees (literally) into
abject impotence, the Bush regime seals the door shut through
its war on the public safety net. The Bush/Wal-Mart vision
of America is labor locked in a box.
The
Coalition of Black Trade Unionists has been on the scene
since 1972, the year
AFL-CIO President George Meany declared labor “neutral” in
the race between Richard Nixon and George McGovern – without
even consulting Black labor.
Peg Glasser writes:
Your
commentary on the Black labor movement is breathtaking in its
depth of information and willingness to draw a bright line
in the sand. Black labor will play an important role in saving
the nation.
Freedom Rider
vs. Wal-Mart
Margaret
Kimberley’s
January 8 Freedom Rider column, “Wal-Mart
and the Economic Destruction of Black Communities” was
republished at sites all across the Internet. The Walton family
business is now the largest corporation in the world, accounting
for 10 percent of China’s total apparel production. The mega-company’s
virulent anti-union policies depress employment standards throughout
the United States. Yet some Black “leaders” insist that Wal-Mart
is “better than nothing,” writes Ms. Kimberley. Folks need
to look at the big picture.
Unfortunately,
even some of Wal-Mart’s detractors miss the significance of
its growth and paint it as some sort of aberration in the history
of American capitalism. In fact Wal-Mart has perfected this
system and the result is the logical conclusion of capitalism
unrestrained. One can argue that it all works out. The Wal-Martization
of America provides us with the lower cost goods we will all
need when our wages are lowered by the Wal-Marts of the world.
Black leadership
should not give into the argument that our communities are
in such need that Wal-Mart and its acts of harassment can
be considered an asset. Wal-Mart employees are punished for
involvement in union activity and are encouraged to spy on
one another. Is it asking too much for these leaders to think
of other ways to bring new employment opportunities
or respond to redlining and other factors that keep businesses
out of our neighborhoods? Apparently it is, and not just
in Crenshaw.
It
appears that Ken Huston never saw a job he didn’t like – for
someone else to do, that is. He wrote Ms. Kimberley a nasty
little note:
I'm
not a big fan of Wal-Mart but I am a big advocate for needed
jobs in our black communities. Additionally, I'm very familiar
with the Wal-Mart dispute in the City of Oakland because I
have lived and worked there for many years. I can tell you
without equivocation that the City leaders in Oakland have
come under great criticism for their foolish decision aimed
at Wal-Mart to prevent competition with other large grocery
store chains. Oakland, as you may know, does not
have the most intellectually enlightened leadership. Remember,
Ebonics was the language of choice of its teachers a short
while ago. Moreover, the City just approved a new Wal-Mart that
does not include the selling of groceries. Apparently, Wal-Mart
is okay but not discounted cans of pork and beans. I mention
that fact just to illustrate the hypocrisy of elected officials
in the City of Oakland. You might want to do a bit more research
before badmouthing a corporation that provides jobs, albeit
low paid, to minorities, teenagers and seniors who the
city has ignored for years.
It
is difficult to vouch for the people who gave us Ebonics,
but I stand by my assessment of Wal-Mart. According to the
New York Times, a Wal-Mart internal audit showed 1,371
child labor law violations, 15,705 instances of employees working
through meals and over 60,767 instances of workers
not taking breaks. Wal-Mart workers on night shifts are literally
locked inside the stores. They are allowed to exit via fire
doors, but only in case of fire. Workers have been ill, injured,
and on the verge of giving birth but if they leave before a
manager arrives to unlock the jail, I mean store, they risk
being terminated. Oakland and other cities are making a grave
mistake if they accept the twenty-first century version
of a plantation in exchange for a few low wage jobs.
Wal-Mart
management insists on calling the people who work for the
them “associates” rather
than employees. These “associates” earn less than $10 an hour,
with few benefits. The company encourages its workers to seek
public assistance, while the Walton family’s foundation rants
relentlessly against “welfare dependence.” It’s crazy in The
Box.
Organizer
Al Norman, author of "Slam
Dunking Wal-Mart," writes:
Thanks
for your piece on Wal-Mart in the black community. I have been
working with grassroots citizens groups against Wal-Mart for
the past ten years, and I can tell you many blacks think wonderful
things about the company that feeds them slave-labor jobs.
In my own community, a black woman is leading the effort to
bring in more and more big box retailers, arguing that poor
people need the jobs.
Al Norman operates
the anti-Big Box website, Sprawl-Busters.
Wal-Mart’s propaganda
is as pervasive as it’s stores: it’s a sponsor of Tavis
Smiley’s public broadcasting programs.
Evelyn Robinson spends
a chunk of each week inside the Big Box.
I
am a part-time employees at Wal-Mart and I agree with the article.
I chose to be part-time because I would like to run my own
nonprofit. Working there in the evenings I see most of the
slave mentality going on. Just last night I had to work the
whole softlines department alone due to lack of staffing. Their
response was, when we can we will try to send someone over
to help you. I live a small town Rhode Island town called Woonsocket
and Wal-Mart just bought out the land of a roller skating ring
to add a superstore. The local supermarkets like Shaws or Price
Rite were not pleased because this will hurt local union stores.
I
am also one who is on Public Assistance and Section-8 and
making only $138
a week at Wal-Mart, so I really understand. My goal is to
continue to build my nonprofit called The Extra Mile which
is an information referral service for low and moderate income
working individuals offering case management and life assessment
skills. We also have a program on low self-esteem called
Sister2Sister for women and teen girls and our final program
RI Double Dutch league just began to teach the young kids
double Dutch. So thru the grace of God my eye is on God's
prize. But I really agree with your article. People in this
town are believing in the mentality that something is better
than nothing.
Men
and boys in the choir
Freedom
Rider’s January 22 exploration of “Sex
Abuse, Corruption, and the Boys Choir of Harlem” struck
deep moral chords among the readership. Ms. Kimberley denounced
choir founder and executive director Dr. Walter Turnbull
for suppressing complaints of sexual abuse, and castigated
community leaders who failed to hold Turnbull to account.
Ms. Kimberley sees a pattern:
I
give Turnbull credit for confessing, albeit lamely. Another
revered Harlem institution, Hale House, was not so lucky. In
2001 it was revealed that its president, Dr. Lorraine Hale,
had charged market rents in an apartment building given to
her by the City of New York to house low-income residents.
As the charges of malfeasance multiplied prominent leaders
such as Rev. Al Sharpton and Congressman Charles Rangel very
publicly leapt to Dr. Hale’s defense. Of course, every day
another sordid shoe dropped. It turned out that the person
listed as the Hale House Treasurer was deceased, and had been
deceased for several years. Dr. Hale had borrowed money from
the organization both to renovate her suburban home and to
finance her husband’s theatrical production. I often wanted
to be a fly on Sharpton’s and Rangel’s walls when those stories
broke….
Once again we see
the Black community beset by a lack of imagination when faced
with a crisis that should be confronted. There is
little doubt that the Choir would suffer a difficult transition
with new leadership, but it could survive if those who circle
the wagons were instead motivated to bring new ideas to a
challenging situation. Turnbull is obviously a very gifted
man, but he can’t be the only Black person in America who
can teach children to sing. Instead of defending the disgraced
Director, the Board should have begun searching for a replacement
to undo the damage that has been done.
B.J.
White wrote Ms. Kimberley, worried that her contributions
to Hale House might
be misused. Kimberley replied that the New York Attorney General
ended his investigation two years ago when Dr. Hale and
the old board resigned.
Gwen
Barbour thanks Freedom Rider for taking on the “icons” of
Black society.
Once
again Margaret Kimberly shows the integrity and hard hitting
reporting that is missing far too often when the focus is on
those in positions of prestige. These "icons" are
routinely pampered, protected and pardoned for behavior that
would result in serious repercussions for us ordinary folk.
Ms. Kimberly
lets the
chips fall
where they
may in calling Turnbull
to task for his willingness to do that which was self-serving and expedient
rather than that which was right. Black leaders need to know that they
carry a heavy burden of trust placed in them by the communities/constituencies they
serve. Fairly or not, they are also subject to more intense scrutiny
than others. When they fail to live up to expectations for honor,
decency and ethical behavior it is good to know that Ms. Kimberly or
someone like her will be there to speak with clarity and
truth about it.
Problems in the
pulpit
As
a religious person, Margaret Kimberley holds ministers to
high standards. In her
December 25 column, she questioned whether disgraced former
National Baptist Convention USA president Rev. Henry Lyons
is “Repentant
or Still Scheming?” Kimberley has no vendetta for Lyons – she’s
concerned about the “calling” in general:
Until
very recently the clergy was one of the few avenues to civic
and political authority open to black Americans. As a result
some of the greatest minds in our community became religious
leaders. Unfortunately it also meant that some of the less
gifted among us also heard the call to preach. The time has
long passed when the pulpit should be the last refuge of a
scoundrel.
Excellent
article!! Remember the membership is either uncomfortable
having this type of frank conversation with preachers
or has the mindset of "it's a sin to confront the Preacher
no matter what." Leadership and lay people
alike should read this article.
Reverend Jeanette
Pollard is a newcomer to and
Kimberley’s Freedom Rider column. She welcomes scrutiny of
the ministry.
I
should be out trying to clear the snow that fell last night
from my front porch. Instead, I am reading (for the first time),
the articles on your web site. I just learned of it a
couple of days ago from a friend. I am so glad there is a place
for true defenders of the Black community to let others know
about what is happening in the Black community.
One
of
the
most
important
and
not
reported
(or
under
reported)
incidents
that will surely further weaken the minds of our young Black people, is the
sexual abuse they continue to suffer at the hands of Black ministers. I'm
not talking about just in the Catholic Church. I'm talking about in
Black Pentecostal, Baptist, etc. churches. This is a travesty of the
true mission of the universal church. Parents of these victims are
afraid to speak up, lest they be viewed as "attacking" the "mand
of God." This is nonsense!! The "mand" or "womand" of
God is supposed to protect the flock, not prey and devour the flock which
they oversee.
Again, your web site is marvelous!
Interpreting
MLK
We’re
pleased that our MLK Week Cover Story, “Dr.
King’s Global Vision – Today’s Missing Ingredient,” was
widely circulated on the Internet and for print publication,
along with the fantastic work of our cartoonist, “Twenty-Nine.”
Click
to view entire Mlk tribute image
We
featured an especially appropriate passage from King’s “World House” chapter of his
book, “Where Do We Go From Here: Chaos or Community,” published
in 1967: “[T]oday our very survival depends on our ability
to stay awake, to adjust to new ideas, to remain vigilant and
to face the challenge of change. The large house in which we
live demands that we transform this world-wide neighborhood
into a world-wide brotherhood.”
It
is woefully apparent that many of Dr. King’s purported admirers
do not share his global perspective, or possess any sense
of historical mission
beyond their own immediate life circumstances. As we wrote:
They
cannot find themselves or their fellow African Americans on
the sweeping map of history, and so have no idea what direction
to take. They are only vaguely aware that the “triple evils” King
spoke of 37 years ago – racism, economic exploitation, and
war – are now infinitely more dangerous to world survival than
while King lived. Consequently, these “leaders” possess only
the narrowest understanding of the threat that the Bush Pirates'
global offensive poses to African Americans, specifically.
Erroneously
assuming that personal wealth equals group leadership,
too many beneficiaries
of the great leap out of Jim Crow use their influence to
lull the rest of the Race to sleep. Like an adolescent
class, they believe they have achieved their present status
in life independent of historical Black struggle – or worse,
that Dr. King, Malcolm and countless others were sacrificed
for the purpose of their own eventual affluence. On King’s
birthday, they celebrate themselves, oblivious to
the blasphemy they are committing. These “distracting
classes” – in that they purposely present distracting stories
of anomalous Black successes to counter the facts of massive
social disintegration – have always been with us. However,
with each ratcheting up of the global and domestic crisis,
we can afford them less.
James
H. Henderson, like many of us, has firm views on the legacy
of Dr. Martin
Luther King, Jr. Mr. Henderson wrote us this letter, after
reviewing our January 15 Cover Story.
This
article is right on time. Dr. King would die from depression
and hurt to see the state of Black America. African Americans
have been lulled into a sense of prosperity by being able to
purchase things that have little to no real long term value: cars,
clothes, electronics, car accessories, and jewelry. The ancestors
of African Americans that came out of slavery had the intelligence,
even though they were grossly illiterate by our standards,
to understand that the ownership of real property, knowledge,
education, and faith and belief in the Great Yahweh would open
doors that the institution of slavery and hatred could not
close. From 1865 to 1968, Blacks had the greatest period of
productivity and growth. People then sought uplift and progress
of the race. Now we search for another Dr. King, and God only
sends one deliverer to an oppressed group of people, and it
is their task to correct the wrongs that have been fraught
against them.
The
problem with African Americans today is apathy. I teach
at an HBCU and at a majority university, and the attitudes
of the students
are like night and day. The black students at the majority
university see education as the key, while many at an HBCU
do not view college as the opportunity to open one's mind
to succeed.
Dr.
King was not about status quo, cliques, Greek Worship, bourgie
mentalities, and other superficial perks that many African
Americans demean others and themselves with. The solution is
right in front of our faces, but we choose not to take the
right approach. First we must empower those of us that
are less fortunate, instead of disempowering and lauding over
them with more severe repercussions than the most racist bigot
on the face of the earth. Secondly, we must take our neighborhoods
back and stop coddling psychopathic social parasites that only
seek to destroy instead of build. Thirdly, we must once again
educate our children at home prior to public school
matriculation. Many of our grandparents and parents did it
for us, and that is why many of the Baby Boom Generation are
able to enjoy the levels of success that they have today. Fourthly,
we must become a village again and help raise those who have
parents or significant others that are incapable of parenthood.
Fifthly, we must turn off the television and turn on the faucets
of knowledge. We must be willing to read and learn and not
be programmed and brainwashed by the media. Sixthly, we must
be role models in our community, and stop looking to entertainers
and athletes to complete our children's self worth and esteem.
Seventh, we must learn to use our financial resources in a
progressive manner to stimulate the growth of the group and
the start of business enterprises. .Eight, we must stop looking
for a system that never included us in its development to correct
all of our problems. Nine: We must teach our children
of their history and heritage. For when a man does not know
his history or heritage, he is doomed to repeat it.
Haiti coverage
Our
Associate Editor in Port-au-Prince, Kevin Pina has filed
a series of compelling reports from Haiti, documenting and
interpreting the current crisis. Pina’s latest article, “Haiti’s
Cracked Screen: Lavalas Under Siege While the Poor Get Poorer,” appeared
on January 15. Last week, was
proud to republish Jamaican activist and educator John Maxwell’s
fine commentary, “The
Racist Antecedents of US Haiti Policy: ‘Imagine! Niggers
speaking French!!!” We have also been privileged to publish
recent articles by TransAfrica founder Randall Robinson,
now living and writing in the Caribbean, most recently, “Honor
Haiti, Honor Ourselves – Forget Haiti, Forget Ourselves,” January
1.
Derrick Gibson writes
from New York. He appreciates the coverage.
should
be commended solely on your coverage of the nations of the
Caribbean – particularly the recent series on Haiti. While
I became acquainted with the Jacob Lawrence series on Toussaint
and the Haitian revolution a few years ago, these articles
have filled in the back-story, including the inevitable US
involvement in placing the world's first Black Republic in
the dire straits it still inhabits today. These communiqués
give me the history I was never taught in school, regardless
of how well I did on the Regents exams, but they still leave
me with questions.
Why
do we – Black people – continue to give credence to nonsense terms like
West Indies? How is it that for over several hundred centuries we continue
to reinforce the inane notion that a lost Italian navigator "discovered" a
westerly passage to India? What rationality states that an African – once
transported across the Atlantic Ocean in chains – transmutes into a West
Indian?
Only
once
we – Black people – learn
to
recognize
ourselves,
learn
to
realize
that the face we see in the mirror, whether in the US or the Caribbean and
South America, is all part of the same family tree (albeit on different branches)
will we ever be able to break through all of the madness that exists around
us.
How is it possible that with the collective economic power of what has to
be over $2 trillion from just the Africans in the Western Hemisphere alone,
we fail to be able to organize ourselves to prevent those who wish to do
us harm from doing so?
Propaganda
or predisposition
Events
of the past year leave no doubt that white America can be
oh so easily
brought to a state of mass, murderous dementia. The question
much of the world asks is: are these people predisposed to
commit atrocities against the rights and bodies of people of
color? Or are they innocent dupes of the War Party’s propaganda?
Johnnie Quezada wrote
us a letter on the subject.
As
I’ve read much on the material on blackcommentator.com I’ve
been impressed with the focus and dead-on analysis of U. S.
society. Specifically, on the current misadventure in
Iraq, much of the commentary focused on the enabling character
of the white U. S. population. Although there is some truth
to Noam Chomsky’s assertion that the high levels of support
for the war is a result of the massive and unprecedented propaganda
campaign unleashed on the North American populace, I have always
maintained that the strength of the propaganda campaign is
not solely based on its intensity and pervasiveness but on
the receptiveness of the white American audience that it is
directed at. It does not take much to convince a population
who are inured to violence (witness the popularity of professional
wrestling and reality TV), mesmerized by popular media that
consistently and unabashedly define democracy and freedom as
uniquely American values and finally, are heirs to three plus
centuries of fashioning a national identity based on white
superiority and privilege.
What
is disturbing is that much of the rag tag left in this
country continue
to insist that if only the American public were better informed
by the media then a movement would arise to challenge the
neo-con’s plans specifically and all injustices generally.
But the truth does not get through the filters of the corporately
controlled media and naturally, the color red or orange
or any other color can mean something only to someone who
can see to begin with. Clearly, the white U. S. population
by and large has been blinded by centuries of racism. As,
indeed, historically is the case with settler states, which
typically have genocidal origins. The pogroms (what else
can they be described as) carried out in Tulsa and Rosewood
should be a lesson to those who believe in the inherent goodness
or benevolence of white U.S society as a whole. As a people,
sectors of the white population throughout the long and tortured
history of the country, have personally engaged in genocide
or ethnic cleansing. Many of those that have not, which may
be the majority, have either cheered from the sidelines or
tacitly agreed through their silence. The main difference
between the genocide of the past and that ongoing today being
that for much of the country’s existence it was accomplished
by the settlers themselves and now its labeled “the war on
drugs” and carried out by the various state institutions
comprising the prison-industrial complex.
Even
if one charitably assumes that the U. S. media can and will
accurately report on U. S. adventures or misadventures abroad,
will as racist society such as the U. S. be able to muster
the appropriate moral outrage and countervailing action appropriate
to the slaughter and maltreatment of black and brown peoples?
Not likely since so much of their identity is based on the
domination of and perceived superiority over black and brown
peoples. Then, when someone among their own, such as Eugene
Debbs, decides to stand with humanity and attempt to move the
white U. S. masses away from their allegiance to the brutish
U. S. ruling class, he is either quickly marginalized (ala
Noam Chomsky) if he or she is lucky or simply murdered or imprisoned
if not. But lets also not forget the economic dimension. Much
of the wealth of not only the U. S. but of the global North
as a whole originated and continues to originate with the destruction
and exploitation of people of color. Racism is integral to
the maintenance of a modus vivendi with the conscience (such
as it may be) of whites individually and collectively. This
is why poor whites consistently vote against their material
interests by voting for the most reactionary politicians. Abandoning
racism would simply mean the destruction of their collective
identity. An identity that while having spelled doom for non-white
peoples and perhaps ultimately whites themselves cannot be
easily discarded. Apparently, the psychological comfort of
their white skins is more valuable than decent healthcare,
wages and schools. In short, if the Iraqis, or the rest of
the world for that matter, are waiting for the white masses
in the U. S. to wake up from their stupor and put the clamps
on their ruling class, we all should collectively not hold
our breath.
The good folks
reaches
an ever widening circle of very smart people. We’ve just been
introduced to Cynthia Emerlye.
This
is the first time I've visited your website. Your article on Howard
Dean was very informative. I mostly want to congratulate
you on the beauty of your website design. I love the
layout and colorful, playful feel of it. Congratulations
on great design!
design
honcho Susan Gamble thanks you, Ms. Emerlye.
Ms. D. Green has kind
words for the whole crew.
Just
had to thank you for your wonderful commentaries. I find
your commentaries to be the most thought provoking take-no-prisoners
analyses of issues since the now defunct "EMERGE" Magazine
articles. Although I don't get the chance to read every article
due to my hectic schedule, I try to read them as often as I
can. The articles help me to maintain my sanity in the
midst of the suffocating propaganda masquerading as "news" in
the mainstream media. Your articles let me know that
I am not alone in my thinking and that some people really do
see through this massive mainstream "bamboozle" as
I call it. I hope you never stop writing and publishing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|