Blogging Amerikkka...

The Presidential Campaign "Rite of Passage": The Flogging of Black America

2012-01-13T21:55:00.001-05:00

Okay, first let me say that I am soooo not being "political" here. But I always have an eye on public policy and am mindful of the ways in which it shapes life's chances and choices, and it is in that spirit that I am writing this.

You'd have to be willfully and deliberately oblivious not to notice that the flogging of Black America is a time honored "rite of passage" for all presidential candidates -- Democrat and Republican. From the GOP strategist Lee Atwater –- whose playbook of intentional and strategic use of coded race-baiting is still being used by candidates today –- to President Barack Obama, who, on his way to a presidential win, famously lectured Black America to be better fathers and to “. . .stop praising yourselves for mediocre accomplishments. . .” (Apparently, it is okay for white America to continue praising themselves for mediocre accomplishments as he had no such comparable message for them on this subject. . .)

In the presidential campaign, the “flogging of Black America” is a rite of passage that cannot be skipped, and every candidate wants their –- as it is described in political terms and yes, this is a real political phrase -- “Sister Souljah* moment” in the sun.

So now we have the newest crop of GOP candidates, who seem to be vying for their “Sister Souljah moment” like it is the Holy Grail. They are sending signals as bright as high beam spotlights to America that they understand the prevailing social order, engaging in a public whole sale "beat down" of the African American community by reinforcing typical American stereotypes of them that have little to do with reality but everything to do with the stereotypes and fears that white America holds of them.

Below are just some of the quotes GOP candidates have made about 40 million Americans – African Americans -- that have been uncritically received by much of “mainstream” media and much of the general public:

Newt Gingrich in Iowa: "Really poor children in really poor neighborhoods have no habits of working and have nobody around them who works. So they literally have no habit of showing up on Monday. They have no habit of staying all day. They have no habit of ‘I do this and you give me cash,’ unless it’s illegal.”

Rick Santorum in Iowa: "I don’t want to make Black people’s lives better by giving them somebody else’s money. I want to give them the opportunity to earn the money and provide for themselves and their families..."

Ron Paul in a December 1989 edition of his Investment Letter: that "racial violence will fill our cities" because "mostly black welfare recipients will feel justified in stealing from mostly white 'haves'." (NOTE: This is just one of many, many, many comments [older and more recent] that he and/or others in his name have made about African Americans.)

Michelle Bachmann and Rick Santorum in July 2011: Both signed a pledge claiming that African American children were more likely to grow up in stable families during slavery than in contemporary times.

So what does this sick rite of political passage – the “Sister Souljah moment” -- say about the role, place, and perspective accorded to and about African Americans in American consciousness?

For all the candidates’ campaign rhetoric about their visions of “freedom” and “liberty”, their characterizations of African Americans are more like the popular 19th and 20th Century stereotype of the lazy, ignorant, recalcitrant, child-like African/African American “slave” that continues to live in the American popular cultural narrative. Which makes me wonder whether their visions of “freedom” and “liberty” are –- like their speeches –- color-coded.

Should African Americans be comfortable with a president who has such mindsets about the African American community?

WOULD YOU be comfortable with a president with such mindsets about African Americans setting public policy?

From their statements, these candidates seem to believe that the “Sister Souljah moment” is still good political capital for capturing votes.

In November, we’ll see whether America agrees that that is true.

Moving Forward,

Adar

*A “Sister Souljah moment” happens when a candidate obviously and deliberately –- and often in a forum that is considered “Black” by white America–- repudiates the realities, issues, concerns, and agendas that are being put forth as having special impact on “Black America.” This is often done through racialized coding that is embedded within the surface remarks of that candidate. NOTE: Even the phrase “Sister Souljah moment” -- and the context in which it is used -- demeans, mangles, and denigrates the context in which her remarks were made as well as turns attention from the historical context from which she was speaking.

"WHY BLACK AMERICA ISN'T 'OCCUPYING' "

2011-12-04T16:46:00.000-05:00

For months I’ve been following the “Occupy” mobilizations and pondering what –- quite frankly –- felt “wrong” about something that -– on the face of it -– seems oh, so right.

Then I read an article by journalist Stacey Patton ("Occupy isn't black America's fight", The Washington Post Outlook section, 11.27.2011), who oh-so-brilliantly provides the context and sheds light on what seems to be Black America’s relationship with this overwhelmingly white mobilization.

In her article, “Occupy isn’t Black America’s Fight”, Ms. Patton serves up an October 2011 Fast Company survey finding that African Descendants, who are 12.6% of the population in America, make up only 1.6% (!!!!!!!!) of the Occupy Wall Street mobilizations. As New York WBAI radio host and producer Nathalie Thandiwe summed up in the Patton interview: “Occupy Wall Street was started by whites and is about their concern with their plight. Now that capitalism isn’t working for ‘everybody’ some are protesting.”

Talk about speaking Truth!

There has not been a time in this country’s history when income inequality, unemployment, disparate economic opportunity, and America’s capitalist system have not been racialized. Yet –- all of a sudden -– these things are JUST NOW coming into the public consciousness of “everybody” else –- enough for them to start mobilizations? Although few say this publicly, there is much chatter and questioning regarding where “they” have been for all the years that communities of color have been organizing around these very same issues. And it is not going un-noticed how -- instead of joining mobilizations of color that have structure, clear messages, actual strategies, and organizing experience -- “Occupy” mobilizers are instead perpetuating historical plantation dynamics when they insist that people of color join THEM in agendas developed according to THEIR racialized interests, experiences, and goals.

Not to put too fine a point on it, but it seems as though the offer being made to people of color by Occupiers is the offer of cleaving to an agenda of THEIR making, choosing, experiences and suffering, while being allocated segregated “safe spaces” to discuss their own concerns in return.

And they are expressing surprise that many activists of color are declining their urgent invitations.

In Patton’s article, a New Jersey comedian says “high joblessness and social disenfranchisement is new to most of the Wall Street protesters. It has been a fact of life for African Americans since the beginning.”

And he is not joking.

“Black America’s fight for income inequality is not on Wall Street, but is a matter of day-to-day survival. The more pressing battles are against tenant evictions, police brutality and street crime. This group doesn’t see a reason to join the amorphous Occupiers,” Stacey Patton affirms.

And it is that crucial difference in focus, history, and “lived experience” –- along with the (I’m sure) unconscious but palatable plantation dynamics –- which is keeping the “Occupy” mobilizations majority white.

Patton states “Beyond a lack of leaders to inspire them to join the Occupy fold,
[B]lacks are not seeing anything new for themselves in the movement. Why should they ally with whites who are just now experiencing the hardships that [B]lacks have known for generations? Perhaps white Americans are now paying the psychic price for not answering the basic questions that [B]lacks have long raised about income inequality.”

Perhaps. Or perhaps “Occupy” mobilizers will stay in the game as long as it takes for THEIR interests to be met. And organizers and communities of color will once again be left in the dust of their “safe spaces.”

Moving Forward,

Adar

CELEBRATING "THE DREAM" OR LIVING "A NIGHTMARE"?

2011-10-16T20:20:00.008-04:00

Today is the dedication of the Martin Luther King Jr. Memorial and, of course, the only thing that too many Americans seem to know about this great man – his “I Have a Dream” speech –- is on full display as the national narrative for this event is being woven by media and participants.

Looking at and listening to the dedications and speeches and remembrances, I admit that, rather than feeling pleasure and pride, I am feeling sadness and pure panic:

• Panic that this dedication will be yet another reason -- for Americans who are always looking for reasons -– to say “okay, let’s now ignore racial disparities! This is more proof that we are ‘post racial’! And anyone who says otherwise is a race-baiter and a racist!”;

• Panic that we will forget the economic realities of living Black in America: that the unemployment rate for African Americans is the highest that it has been in 27 years at 16.2% (when the total national unemployment rate stands at 9.1%);

• Panic that as a country we continue to demonize African Americans as thugs and criminals – even those as young as 8 years old! -- instead of correcting a system that encourages gross disparities in the sentencing and imprisonment of Black men, and increasingly Black women, and that feels no shame or remorse about their state-sanctioned killing even when there is reasonable doubt supporting their innocence;

• Panic that we live in a country that is okay with disparities that disproportionately impact African Americans, whether economic, legal, educational, health and well-being, and in just about every systemic indicator of health and life in America.

How can this country –- who now professes to love the Reverend Doctor King as a great man, a great AMERICAN, for all they tormented and demonized him when he was alive – not know any of his other writings that so clearly address the economic disparities and other issues that we are so tragically facing now?

How can this country ignore with clear conscious the increasing and racialized gap between rich and poor? And how can we say that we adhere to the great man’s message when the two most media-prominent mobilizations –- the tea party and the “occupy” movements –- are majority white and acting out of all the privileges of that whiteness?

As much as my heart might want, celebrating today as progress for “The Dream” seems more of a matter of celebrating symbol over substance. But too many Americans are living in this on-going racialized nightmare, which this country seems determined to ignore, for that to happen.

In Dr. King’s last book, “Where Do We Go From Here: Chaos to Community” (New York: Harper and Row, 1967) he said:

“Let us take a look at the size of the problem through the lens of the Negro’s status in 1967. When the Constitution was written, a strange formula to determine taxes and representation declared that the Negro was 60% of a person. Today another curious formula seems to declare that he is 50% of a person. Of the good things in life he has approximately one-half those of whites; of the bad he has twice those of whites. Thus half of all Negroes live in substandard housing, and Negroes have half the income of whites. When we turn to the negative experiences of life, the Negro has a double share. There are twice as many unemployed. The rate of infant mortality (widely accepted as an accurate index of general health) among Negroes is double that of whites.”

Forty-four (44) years later, for all that we acknowledge changes, let’s at least have the courage to admit that not much has changed on that score. And for all the symbolism of his memorial now being on the National Mall, neither has the following (which Dr. King also noted in 1967):

"Depressed living standards for Negroes are not simply the consequences of neglect. Nor can they be explained by the myth of the Negro's innate incapacities, or by the more sophisticated rationalization of his acquired infirmities. They are a structural part of the economic system in the United States."

Now why don’t we hear more about THOSE Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. quotes?

And most importantly, why are we not doing anything about these structural issues?

If Americans are REALLY interested in achieving “The Dream”, they first need to acquire the will to address our on-going national, racialized nightmare.

Moving Forward,

Adar

"YOU MAD, BRO?"

2011-09-11T22:58:00.000-04:00

This was the sign held up by Kirtland High School students and their parents (according to all media reports) to taunt the losing Harvey High School team at the end of their recent football game in Ohio.

In the week since, the Ohio NAACP condemned the sign as "racial and ethnic intimidation."

Now we see the media equivalent of "You Mad Bro?" as media and bloggers engage in a campaign to discredit the Ohio NAACP as "race baiters" while excusing the race-baiting actions of those Kirtland students and parents as "bad sportsmanship".

However, in their rush to whitewash this incident as one of bad sportsmanship devoid of any racialization, they have failed to report the environmental / social context in which this "You Mad Bro?" drive-by assault occurred.

Not usually included in the reporting about this incident is the fact that Kirtland High School has a 98% white student population and is located within a white (99.1%) enclave.

Nor does the media usually include the fact that Harvey High School's student population is 53% students of color.

Nor does anyone really bother to mention that Painesville OH, where Harvey High School is located, has a higher representation of Afrikan Descendant and Latino residents than other areas of the state.

Nor do those reporting feel it important to mention the stark economic contrasts between the privileged Kirtland High students and the challenged Harvey High students. Media reports do not mention that in Painesville OH, people of color are experiencing a high level of poverty, with 31% of Afrikan Descendant and 50% of Latino residents classified as "living in poverty" by the state nor that 83% of the student population at Harvey High School are eligible for free lunches. (All data from city-data.com, publicschoolsreview.com, and schooldigger.com.)

Only the most determined, pugnacious, willfully blind will deny what this means in terms of the vulnerability of Harvey High students to being stereotyped racially, economically, educationally, in the media, and by their white Kirtland High peers. And the "You Mad Bro?" sign clearly shows how well that message has been learned by these young Kirtland students.

If this were only a case of bad sportsmanship, they could have used any of a number of slogans that did not hint of racial/cultural appropriation and micro-aggression. Instead, they went straight to the heart of it, as their racial inheritance and racial history dictated, and as their familial and societal institutions supported.

And now their actions are being shielded and co-signed as officials, media, and bloggers coddle and protect them, hide them behind a "youth are post-racial" banner, and excoriate NAACP officials for "making this a racial issue" -- right, as if THAT were the egregious offense! -- when what the NAACP is doing is calling a racial micro-aggression exactly what it is.

"You Mad, Bro?"

About this? Yes, I am. And you ought to be, too.

Moving Forward,

Adar

“THE HELP”: EXPOSING A LOT MORE THAN RACIAL APARTHEID IN THE ‘60s

2011-08-15T14:54:00.003-04:00

The movie “The Help” is joining the book (of the same name) in near unanimous cultural acclaim for highlighting a fictional 1960s era Civil Rights story about the “relationship” between economically privileged white women, the African American women they employed as domestic help, and the white supremacist cultural dominance that allowed their abuse at the hands of their white employers.

In reading and hearing about the major swoon that white America has taken over this piece of fiction, I naturally wondered whether this feel-good, sugar-coated version of '60's Racial Apartheid would finally create space for a serious conversation regarding ways to repair the damaging impact that the history of Racial Apartheid continues to have on the African American community. I wondered whether white America would finally be able to acknowledge that so many of the benefits they enjoy today were built on the backs of this Apartheid.

"Oh no" a white friend, who has seen the movie and was deeply affected by it, said; "that won't happen; that isn’t what this movie is for or is about."

And there it is. . .

How you view "The Help", of course, depends on your world view lens. And this book -- and now movie -- has exposed how comfortable we are with "history light": touching on the edges of our national tragedy of racial apartheid and needing even that tentative toe dip wrapped in a generous helping of comic relief and a story told through the lens and world view of a "good" white protagonist.

This book and resulting movie -- which puts as its "lead character" individual acts of racial oppression and only as "supporting characters" the white supremacist cultural and structural dominance that supported those individual acts --have already spawned debates that, as much as they straddle racial fault lines, are really about how the narrative of America's history of Racial Apartheid will be (re-) written.

It -- along with other movies of this genre that have made their way into the consciousness of white America -- gives a very skewed view of the role of whites in the Civil Rights Movement, giving the impression of whites’ creating opportunities for and leading and hand-holding scared Black people to opportunities to find their voices, as well as giving the impression of white people being so incensed by racial apartheid that they worked actively and on the front lines, taking the lead in "liberating" Afrikan Descendants from "extremists" white groups like the Klan, the White Citizens’ Councils and even (the book’s main antagonist) Miss Hilly.

And while that framing is a "feel good", affirmative framing for white America, it is also a lie.

There have been many books written about the 1960's Civil Rights Era in recent years, by both African American and white authors, that are more historically accurate. Yet they have not been as enthusiastically and broadly received as this book. Why have they not spawned the massive cultural push and discussion given this book (and now movie)?

Is it because the racial apartheid messaging of this book and movie gives perfect opportunity to inculcate a new (and historically false) narrative about the era into national consciousness for generations who were not there to experience it?

Is it that, by condoning this kind of false messaging as “real”, we successfully backtrack regarding having an honest national conversation regarding the normalized role that Racial Apartheid enjoyed since the country's inception, and of the psychological toll and economic losses incurred by Afrikan Descendants, and the myriad of ways in which the white supremacist system – which was enshrined in law for the majority of this country’s history – still impacts that population today?

Is it that books and movies like this help distort and erase national memory regarding America's legal and structural roles supporting unearned and unfair psychological, economic, educational, career, vocational and other opportunity- and asset-benefits incurred -- and still being enjoyed today -- by whites?

Is it that books and movies like this now frame Racial Apartheid in a way that gives whites a new narrative of their (supposed) primary role in the Era: not as Oppressors who benefited (regardless of whether they were active or passive participants) but as Freedom Fighters with the central role of working for the liberation of Black people?

Because what white person, really, would want to identify with a Hilly when they can think of themselves as a Skeeter? And this is where the embrace of this distorted view of Racial Apartheid, this “history light” tale works as a dangerous cultural tool:

In the book, it was mentioned that Skeeter's father owned a cotton farm.

But see, this is what the book's "history light" approach and new narrative of that era does not mention: cotton was the economic king of the South that built economic assets for the owners of those farms and plantations AS WELL AS economic opportunities and assets for that region; including for those whites who were not active enslavers. And that helped build an entire culture -- such as the one that was the support for all the individual acts of racial apartheid in the book -- that fueled the racial privilege of whites and the racial oppression for African Americans (Afrikan Descendants).

And although the book does not say, I wonder whether that farm that Skeeter's father owned was inherited and whether Skeeter's education -- and the education of her brother, who was in law school -- was financed through the wealth and the access and opportunity that came from ownership of that cotton farm. I wonder whether Skeeter's family line included plantation owners who enslaved Minnie's and Aibileene's ancestors there. We already know that the same culture that fueled the rise of Skeeter’s family and families like hers was the often-insurmountable barrier that denied comparable opportunity and access to those African American families they employed as their domestics.

So if all that comes from the on-going cross country discussions about "The Help" is buy-in to a new “feel good” narrative about the false role of whites in the movement of that era and a glee about Minnie desecrating HER OWN KITCHEN – where her children ate! – to make a Dung Pie for her white employer without any talk of the connections between what happened then, what is going on now, and what society needs to do to repair that generational damage, then I have a HUGE problem with this love affair with “The Help.”

Because this exposes where we are as a country on the history of Racial Apartheid: our lack of willingness to look at hard historical facts and perspectives and our comfort level with feel good lies that hold us all in bondage.

And while I am quite sure that the author did not intend it in this way, how the book ends is the truest statement she made of the historical relationship between African Americans and whites: while the Black "Help" are left waiting for the fallout that threatens their livelihood -- and even their lives -- because of the risks THEY took to write the book that gave Skeeter the opportunity to climb yet another rung on the American ladder of success, climb she does: over their sweat, their tears, their tragedies, their stories, and their bodies to New York to begin the fabulous new career she has always wanted, with a salary that gives her some measure of financial independence.

More than anything else in the book, THAT part of it -- historically – rang very true.*

Moving Forward,

Adar

* The author of "The Help" is being sued by her brother's maid for using her name (in the book, "Aibileene Clark", in real life, Ablene Cooper) and likeness without permission or compensation. As was part of the character "Aibileene's" story in the book, Ms. Cooper has a gold tooth and had an adult son who died just before the birth of her white employer's first child. The author's publisher insists that there is no basis to Ms. Cooper's lawsuit.

** For a non-fictional read, go to http://historymatters.gmu.edu/d/80/ "We Are Literally Slaves": An Early Twentieth-Century Black Nanny Sets the Record Straight.

Appreciation, Appropriation, and Micro-aggressions

2011-07-25T10:51:00.007-04:00

Okay, so I have been thinking about this for awhile, mostly because my work on these issues and because of what I see as a growing trend of those with white skin privilege: at what point does “appreciation” -- the recognition of the quality, value, significance, or magnitude of people and things -- become “appropriation” -- the act of setting apart or taking for one's own use (personal, commercial, cultural, etc), often without the consent of the owner? And does racialized and cultural “appreciation” and “appropriation” blind us to the racial micro-aggressions –“everyday insults, indignities and demeaning messages sent to people of color by [the] well-intentioned who are unaware of the hidden messages being sent to them”, as defined by Asian-American Columbia University psychologist Derald Wing Sue, PhD – that people of color regularly experience?

Now, bear with me here . . .

We see racial appropriations all the time. They are like the air we breathe, the water we taste: expected, unnoticed, and necessary. From TV shows who use hip hop and other music to emphasize story lines and the actors in them as being "cool" and "hip" and "street smart" and "dangerous" -- and other adjectives that are racialized as the cultural norm -- while only using white actors as the lead characters; to young white suburbanites who are the major purchasers of hip hop music; to these self same youth who easily purchase and walk around decked out in the hip hop styles that Afrikan Descendant youth can't afford; to the white people we see walking down the streets in dreadlocks and who will argue that dreadlocks are not an indigenous style from the loins of the Afrikan Diaspora but is instead a "lifestyle choice" found naturally in all cultures (free tip: don’t fall for that. . .).

Appropriation – otherwise known as being a “culture vulture” (someone who not only racially appropriates but makes reputation and money off that appropriation – for example, Elvis Presley, Eminem, and Quintin Tarantino are names that are often mentioned. . .) -- has long been part of the American Narrative. And although one could debate the degree to which America in 2011 finds its Afrikan descended citizens palatable – despite the election of President Obama – there can be little credible argument regarding the role of America’s racial appropriation and white-washed assimilation into the white cultural narrative the cultural markers of Afrikan Descendants.

So now here we are in 2011, and because of what has become the “norm” in the American Narrative as racial appreciation and marketed and prostituted through racial appropriation, we have normalized more than ever racial micro-aggressions.

In other words, we have people – acting individually or under institutional authority -- who feel free to act out their racial biases with unconscious abandon. Think about the debate that percolates just under the surface (and in many cases, on top of it) about whether it is “racist” for white people to say “nigger” since Afrikan Descendants say it in rap songs. Or whether pulling a college student off a plane and arresting him because of an originating complaint about his pants not being pulled up – while letting a white man dressed in ONLY women’s lingerie regularly fly with the same airline without complaint or incident is “racist.” Or commemorating the Civil War and “celebrating” soldiers on both sides while divorcing the national narrative of the war from the horrible crime of enslavement and 100+ years of American Apartheid (how must that feel to Afrikan Descendants?). Or a rising-in-popularity party that has as almost an anthem the phrase “take our country back” within the context of the country’s first Afrikan Descendant president?

When conversations such as this one are raised, many say that folk are being too “sensitive” and just need to get over it.

But Sue and his colleagues are building upon the works of African American psychiatrist Chester M. Pierce (who first coined the term racial micro-aggressions) and African American Stanford University psychology professor Dr. Claude Steele (who is known for, among other things, his groundbreaking work on stereotype threat) to explore and document how the societal normality of these “psychological slings and arrows” erode mental health, the quality of social experience, identity, and even job performance.

"It's a monumental task to get white people to realize that they are delivering micro-aggressions, because it's scary to them," Sue asserts. "It assails their self-image of being good, moral, decent human beings to realize that maybe at an unconscious level they have biased thoughts, attitudes and feelings that harm people of color."

Sue is developing a theory and classification system to describe and measure this slice of American life that is as old and familiar as our national apple pie. He first proposed a classification of racial micro-aggressions and how they manifest in clinical practice in the American Psychologist (Vol. 2, No. 4). The three types of current racial transgressions that he notes there are:

Micro-assaults: Intentional actions or slurs, such as using racial epithets, displaying swastikas or deliberately serving a white person before a person of color in a restaurant.

Micro-insults: Nonverbal communications that subtly convey rudeness and insensitivity and demean a person's racial heritage or identity. An example is an employee who asks a colleague of color how she got her job, implying she may have landed it through an affirmative action or quota system.

Micro-invalidations: Communications that subtly exclude, negate or nullify the thoughts, feelings or experiential reality of a person of color. For instance, white people often ask Asian-Americans where they were born, conveying the message that they are perpetual foreigners in their own land.

Social psychologists Jack Dovidio of Yale University, and Samuel L. Gaertner, PhD, of the University of Delaware, have also conducted studies that established that many well-intentioned whites who consciously believe in and profess equality unconsciously act in a racist manner, particularly in ambiguous circumstances. This often unconscious pattern -- one that is not necessarily grounded in any white supremacist ideology but refers in part to the aversion of whites to being seen as engaging in racialized thinking -- especially given the conscious belief of these people in the adherence to racial equity principles (these are the people who will triumphantly crow or quietly beam that they “marched with Martin Luther King”; or that they have Black people in the family [“my son/daughter is married to a Black woman/man. . .”]; or that they have “given my life to the struggle”) -- is called “aversive racism."

Because whites very rarely-to-never are held accountable for incidents of aversive racism or micro-aggressions, and because the impact to people of color in the face of the same is that they are left dealing with the emotional baggage and confusion or social condemnation if they call a white person out on the behavior (as surfacing such behavior will lead to denials that such a thing took place, as well as the onus being turned on the person surfacing such behavior as being "the problem" while the micro-aggressive attacker is treated as the one being attacked), it is important to understand aversive racism, micro-aggressions, and the whole vocabulary. Surfacing and understanding these prevailing types of racialized manifestations in the 21st Century provides us all with education, protection, and a base of empowerment when it (inevitably) occurs.

Moving Forward,

Adar

MEMORIAL DAY: WHOM SHOULD WE HONOR?

2011-05-30T17:03:00.003-04:00

I think about this every Memorial Day, but this year – the year that we are also “celebrating” the 150th anniversary of the Civil War – is a good time for a public pondering: what are we really honoring when we acknowledge Memorial Day?

On November 19, 1863 – widely acknowledged as the first observance of what would be called Memorial Day, although it was not declared a national holiday until 1971 – Abraham Lincoln delivered the Gettysburg Address in dedicating a cemetery for fallen soldiers. He said:

“That from these honored dead we take increased devotion of that cause which they gave the last full measure of devotion . . . that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom. . .”

Yet on this day, we also honor soldiers who, certainly, were not fighting so that others would have “a new birth of freedom.”

Others were, however, and their struggles and sacrifices should be included and honored on this day. They were not necessarily the military veterans of which Lincoln spoke; in fact, military pathways for them were banned or obstacle-laden. And their service – as military soldiers and as civilian Racial Apartheid Freedom Fighters -- was denigrated, overlooked, and for the majority of this country’s existence, relegated to the back pages of its history.

These domestic Freedom Fighters served in the full spirit of Abraham Lincoln’s remarks. Some served publically and some served quietly, but all served under the noses of American laws which supported every defense of American Racial Apartheid. Soldiers in these wars were Afrikan Descendant and they were white, working apart and together, living embodiments of dreams for “a new birth of freedom.”

It is they, above all others, who brought us here today. It is they whom we should be honoring today and every day. It is they, above all, who deserve remembrances and gratitude, in the spirit of Abraham Lincoln’s words and hope for this day.

And yet here we are, another year, and they who deserve it the most continue to be overlooked and just plain ol’ dissed on this day.

So this is my “shout out” to those Warriors and Transformers, with Thanks, and Gratitude, and Appreciation. On this day especially, I acknowledge your sacrifices, which were made beyond measure and reason. You lived up to a vision that America, for all its words, spat upon every day for the majority of its existence. You are whom I think of whenever I read the words: “That from these honored dead we take increased devotion of that cause which they gave the last full measure of devotion . . . that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom. . .”

Quite simply, because You Were, I Am, and others have a chance to be . . .

Your examples continue to inspire me, and your Spirit is needed as we are quickly slipping backward to America’s Racial Apartheid roots. But that is another story and should not mar this, the day we remember you.

And you are who I honor on this day, for because of you, I have opportunity to say and pray that we are:

Moving Forward,

Adar

WITH BIN LADEN’S DEATH, WILL OBAMA FINALLY BE SEEN AS “AMERICAN”?

2011-05-11T12:21:00.004-04:00

Well, America has finally -- on President Obama's watch -- tracked down Osama bin Laden, who was hiding in plain sight, and killed him -- allegedly unarmed -- in his compound.

After 10 years, $1,291-plus trillion spent*, and more than 12,2712 American military casualties** (deaths and those wounded in action; this does not include Iraqi, Afghan and Pakistani casualties), President Obama finally did what George Bush so wanted to do but couldn't: kill Osama bin Laden and avenge the 9/11 attack in American soil.

And after a week of media orgy covering every unclassified aspect of the raid and as I watched repeated images of young -- and mostly white -- Americans literally dancing in the streets celebrating Osama Bin Laden's death, one question kept running through my mind: I wonder if white America will FINALLY give Obama his "freedom papers" and concede once and for all that he is American and Christian and -- that Holy Grail word when white America is talking about anyone who is not white, but most especially African Americans -- Qualified.

From the Tea Party to professional self-promoter Donald Trump, President Obama's politics (including the characterization of his healthcare policy as "reparations" to Black America) and person (seriously, do I really need to give examples?), have been racialized and put under unrelenting assault to prove to white America that his perceived "otherness" will not betray their interests.

So we have had the 3 year campaign for President Obama to release the long-form of his birth certificate. And immediately after its release, we've seen a grassroots campaign mobilizing around proving it’s a forgery.

Now we have Donald Trump clamoring for the release of President Obama's school transcripts, stating:

"I heard he was a terrible student, terrible. How does a bad student go to Columbia and then to Harvard? I'm thinking about it, I'm certainly looking into it. Let him show his records."

In this Associated Press interview, he went on to say "I have friends who have smart sons with great marks, great boards, great everything and they can't get into Harvard. We don't know a thing about this guy. There are a lot of questions that are unanswered about our president."

And -- just so we understand that Trump speaks for more than just a small, marginalized segment of society -- his questions about Obama's legitimacy as a United States citizen and as someone who is "qualified" to be president shot him to the top of the polls as a Republican presidential candidate contender. Not only that, his allegations have been treated as serious news by "mainstream" media (which is to say, media where the news "lens" of newscasters, their "experts", and their audiences are not generally inclusive of the world views and experiences of people of color).

USA history, in relation to its African American population, has example after example of the very clear message that generations of African Americans have received: that there is nothing people of color can do to instill white America’s confidence in and respect for their merit accomplishments. And in this instance yet another generation is having reinforced the old adage that African Americans have to be "twice as good to get half as much" played out through the example of President Obama.

We are seeing that even graduating magna cum laude and as president of the prestigious Harvard Law Review -– noteworthy accomplishments by any measure but extraordinary accomplishments considering the school's history, culture and climate -- does not insulate people of color from having to prove that they are merit worthy. It reaffirms that no matter how accomplished, no matter how smart, no matter how many credentials they have, they are somehow “less than”, in terms of their intellectual capacity, and that their accomplishments can be challenged and called out at any time. It reaffirms the historical racial and power dynamics of this country.

Unless "Trumpers", Tea Partiers, or other naysayers have proof in their back pockets that President Obama’s accomplishments were somehow rigged -- and unless they are willing to go on record accusing Columbia and Harvard of collaborating and colluding with Barack Obama in false academic achievement -- THEIR motives and biases should be scrutinized and THEY should be called to explain their racialized rumor-mongering. THAT should be the "serious news story" to which the mainstream press gives credence. America has an opportunity here to say that long-gone are the days when any and every white person can call into question a person of color's achievements -- or citizenship, for that matter -- based on a feeling or whim and have it taken seriously. They have an opportunity to pull the white sheets off the heads of those who would put the burden of proof on a person of color to disprove such ramblings.

Let me put this another way: if President Obama -- with his centrist, colorblind universalist philosophy, record of achievement at Ivy League schools, and direct connection to "whiteness" -- has to show his "papers", what hope can the rest of us have in a country where the "wrong" skin color seems to trump honest merit every single time?

And so here we are. Bin Laden has fallen and America is in a "feel good" moment, on Obama's watch.

Let's see how many of those who count themselves as Americans are willing to concede that President Obama is too. Let's see how many of them will speak out, demand a stop to this newest round of madness, and give President Obama his "freedom papers" of citizenship, religion, and merit qualifications for holding the office of president.

Moving Forward,

Adar

* Congressional Research Service, "The Cost of Iraq, Afghanistan, and Other Global War on Terror Operations Since 9/11". Belasco, Amy, 3.29.11 (Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress).

** US Department of Defense, Statistical Information Analysis Division,
http://siadapp.dmdc.osd.mil/personnel/CASUALTY/oefmonth.pdf.

THE INDUSTRY OF "RACISM REPENTANCE"

2011-04-20T10:04:00.006-04:00

Here we go again, as Ronald Reagan famously said.

For the umpteenth time – and quite frankly, I’ve lost count – someone says or does something that is historically contextual in-your-face-racism and then -– after days of denying that they've done anything wrong –- issues a weak apology to anyone who “. . .was offended by my action” along with an excuse such as "at the time I received and forwarded the email, I didn't stop to think about the historic implications and other examples of how this could be offensive.”

Yes, yes, I’m talking about 74 year old Marilyn Davenport, elected official of the California Orange County Republican Central Committee, self-described “Christian” Sunday school teacher, and a woman who is now claiming that –- at 74 years old -– she is somehow clueless to the “. . . historic implications and other examples of how this” –- and by “this” she meant sending out an e-mail depicting President Obama and his family as chimps -- “. . . could be offensive.”

Well, I don’t buy what she is trying to sell and neither should you.

Depicting African Americans as monkeys has a long history in the popular culture of this country. Examples abound, including and especially from two sources that consciously, systematically, and “benignly” inculcates Americans into cultural thought: popular entertainment and the media. From the 1933 “classic” King Kong; the ubiquitous Disney machine’s offerings, such as a 1948 Mickey Mouse book, “Mickey Mouse and Boy Thursday” (where Mickey the Mouse receives a crate full or West African bananas only to find an sub-humanly drawn African in the crate instead) and a 1967 film, “The Jungle Book”, showing a Black ape-like King Louie; to countless European and American pictures, texts, and other images, America has a long and despicable history of depicting African Descendants as monkeys, chimps, gorillas, and apes.**

For SEVENTY-FOUR year old Marilyn Davenport to claim that she did not think about the implications of her e-mail is ludicrous.

The LA Times reported this written message from her (emphasis is mine):

“I’m sorry if my email offended anyone, I simply found it amusing regarding the character of Obama and all the questions surrounding his origin of birth.” In no way did I even consider the fact he’s half black when I sent out the email. In fact, the thought never entered my mind until one or two other people tried to make this about race. We all know a double standard applies regarding this president. I received plenty of emails about George Bush that I didn’t particularly like, yet there was no ‘cry’ in the media about them.”

Now come one!!! Isn’t it funny – and not in a “ha ha” way – how President Obama all of a sudden becomes “half black” when people are trying to back their way out of a charge of racism? As if American history is not replete with examples of “half black” people and other people of African descent being enslaved, lynched, raped, AND being depicted as monkeys. Because in this society – and correct me if I am wrong here – “half black” has meant “all Black and we are asking no other questions, Nigger” if one did not hold white skin privilege.

For Ms. Davenport –- at 74 years of age, and with all the historical perspective of that –- to claim that race did not enter in this shows, more than any words can say, the arrogance with which she holds her own white privilege at the expense of the historical oppression of others.

Scott Baugh, Orange County’s Republican chairman, rightly said that he condemned her actions despite her apology and he believed that she should resign. But do he and others believe that enough to mount an intra-party campaign for her to do so?

Because in the industry of “racism repentance” what does an “I’m sorry” mean if you –- or your party or your government or your businesses or your country –- continue to do it again and again?

Moving Forward,

Adar

** For more information on the depictions of African Descendants by Europeans and white Americans, see Winthrop Jordan’s study “White Over Black.”

"FOR WHITES ONLY" SCHOLARSHIPS: BACK TO THE FUTURE

2011-04-10T12:46:00.000-04:00

"For Whites Only" scholarships take you back to the "good old days" when the concept of white entitlement was a given: the overriding custom, law, and influencer of opportunity and access affecting all aspects of life from cradle to grave.

For less than 50 years -- and that would be less than a quarter of this country's long, sordid history of institutional racial terrorism and oppression of African Americans to the benefit of whites as a group, mind you -- programs have been put in place to try to "even" a racial playing field in a country that has yet to acknowledge the severity of the impact of racial terrorism on generations of its citizens of color or the myriads of ways in which its white citizens continue to benefit, especially economically (www.racialwealthdivide.org/color_of_wealth).

Yet a new generation of young white men in Texas and elsewhere -- the same generation famously touted as being "colorblind" and "post-racial" -- have decided to take a "blast from the past" and institute their own form of Jim Crow, 21st Century style, with the introduction of scholarships for whites / white men only.

In its most recent incarnation, 28 year old founder and Iraqi veteran Colby Bohannan says "We're not racists, just guys trying to help young Americans." He says "In the landscape of the scholarship foundations in this country, there is just one demographic that does not have a single dedicated scholarship, and that demographic is white males. That's the gap we're trying to fill” (www.ABCNews.com).

Although careful to distance their group’s philosophical perspectives and motives from "extreme" white supremacist groups, they heartily continue the (white) American tradition and mindset of ignoring the historical and on-going manifestations of institutional racism, opting instead for a "fish in water" approach to the issue: if you are a fish, you do not see your water privilege --even though you swim in it every day (or maybe because of that?) -- until you see your exclusive right to the water being threatened.

Although much of the recent press has been about the Texas "For White Men Only" scholarship, this concept, and the white racial victimology that drives it, is not new or strictly Southern.

Any rudimentary Google search will bring up pages on the subject, including one, established in 2004 by a Republican student organization at Roger Williams University in Bristol, Rhode Island and another established by college Republicans at Boston University in 2006.

Those who create “For Whites Only” scholarships are disingenuous in their logic about the purpose. They ignore the vast number of opportunities and scholarships at their disposal. They also very deliberately and willfully ignore the fact that what they term "affirmative action" scholarships account for less than 4% of college scholarships.* They are ignore a couple of other very pertinent facts: that those 4%of scholarships targeted toward racially marginalized groups were created less than 50 years ago -- in their parents and grandparents time -- when scholarships and most opportunities were "For Whites Only"; that they are still economic and social beneficiaries of privileges bought as a result of the racial oppression of the very groups they accuse of receiving "racial preferences" today; and that they, as a group, still hold the "golden ticket" when comparing life opportunities and chances of any other racial group.

So what gives here? Draw your own conclusions -- panic over changing racial demographics that have whites seeing themselves as "minorities" and "victims" because of the color of their skin, stoking their racial fears; the changing national and global economic climate which stokes their racial insecurities and fears; inch-worm slow movement toward a semblance of "racial equity" which stokes their racial insecurities and fears; and a myopic view of life, centered on the fast growing concept of white racial victimhood which obliterates historical perspective and all data regarding current racial realities of life's opportunities and chances.

(Sigh)

As a country we are famously ahistorical, and whites as a group -- famously -- seem to have perfected a form of collective amnesia when it comes to acknowledging and truly seeing the day-to-day impact of their continuing white privilege, even as they pass the baton of this legacy to succeeding generations.

But whether we as a country acknowledge the slippery historical slope of "For Whites Only" scholarships or continue to falsely equate them with so-called "affirmative action" scholarships, one thing is for sure:

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."**

Moving Forward (or, in this case, Back),

ADAR

*U.S. General Accounting Office, 1994. “Information on Minority Targeted Scholarships,” B251634. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, January.

**George Santayana, Reason in Common Sense, The Life of Reason, Vol.1

"CAN YOUTH LEAD?"

2011-04-03T11:13:00.003-04:00

Wow. After an extended period of disinterest in blogging -- I mean, what is there to say that others have not discussed, either with more clarity and insight or just clogging up the blogosphere -- I finally came across a topic that has pulled me back in.

I had the privilege of participating as a panelist in a Leaders of a Beautiful Struggle Freedom Forum titled "Can Youth Lead". Great topic, but my oh my did our unconscious "Western" philosophical perspectives show as we fell all over ourselves affirming youth leadership. We spoke about the leadership of youth in every movement in America while leaving out the strategic context of putting youth bodies on the front lines - not because youth were leaders (although some were) but because of the strategic hope that perhaps the white supremacist agents of the state would be more humanistic towards youth than adults (as history records, they weren't).

We spoke about the leadership of Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X and discussed them as "youth leaders" when in reality they were young ADULT leaders with families of their own. They were PARENTS, REAL PARENTS taking care of their children while facing real risks (not just "Baby Mamas" and "Baby Daddys" who paraded their children as new accessories before handing them off to grandparents or foster parents responsible for their day-to-day care . . .but I digress).

Finally, during the forum's Q & A period, one 17 year old stated that youth -- she in particular -- should be on panels like this because, after all, she was 17 and was a youth and had opinions while everyone else on the panel were adults. One panelist immediately ceded her seat to the youth, who went on to mis-characterize what panelists had said about youth leadership. Only one panelist dared to challenge her mis-framing of what the other adults on the panel had said, while the others watched in indulgence and affirmation. No one challenged her on her seeming belief that individuals with actual bodies of work and expertise on these issues that transcended the scope of personal experience, could actually be advocates with insights to share in this forum. As adults on the panel, we failed -- miserably and completely -- in our responsibility to make that happening a "teachable moment" and an example. Acknowledging this does not negate that 17 year old's point, but it is an example of how we adults fail in our roles of teachers of respect and models of appropriateness to younger generations.

There was much talk by panelists about getting back to the communal interdependent Afrikan model of community that has brought us so far in surviving and even thriving in this country. But in that model, adults were ADULTS who did not cede their responsibilities AS ADULTS to learning youth. ADULTS parented, educated, taught, nurtured, modeled, listened to and mentored youth, readying them for leadership and the assumption of their place as responsible adults in society. Youth LEARNED to lead. FROM ADULTS.

Have we so assimilated that we have fallen into the trap of believing that "children shall lead us" (and can we please acknowledge already that we so take this Bible quote out of context!)? If we truly believe that this is the case, then why parent youth? Why protect them? Why guide and nurture them, why impose standards and parameters for their safety? Western society tries to have it both ways -- on the one hand, it says that we need to protect, shield, and teach youth. On the other hand, it promotes an "our children shall lead us" philosophy that fuels the entitlement thinking among youth that youth for youth's sake is enough to lead and adults should just listen to and hear their wisdom and follow their lead.

Let me put it this way: if you are not willing to say that you will allow your teenage youth to lead in your home -- to run your home -- then why are we willing to sign on to the fiction that they are ready to lead in forums that are not appropriate to their levels of experience, expertise, or skills? As one panelist said, we should tell the truth! And the truth is that there are different scales of leadership and certainly arenas appropriate to youth who are learning to be leaders or who are leaders in some of those arenas. But leading outside of those arenas? Taking on the full scale of risk, responsibility, and accountability that those in the full bloom of leadership take? Don't try to sell me that putting youth leaders in those arenas is an Afrikan model or responsible behavior.

What is wrong with this picture? Are we afraid -- in a youth obsessed society -- to be adults, to be Elders, with all that means? Is that why we run from the responsibilities of those roles and from the voices of those individuals speaking unpopular truths in this society about the differences between youth and adults and about the critical role of experience gained from life's journey? Do we run because we are trying first and foremost to be friends with youth instead of stepping up to our central role of preparing them? Or do we run because we are still trying to BE them?

If we are still claiming -- at 24, 26, 30 and older -- that we are "youth" instead of young adults, adults, and Elders, we need to seriously take a look at ourselves and figure out why we are clinging to an extended state of self-described adolescence -- and whose model we are emulating and assimilating into -- even if and while we are stepping up to the work.

And if adults and Elders believe that youth can "lead" them in forums where experiences, expertise, a body of work, a wider worldview, and life "seasoning" greatly inform decisions as parents and leaders, then we have larger issues to discuss: namely the abdication of our own roles, as adults, in their lives.

Moving Forward!

ADAR

"A Nation of Cowards. . ."

2009-02-24T20:14:00.004-05:00

Well, it didn’t take long for the knives to come out to make piecemeal of Attorney General Eric Holder’s speech to his staff on race in America (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hmU5UV3bnuM).

The outrage expressed by the Sunday morning white news pundits (and Juan Williams) and talk radio hosts about Eric Holder’s even speaking about race -- especially in his official capacity as Attorney General – was jaw-dropping and instructive. They complained and blustered about A. G. Holder’s “. . .framing things through a racial lens. . .” and they opined that his doing so was “liberal elitism” and “racism” (??!!!!) since we now have an Afrikan descendant president.

Eric Holder’s speech has once again revealed the “fault lines” around race:

· Much of white amerikkka believes that America’s “racial problems” have been solved. As proof, they point to Barack Obama, the newly elected and first Black president. Many Afrikan descendants –- and other people of color and some whites –- know that this is not true. . .

· Much of white amerikkka is in shock –- and anger –- over any mention of race which speaks historical truths outside of the self-laudatory “privileged beliefs” of America that are lifted up and held dear. Many African Americans (Afrikan descendants), however, are saying “FINALLY. . .”

President Obama –- who has backed away from Attorney General Holder’s remarks –- and his staff have been remarkably restrained in and on discussions of race, the phrase “nation of cowards” notwithstanding.

It is so sad –- and so telling –- that even now at this pivotal moment in history, America STILL shies away from honest, real and gritty dialogue about race, continuing to pretend that the election of Barack Obama takes the place of honestly assessing and repairing the impact of amerikkka’s 400 year history of racial domestic terrorism on Afrikans and their descendants.

It is so sad –- and so telling –- that even now we refuse to look at and acknowledge the continuing impact of American Apartheid because we don’t want to see the lie of the myths of America as opposed to the reality of amerikkka as experienced by people of color. We don’t want to compare their experiences and standing to that afforded its white population by the affirmative action -– called “For Whites Only” –- practiced from the conception of this nation to the mid-1960s.

We choose not to look too deeply . . .

And we choose to excoriate and demonize those who do . . .

“A nation of cowards” on honestly looking at and addressing the history and continuing impact of race?

Sounds about right to me. . .

Moving Forward!

Adar

INAUGURATION DAY THOUGHTS: WHAT ABOUT JUSTICE?

2009-01-20T10:48:00.006-05:00

As I watch Inauguration Day activities and commentary, I am just awed –- and not in a good way –- at the “spin” being spun “. . . from sea to shining sea” regarding the significance of this election and Inauguration Day.

If you believe the media –- as well as so many whites and some Afrikan descendants –- today is either “the culmination of a dream”; “the end of a struggle”; and / or “the culmination of what we’ve been fighting for.”

Seriously? We’ve been fighting for an Afrikan descendant in the White House?

Now, MAKE NO MISTAKE, I stand with those who acknowledge this historical moment and I fully support those who celebrate this historical moment. . .I understand its emotion, its significance, its resonance to so many who have fought for so long. . .

However, my question is “BUT WHAT ABOUT JUSTICE?”

Because, see, that is what I thought was at the heart of the fight against racial apartheid and the other forms of oppression that was (were) delivered as a cherished twin (along with “freedom”) in the birthing of America and nurtured for the majority of its history.

The fight for JUSTICE has lasted for 400 years . . . are we saying now that the struggle that cost so many lives (physically and metaphorically, in terms of the hopes and opportunities of A People) and spilled so much blood was so an Afrikan descendant can be the head of a country where deep inequities grow by the day, or be the “Black face” of a country that has chosen for so many years to follow an imperialistic agenda?

Do we say “oh, that’s okay now” and continue to support decisions and choices that may represent the best economic, political, and power interest of this country –- at the expense of other countries and peoples because there is an Afrikan descendant at the helm?

Is this truly the culmination of “the dream”, the beginning of what is being heralded as a “post racial” America when $419 million in Black wealth is being lost through foreclosures; when prisons where Black youth are being incarcerated in record numbers are one of the few thriving growth industries; where for every dollar of white per capita income, Afrikan descendants had only 57.5 cents in 2005 – down .2 cents from 2002? Where Afrikan descendants and whites will achieve parity in high-school graduation rates by 2013, but won’t achieve parity at the college level until 2075? Where –- for other communities – 80% of accumulated lifetime wealth begins with a gift from a relative, while for nearly 80% of Afrikan descendant children, the journey toward accumulated wealth begins with no assets whatsoever? (Stat sources: The Reinvestment Fund, University of California, Santa Barbara; US Census Bureau; and United for a Fair Economy)

Yes, America is now in love with President Barack Obama, but will that love extend to the rest of the Afrikan descendant community? Or the majority-Brown and Black global community? Will it extend past this moment to the greater issue of JUSTICE?

Today I pray that this country has the courage and fortitude to ride the wave of this moment past self-congratulations for choosing one man (who finds America increasingly stripping him of his self-identification as “African American” and imposing on him their identification as “Bi-racial”) to embracing the moment in history in which his election and presidency affords us: inspiration and motivation to mobilize and organize in support of a true JUSTICE agenda.

Then we can all be guaranteed to stand on the right side of history, not only in symbolism but in truth.

Moving Forward!

Adar

"NO MORE EXCUSES"

2009-01-08T20:32:00.001-05:00

The closer we come to the inauguration of President-elect Barack Obama, the more I'm hearing from communities both Afrikan descendant (African American) and white the phrase "no more excuses."

As in "Now African Americans have no excuse not to succeed."

As in "Now African Americans will stop being able to play 'the race card'."

Hmmmmm. . .tell me, what is THAT about?

I concede that there is a certain segment of any population that will look for excuses, use "crutches", or otherwise give up and stay down when they fall.

But what bothers me about the increasingly blanket use of this phrase is its implication that the majority of us HAVE been using "excuses"; HAVE been using this country's generational practice of racism-white supremacy as crutches; and HAVE a history of staying down in the face of its manifestations and impact.

But, of course, our history of accomplishment tells us that this is not so.

So what the heck is going on here. . .really?

The use of this phrase by African Americans makes me wonder IF and to what extent we know -– truly know -- our own history, because if we are repeatedly using this phrase, we have clearly not internalized our history of success in the face of generational institutional and systemic oppression.

The use of this phrase by whites evokes the standard dismissals of the generational impact of the system of racism-white supremacy and belittles the damage done by that system. It also reinforces the typical "blame the victim" mentality and finger-pointing that usually accompanies these types of discussions.

Even Dick Cheney, for goodness' sakes, has seemed to grasp the concept of psychological damage that individuals bear when dealing with sustained domestic terrorism. If EVEN HE can acknowledge that psychological damage to Iraqis' as a result of years of institutional and systemic oppression (January 4th Face the Nation interview), why is it so hard for Americans to acknowledge that many issues in the Afrikan descendant community stem not from "excuses" but from the psychological damage of a people generationally abused by the institution of racism-white supremacy?

Or is it that we're once again caught in the historic "double standard" that allows empathy and objective understanding for the impact of terrorism (domestic or international) for every group of people but African descendants?

So, am I suggesting that we condone and reward those who do fall down, lay down, or who were born "down" without the resources or access to get back up?

No. . .

But I am suggesting that we acknowledge that there will be those in any institutionally and generationally oppressed group who have "fallen and cannot get up"; that we do not dismiss or trivialize the very real impact of racism-white supremacy on those who have psychologically given up; and that we not add "insult to injury" by absolving ourselves –- as a country that for 80+% of its history bears responsibility, through its system of LEGAL American Racial Apartheid -- for creating and maintaining the conditions that "seeded" this population.

Not everybody has the psychological fortitude of –- well, forget Barack Obama, let's use as examples those many other Afrikan-descended individuals who live and achieve every day, even as they are stereotyped, demonized, and / or ignored.

Yes, a few will use "excuses." And many more will continue the African American legacy of accomplishment. But, come on, let's openly acknowledge that for a percentage of the population who will not succeed, it is easier for us as a country to berate them for using "excuses" than it is to explore or acknowledge that as one impact of the legacy of racism-white supremacy.

Most of us will do as our Ancestors have done: negotiate through existing racism-white supremacy and accomplish despite it. And some of us –- because of a penchant for making "excuses", because of lack of an emotional and familial structure and roadmap, and/or because of lack of emotional or psychological fortitude -- will not.

Let's acknowledge that reality -- "No more excuses."

Moving Forward!

Adar

'TIS THE SEASON. . .

2008-12-25T08:58:00.001-05:00

‘Tis the Season to once again see who and what we are really worshiping: Christ or Consumerism.

Although it is easy to forget, this is really a spiritual and religious holiday -- and I'm not talking about worshiping at the altar of consumerism, although we genuflect at that altar en masse every year about this time.

But this year it is different: we are in the middle of an economic crises such as we have not seen since, many say, the Great Depression. People -- especially Afrikan descendants (African Americans) -- are losing homes, jobs, and life savings; are hanging on, having survived gas prices of almost $5.00 per gallon, ARM loans that doubled the price of mortgages and foreclosed homes like falling Dominos; and long-established companies folding as quickly as a bad poker hand.

People are running scared and feeling grateful for just holding on. . .

Just in time to go out and amass MORE debt in the name of Christmas.

You'd think we'd be dropping to our knees and giving thanks in prayer for surviving, economically, in a year that many have not. You'd think that, for Christians, the focus would be on the "Christ" in "Christmas" rather than on that other “C” -- Consumerism -- that we've been seduced to believing is ". . .the reason for the season."

It is at times like these when our faith (however we believe) needs to be front and center.

Or maybe -- through our need to "feed the beast" of materialism and consumerism even in the midst of so much economic pain -- we are truly showing who and what we are worshipping.

And it has nothing to do with Christ, so let’s stop faking it.

Holding in prayer you and all those you hold dear! Walk in faith, let Spirit surround you. . .and whatever you believe or are celebrating this Season, let it be deeper than consumerism and materialism.

Moving Forward!

Adar

THE ELECTION OF BARACK OBAMA: WILL YOU "TURN THE PAGE" OR "STAY THE COURSE"?

2008-11-05T08:17:00.001-05:00

Many of us are celebrating the election of Barack Obama as this country’s first Afrikan descendant president. And, of course, the historical implications of this moment cannot be denied.

But I do have a question. . .what is it that we are really celebrating about his victory?

IF – as so many political pundits have shared with their insistence on casting Barack Obama’s candidacy as “proof” of a “post-racial” world, what we are really celebrating is that which John McCain noted in his concession speech:

“America today is a world away from the cruel and frightful bigotry of that time. There is no better evidence of this than the election of an African-American to the presidency of the United States. Let there be no reason now. . .Let there be no reason now for any American to fail to cherish their citizenship in this, the greatest nation on Earth”

And if this is what we are really celebrating, what we are supporting is the notion that Barack Obama’s presidential victory means that racism / white supremacy is no longer in operation, is dead and buried, and can no longer be “used as an excuse” (as if that is what the majority of Afrikan descendants are doing when noting examples and impacts of racism/white supremacy on their lives).

With this victory narrative is the demand that we now “turn the page” because – as the media and other white amerikkkans (and some Afrikan descendants) are saying - with Barack Obama as president, the last institutional barriers of racism/white supremacy are now torn and we can -- at long last -- put “race” behind us.

In fact, that is one of the overriding themes of post-election coverage, and I’M SURE that that theme is one we’ll be hearing from white amerikkka in the days, months, and years to come, though the facts –- even and including the way Barack Obama had to claim “cultural invisibility” to successfully campaign and increase white amerikkka’s comfort level with him as a Black man -– do not support this rose-colored-glasses view.

But this is how the celebration story is shaping up and I’m sure that this will be the overriding narrative as the country moves forward, including the “Jeremiah Wright-ing” (so to speak) of those whose lives make it impossible to engage in the acts of self-hatred that denying the social/political/economic realities of racism in amerikkka would be.

So. . .having said this, I am prayerfully grateful for this historical moment. Am I “celebrating”?

Not quite. We have not “arrived” anywhere yet, and despite victory, the acknowledged concessions that Barack and Michelle Obama had to make in order to “adjust” to the racist/white supremacist climate of this country –- still -- just reinforced how far we have to go on this issue (“post-racial”? still wishful thinking. . .). (In that same vein, the way that white amerikkka insists upon simplifying and dismissing this as an issue just shows how much they want to “turn the page” without thought, reflection, or analysis.)

But yet. . .

I am hopeful that maybe this country will now have an administration that is open to “staying the course” and advancing the work of Justice.

I am open and prayerful that we will NOT choose to “turn the page” as if generations of my family and yours did not matter. This country still owes a great debt of acknowledgement and restitution of great and continuing wrongs to those of us whose physical, spiritual, mental, emotional, and economic well-being have been lost on the altar of the white worship in which this country has spent the bulk of its existence engaged.

No one election, no one Afrikan descendant in the presidency will “make up for”, sweep aside, or “turn the page” on that; not unless we are willing to abandon and dismiss the sacrifices of those who have come before; those upon whose shoulders we stand.

IF what we are really celebrating stays here -– the election of Barack Obama –- with no plan of action to continue to work for justice; IF we just view his election to the White House AS the justice we seek; then we have lost our minds and the opportunity his election has provided.

Martin Luther King, Jr. stated not that long ago “the moral arc of the universe bends at the elbow of justice.”

Let’s hope that this is the beginning of that bend and let’s be mindful of what is really important:

· the opportunity to work with a new administration that will, hopefully, be committed to justice;

· the opportunity we have to “stay the course” in seeking justice; and

· the privilege to see justice through, for Our Ancestors, for Our Children, for The World.

Moving Forward!

Adar

SARAH PALIN AND THE DOUBLE STANDARD OF WHITE PRIVILEGE

2008-10-03T10:02:00.001-04:00

Have you noticed the feedback on Sarah Palin?

FIRST, talk about “shock and awe”!! Who would have thought that of all the candidates available to the Republican Party, Sarah Palin from Alaska would have been chosen, and defended (repeatedly!), as being “the best” that the Party had to offer?

THEN there were the disastrous (is there really any other word?) appearances and interviews with Katie Couric, among others.

AFTER WHICH WE HAD the debate with Democratic vice presidential candidate Joe Biden. . .

AND NOW WE ARE LIVING WITH the excited buzz about Gov. Palin because. . .BECAUSE SHE DIDN’T PUT HER FOOT IN HER MOUTH DURING THE DEBATE!!!

Yes, Sarah Palin can talk, read, and follow her debate programming (and that is not a dig) all at the same time (even though the answers she gave could apply to just about whatever question was asked of her) and the “shock and awe” and excitement that this little fact is generating - especially among Republicans – says so much about both their assessment of her and the cynicism with which she was chosen.

Other than “energy conservation”; the fact that she “can see Russia from [her] house”; and the fact that – most cynically and importantly - she is a young, white woman, Sarah Palin – I’ll just say it – has brought less to the table, in terms of experience, than a well-traveled, uninvited houseguest.

Many are comparing her background and experiences as COMPARABLE (!!!!!) and SUPERIOR (!!!!) to Barack Obama’s.

Doesn’t that just take you back to the “good old days” when one of the most relevant generational truisms of being Black in Amerikkka was that you “. . . have to be twice as good to get half as much”?

Isn’t it sad that – with the favorable comparison of Sarah Palin’s professional experiences to Barack Obama’s professional experiences, we see so baldly how that truism still applies, even as we talk about a “post-racial” Amerikkka?

How do you think Amerikkka would receive Barack Obama had he a string of disastrous interviews and appearances on national TV, where he exhibited so little grasp of the issues?

How do you think Amerikkka would receive Barack and Michelle Obama had they a teenage, pregnant, unwed daughter (can’t you just see the headlines and racial stereotypes leaping of the page and the blogosphere?)?

How is it that his professional attainments and expertise are even being compared to hers - as if there was a valid comparison in terms of educational attainment and professional experiences – and that people are debating whether he is “qualified” while bashing those who ask that same question of her?

And why is it that he – a PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE – is even being compared to her – a VICE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE – anyway, as if she were running for president. (Or is this Amerikkka unconsciously elevating Joe Biden to the position of leadership to stoke their comfort level with the Democratic ticket? Hmmmmm. . .)

And on an even more telling subject: how is it that many white people - and white women in particular - have favorable views of Sarah Palin but STILL QUESTION BARACK OBAMA’S READINESS TO LEAD?

Do you truly believe that if a person of color – or heck, even a white man, in this instance - had Gov. Palin’s resume, s/he would have been chosen to represent the Republican ticket as vice president?

I think we need to update that old truism. Because we see very clearly in this case that even being objectively “twice as good” isn’t necessarily good enough.

Well, Friends and Dissenters (you know you're all welcome here), I’M BACK!!!!

Hoping that you had a wonderful summer and anxious to know your thoughts on Sarah Palin and the elections.

Moving Forward!

Adar

YOUR WHITENESS IS SHOWING

2008-06-10T20:24:00.001-04:00

Well, WOW! The open letter below was written by Tim Wise, a noted white "anti-racist activist."

Now, I know we all have the attention span of about a minute on a good day (smile) but this piece -- long though it is! -- will leave you well-informed and with the general election coming up, "well-informed" is what we all need to be to understand what is happening, because you know that folk will be trying to tell you "don't believe your lying eyes."

All I have to say is THE BROTHA SPEAKS THE TRUTH about white women who are threatening to withhold their votes from Barack Obama -- or give their votes to John McCain -- in "protest" to Hillary Clinton's Democratic primary loss.

Now, I'm REALLY interested in hearing what "certain white women" have to say, so please take a read and then refer this blog to your favorite (or not so favorite) white women.

Sounds to me like "certain white women" have got some 'SPLAININ' to do!

Moving Forward,

Adar

Your Whiteness is Showing: An Open Letter to Certain White Women Who are Threatening to Withhold Support From Barack Obama in November

By Tim Wise
June 5, 2008

This is an open letter to those white women who, despite their proclamations of progressivism, and supposedly because of their commitment to feminism, are threatening to withhold support from Barack Obama in November. You know who you are.

I know that it's probably a bad time for this. Your disappointment at the electoral defeat of Senator Hillary Clinton is fresh, the sting is new, and the anger that animates many of you--who rightly point out that the media was often sexist in its treatment of the Senator--is raw, pure and justified.

That said, and despite the awkward timing, I need to ask you a few questions, and I hope you will take them in the spirit of solidarity with which they are genuinely intended. But before the questions, a statement if you don't mind, or indeed, even if (as I suspect), you will mind it quite a bit.

First, for those of you threatening to actually vote for John McCain and to oppose Senator Obama, or to stay home in November and thereby increase the likelihood of McCain winning and Obama losing (despite the fact that the latter's policy platform is virtually identical to Clinton's while the former's clearly is not), all the while claiming to be standing up for women...

For those threatening to vote for John McCain or to stay home and increase the odds of his winning (despite the fact that he once called his wife the c-word in public and is a staunch opponent of reproductive freedom and gender equity initiatives, such as comparable worth legislation), all the while claiming to be standing up for women...

For those threatening to vote for John McCain or to stay home and help ensure Barack Obama's defeat, as a way to protest what you call Obama's sexism (examples of which you seem to have difficulty coming up with), all the while claiming to be standing up for women...

Your whiteness is showing.

When I say your whiteness is showing this is what I mean: You claim that your opposition to Obama is an act of gender solidarity, in that women (and their male allies) need to stand up for women in the face of the sexist mistreatment of Clinton by the press. On this latter point--the one about the importance of standing up to the media for its often venal misogyny--you couldn't be more correct. As the father of two young girls who will have to contend with the poison of patriarchy all their lives, or at least until such time as that system of oppression is eradicated, I will be the first to join the boycott of, or demonstration on, whatever media outlet you choose to make that point. But on the first part of the above equation--the part where you insist voting against Obama is about gender solidarity--you are, for lack of a better way to put it, completely full of crap. And what's worse is that at some level I suspect you know it. Voting against Senator Obama is not about gender solidarity. It is an act of white racial bonding, and it is grotesque.

If it were gender solidarity you sought, you would by definition join with your black and brown sisters come November, and do what you know good and well they are going to do, in overwhelming numbers, which is vote for Barack Obama. But no. You are threatening to vote not like other women--you know, the ones who aren't white like you and most of your friends--but rather, like white men! Needless to say it is high irony, bordering on the outright farcical, to believe that electorally bonding with white men, so as to elect McCain, is a rational strategy for promoting feminism and challenging patriarchy. You are not thinking and acting as women, but as white people. So here's the first question: What the hell is that about?

And you wonder why women of color have, for so long, thought (by and large) that white so-called feminists were phony as hell? Sister please...

Your threats are not about standing up for women. They are only about standing up for the feelings of white women, and more to the point, the aspirations of one white woman. So don't kid yourself. If you wanted to make a statement about the importance of supporting a woman, you wouldn't need to vote for John McCain, or stay home, thereby producing the same likely result--a defeat for Obama. You could always have said you were going to go out and vote for Cynthia McKinney. After all, she is a woman, running with the Green Party, and she's progressive, and she's a feminist. But that isn't your threat is it? No. You're not threatening to vote for the woman, or even the feminist woman. Rather, you are threatening to vote for the white man, and to reject not only the black man who you feel stole Clinton's birthright, but even the black woman in the race. And I wonder why? Could it be...?

See, I told you your whiteness was showing.

And now for a third question, and this is the biggie, so please take your time with it: How is it that you have managed to hold your nose all these years, just like a lot of us on the left, and vote for Democrats who we knew were horribly inadequate--Kerry, Gore, Clinton, Dukakis, right on down the uninspiring line--and yet, apparently can't bring yourself to vote for Barack Obama? A man who, for all of his shortcomings (and there are several, as with all candidates put up by either of the two major corporate parties) is surely more progressive than any of those just mentioned. And how are we to understand that refusal--this sudden line in the proverbial sand--other than as a racist slap at a black man? You will vote for white men year after year after year--and are threatening to vote for another one just to make a point--but can't bring yourself to vote for a black man, whose political views come much closer to your own, in all likelihood, than do the views of any of the white men you've supported before. How, other than as an act of racism, or perhaps as evidence of political insanity, is one to interpret such a thing?

See, black folks would have sucked it up, like they've had to do forever, and voted for Clinton had it come down to that. Indeed, they were on board the Hillary train early on, convinced that Obama had no chance to win and hoping for change, any change, from the reactionary agenda that has been so prevalent for so long in this culture. They would have supported the white woman--hell, for many black folks, before Obama showed his mettle they were downright excited to do so--but you won't support the black man. And yet you have the audacity to insist that it is you who are the most loyal constituency of the Democratic Party, and the one before whom Party leaders should bow down, and whose feet must be kissed?

Your whiteness is showing.

Look, I couldn't care less about the Party personally. I left the Democrats twenty years ago when they told me that my activism in the Central America solidarity and South African anti-apartheid movements made me a security risk, and that I wouldn't be able to get clearance to be in some parade with Governor Dukakis. Yeah, seriously. But for you to act as though you are the indispensible voters, the most important, the ones whose views should be pandered to, whose every whim should be the basis for Party policy, is not only absurd, it is also racist in that it, a) ignores and treats as irrelevant the much more loyal constituency of black folks, without whom no Democrat would have won anything in the past twenty years (and indeed the racial gap favoring the Democrats among blacks is about six times larger than the gender gap favoring them among white women, relative to white men); and b) demonstrates the mentality of entitlement and superiority that has been long ingrained in us as white folks--so that we believe we have the right to dictate the terms of political engagement, and to determine the outcome, and to get our way, simply because for so long we have done just that.

But that day is done, whether you like it or not, and you are now left with two, and only two choices, so consider them carefully: the first is to stand now in solidarity with your black brothers and sisters and welcome the new day, and help to push it in a truly progressive and feminist and antiracist direction, while the second is to team up with white men to try and block the new day from dawning. Feel free to choose the latter. But if you do, please don't insult your own intelligence, or ours, by insisting that you've done so as a radical political act.

AT WHAT PRICE OBAMA?

2008-05-12T14:07:00.001-04:00

Okay, here is what’s been bugging me:

Barack Obama is an appealing candidate. A viable candidate. A candidate that a larger-than-normal percentage of white Amerikkka is willing to rally around and Afrikan descendants (African Americans) are in love with.

And he is “groundbreaking” -– not in the sense of a Jesse Jackson way back in the day, who really had an agenda that acknowledged the role of racism-white supremacy in Amerikkka and strategy for changing that -– but “groundbreaking” in the sense that he might actually win this thing.

But is Barack Obama a candidate that will initiate and advocate for “change” that will break the yoke of de facto racism-white supremacy? That will assist in righting historical wrongs? That will change the historical, foundational, systemic systems that contribute to the oppression of Afrikan descendants in Amerikkka?

And see, that is “the rub” for me.

Because if that is not a great part of his agenda, for the benefit of not only Afrikan descendants but for all who live here who actually believe in what has been –- up to this point -– the myths of this country (and yes, I’m talking about the “privileged beliefs” we hold and upon which this country is based: “all men are created equal”; “freedom and justice for all”; “merit”; “an equal playing field”; you know, all those things that we say make us different from other countries and all those things that have never been true in this society), then what does it matter if he is elected????!!!

If he is a president that will continue to uphold and uplift and protect those systems and structures that have always worked in the best interests of white people to the detriment of People of Color, and specifically Afrikan descendants, then does it REALLY matter that his will be a Black face –- excuse me, a “bi-racial” face, as many white people (repeatedly) take great pains to point out –- in the White House?

Are his supporters -- Afrikan descendant and white -- REALLY counting on him to advocate for the change of structural and foundational systems and dynamics in this country that have given racism-white supremacy an assist?

Or do they believe that by virtue of his election, racial oppression will just –- poof!!! –- magically disappear?

Do his white supporters believe that their vote for and his election to the highest office in the land will be “proof” that Amerikkka is “post-racial” and therefore they can officially lay down the burden of “white guilt” over racism-white supremacy and ignore -– in good conscience –- the numerous examples of and the continuing impact and legacy of racism-white supremacy still prevalent in this society?

Are his Afrikan descendant supporters casting their votes because they are just so thrilled to have “someone who looks like us” in the White House that they are willing to sell themselves (by giving him their votes) even though they understand that a commitment to Obama is a commitment to keep laboring under the systemic “devil we know” –- even though the chief representative now looks like us?

OR do they really believe that –- once securely in office –- Obama will drop the “we are all one Amerikkka” rhetoric and really begin to honestly address the existing racial and racial/class issues in this country?

Here is what’s bugging me: because he has to run a “we are the world” campaign to win, the question of a vote for Obama becomes: do you believe:

- that his agenda will honestly address issues of racism-white supremacy without sugar-coating them, minimizing them, or being so afraid of being accused of “divisiveness” that he will not really address them at all

- that the white people who say they are for Obama will continue to stick with him if and when he breaks his “social contract” with white Amerikkka by beginning to honestly talk about racial issues

- that the Obama we now see is a “strategic Obama” running a smart campaign OR “the real Obama” -– in which case, we will be stuck with the systemic “devil we know”

So, I guess the REAL question is -– as Clint Eastwood used to say –- “do you feel lucky?”

And I believe that in Amerikkka, the answer to the gamble that is Barack Obama depends on what side of the philosophical “color line” you fall.

Your thoughts?

Moving Forward!

Adar

CHARACTER OF A MAN / CHARACTER OF A NATION

2008-03-16T19:21:00.001-04:00

“For the first time in my adult lifetime, I am really proud of my country, and not just because Barack has done well, but because I think people are hungry for change.” (February 20, 2008, Milwaukee WI) Michelle Obama

“Racism is how this country was founded and how this country was run. . .We believe in white supremacy and black inferiority and believe it more than we believe in God.” Rev. Jeremiah Wright, former pastor, Chicago Trinity United Church of Christ

“ All of the statements that have been the subject of controversy are the ones that I vehemently condemn. They in no way reflect my attitudes and directly contradict my profound love for this country.” Barack Obama, speaking about Rev. Wright

I've said before that white amerikkka supports Barack Obama because he was not a part of the Civil Rights Movement; does not mention the racial history of this country but instead focuses upon the myths and privileged beliefs upon which this country was founded and remains invested; is not seen as "angry"; and is believed to be invested in upholding and perpetuating the interests of white amerikkka.

MUCH –- and I mean MUCH (!!!) –- has been made during this entire campaign by white media and white amerikkka about Barack Obama’s (in their views) “transcending race”; about his having a white mother; about his being a “post-Civil Rights” candidate; AND about his not being connected to the experience of enslavement and resulting “Amerikkkan Apartheid” that has kept so many other Black people –- in the words of white news pundits and others -- “angry.” These characteristics were trumpeted just as much as his call for “change.”

Time and time again it was emphasized that Barack Obama did not talk about racism or race or amerikkka’s racial history –- or, in another media variation, that he did not talk about these subjects in a way that made white people “feel bad.”

And thus far in his campaign, that “social contract” with white amerikkka –- that he would not speak honestly about racism; that he would ignore this country’s history of racial oppression and move forward; that he would not act as other Afrikan Descendant candidates have in the past (hello, Jesse) and present (hello, Cynthia McKinney) –- was a viable one.

Senator Obama spoke and represented in a way that kept white amerikkka comfortable. And he was rewarded by his acceptance as a “mainstream” candidate instead of being marginalized as the “Black candidate” as was Jesse Jackson, even though Jesse Jackson was an active advocate for his vision of a “rainbow coalition” as the backbone for his presidential run.

And white amerikkka (and its Black allies) began to break out the confetti and champagne as it congratulated itself on having officially “moved past the issue of race.”

In February, however, that “social contract” began to tear with Michelle Obama’s remarks alluding to the sorry history of racial oppression in this country. White media went wild, with even John McCain’s wife weighing in on the subject.

Then came Minister Louis Farrakhan’s assessment of Senator Obama and all heck broke loose with white amerikkka in a fright at the “hate.”

Now Senator Obama is being called upon to “denounce” and “reject” the Reverend Jeremiah Wright, his pastor, mentor, and friend for the past 17 years, just for speaking some hard hitting historical truths about racial oppression in amerikkka.

And not once in all the discussion has it been mentioned that much of what he’s reported to have said has its basis in historical truths.

And just because most in this country would prefer NOT to remember, that doesn’t make it less true.

But what is really at issue here is not “truth.”

What is really at issue here is white amerikkka’s comfort level.

And it seems as if historical truths –- and those who speak them -- will once again have to be sacrificed on the altar of white amerikkka’s comfort.

Everyone is invested in pointing to Obama’s current success as a sign of how “far we’ve come” in terms of “race relations.”

But the racial litmus test that white folk were trying to make of the Obama campaign has only now really,truly, just begun because those close to Senator Obama attempted to acknowledge the history of Afrikan Descendants in this country instead of denying it to make white amerikkka feel comfortable.

Has amerikkka grown enough to acknowledge and talk about its history and legacy of white supremacy in this without being censured and reviled as "divisive" or "unpatriotic"?

Will Barack Obama’s presidential campaign be derailed if he has the character to refuse to “denounce and renounce” those who air amerikkka’s dirty racial history of oppression front and center?

Will the country finally have the character to be able to have a mature, honest conversation about its ugly racial history and still stand behind and elect an Afrikan Descendant candidate who will not hide from that reality?

As long as this campaign has been on-going (and it seems like it has been going on forever), we are just beginning to really begin the test of seeing where amerikkka is on the issue of racism-white supremacy.

Barack Obama’s running did not do that.

But how he and white amerikkka respond to Michelle Obama’s and Reverend Wright’s comments will.

Thoughts?

Moving Forward!

Adar

AN OPEN LETTER TO TYRA BANKS: A "MAMMY" MINDSET IS NOT AN ATTRACTIVE LOOK, EVEN FOR A SUPERMODEL

2008-01-25T21:10:00.002-05:00

Tyra, My Sister, it pains me to say this because I do admire your successful reinvention from model to businesswoman. I do respect your efforts in developing a summer camp for young women. And I’ve no doubt that your “heart” is in the “right” place advancing causes close to it.

But I must say, Ms. Tyra, that after watching many a show where you claim to shed light on one of the most relevant, tragic, culturally entrenched and on-going transgressions of the country –- racism-white supremacy –- I have come to believe that you need to –- and I say this respectfully -– catwalk yourself across amerikkka in search of education and true historical perspective on this issue.

In gushing –- oops, I mean “interviewing” –- presidential candidate John Edwards, you posed one of the most ridiculous and inaccurate questions I’ve heard a white candidate asked: “What is it like to be THE MINORITY in the presidential campaign? I mean, with a Black and a woman, you are the minority. What’s that like?”

Tyra, Tyra, Tyra. . .

I hate to say this, but with that one statement, you just added “fuel to the fire” for all those for whom the term “supermodel” is synonymous with “superstupid.”

With that one statement, you just “outed” yourself as being so totally ignorant of --or maybe it would be more truthful to say that you are more than willing to defiantly ignore, for the sake of the comfort level of your white audience:

• HISTORY AND INSTITUTIONAL WHITE PRIVILEGE. Tyra, how could one EVER –- especially knowing the history of this country –- equate a white male (or even a white female) in this presidential race as having “minority” status?

Leaving aside the numbers for a moment, just in terms of the white skin privilege supported by history, cultural norms, and institutional power, how could you EVER make that statement?

Did you mean that:

• JUST BECAUSE FOR ONCE IN THE HISTORY OF THIS COUNTRY there is a white woman and an Afrikan Descendant man who are polling equally strong or stronger numbers;

• JUST BECAUSE FOR ONCE IN THE HISTORY OF THIS COUNTRY someone other than a white man might have a statistically relevant shot at the Oval Office;

• JUST BECAUSE FOR ONCE IN 400 YEARS a white man in ONE political party might actually have to WORK at “earning” the votes of Afrikan Descendant people with more than just empty, watered down promises. . .

. . . that this white man is actually DISADVANTAGED because he cannot automatically rely AS MUCH on HIS unearned white -- and white male -- privilege?

Tyra, say it ain’t so!!

With that one statement, you -– yes, YOU, Tyra! -- “outed” yourself as being so totally willing to ignore historical truth and basic logic to protect your white viewers from the fact that:

• MATHMATICALLY, THERE IS NO WAY THAT: ONE white man is a “minority” in a race where there are TWO ADDITIONAL white men participating in the same party, in addition to ONE Afrikan Descendant man and ONE white woman.

Tyra, even with the “new” math, in a race of THREE men competing for the top spot on the Democratic ticket –- TWO of them WHITE men -- AND FOUR of those FIVE Democratic candidates being WHITE (the three white men and Hilary, a white woman) –- it looks like the white candidates and the white men who are candidates are clearly in the majority.

So tell me once again, Tyra, by what logic have you anointed John Edwards the “minority” candidate?

A “Mammy” mindset is not an attractive look, Tyra, even on a (former) supermodel.

And I don’t mean to dis –- even though by your comment, you dissed Afrikan Descendants and all those generations who lived (and continue to live) in a white supremacist system -- but Tyra, I truly believe you know better than that.

And not that you asked, but here is one piece of unsolicited advice that I hope will help in keeping you from making such unfortunate and inaccurate statements in the future: in your "down" time, please spend more of it immersing yourself in learning about the true history of this country, because you have proven that, in the many ways in which it counts the most, your education and understanding are truly -- and sadly -- lacking.

And ignorance is not an attractive look even when you dress it up in high fashion.

Moving Forward!

Adar

BLACK WEALTH LOST IN BLOOD. . .

2008-01-21T17:20:00.001-05:00

I saw a young Black man the other day. All dressed in white, handsome face under a white Kufi, surrounded by smooth white fabric on all sides.

In a casket.

I sat and watched his face for what seemed like a long time, waiting for him to wake up, trying not to hear the stifled sobs around me.

I saw his peers, young people with faces bright with promise and shadowed by grief.

I saw Elders there, too, with faces of resignation and I could almost hear them thinking “Oh My God, yet another one, why did we lose another one, what did he ever do? How is it that our wealth – our future – is being stolen, lost in the bloodbaths that are daily occurrences in Baltimore? How did it come to this?”

I stared at him, knowing that there was a young woman somewhere who is now a widow, even before she had the opportunity to meet the young man who would have grown into her husband, father to her children. Generations were killed by that gunman’s bullet. Generations – children, grandchildren, great-grandchildren – passed into never being when that young man took his last breath.

Killed standing at the bus stop, just trying to get home.

And it would seem shocking if the storyline were not so familiar.

And I can see the headlines once – IF – the killer is caught, the rush to excuse actions by invoking the tired tales of a childhood gone wrong. I can hear the spin on Black talk radio about giving the killer another chance because, after all, what good would it do to put away another young Black man, would it bring the victim back? Because “. . .two wrongs won’t make a right”, especially in a criminal INjustice system that is so weighted AGAINST Afrikan descendants.

We so guard our communities from the whiff of white supremacy that sometimes we even knowingly and willingly hide killers in our own midst.

Guess we feel that it’s alright if the only people they are killing are their own: us Black folk.

And we pay for that mindset by offering up our young Black people as sacrificial lambs to the Black killing machines among us, down-payments on the price owed for keeping them out of “the system.” Handing over our wealth – our Elders, our children, our futures, our communities – to those who do not value them and willfully and gleefully destroy their own: US.

Why do we give them that allegiance while they take the best from among us? And why do we save our outrage for white people, then, who are “only” doing the same thing?

As I kept waiting for that young man to open his eyes, to give us back the promise of his future, the following refrain kept playing again and again over the speakers: "Lord, make me more than I am. Make me over again.”

If only the killer had another chance to make another choice. If only that innocent young man had not been robbed of his chance to live.

If only we as a community had the guts to stop shielding killers who rob us of our joy, our promise, our youth-wealth, just because they are Black. In shielding them we have made a bargain with the Devil which robs of us our Futures as A People.

Lord, truly make us more than we are.

And help us to stop colluding in our own genocide and to make the investment in keeping our young Wealth alive and safe.

Moving Forward!

Adar

MAKE EVOLUTIONS, NOT RESOLUTIONS. . .

2008-01-13T18:20:00.002-05:00

Okay, we are now 13 days into the New Year, and by now, Resolutions are probably being broken or have an additional shelf-life of about a half a month --and maybe a couple weeks longer for the over-achievers among us (smile).

So I am asking you. . .are there areas of your life -- areas in YOU -- that you want to change and grow this year? Well, My Friends and Family, consider the concepts of committing to EVOLUTIONS instead of RESOLUTIONS.

A friend of mine, Khepra the Evolutionary, wrote the following and it makes perfect sense to me.

Read it and let me know what you think. . .

Consider New Year's EVOLUTIONS and not New Year's Resolutions

Greetings All!!!

A question a friend of mine asked me about my "resolutions" for the upcoming "New Year" inspired me to write and share this.

Consider committing to what New Year's Evolutions will assist you in getting closer to the person you need to be and/or destined to be in 2008 B.C.E. and beyond. Don't try to use "resolutions" to resolve the challenges/problems that you may have had in 2007 or years prior by making New Year's Resolutions.

Commit to creating personal evolutions that will have permanency for as long as you live on this planet.

Stop considering yourself a problem child that has issues that need to be resolved before you can begin being the best person you can be today.

Commit to being the person that embodies and demonstrates the activities needed for you to be who you need to be and/or are meant to be.

Instead of making a New Year's Resolution to lose weight (been there, done that) commit to a New Year's Evolution of evolving to being that person that embodies and demonstrates the activity of getting physical exercise as often as possible. Or commit to evolving to being the person that embodies and demonstrates the activity of eating healthier.

That way your Evolution to who you are becoming can begin with immediacy and have sustained permanence.

For example, you can go to the mall and park way in the back away from the entrance of the store(s)/mall. Or when taking public transportation, get off one stop further than the nearest stop to your house or wherever you are going.
Or exit at the furthest exit on the subway. Or even taking the dreaded stairs instead of the escalator(smile).

Whatever you choose, you can immediately begin your New Year's Evolution right where you are with just a slight alteration to what you are already doing instead of promises to yourself and grand plans written out to figure out how and when to begin (been there too).

Don't just talk about it.!!!!

Don't just write about it!!!!

Be about it!!!

When embodying and demonstrating these activities, you are immediately producing tangible evidence of your New Year's Evolution that you can actually chart/record and reflect on throughout the year, not to mention throughout your life. This evolution can continue as long as you live to whatever limit you choose if you decide to choose a limit at all.

Of course you can begin your personal evolution anytime you want.

Using the philosophy of Evolution through Fusion, you can take the annually reoccurring celestial cycle of the star Sirius's (A.K.A Spdt, the Dog Star etc.) heliacal rising reaching its peak point at approximately midnight December 31. Fuse that with a strong deliberate willful intent in committing to your personal evolution and you have the ability to harness Astronomical momentum going into 2008 B.C.E. for Evolutionary results.

Who do you commit to being in 2008 B.C.E. and beyond?????

What will be your New Year's Evolution??????

Sovereignty for Success
Khepra the Evolutionary

And there you have it (Thanks, Khepra!).

Who will you commit to EVOLVING into in 2008? What will your projectory of growth be?

Too many times we focus our attention on all that needs to change around us while ignoring our own growth. I'm suggesting that in 2008 we take the time to focus some of that passion on our own Evolution.

We will be all the better for it. And so will our families, our communities, and our world.

Let me know about your Evolution(s) for 2008! I want to hear from you. . .

Meanwhile, affirming Peace to you and yours and looking forward to Evolving Together. . .

Moving Forward!

Adar

WHAT ARE YOU REALLY CELEBRATING?

2007-12-09T21:14:00.001-05:00

Well, the holidays are here -- again -- and once again, I’m shaking my head at the massive scale madness that seems to engulf so many of us each year.

And it leads me to wonder: what are you REALLY “celebrating”?

Now, some folks say that they are “celebrating” this religious holiday or that one.

But I can’t figure out how spending money that you don’t have; going into debt that takes 6 - 9 months to pay off (just in time to spend again for another holiday); and focusing on secular symbols (not that there’s anything wrong with that if that is how you flow), food, and presents has anything at all to do with religion –- unless the Higher Power being celebrated is The Great God of the Coin (and in this economic climate you’d do better to genuflect to the Euro, but that is another story. . .).

And now poor Kwanzaa is on the run from the powerful, all-encompassing, greedy hand of American consumerism. Used to be that amerikkka did not even recognize Kwanzaa as a holiday. But with Kwanzaa growing worldwide as a season of importance for Afrikan descendants, I guess amerikkka decided that as long as there was a buck to be made –- or two, or three, or a couple hundred –- it would be more profitable to absorb it in the great maw of amerikkkan consumerism than to continue its ineffective strategy of marginalizing it.

After all, amerikkka has never been adverse to making big bucks of off Afrikan descendants -- in fact, the history of this country is ripe with example after example of that –- but the sad part is that now we seem to eagerly welcome our own exploitation by throwing our money into the mouth of the consumer machine that is amerikkka, especially around the holidays.

In 2006, Afrikan descendants spent 50%* more during the holiday season than they had in the previous year: more than whites (35%)* and more than Latinos (37%)*. 39%* of that consumer spending went to “mass merchants.” You can imagine that not many of those –- if any -- were Black owned stores or even stores in our Black communities.

In 2006, it is estimated that Kwanzaa generated as much as $500 million in consumer spending.

And with the dollars of Afrikan descendants staying in our communities for all of six hours (just enough time to deposit your check in the bank), you can imagine how much –- or more accurately, how little! -- of that money benefitted Afrikan descendent business owners and other Black entrepreneurs.

Sadder still is that we willingly disinvest in our communities, ourselves, our families, by investing –- through our spending choices –- with “mass merchants” even as we are reverently and sincerely mouthing the Ngozo Saba (The Seven Principles of Kwanzaa).

So much for Umoja (Unity), Kujichagulia (Self-Determination), Ujima (Collective Work and Responsibility), and Ujamaa (Collective Economics)!

Maybe this holiday season, we can give ourselves and our loved ones the gift that keeps on giving: consciously and truly celebrating -– with our hearts and our pocketbooks and wallets -- what we say we believe with Nia (Purpose), Kuumbaa (Creativity), and Imani (Faith).

Habari Gani?

That’s what’s up.

Moving Forward,

Adar

*From the 2006 National Shopping Behavior Study, The Gordman Group

STRANGE FRUIT IN THE 21ST CENTURY

2007-10-17T21:58:00.001-04:00

See, this is what happens when folk –- Black folk –- get too comfortable.

Citing Jena –- which I did in a prior "Blogging Amerikkka" –- was only scratching the surface. To date, more than 30 –- THIRTY! –- reported incidents of noose hangings occurred throughout the country, with more sightings in view.

(Care to guess how many unreported "noose sightings" there have been around the country? Hmmmm. . .)

And if you're surprised, you haven't been paying attention to this country's history.

But what is it about NOW, about THIS TIME IN HISTORY, that makes folk so very comfortable wearing their Confederate shirts. . .hanging nooses. . .locking up Afrikan descendant children for incidents that are dismissed as "pranks" or "acting out" when white children are involved?

What is it about NOW that has bolstered the comfort level of a new generation of racial domestic terrorists intent on reeking havoc on those of Afrikan descent?

What is it about NOW that has emboldened "the white authority" to very bluntly declare open season on Black America with barely a ripple of sustained public outcry?

Many of us are comfortable in our gilded cages, with good jobs, houses, savings, and all the trappings of "success" in amerikkka.

But no matter what the trappings, no matter where you are on the "success" ladder, here is the "real deal" that we as A People must ponder as racial terrorism continues its surge in amerikkka. Let's learn the lessons from Jena. And the rise in noose hangings, if nothing else, remind us of the following (from "Underneath the Sacred White Tree" by Adar Ayira**):

In America there are towns

with plenty of Sacred White Trees

and a seat is reserved there

for everyone except

the ones who look like me

Branches ready for decoration with

21st Century Strange Fruit beckoning to me

with tightly knit knots of the deadly noose

While the town of Jena still claims

it doesn't know what the history of the noose means

they still knew enough to tie a noose of up high and very tightly

Underneath their Sacred White Tree

They know enough to continue to deny seats

to those who look like me

to arrest those who look like me

who just want to be free to sit in any spot, even up

Underneath their Sacred White Tree

Bob Marley spoke of One Love

but I wish you would tell me when will we love ourselves

what will it take, before we love ourselves enough

to stop assimilating into hate

Before we begin to love ourselves enough to become

the masters of our own fate or will we continue

holding out hope for change until change comes too late

Moving Forward,

Adar

**"Underneath the Sacred White Tree" can be heard on
Adar Ayira's poetry CD, "Baby, We Need to Talk" dropping soon!

THE JENA SIX: AND THAT'S WHAT AMERIKKKA STANDS FOR. . .

2007-09-06T08:15:00.001-04:00

Don’t let the surface emphasis on equality and multi-culturalism fool you.

What is happening in Jena, Louisiana gets to the very heart of amerikkka and its legal pathology of racism-white supremacy.

Six teens charged with attempted murder and conspiracy, prosecuted for a school yard fight with a white teenager who had joined in “racially motivated” (we need to call it what it is: white supremacist) gang attacks on them and their friends.

Charged with attempted murder and conspiracy even though the white teen was well enough to party that evening.

But even though those were the charges that the prosecutor -– representing the case of the STATE against those teens –- was able to make stick in a white supremacist landscape, let’s make no mistake about it:

The REAL “crime” with which those teens are being tried and convicted (as their conviction is not in doubt, even with the massive protest across the country) –- and which remains unspoken in public conversation but is understood by white men congregating in bars lamenting the fallen South as they nurse their beers and by white women dressed in their Sunday bests and by the white teenagers whom they raised -– is their AUDACITY.

That’s right, their audacity:

• to advocate for the rights of teenagers of Afrikan descent to sit under what had been known as “the white tree”
• to question the injustice of three nooses found hanging from the tree after their request became known and an Afrikan descendant student actually sat under the tree
• to defend themselves from beatings from white supremacist teenagers who wanted to send a message that racism-white supremacy is still the de facto law of the land in Jena, Louisiana

And, of course, they were right. Because those teens have been charged (one has been convicted of battery and faces up to 15 years in prison; the others are still awaiting trial) and have been convicted -– in the minds of most white folk residing in Jena Louisiana and many white folk across the country -– of the crime of continuing to fight injustice even after the same District Attorney who is prosecuting them showed up at their school and boldly declared that he would “ruin your lives with the stroke of a pen!”

And so he has. . .with the full support and encouragement of the state of Louisiana.

The sad thing is, we’ve seen this all before. We’ve been living it since the forced sojourn of Our Ancestors in this country.

Afrikan descendant political prisoners are nothing new; the history of this country is riddled with them, many unaccounted for and many whose sacrifices have been forgotten.

The two constants from the inception of this country to its present remain:

1) amerikkka still feels free to prosecute those of Afrikan descent for resisting racism-white supremacy with impunity and
2) we -– the Afrikan descendant community -– still remain too weak as a political force to stop them or to hold them fully accountable for doing so

Many in this country –- usually white, although there are plenty of Afrikan descendants sprinkled into that mix –- would have you believe that “racism is a thing of the past.” And for those who have the privilege to turn a blind eye to the racism-white supremacy that surrounds us, maybe it is.

But for the rest of us who live in a country STILL addicted to the pathology of racism-white supremacy and not looking to join a 12-step program anytime soon, I say to you:

Anyone of Afrikan descent who believes and teaches their children that this country is interested in ridding itself of it’s “original sin” -- racism-white supremacy -- and affording its Afrikan descendant population the same rights, liberties, and “equal protection” that its white citizenry enjoy is not only seriously delusional, but genocidal.

The biggest lie upon which this country was built and on which those who would deny that racism-white supremacy is the mother’s milk of this nation is this:

We hold these truths to be self-evident,
that all men are created equal,
that they are endowed by their Creator
with certain unalienable Rights,
that among these are Life, Liberty
and the pursuit of Happiness.
(From the Declaration of Independence)

Tell that to the Jena Six.

SUPPORT THE JENA SIX!!!! NEXT TIME, IT COULD BE YOU!

Moving Forward,

Adar

The Michael Vick Case in Black and White

2007-08-25T21:44:00.002-04:00

Now, anybody who knows me knows that I LOVE, LOVE, LOVE animals!! Have NEVER lived without one, stop to give friendly dogs a pat and cuddle, ooh and coo at cute kitties. . .the whole deal!

So I was appalled when I first read about Michael Vick –- whose skills I totally respect! -– and his alleged connection to animal abuse in the form of dog fighting.

But between the first allegation and his "guilty of financing dog fights" plea, an interesting -- and oh, so predictable -- thing happened. . .

As with most things in amerikkka, the case quickly became "racialized", seemingly providing yet another avenue for many in the "general public" to spew their ire on and tut-tut over privileged sports figures of Afrikan descendant and -- by some comments –- on an entire Afrikan descendant community.

The racial difference in support was so stark that even the news media were commenting on how Vick supporters were more often than not of Afrikan descent and those in active protest calling for his head –- even before a plea or a trial –- were white.

Now, how long is it going to take for all of us to finally catch a clue??!! Because amerikkka's endless racial obsession -- which has flamboyantly and jubilantly "come out" from under the collective white sheet during the last eight years –- takes us down the same road every time:

WHITE PEOPLE: GUILTY!! GUILTY!! GUILTY!! WHY CAN'T YOU BLACK PEOPLE SEE S/HE IS GUILTY? WHY DO YOU CONDONE THAT TYPE OF BEHAVIOR? WE KNOW WHY: BECAUSE YOU ARE LIKE THAT, YOU HAVE NO RESPECT FOR THE LAW! THAT IS WHY "OUR" COUNTRY IS THE WAY THAT IT IS!

AFRICAN DESCENDANTS: S/He may or may not be guilty, we don't know yet, but once again you are going after another Brotha / Sista and we will not abandon him / her to a white mob, no matter what s / he has done. We will not condone a public lynching, not anymore, not ever again. . .we know your history and that your "justice" still has a "For Whites Only" sign at the courthouse door.

Sound familiar?

And the outcome for white amerikkka is a reinforced comfort level with their stereotypes of an Afrikan descendant community of lawlessness, which in turn feeds their comfort level about the unjust laws that give a negative "affirmative action" to Black men and women, herding millions of them into one of the fasted growing industries in amerikkka -- the prison industry -- while giving whites a free pass for similar offenses (case in point: the railroading of the Jena Six).

And the outcome for Afrikan descendants?

White amerikkka's insistence on hysterically crying "guilty" before plea or trial guarantees that Afrikan descendants will correctly rally around the newest symbol of white supremacist aggression because. . .face it, we all know that in any given circumstance, any of us –- including Oprah, who was called a nigger during her road trip across amerikkka –- could be the next victim and symbol of that aggression.

It also guarantees that the Afrikan descendant community will not address the issue at hand –- his guilt and/or innocence, and rehabilitation –- because once again, we are fighting for our collective lives in a country that has never had a problem lynching us (physically and symbolically) and for the life of one specific individual caught in the white supremacist machine.

Because we are well acquainted with the "Just Us" brand of "justice" in amerikkka.

And because we know that the outcry from white amerikkka about Michael Vick is not JUST about allegations of animal abuse, as reprehensible as that is. . .

If white amerikkka is serious about "justice" –- real justice –- maybe it would want to expend some of that passion and anger that it is expending on Michael Vick on working for justice for "the Jena Six" –- those Black teenagers who are being railroaded by the state machinery for the audacity of wanting to sit under "the white tree" and for daring to retaliate against white students who were enforcing their own special white supremacist terror campaign against them.

If white amerikkka is serious about "justice" –- real justice –- maybe it would want to expend some of that passion and anger that it is expending on Michael Vick on working for justice and laws that would change the life dynamics and increase opportunities for success for those drowning in the abuse of neglect born of racism-white supremacy.

If white amerikkka –- and PETA supporters in particular –- are serious about "justice" –- real justice -– maybe it would want to expend some of that passion and anger that it is expending on Michael Vick on forcing PETA to apologize for its marketing campaign that compared people of Afrikan descent to animals.

There has not been the level of outrage about any of the above that there is about Michael Vick.

Maybe that is because amerikkka –- who insists on "justice" when those of Afrikan descent are involved even as it gives free passes to the Paris Hiltons (who famously was caught on camera talking about "niggers"), Lindsay Lohans (how many times has she been caught for underage drinking, drugging, and the like?), the "American Taliban" (who was caught in a "terrorist" camp with a gun in hand and still received sympathetic treatment from the press) and the like –- still likes its Negroes better when they are in chains.

Moving Forward,

Adar

Play Me A Love Song: The Legacy of Racism-White Supremacy On Black Relationships. . .

2007-08-19T21:04:00.001-04:00

Nowhere is the legacy of white supremacy seen more -- and with more of an impact -- than in romantic relationships among Afrikan descendants.

The battle lines are openly drawn -- sometimes consciously, sometimes not -- in every encounter as we play our historically assigned roles in the death march of the functional Black family.

Both Afrikan descendant men AND women feel unheard, disrespected, and unloved and gentleness with each other seems a thing of the past, long relegated to the reject bins like love songs, love poems, and sweet caresses for their own sake -- the kind that don’t necessarily lead to sex (remember those? No? I’m not surprised. . .).

Instead, we leave our own traditions behind -- the traditions of familial yearning and loyalty that even generations of enslavement and Jim Crow could not fully break -- and we rush to claim as our own the pathology of paternalism, sexism, and disrespect of family and family structure.

We embrace the philosophical manifestations of “anything goes”; "superheads"; “baby daddies” littering the urban landscape with their children while thinking that it is enough to take care of them “when I’m able”, as if children don’t need to eat every day; Black women who let them while claiming that they are “strong Black women who do not need a man”, and the like.

We have watched the seeds of our own claim to this pathology grow with every successive generation unthinkingly, uncritically, dispassionately, while ignoring the destructive outcome of such “thinking” in the dead eyes of our children and its impact on our relationships, families, and communities. . .

Now, I do know that there are relationships out there that do work.

But I also know that many times those relationships are not celebrated as anything other than anachronisms, even in our own communities.

Now our concepts of “loyalty”, “commitment”, and “fidelity” are saved not for our families and relationships, but for our “peeps” who have stepped into those places in our lives once reserved for lovers, life partners, and family.

WHAT HAPPENED???!!! What happened between the ending of Jim Crow and now?

And more importantly: how do we get back to who we were?

Destroy the Black family and you destroy the Black world.

And in whose interest, ultimately, is that?

Moving forward,

Adar

"NIGGA, PLEASE!"

2007-07-14T18:15:00.002-04:00

On Monday, July 9, 2007 the NAACP held a mock funeral in Detroit to “bury” the infamous “N word” –- nigger.

I have just two words in response: Nigga, PLEASE!!

First of all, did you see who attended that “funeral”?

Yup, mostly people of Afrikan descent.

Now, considering that this word was created by, came into popular use by, was “normalized” by generations of white people in this country, and was given its unique power as a racial epithet and tool by white people, this “funeral” would have been more meaningful had it been conducted and solemnized by white people for white people.

After all, during its generations of use by white people –- and make no mistake, this term was one of the ones that Afrikan descendants heard as they were being lynched, raped, and subjected to all kinds of “domestic terrorism” for which we have yet to receive justice or reparations –- every time the term was used, it served to lift them up and tear us down.

And even today, whether that term is used by white citizens or those of Afrikan descent, it serves to do the same.

And –- because we are here to deconstruct everyday manifestations of racism-white supremacy in popular culture -– how “convenient” that just as white people had to go under white hoods to comfortably use the term, the entertainment industry –- long dominated by white men with decision making authority –- chose to promote, uplift, and foist upon the public that one aspect of popular amerikkkan culture which was publicly forbidden them: a gluttony of usage of that word (in songs, rap and hip hop lyrics, movies, etc.).

With most hip-hop and rap music being consumed by young white men, yet another generation is inculcated in the popular amerikkkan sport of “nigger name calling.” Only this time, they can do it without prohibition, in the form of popular music coming out of the unconscious Black mouthpieces of white suits consciously making musical choices in line with the racial history –- including minstrel entertainment history –- of this country.

People like Quentin Tarantino have long been thought of as “cool” and “edgy” as they make careers of generously sprinkling the word “nigger” throughout their movies like butter over popcorn, and the movie-going audience -- both the Black brainwashed and the white beneficiaries of amerikkka’s racial oppression –- gorge on it like starving men and women at a free all-you-can-eat buffet. . .taking their assigned roles on the 21st Century neo-plantation. Smiling “niggas” and their “racially benign friends”, ready for three. . .two. . .one. . .ACTION!!

And so here we are.

With those of Afrikan descent “burying” a derogatory term that they appropriated from white amerikkka, claiming 100% responsibility for its use as if they had invented, popularized, and given the word its power.

And “colorblind” white amerikkka letting them, disassociating itself from that word and action as if it bears no responsibility at all for it, willing to let Black America do the work and carry their burdens for them. . .just like on the plantation.

A more authentic “burying” of the term would have happened had it been white amerikkka admitting to, expressing contrition, and asking repentance for the creation and multi-generational use of the term as its preferred “weapon of mass destruction” that it so long ago unleashed on both Afrikan and Afrikan descendants.

Of course, that did not happen on July 9th. Nor will it.

But when and if it does, I’ll make sure to be at the “funeral” in the front pew.

Until then however -– and trust me on this! -- we’ll see that this “buried” term is just like a vampire: it will keep coming back no matter how many times Black America symbolically kills and “buries” it.

As long as institutional white amerikkka supports its use in popular media; as long as white beneficiaries of the term continue their passionate love affair with it; and as long as unconscious, brainwashed, cynical, and materialistic Afrikan descendants are willing to act as Black minstrels in the white supremacist traveling show, this term will continue to remain in general use, with its popularity unabated.

Final thought: no matter what the skin color of the mouth releasing that poison, this truth remains the same -- when the term is used, white amerikkka is uplifted, according to generations of tradition and power accorded the term, and Afrikan descendants are diminished and belittled by it.

White amerikkka invented and continues to benefit from this term. Let them take responsibility for it, drive a stake in its vampire heart, and bury it.

And to those of Afrikan descent still using the term:

“‘Nigger’ is a racial curse known around the world
and although we say its good, its not
no matter what you’ve heard

On the one hand we say that we
belong to Kings and Queens

Then we call each other ‘nigger’ like
we can change what ‘nigger’ means

See, I can call you ‘nigger’ or I can call you King
I can call you ‘nigger’ or I can call you Queen

‘Nigger’ is not a word that elevates
so we must collectively eliminate that word
that word, that ugly, ugly word.”

From “That Word” by Adar Ayira © 12.06

Moving Forward,

Adar

The Mugging of Juneteenth: An "Extreme Makeover"

2007-06-19T08:48:00.001-04:00

June 19, 1865: Juneteenth “Old School.”

On this same day in 1865, Union soldiers marched into Galveston TX and informed Diasporic Africans (in this context, specifically American Africans) that two and a half years earlier, the Emancipation Proclamation had “freed” those enslaved in other parts of the South.

Of course, there was general rejoicing, all observed under the watchful eyes of both the Union Army and Confederate Southerners.

And the day that became known as “Juneteenth” -- sometimes in vogue and sometimes not -- continued to be carefully acknowledged as both a Day of Celebration and a Day of Mourning by many Diasporic Africans who connected to the day as a true cultural “Fourth of July”, while still continuing, in many cases, to give faux “celebration” to a holiday that -- for Diasporic Africans -– has been more aptly termed the hypocritical “Fourth of You-Lie.”

Since 1865, Juneteenth 19th has been a day in which Diasporic Africans can embrace the history and struggles of Our People in this country. Traditionally ignored by other racial and ethnic groups, Juneteenth has been one of the few days kept sacred by and for those whose Ancestors were birthed through the watery canal of the Middle Passages and raised through enslavement, sharecropping, Black Codes, Jim Crow. Who continue to exist within the current societal structure of “Color Blind Racism/White Supremacy” (i.e. “I’ll pretend not to see your color if you pretend that there is no racism/white supremacy in play.”)

All under the watchful societal eye of “mainstream” amerikkka, who, up to this point, has been content to sit on the sidelines of the day, as long as not too many Negroes gathered together in one place and as long as their “celebrations” were “transparent.”

You know. . .like in the “good ol’ days.”

June 19, 2007: Juneteenth “Extreme Makeover Edition”!

Content to sit on the sidelines no more in a day in which they have absolutely no legitimate presence, “mainstream” amerikkka has now claimed Juneteenth as a day of its own, albeit one in need of an “extreme makeover”.

And “makeover” it is receiving.

“Mainstream” amerikkka is treating Juneteenth like a pair of size 10 feet being stuffed into a pair of size 8 shoes, uncomfortably forcing its morphing into a “multicultural” celebration which obliterates its very meaning.

Content to sit on the sidelines no more in a day in which they have absolutely no legitimate presence, white amerikkka has muscled its way in, proclaimed the heartbeat focus of Juneteenth “divisive” and demanded that its message be made “accessible” to all -- including and especially those who benefit from the very same racial privileges that their racially privileged ancestral fathers and mothers fought so hard to protect.

Now ponder this:

Why is it that it is alright for St. Patrick’s Day to be a celebration of Irish heritage without an extreme makeover of message –- without Diasporic Africans or other racial or ethnic groups morphing the message of the day to promote “inclusion”?

Why can Greek Festivals be celebrated without an extreme makeover of message to accommodate those who do not share that heritage?

Why is this country not threatened by the celebration and “divisive” message of Cinco de Mayo? The celebration of and “exclusionary” and “divisive” message of the Chinese New Year?

Why is it that EVERY TIME Diasporic Africans have mass gatherings to celebrate something –- ANYTHING! –- important to our specific community, heritage, and journey, “mainstream” amerikkka is not content to sit on the sidelines but has to attempt to stuff its size 10 feet into our size 6 shoes?

Observe Juneteenth “celebrations” today. Watch and see if and how the heartbeat focus of the day -– and the message –- has been all but superficially stripped down to make it more “acceptable” and “accessible” to all other ethnic and racial groups.

Juneteenth has been mugged; mugged and morphed, its soul left for dead inside its pretty, superficial “extreme makeover”, prime time ready for its white amerikkka debut.

And now we’re the community sitting on the sidelines, afraid to “snitch” and tell, as the new, “color-blind” socially acceptable Juneteenth parade rolls on right in front of our very eyes.

Juneteenth, 1865. Juneteenth, 2007.

Behold the difference.

Moving Forward (or maybe not. . .),

Adar

When Death Comes, What Will Your Legacy Be?

2007-05-18T15:44:00.002-04:00

So, Yolanda King -- the great Martin Luther King Jr.’s eldest daughter –- passed away at the age of 51. Just dropped dead, like that (fingers snapping).

Just confirms that, although we may believe that we have all the time in the world, we don’t.

We never know when our own transition will come.

And when it does come, what will your legacy be?

If you’re like me, it can be so easy to fall into the habit of putting things off until tomorrow. . .and tomorrow. . .and tomorrow.

We tell ourselves that we’ll begin a new fitness plan then. Will take the first steps of reconciling with loved ones then. Will begin to work for our community, Our People, to “give back” then.

But what if we took a lesson from Yoki King’s life, and began to work where we are?

Now, this Sista was heavily into the arts –- actor, producer, motivational speaker, a myriad of other things –- and her interests could have easily lent her to say “no time for giving back to My People! I have to write, I have to act, and I want to appeal to everyone! I can’t talk about issues of racism and racial oppression because that might diminish my commercial appeal.”

But she didn’t. She lived a justice philosophy by incorporating it into her art. Now, I’m not saying that she was a one-note wonder, always talking about Justice and nothing else; no! On the contrary, I’m saying that she was a well-rounded person who “talked the talk and walked the walk” in her own way, in accordance with her own gifts and talents.

And that leads us to yet another lesson we can take from Yoki King’s life: that of following the beat of your own drummer in working for racial justice - - for Justice -- even as you work in community for the same.

Now, many folk in Justice Movements will tell you that you must think their way, believe their way, do things exactly their way, in order to be on the “right” path!

If you have an independent thought with which they don’t agree, they will question your “Blackness”, rebuke you as a “self-hating Negro” or “Uncle Tom” or “Aunt Jemima”, and otherwise try to make you feel that you are somehow less committed to the Movement or less of an Afrikan in amerikkka than they are if you are not their philosophical or methodological clone.

Too many times we fall into the trap of which Malcolm X (El-Hajj Malik el-Shabazz) spoke: "Our people have made the mistake of confusing the methods with the objectives. As long as we agree on objectives, we should never fall out with each other just because we believe in different methods or tactics or strategy.”

Sooooooo. . .What I am respectfully submitting for your consideration is the notion that we could all take these lessons from Yolanda King’s life:

1) that we can and must find a way to speak out about racial injustice –- to speak FOR justice, whatever the form and need!! –- in our day-to-day lives; to “preach” about justice; and to live in accordance with a recognized justice philosophy that counteracts the on-going institutional campaign of racial oppression. No matter what our 9 to 5’s. No matter what our talent(s). No matter what our interests and time constraints.

2) that each of us “do you” with integrity. That we realize in order to act as “agents of change” for racial justice –- in order to successfully incorporate action into our day-to-day lives –- we must do so in a way that is individually viable, and

3) that we must allow others the independence –- of thought, of tactic, of use of our individual gifts in the cause of eliminating racial oppression -- to work in different ways without penalty or marginalization from each other and our community.

We must not be discouraged or allow ourselves to be invalidated by the disparagement of others because the work we are doing on the issue follows a different path or because we do not have 100% philosophical agreement with another Brotha or Sista in the justice movement.

We must realize that there is room for disagreement and growth about methods, strategies -- even philosophies -- as long as we share the same justice goal of dismantling amerikkkan white supremacist philosophy and replacing it with a justice philosophy.

We must stop beating up on each other and act like the Brothas and Sistas we claim to be.

We must hold each other accountable and accept our individual responsibility of accountability to our families, our communities, Our People. . .ourselves.

Living a justice philosophy –- not just talking about it or agreeing that it is a good idea –- means incorporating some action FOR justice in our day-to-day lives, each day, each month, each year.

Living a justice philosophy means that when death comes to us, part of our legacy will be that we lived with integrity. . .and gave back to Our People. It means that we become one of the many broad shoulders offered upon which the next generation can choose to stand.

A beautiful Legacy, don’t ya think?

Until next time ponder this. . .

Freedom in amerikkka

Living in the free glory of
“We Shall Overcome”
giving thanks for gloried marches

Dismissing the work left undone
accepting amerikkka’s watered down version
of “I Have A Dream”

You know that in amerikkka
“freedom” ain’t all that it seems
you know that “freedom” ain’t all that it seems…

As you’re being told that the work is finished
while you’re rattling your chains having freely traded in
the physical for those chains around your brain

As you buy into the consumerism of
“the American dream”

You know “freedom” in amerikkka
ain’t all that it seems when you’re

Still being called a “radical” when you
dare to complain; but it’s too late when
you jumped at that bargain price to freely
slip back into your chains

Four generations was all it took
to bargain our hard won freedom
away and although

A dream deferred is a dream denied
maybe our children won’t mind the free delay

While you buy into the consumerism of
“the American dream”

You know that in amerikkka “freedom”
has never been all that it seemed

But maybe that’s why it’s really good that
as a people we so love to barter because
what was paid for by Our People in blood we now
freely sell for the highest dollar, and maybe

We’ll barter our way out of chains before our
Judgment Day, but then we’d probably just turn
around and once again give our freedom freely away

By buying into the consumerism of
“the American dream”

We now pay premium price for the chains
once forced upon Our Ancestors for free and

This “freedom” in amerikkka
ain’t all that it seems, you know
this freedom ain’t all that it seems

For Us, this “freedom” in amerikkka
ain’t never been all that it seemed and for Us
this “freedom” in amerikkka ain’t
even that free

Adar Ayira.0207 ©

Moving Forward,

Adar

The Fear of Black Anger. . .

2007-04-29T00:05:00.001-04:00

A funny thing happened on the way to this blog entry.

In fact, two.

In two separate incidents –- one involving my poetry and one involving this blog -– yours truly has been questioned about her (supposed) “anger.”

“You are one angry woman” one person commented after reading www.ayira-bloggingamerikkka.blogspot.com entries.

Yet another person commented “Why do you always talk about racial oppression in your poems? People want to be entertained, not beat over the head with that stuff.”

Well, hmmm. . .

No one questions the validity of the anger of an innocent victim whose life has been high-jacked by a crime of violence or a random circumstance (such as having a fatal illness, losing a child, loss of loved ones or material possessions because of a natural disaster, etc.).

Yet just about everyone questions the validity of African American “anger” over generations of victimization.

In our society, anger is invalidated as a negative, unproductive emotion, and Black anger is too often seen as being not only “rebellious” but as inciting insurrection.

Black anger is always connected –- by mainstream society -– to the threat and perception of violence and destruction, divorced from any historical context. The extent to which Black anger is referenced in news reports and the public feeds this perception. It disassociates reactions to injustice and hopelessness and views them from a white, ahistoric lens that perpetuates the stereotypes of randomly lawless Black men and women (although there are some of those. . .as well as lawless white, Latino, Asian American and other men and women, too. But that is another topic. . .).

This same lens ignores and/or supports the refusal of individual cities and overall society in acknowledging or demanding justice for those negatively affected by the same unjust systems that benefit and support white privilege.

Black anger in the face of injustice needs to be validated as being a “just” response, as appropriate –- if not more so -- than immediate forgiveness and understanding of continuing injustice.

We need to assume –- as we did after 9/11, after the Columbine attack, after this newest incident at Virginia Tech, after any incident in which greater society is injured -- that anger in the face of injustice is a positive response for a people who, through that anger, work through grief, fight for justice, and find their way through to forgiveness once justice has been satisfied and reparations made.

Validating Black anger as a “normal” response in the face of historic and sustained injustice – just as we validate the emotion of anger in any other instance of personal or institutional injustice -- can help fuel possibilities, hope, and achievement in the African American community.

Working to understand Black anger –- instead of just dismissing it -- can also help white people, if they open their hearts and minds to really listen past the stereotypical fears that have been drummed into them since birth and understand the depths of generations of hurt and pain that the system of Amerikkkan Apartheid and white supremacist philosophy and structure (and those who practice and/or tacitly support even the most “benign” forms of it) have caused African Americans and other People of Color to endure.

If it is true that “the truth shall set you free”, then it is also true that anger can help heal.

In my opinion, the question should never be “Why are you still angry in the face of continuing oppression?”

To me, the question should be:

• If you get angry about standing in a long line at the store. . .
• If you get angry about being cut off in traffic. . .
• If you get angry when your team loses a game. . .
• If you get angry about any of the little things in daily life that we
allow to irritate and aggravate us. . .

Then how can you NOT be angry in the face of continuing oppression –- whether you are one of the oppressed or a part of the group benefiting from the oppression -- if you believe in the concept of justice?

The “angry” people I know care about righting the wrong of injustice. The “angry” people I know are all using that emotion in ways that motivate and effect change!! The “angry” people I know are not giving up or “going along to get along”; they are working in their communities and helping people that “mainstream” society gave up on long ago.

They are having a sane response in the face of enormous injustice.

Their –- our -– “anger” helps us know that we still feel; that we are not jaded by “the way things are”; that we have not given up on the fight to change things for the better for “the least of us”; that we still have a pulse.

And if you are not “angry” in the face of massive injustice, you might want to check yours (smile).

Let’s chew on that one until next time.

Moving Forward,

Adar

THIS IS HOW WE DO IT: The Don Imus Case -- Just Blame Black Folk. . .

2007-04-14T15:22:00.001-04:00

WOW, if I didn’t think I was ill before – for weeks!!! – the Don Imus flap is enough to surely send me back to my bed!

Okay, things that happened correctly: bottom line – the guy was fired.

What Don Imus said was not a “slip of the tongue.” This is the man who called respected journalist Gwen Ifill –- an African American woman –- a “cleaning lady.”

He is the man who has made so many racist, sexist, homophobic comments through the years that his listeners – and indeed, the country – have viewed them as “normal.”

And were it not for bloggers (God Bless ‘Em!) picking up on it, Don Imus might still have a job.

Actually, scratch that.

If it were not for corporate executives seeing a loss of green (money), Don Imus would still have a job.

Make no mistake, it was not the public “outrage” or letters or calls or e-mails from civil rights activists and individuals across the country that did in Don Imus.

Nor was it that CBS or MSNBC all of a sudden grew a backbone and a conscience.

What really did in Don Imus was the loss of revenue in corporate advertising to his program.

Major long-term sponsors pulled out, packed up their suitcases of money and took it to another playing field. Don Imus became a corporate liability and therefore had to go.

In Amerikkka, “justice” is colored green.

So now, not even 24 hours after he has been fired, a curious – and oh so predictable – public re-writing is now taking place, and it goes like this:

“Don Imus wouldn’t have EVEN KNOWN to call those Black women ‘nappy headed hos’ IF IT WERE NOT FOR THE BLACK HIP-HOP COMMUNITY!!!”

Now, people PLEASE!!! AS IF a WHITE MAN in Amerikkkan society has EVER needed permission – AT ANY POINT IN AMERIKKKA’S BROKEN, RACIST HISTORY – OR NEEDED AN AFRICAN AMERICAN MAN TO GIVE HIM THE WORDS – to denigrate Black women!!!

But the media is simultaneously creating and eating up this “new reality” with a silver spoon.

Talk shows, bloggers, and media are asking the question “why is a radio jock held responsible for calling a group of [B]lack women a slang term for prostitutes. . .when scores of rappers have gone multi-platinum using the same word and uglier ones in reference to [B]lack women everywhere?(The Washington Post, Remark renews old hip-hop debate, Friday, 04.13.07)” while ignoring the following:

• There is a cultural context of white supremacy that cannot be ignored and that gives different “weight” and power to words spoken depending on whether the speaker is African American or white and to whom the slur is intended. For example: an African American person calling me a “nappy headed ho” – while reprehensible – does not carry the same racial baggage and racial significance of a white person calling me that. In white Amerikkka, the term “nappy headed” has been used for 400 years by white people denigrating African Americans. Black people picked up the term as a pejorative FROM WHITE PEOPLE, not the other way around. Now consider this: if a Black person calls me a “nappy headed ho,” while wrong, their use of it denigrates me AND them. When a white person calls an African American a “nappy headed ho,” it denigrates all African Americans (especially in a white society where the wearing of “natural” hair is STILL an issue in 2007!!!!) and uplifts the notion of white hair texture being “normal” and desirable.

• The white music producers and corporate representatives that control the music industry are ultimately responsible for what is produced for public consumption and they are choosing to push down our collective throats music that is denigrating to the Black community. Remember MayMay Ali? Of course you don’t. She is a rapper whose career was truncated by white music producers who told her that her music was “too positive” and not “hardcore” and “street” enough for them, and she is just but one of many examples.

Rap and hip-hop today have increasingly become a 21st Century minstrel show orchestrated by white music producers and corporate heads who want the green for the amusement and consumption of disaffected white (who are the majority of buyers/listeners) and African American youth who uncritically inculcate these toxic images of Black America and act toward our community accordingly.

For both groups, it means acting in a debasing manner toward Black women and mothers.

It means looking at Black culture through a very narrow lens which dismisses our most treasured accomplishments as “acting white” (as if Africans and descendants of Africans in Amerikkka have not always valued, fought, died for, and achieved education and acted out of our inherent intelligence against the most crippling of odds).

It means promoting a view of “manhood” more in line with 17th and 18th century overseers who were broken under the daily indoctrination of the individualistic, “me first” “protecting the interests of white Amerikkka” philosophical thought and actions rather than the collective, “let’s rise as a people” interest that has been a staple of the African American community in Amerikkka.

And again: both groups may listen to the music. Both groups may act out of the messages of the music. BUT ONLY ONE GROUP will be lifted up by either group’s acting out of the negative messages of some rap and hip hop music AND THAT GROUP IS WHITE AMERIKKKA.

Final point: Do I think that misogynistic, homophobic, racist messages in any form are alright?

Emphatically no.

Do I think that the African American community has done enough to “censor” those messages in our own communities and to protect our youth from those messages?

Emphatically no.

BUT I find it so telling that the Amerikkka that is crying about “censorship” of Don Imus is now calling for “censorship” of rap and hip hop music. . .

I find it curiously telling that in their rush to assign blame to the rap and hip hop communities they are ignoring that white music producers control that music scene and the production and distribution of those negative messages. . .

I find it awfully telling that Amerikkka is now trying to blame Don Imus’ racism on the rap and hip hop community – as if this country has not been steeped in racism/white supremacy from its inception and as if now this is a new phenomenon created by the community most victimized by it. . .

And I find it laughable – - and an indication of the racist thought that is so alive and well in Amerikkka – - that when a “white privilege” is taken away, white Amerikkka becomes so panicked that now they are acting as if Don Imus – and their collective selves – are the “victims” because somehow the “normal” climate has “changed” and they cannot now get away with the hate speech that they made a staple of the Amerikkkan palate.

Moving Forward,

Adar

So You're Talking Revolution. . .

2007-03-25T09:10:00.002-04:00

So guess what I’ve spent my week doing?

Battling a bad cold (hence no new posts!), feeling miserable, listening to talk radio, keeping my chin up, and . . . . pondering on the nature of “armchair revolutionaries.”

MY GOODNESS, there are SO MANY “armchair revolutionaries” calling in to talk radio shows, have you noticed?

Theorizing and proselytizing from the comfort of their easy chairs, talking about what everyone else could do and should do without actually taking any action themselves.

Sound familiar, right? Because face it, most of us are “Armchair Revolutionaries,” criticizing others taking action while never getting in the game ourselves and it is time for that to stop!

“Changing the system” begins in your own home and on your own block. It begins with first changing ourselves and living the way we are supposed to be living (i.e. as in the way we tell others they should be living!). It proceeds with encouraging and enabling those around us to a better way. And those actions take root and blossom as we make the progression to really seeing –- really seeing –- what goes on around us with new eyes. Not critical ones ever ready to tear down someone else, but compassionate ones ever ready to build up.

Build up and reach out in action by helping those individuals and organizations that are on the front lines trying to make a positive difference. And you can take action in many ways:

• give a financial, direct service, or material contribution to a grassroots nonprofit organization who needs it

• answer a “call to action” and write your congressman, senator, and/or your state representative to give support to a piece of legislation that will help the community

• sponsor a child going to summer camp or an enrichment class

• mentor a child

• help clean up your community

• report drug activity on your block

• educate yourself on this country’s history and the resulting, continuing effects of institutionalized racism and oppression (hey, I’m sick, not amnesic. . .you didn’t seriously believe I’d leave that out, did you? [smile])

• take a good, hard look in the mirror. Critique yourself with as much honesty and detail as you critique others. Then heal yourself – and get assistance in healing yourself -- so that you can encourage and enable others to heal

We so often believe that we must do something really big for an action to have meaning. But it is those small actions that we commit to each day that make the most difference.

So, while you are waiting for the “big” action, the “revolution [that] won’t be televised,” start with these smaller ones. Baby steps, right?

And you can begin, “Armchair Revolutionaries,” just by getting out of that chair.

Moving Forward,

Adar

The Black Man's (and Woman's) Burden: Making White People Comfortable in Discussions on Race (Part 2)

2007-03-14T18:45:00.001-04:00

African Americans are a big part of the “issue” (read: problem) in discussions about race.

There are definitely times when we are our own worst enemies.

Below are the three primary ways in which we collude in the “plantation dynamics” that oftentimes occur in interactions between African Americans and whites . . . especially as they relate to conversations about race.

• Being the defenders of “our” white people when other African Americans or people of color challenge them on manifesting white privilege.

African Americans (and other people of color) oftentimes jump to the ready to defend those white people they consider friends and family from other African Americans who challenge them. No matter how obvious the manifestation of white privilege –- verbal or behavioral –- they will play the role of defender, battling any other person of color who dares challenge their white friend, with all the passion and activism they never exhibit in the fight for racial justice and for the interest of their people.

Sadly, instead of the white person then having the opportunity to honestly engage and grow through the exchange, they are content “hiding” behind their friendship with the person of color who is championing them, and the focus deflects from the white offender’s comment/action to the two African Americans (or other people of color) engaging in a verbal display that does nothing to enlighten anyone or resolve the original issue and everything to validate the white person who initiated it.

And this is different from the “enslaver/enslaved” relationship how? The only difference I see is that now it is voluntary.

• Discounting history when building relationships with whites in Amerikkka.

As quiet as it is kept, there have always been relationships between African Americans and whites, even during times of enslavement, Black Codes, Jim Crow -- all the way up to James Crow Esq. “Friendships” between African Americans and whites are nothing new.

What IS new is the way African Americans have developed a collective amnesia -–the flip side of the kind that whites have developed -– about racial history. At every other time in this country’s history Africans and their descendants have understood the context in which their “friendships” developed -- i.e., that everything between Africans/African Americans and whites was within the parameters of a white supremacist structure that left them in unequal and vulnerable positions. Yet today we buy into the myth that “friendships” between African Americans and whites are “equal” because the chains resulting from the unequal power dynamic are not as obvious as they once were. (If you are unclear what I mean, just take your white buddy and try to catch a cab . . . separately. . .and see who gets picked up. Or drive two expensive cars while dressed in workout clothes . . . separately . . . and see who is stopped by police. Or flip through magazines and see whose image is held up as being the height of beauty. For example.)

During the last 40+ years, Black/white “buddy” movies have moved to the center of public consciousness, fostering the myth that “racism is no longer an issue” and that we can “all just get along.” And African Americans have assimilated into a white world view to the point they are willing to focus on the individual to the exclusion of the larger context in which we all live -– one that advantages whites and disadvantages African Americans and other people of color.

There is much talk from many white people –- and many African Americans -- about racism being individual “hate” that would dissipate if only we could “change hearts.” And while waiting another 100 – 400 years for that change might be acceptable for those who hold privilege, for those who don’t –- and for their children and children’s children and children’s children’s children -- that is a mighty long time to wait.

Again, African Americans: if your focus is on judging people by only their individual identity while ignoring their place in the larger group identity power structure and Amerikkkan context -- which many white people and some African Americans promote -- and if you believe that people should only be held accountable for their individual actions while ignoring their role in the larger Amerikkkan context -– which many white people and some African Americans promote -- then a reasonable question for each of us to ask our white friends and family is:

“If you love me as you say you do and if I am your friend as you say I am, then look at my reality and ask yourself: what are you doing to advance racial justice for me and mine so that we can have the unearned advantages that you and yours have and have always had in this country?”

And if the answer is nothing more tangible or weighty than “I read the speeches of Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and I celebrate Kwanzaa and I listen to rap and hip-hop music and I have Black friends” -- or some version thereof -- then maybe you need to reevaluate the relationship and the role you have chosen to play in it.

And maybe even hold “your” white people accountable for their actions and speech instead of letting them hide behind their friendship with you. After all, accountability is a two-way street. African Americans are always being urged to be “accountable” for the problems we have in our community. I’m all for that . . . and for others understanding that many of the problems currently in our communities result from generations of institutional racial oppression and it is incumbent upon us to hold this country –- and those who continue to benefit economically, socially, educationally, etc. -- accountable, too.

And that includes our white friends and family.

Moving on, let’s talk about the following:

• Being “too heavenly bound to do any earthly good.”

The Black church was the vanguard of social activism/racial justice efforts up until the 1960s – 1970s.

Oh, how the mighty have fallen now that we hide behind our religion and use spirituality as an excuse to retreat from the fight for justice -– now that we are more materially and physically comfortable than our predecessors.

We buy into the “mainstream” concept that “forgiveness” and “racial reconciliation” are the ultimate goals that will usher in a colorblind society of true brotherhood/sisterhood and that a call for anything else –- either as significant as the justice of reparations or as innocuous as an apology for past and current racial oppression -- is “un-Christian” and “racially divisive.”

Forgiveness is great and something that we all need, but repeatedly “forgiving” in the face of the same continuing oppression without working to change it and to obtain justice is just . . . well, you supply the word.

But the one thing it does not strike me as is spiritual.

And while I assume that all of us want to be “heavenly bound,” while we are on Earth, let us do some “earthly good.” It is not just about us, but about those who come after us.

Are you satisfied with where we are on issues of race and racial oppression? If not, we’ve all got some work to do.

Stop hiding behind spirituality to give our white friends and family a free pass in conversations about racism/white supremacy and the ways in which they are manifesting that and/or their white privilege.

Stop taking on those other African Americans and people of color when they question the actions/behavior of your white friends and family. Sometimes it feels like we are more comfortable and feel freer to fight among ourselves than to fight together for a justice that would benefit us all.

Let’s hold white friends and family as accountable for their actions and let’s be as quick to “jump in their Kool-Aid” with as much fervor and passion as we demonstrate in criticizing and correcting each other.

Accountability is part of being spiritual and righteous. And accountability is not just “a Black thang” to be dragged out when talking about our own and tucked away like we’d be whupped if we demand it of others.

If our Ancestors did that, we’d still be in chains.

Sometimes, My Beloved People, the hearts and minds we first have to change are our own.

Moving Forward,

Adar

The Black Man's (and Woman's) Burden: Making White People Comfortable in Discussions on Race (Part 1)

2007-03-11T01:44:00.001-05:00

Tell me, when are we going to be able to put our burden down? Because it is HEAVY carrying white people in discussions of race.

And the "fault" for that is not all on one side; no, we all bear a little bit of that burden. However, as in most comparisons in this country using racial indicators, African Americans -– as usual –- end up carrying a disproportionate load. Below are some of the primary reasons why:

· White people in this country do not see the breadth and depth of their generational privilege, if they see it at all (and most do not).

Just as most of us take for granted on a day-to-day basis the very air we breathe to live, white people seem not to be willing or able to see the day-to-day white privilege -– the concrete benefits of access to resources and social rewards and the (group) power to shape the norms and values of society which whites receive, unconsciously or consciously, by virtue of their skin color in a racist society -- that smoothes and soothes life's rough edges for them in so many instances.

The "merit" mythology that has been an Amerikkkan justification through generations of enslavement; Black Codes; Jim Crow; and now James Crow, Esq., has been firmly entrenched in the hearts, minds, and spirits of most whites (and many African Americans, for that matter).

To deny that most basic of Amerikkkan beliefs –- that if you work hard enough and "pull yourself up by the bootstraps" you can succeed -- and the corresponding racist view that African Americans are in the "situation" they are in because they have not -– is to, apparently, have your world shaken to the core.

So oftentimes when stating the reality of white privilege, African Americans hear these "comebacks" from whites: "but what about Oprah Winfrey? And Bob Johnson? And all those Black sports millionaires? What about them? And now you have 'a Black' running for president! What more do you people want?"

Alas, "justice" seems too hard a concept to grasp when you're talking about the reality and manifestation of white privilege.

· White people in this country see themselves as "good people" who have nothing to do with oppression.

One way in which this country dismisses and denigrates its institutional –- federal, state, locally, and commercially sanctioned oppression of Africans and their descendants -- culpability regarding the Amerikkkan Apartheid under which whites as a group flourished is to associate oppression with "fringe groups" like the KKK while maintaining a willful blindness to the ways in which the dominant group's acceptance of this country's philosophical "norms" enable and promote racist philosophy and resulting institutional manifestations.

For example, most people, white or other, have never heard of the "Black Tax" (that extra amount of money African Americans pay when making major purchases such as cars, houses, etc., and which is apparent in indicators such as health, among others) the "Black Tax" still exists today and economists -- such as former Federal Reserve Board Chairman Andrew Brimmer -- estimate that "Black Tax" "soft" discrimination costs African Americans more than $10 billion yearly (through the wage gap, reduced social security and other government benefits, etc.). Other economists put losses resulting from the "Black Tax" in the trillions annually.

Thus institutional racism is allowed to flourish -– and is seen as "business as usual" and "normal" -- while the citizenry who want to remain willfully ignorant are supported and rewarded in doing so.

And while African American and white groups can both choose to be willfully ignorant, the impact of that decision is different for each of the two groups: whites continue to benefit and African Americans continue to bear the cost.

· White people do not recognize their group identity.

White people see themselves as "individuals" only and accuse African Americans and others of practicing "group identity politics" while ignoring their own and the ways in which they practice it.

For example, by promoting and advancing racism/white supremacy as individual "hate" and "ignorance" while downplaying and whitewashing the hundreds of years of institutional Amerikkkan Apartheid, individual white people in this country are allowed and encouraged to maintain the fiction that racial oppression has nothing to do with them . . . that they should be seen as individuals, not members of a dominant group whose parents, grandparents, great-grandparents, and children have/will have unearned privilege by being a part of that group at the expense of African Americans and other people of color who are not accorded "honorary white" status in this society.

· White people are afraid of African American "anger" and of being "called out" regarding their role in the racial politics of oppression practiced by their racial group.

Time and time again, white people want to be kept "comfortable" in discussions of race. They want to be assured that they will not be "attacked" (read: questioned, challenged, and made uncomfortable). And any visible sign of anger from African Americans often shuts down discussions as most white people react to that anger by making it -- and their own discomfort and hurt feelings -– "the issue" as opposed to examining the root cause of the anger being expressed.

In other words, they fall back into a fear of an "angry Black man" or an "angry Black woman."

No one would question the appropriateness of a rape victim's anger; no one would question the appropriateness of the anger of someone who was a victim of a violent crime; no one would question the appropriateness of anger people may have at senseless life tragedies.

Yet the anger of African Americans is seen as whining, having a "victim mentality," making excuses, or being "stuck in the past."

The anger of African Americans is never seen as being a valid response to multigenerational grievous crimes against humanity but as a stubborn obstacle to a goal that many white people see as critical to "race relations moving forward": forgiveness.

Witness the reason why the great Nelson Mandela is lauded in the West: because he "forgave" his jailers and focused on reconciliation instead of justice. Witness the way that this country holds up one speech by Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. while ignoring just about everything else he has said on racial justice, oppression, and white Amerikkka's -– including liberal white Amerikkka's -– role in perpetrating oppression and the plantation dynamic (in which whites are seen as the major "actors" and leaders and African Americans are seen as the good lieutenants or in an "assistant leader" role). Witness the way Malcolm X -– if he is mentioned at all by white Amerikkka -– is compartmentalized as the unacceptable, "pre-Mecca Malcolm" and the "post-Mecca Malcolm," who is acceptable because he is seen as being more open to engaging whites as "individuals" (having seen white Muslims for whom the practice of Islamic religion was more important than the practice of white supremacy) instead of primarily by their group identity as racial oppressors.

Forgiveness, reconciliation, and "healing" become the holy trinity for race relations in Amerikkkan society for whites as a group as they -- and some African Americans and other people of color -- practice collective amnesia regarding the critical factor that precedes the three: Justice.

Moving Forward,

Adar

Next Post: The Black Man's (and Woman's) Burden: Making White People Comfortable in Discussions on Race -- African American Collusion (Part 2)

*Thanks to my BARN/WARN network for the definition!

Makes Me Wanna Holla...The Language of White Supremacy

2007-03-06T13:30:00.001-05:00

Tuesday, March 06, 2007

Okay, here we go....

Now I know you've heard about Al Sharpton's familial ancestors being "owned" by Strom Thurmond's. And about Barack Obama's (white)mother's family "owning" "slaves."

Now tell me what is wrong with this picture...or are you so used to this language that it seems "normal" and "right"?

Well, two things are for sure: in this society, this kind of language IS both "normal" and "white (supremacist)."

But it ain't right, okay, and we must stop believing that it is.

Words matter and all "mainstream" (and you know I mean white-owned) media who use terms like "owned" and "slave" to describe the circumstance of those HUMAN BEINGS (hello!!) who were ENSLAVED are standing in symbolic solidarity of racial oppression by using the language of Amerikkkan enslavers, who spoke of "owning" "slaves" in a successful multi-generational, systemic, and institutional dehumanization campaign against Afrikans and their descendants.

And when we -- African Americans whose ancestors were enslaved -- join white Amerikkka in using this kind of language, we are colluding in our own oppression by willingly using the terms used to describe the oppression of our Ancestors.

We are also validating white Amerikkka's view of enslavement and the worth of our Ancestors when we accept their chosen language in describing as "normal" what our Ancestors had to endure in one of the largest scale and longest running crimes against humanity ever perpetrated upon a people.

Okay, I hear you saying "it was long ago. Why does it matter now?"

These words matter because to speak of "owning" other human beings is to employ a gentler euphemism that does not convey either the horror or the accuracy of the word "enslaved."

These words matter because to speak of "slaves" is to deny that those who were enslaved were human beings with lives, families, and aspirations, all of which were taken away or aborted from birth by their enslavement in this "...land of the free."

These words matter because the enslavement and apartheid of countless millions of Afrikans and multiple generations of their descendants remain a permanent stain on the soul of this country.

These words matter because they constantly appear in all media and we are going to be hearing them even more with Barack Obama's run for the presidency and with more individuals pursuing DNA analysis and genealogical research which will end up identifying a whole bunch of enslaver families!

And -- from a social justice perspective -- to continue to use language which in any form negates the horror of enslavement and consigns the enslaved as being no more than their enslaved status ("slave") just rubs salt in the wound and reveals that this country is still not ready to come to full and accurate terms regarding its crime against humanity.

And -- from a common sense and "respect for your family" perspective -- for African Americans to continue to use these terms shows how far we have gone in turning our backs on those upon whose shoulders we stand -- our Ancestors -- and how we have assimilated white supremacist thought to the point that we will allow any and every disrespect to their struggles and to their memories as we engage in a mad rush to be the first to fully embrace as "normal" both their oppression and our validation of the demeaning and dismissive language still used to describe their bondage.

And, again, to those of you who say "it is in the past, let it go, it doesn't matter," I'll leave you with this: if you believe that, be consistent. Stop acknowledging / celebrating Fourth of July, which commemorates "Amerikkkan Independence."

Stop acknowledging / celebrating Veteran's Day, which focuses on those who served in past and current wars.

Stop acknowledging / celebrating Thanksgiving, President's Day, Martin Luther King Jr.'s birthday.

Stop acknowledging 9/11 -- at six years out, that is in the past, too -- and bring our troops home.

And in addition, start reflecting on why you choose to acknowledge and validate aspects of Amerikkkan history important to and celebrated by "mainstream" society while denying, denigrating, and dismissing those aspects of Amerikkkan history in which your Ancestors were the main players...

Truth hurts sometimes, doesn't it? But believe me, it's all about the love...and about the knowledge we need to fight, grow, and thrive with hearts and minds free of chains...with strong spirits...because we must be the shoulders upon which future generations can stand.

Next entry: The Black Man's (and Woman's) Burden...Making White People Comfortable in Discussions on Race...

Until then...

Moving Forward,

Adar

WHY "BLOGGING AMERIKKKA..."

2007-03-06T13:22:00.000-05:00

Sunday, March 04, 2007

First we must agree that racism/white supremacy is the mother's milk of this country. Any thorough reading of history will support that contention.

Next we must agree on definitions...not the popular definition of racism which is now being advanced by "mainstream" media, culture, and political thought that supports the notion that racism is individual acts of "hate","ignorance" and prejudice -- which we all can have -- or even discrimination -- which is a behavior manifesting the prejudice.

No, we must wrap our minds around the accurate definition of racism: racial and cultural prejudice and discrimination, supported intentionally or unintentionally by institutional power and authority, used to the advantage of one race and the disadvantage of other races.

The critical element which differentiates racism from prejudice and discrimination is the use of institutional power and authority to support prejudices and enforce discriminatory behaviors in systemic ways with far-reaching outcomes and effects.

Now, I know that you've heard, as we all have -- mostly from defensive whites and from others of all races who are usually defending whites -- that "African Americans can be racists, too!"

In other societies where they hold far-reaching institutional power and authority that can and does impact and control the lives of other -- yes.

BUT IN AMERIKKKA where they have yet to hold institutional power and authority with far-reaching power that impacts upon the day to day lives of whites living in this country in most or all indicators of life? Uh...no.

Even in those instances where African Americans hold power in existing institutional structures, either in reality (i.e. they are the majority in leadership positions, bear the reins of institutional power, have an organizational culture that is racially reflective, and are not controlled by others of different races holding the funding reins) or as the "organizational face" (i.e. they are the public face of the organization but do not have institutional control of the organization), they still do not have the power or reach to affect the lives of whites either legally, socially, economically, or by any indicator with which we measure power, authority, and control.

By contrast, whites in Amerikkka have historically been and remain over-represented in all institutions -- the White House, Congress, industry, the legal system, etc. -- that have far-reaching power and authority to control the lives of all Americans.

And historically, that power has been used in this society to support white supremacist philosophy and to develop and implement laws, customs, and practices which systematicallyreflect and produce racial inequalities in Amerikkkan society.

Which brings us to institutional racism -- those established laws, customs, and practices which systematically reflect and produce racial inequalities in Amerikkkan society, whether or not the individuals maintaining these practices have racist intentions. Institutional racism is often discrimination without prejudice. Individuals can unintentionally discriminate by applying policies and practices that perpetuate past inequalities. And while their attitudes may be unbiased -- devoid of "hate' or "ignorance" -- their behavior enforces the philosophy as well as the practice of racism.

And -- as we see so many times in every day life, right? -- the advantages created for whites by these systems and structures are often invisible to them, or are considered "rights" available to everyone as opposed to "privileges" awarded to only some individuals and groups.

So, does this mean that African Americans are powerless in the face of racism/white supremacy? NO!

We have a long, vibrant, active, and varied history of resistance to racial and other oppression beginning with the Afrikans forced upon these shores. But unfortunately, this history of Afrikan and African American resistance is not one taught in schools or even often passed down through oral histories in our families.

I know you've heard of the Civil Rights Movement...right? But have you heard of the Moors?

You've heard of The Underground Railroad. But have you heard of the many acts of resistance in plantations across the South?

You've heard propoganda about the Black Panthers Party. But do you know the true story?

And do you know about the active resistance to oppression going on in different communities in your own backyard?

That is the purpose of "Blogging Amerikkka." We will be highlighting and profiling those in the arts community, the social justice community, the poetic community, in grassroots resistance movements, and others.

Whether working from the inside of institutions or on the outside of those social structures, we will be making connections to help you find your place and role -- if you want one.

Just as importantly, a focus of "Blogging Amerikkka" will be deconstructing and analyzing how racism/white supremacy rears its head and impacts upon day-to-day life...popular culture, "mainstream" media, TV, music, personal interactions, etc.

Because often times, we do not see the subtle "brainwashing" which keeps us in chains because we do not have the tools to deconstruct and analyze the racist undercurrent...to pull the hood off the underlying racial assumptions that fuel the exchanges.

Finally, "Blogging Amerikkka" will address the issue of internalized oppression -- the acceptance and incorporation of the negative images of one's own group that are fostered by the dominant group regarding looks, culture, ability, etc. These negative messages -- when absorbed, believed, internalized, and acted upon -- often in ways detrimental to the oppressed group -- represent internalized oppression.

Because don't think I'm going to forget the "issues" that we as oppressed folk bring to the table and the ways in which we collude -- yes, collude, I said it! -- in maintaining systems of oppression because we internalize the false belief that the system is correct AND as a means of survival.

But you know what? I'm also going to talk about ways in which we can heal ourselves and free our minds, hearts, and souls. And in doing so, we can re-build our families and our communities.

So stay with me and follow the flow...

And bring the hip boots, 'cause it's going to get deep up in here...

Moving Forward,

Adar

*Thanks to my BARN/WARN network for the definitions!