Hillary Clinton, who is running for US president in the 2016 election, met with some Black Lives Matter (BLM) protesters in Keene, New Hampshire on August 11th 2015. That was just three days after BLM protesters shut down a speech by Bernie Sanders in Seattle. Clinton made both BLM and Sanders look like rank amateurs.
Clinton, as a former First Lady, has Secret Service bodyguards. To rush her stage is to court death. In this case, BLM was not even allowed into the town hall meeting she was holding. They put them in an “overflow” room where they could watch her on a television screen.
Clinton did, however, meet them afterwards. The video of it came out this week. She knew she was being recorded. It shows her talking to Daunasia Yancey, the founder of Boston BLM, and Julius Jones, of the Worcester BLM. Both were from the neighbouring state of Massachusetts.
Yancey and Jones wanted to know what was in her “heart”, why they should expect she would be any different as president than she was as First Lady – when she helped her husband, President Bill Clinton, pass the 1994 Crime Bill. That bill is a big part of what has led to the mass incarceration of Black men.
Clinton avoided talking about her heart. But she did not give the non-answer you would expect either. Instead she said (just like a high school teacher talking to students):
“Look I don’t believe you change hearts. I believe you change laws, you change allocation of resources, you change the way systems operate. … You can keep the movement going, which you have started, and through it you may actually change some hearts. But if that’s all that happens, we’ll be back here in ten years having the same conversation.”
What she wanted from them were proposed changes to government policies:
“Because in politics, if you can’t explain it and you can’t sell it, it stays on its shelf. And this is now a time – a moment in time, just like the Civil Rights Movement or the women’s movement or the gay rights movement or a lot of other movements reached a point in time – the people behind that consciousness raising and advocacy, they had a plan ready to go.”
They were caught flat-footed.
So was Alicia Garza, a BLM founder, when MSNBC on that same day asked her about proposed policy changes.
I hate Hillary Clinton and I am all for Black Lives Matter, but in this case I am afraid she was right. BLM so far has been driven by the steady, horrifying drip of police brutality and overreach. The names of unarmed Black people killed by police have become a chilling litany: Michael Brown, Eric Garner, Walter Scott, Freddie Gray, Sandra Bland, Sam Dubose and on and on – with more still to come. But if BLM is to succeed it needs at least a set of demands, ones that voters can judge politicians by, ones that can be made into into laws.
– Abagond, 2015.
Update (August 27th): Shortly after this post went up, BLM did come out with a set of policy demands on the Campaign Zero website.
See also:
- The meeting: video, transcript
- The Garza interview on MSNBC
- Black Lives Matter
- Marissa Johnson – of Seattle BLM who shut down Bernie Sanders
- Hillary Clinton
- Obama and the N-word – in which the current US president shows the same technocratic understanding of government as Clinton does.
- The litany
- The mass incarceration of Black men
- MSNBC
- Protests with concrete demands:
- The March on Washington of 1963 – Dr King had more than just a dream. He came to Washington with demands.
- Bree Newsome
- Freedom Riders
600
She treated these folks with respect and candor and constructive feedback, I’m actually pretty impressed with the ad-hoc response. This had the potential to wreck her campaign if she had given some glib dismissive answer or otoh an overly groveling response.
Why do you hate Hillary Clinton? She wasn’t president, she was married to the president. And you have to consider the actions of politicians not in a vacuum but with respect to the alternatives. The Clintons are horrible, terrible people… but the Bushes are far, far worse. That matters, it really does, you can’t sit it out. That’s a vanity position to brag about and it’s irresponsible, see: sitting out 2000 or voting for Nader. Yeah Gore he’s just like Bush, makes no difference! Uh not quite. See: Iraq. Next up see: Iran.
Think of Lyndon Johnson: He said the N word (sorry I’m white I feel uncomfortable even writing it out, out of respect for its meaning and its history, not cowardice) However he did more than anyone in his era could possibly have done, the civil rights act and the voting rights act, and desegregating the white house (hired staff) and the supreme court (appointed Thurgood Marshall) but at the same time massive injustice continued and he could have done much, much more but things went from horrible to slightly less horrible with him in the white house. It’s better than nothing, can’t expect things to improve suddenly, it’s gradual (too bad he has the whole vietnam thing hanging around his neck, if not for that he would have gone down as a great president)
We’ll get more with Clinton than with the R’s, every bit helps.
LikeLike
I don’t trust Hillary AT ALL.
LikeLike
BLM, all protest and no policy! Is that what happens when you go for ‘leaderless’ organizing? They need to study the past and learn something more from it than leaders betray.
Abagond, glad to see you’ve reached the same conclusion I did in this comment:
“on Fri 14 Aug 2015 at 21:01:05
gro jo
Abagond, the information you provided on this lady and her group worries me. It appears that all they do is engage in mindless protests. Sanders and the other aspirants to the white house will not give them what they want, because only a social and cultural revolution can bring about the re-ordering of priority they say they want. This will end up being another occupy wall street. I didn’t have a problem with their interruption of the Sanders rally, but with the fact that they didn’t have anything of substance to say. Whining about racism isn’t a political program. They need to come up with concrete demands.”
It’s funny that they should expect Mrs. Clinton to take down her husband’s legacy.
Is BLM practicing confrontation politics to unmask the US political class, or supplicant politics, hoping the ‘gods’ of US democracy will deign to co-opt a few of them? Mrs. Clinton’s criticism of them seems to indicate a willingness on her part to take them on as junior partners for the duration of the campaign, as long as they are willing to be ‘reasonable’. Her approach seems to be working on you.
LikeLike
@King
I think a lot of people are giving Hillary the side eye right now… Bernie is giving her a run for her money.. I still think Biden may enter the 2016 race.. We shall see.. As long as Trump isn’t elected!!!
LikeLike
Maybe this is a good wake-up to BLM. A good thing.
All the main lobbying groups in Washington set up think tanks and establish policy initiatives to present to Congress. Their salaries are paid by big business that have shared interests.
BLM might not have the money behind them, but they could impact the votes. BLM will have to raise money or get volunteers and advocate specific policies just like anyone else.
LikeLike
Yeah, it can’t be Hillary.
I won’t vote for her. I’d rather not vote at all.
She can’t be trusted, mark my words.
LikeLike
OK, watched the MSNBC video.
Alicia Garza dropped the ball there. The interviewer was leading her in to the question about policy demands and she gave a very equivocal non-answer. It would have been a perfect opportunity to state at least one policy demand.
Pick something. Civil Review boards?
LikeLike
This sounds similar to what happened with “Occupy Wall Street.” In the end, nobody had any real demands. Just stuff like “Capitalism = bad” and “the One Percent are in control!” But nobody seemed to have any idea what to actually do about it beyond protest.
LikeLike
The question about “heart” reveals where a lot of black people are coming from and why movements sometimes get attention but achieve few tangible results. Some of us are defining “progress” in terms of positive changes in the attitude of white people not in terms of the ability of black people to defend ourselves regardless of anyone’s hostile attitude. Therefore we fail to push for things that will make us more powerful but instead ask for things that make us more dependent on white goodwill (“heart”).
Even the “integration” of the 1960s suffered from this phenomenon to some extent. The MLK quotes that have become the most iconic are the ones that speak of his “dreams” of a racial utopia. In some ways, integration assumed that such a reality had already come into existence or that “hearts” could be changed simply by forcing proximity.
When schools were desegregated, I don’t suppose the mobs of angry whites that black students had to be escorted past changed anyone’s mind that the approach might have been flawed. Those images of angry white parents establish a genetic link to the so-called “school to prison pipeline” which later developed. Black people had demanded to be taught by whites and they eventually acquiesced! How foolish to assume that black students would be treated the same as whites just because they were attending the same school.
I think failure to accept certain cold, hard realities will cause activists to ask for the wrong things or be unclear about what they actually want.
LikeLike
I often think about Emmanuel Goldstein, from Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four. The mysterious leader of the “Brotherhood,” the opposition to Big Brother. I was fascinated when it turned out that Emmanuel Goldstein was really just another part of the system… a way to draw dissidents into an acceptable means of protest then eventually into reeducation. It hd the ring of truth to it. In fact, it rang too true to be mere fiction. If you would control a society, you must even control its “rebels” and “dissidents.” (even better if they are all on your payroll.)
Keeping this in mind, I am always leery or movements that blow off steam but seem to go nowhere in the sense of actual accomplishment. Where do they get their money and support from? Who designates them as the “Voice” of opposition? How ‘spontaneously’ do they really spring from nowhere?
Do they only exist to burn the fuel first so that no real opposition can ever catch fire? If I was trying to control a society that is what I would do.
LikeLike
@ King
“This sounds similar to what happened with “Occupy Wall Street.” In the end, nobody had any real demands. Just stuff like “Capitalism = bad” and “the One Percent are in control!” But nobody seemed to have any idea what to actually do about it beyond protest.”
I think the problem is that the contemporary left has no theory, no idea how an alternative society would look like. A movemen that doesn’t just want to change or protect one or two laws, needs such a vision. I deeply despise communists but they had theoretical depth.
LikeLike
[Dons flame-proof underwear]
I find myself in disagreement with much of what has been said.
Let me paraphrase Clinton’s advice to BLM: “Assimilate, and change the Borg system by participating in its processes; you know, the ones that have worked so well for you so far.”
Spontaneous protest and direct action have raised the profile of racism issues since the murders of people like Trayvon Martin and Michael Brown. Many whites are afraid – as they deserve to be. The groundswell is largely disorganised, but it is substantial.
Organisation should come from within, and the way forward should be dictated by whomever the people decide they want to guide and represent them. IMO, that will never be Clinton, the Democrats, or any other extant part of the white establishment.
Proposing policies and legislation will get you approximately nowhere.
Why the hell would you trust Clinton when you/we (we = rest of the world) couldn’t even trust Obama? Mr Disappointment has been unable to deliver substantial change despite the good intentions I believe he genuinely had at the start of his first term. Clinton is less motivated to deliver the changes that would benefit POC and poor whites, and she is more embedded in the establishment. She is a dead end. Sanders is possibly the lesser of the two Democrat futile evils.
Personally, if POC want to influence social change I would suggest organisation along lines analogous to those of trade unions.
Kartoffel said:
Yeah, thanks for that. If it weren’t for the proscription against going too far off topic, I’d ask what it is about me and my (non-Marxist, non-Leninist, non-Trotskyist, non-Maoist) ideology you despise.
There is an on-topic side to my quoting this, though. Much as you (and I) may disapprove of the choices made in the former USSR and, earlier, in France, both places demonstrated that people can organise themselves for change without the involvement and manipulation of the incumbent regime.
If I were involved directly in your quest for change I would be advocating the formation of a national association for people of colour. An association that was grass-roots democratic with all representatives elected directly by members on a localised one-member-one-vote basis.
I would envisage that association being a practical organiser of social projects for the benefit of members and for the disadvantage of those who work against POC. It would form credit unions, shelters for homeless people, educational projects. It would register businesses owned and run by POC and encourage members to use those businesses in preference to white-owned companies and large corporations.
I would envisage the association having a security division (armed in accordance with law) to protect members in areas of danger.
I would envisage the association running projects aimed at reducing the participation of POC in crime by addressing the conditions that force people to commit crime (and thus removing excuses for their disproportionate numbers in prisons). The association would encourage compliance with law and peaceful – even, where possible, cooperative and friendly coexistence with white society – up to the point where white people try to fcuk you over.
If government or white supremacist groups attempt to interfere or prevent the implementation of programs that reduce POC reliance and dependence upon white power structures then they should be met with firm resistance.
Of course, what I am advocating is pretty much the establishment and huge expansion of something like the Black Panther Party. (Not, however, the parody that has the nerve to call itself the New Black Panther Party).
You want firm demands? I think you could do worse than to refer to the original BPP 10-Point demands:
Of course, some of you despise the original Black Panther Party because they were communists. I don’t know what to suggest to those people.
LikeLike
I suppose it would be off topic to observe that I despise capitalists…
LikeLike
@Abagond
Great post. Hillary is right, you cannot expect to change the hearts of people who are already comfortable with their current position. Why is it that some black Americans really yearn for white acceptance? They will never get that acceptance; it will never happen. I think they should actually give ideas for policy changes that will actually make it harder for police to target black people and make it easy for trade and business between black people. That is the only way BLM will survive. Occupy WallStreet failed because most of the organizers wanted to shame WallStreet people straight; that never happened.
LikeLike
Speaking of leaderless organizing in regards to the Black Lives Matter movement, i believe Oprah Winfrey said they weren’t organized well and many black social media sites labeled her lot of bad names. I want to see BLM succeed but they do need better organization. I Distill don’t like Hillary Clinton.
LikeLike
The policy/legislation part is so critical because windows of opportunity are so ephemeral. As an example, some years ago SCOTUS released its opinion in the Kelo case (the infamous eminent domain case out of Connecticut), sparking a roar of nationwide criticism and a landslide of legislation aimed at bolstering protections of property owners against capricious takings by government. Some have said that Kelo resulted in more legislation than any other single SCOTUS opinion. The reports from the trenches are that much of that legislation was hastily patched together in knee-jerk fashion, containing lots of statements of highfalutin intent but little real meat. End of the day, government is still arbitrarily and capriciously taking private property and second-guessing the market, and affected property owners are still undercompensated. Now, however, this issue has zero political traction. There is no window of opportunity to fix it.
LikeLike
As to Hillary here, she treated BLM as a political equals and laid out the political reality that faced them if they wanted to make an actual difference. It was the right thing to do.
LikeLike
@Buddhu,
Is that much different from the reasons the NAACP first organized and set up?
Shouldn’t they be one of the main interest groups out there trying to shape and advocate public policy?
But what are they doing now?
Is there room for many multiple advocacy groups?
LikeLike
@ Budhuu
Let’s not make this thread about communism. I just wanted to say that an advantage they had over the Occupy Movement was, that they weren’t just emotional, but had a theoretical background. I’m not yet sure if that is also true for BLM. The proposals that were linked in the Marissa Johnson thread seemed quite good, but more in regards to housing and other issues rather than racist police violence.
I’m not saying that the policy proposals have to be “politically realisitic” or in any other way comfortable for the Democratic Party. They should be radical. The question is: What would BLM do if they had dictatorial authority in the US today?
LikeLike
I want BLM movement to gain traction. I don’t want their efforts to be in vain. With that being said, I seem to recall Oprah Winfrey making a statement when the Ferguson protest were going on and she mentioned that the leadership needed to have some direction and needed to make demands about what it was they wanted and how they wanted things to be implemented. And the young black folks on black Twitter slammed her. I just find it kind of ironic that we are back to that conversation.
LikeLike
1) Reparations 😀
2) 40 acres and mule
3) Free college tuition to descendants of the enslaved African people that help build the USA.
4)Entrepreneurship needs to be foster specifically descendants of the enslaved Africans) that want to go into business(i.e incentive programs like they gave to the Eastern Europeans for farming back in the early part of the Industrial age in the USA)
LikeLike
I will vote for Sanders before i vote for Hillary Clinton or not vote at all.
LikeLike
If i was to get part 2 of my American cocaine story together. .. mena, ar? Asa Hutchinson? Cattlegate? The land scandal? That guy rohm whatevver the jewish fellow from chicago please
LikeLike
“ Mary @ I will vote for Sanders before i vote for Hillary Clinton or not vote at all.”
King @ I won’t vote for her. I’d rather not vote at all.
Linda says,
Mary and King (and anyone else who feels like sitting out)
and if you sit this election out because Hillary is the candidate, then who are you left with to make decision about Your life and the Life of black and brown people?
Rhetorical question, because the alternative to not voting for Hilary, is to have the Republicans take control again…
and remember, Which Party almost destroyed the country in 2008 and are Strong Advocates for black people being Incarcerated and to have their civil rights trampled on because they like the Gestapo state we are living in?
It was the Republicans who put “Stand Your Ground” in Florida that allowed Trayvon to be shot and killed by a useless POS.
This election is about Business — it shouldn’t be personal.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I don’t want to not vote either. I saw the YouTube about Fannie Lou Hamer and how she was an activist and she and her fellow activists in Mississippi were trying to get black people registered to vote and how she endured torture at the hands of racist law enforcement in jail. I know I can’t not vote even if Sanders doesn’t win.
LikeLike
@lifelearnder
Reparations should definitely be a key demand. There is no shame in it. British slave owners were compensated when slaves were emancipated (IIRC, some of Ben Afleck’s ancestors were among those who received money). Yet the Haitians, who fought for their own freedom, had a sum extorted from them, while under seige from the combined forces of France and the USA, to cover the losses to France! Haiti started out in debt.
I’d read that a group of Caribbean islands were suing Britain, Holland and France for reparations. I agree with that move.
LikeLike
@MB
Any explanation for that?
LikeLike
@Origin
Some very liberal whites and almost all Republicans will fight tooth and nail to make sure blacks do not get reparations. Not because they hate black people just because they can.
LikeLike
@jefe: Lots young black people especially those who are into the black consciousness movement don’t trust black celebrities like her because they consider her a sellout.
LikeLike
@MB,
So, they are slamming Oprah because she is a celebrity who sold out to white people with money?
They are not so much slamming her suggestion about making specific demands, except for the fact of that suggestion coming out of her mouth.
Or are they slamming both?
Personally I feel that, short of a full revolution, one has to play politics. Of course, playing politics could involve the insinuation that a revolution style revolt could occur. Who wants another civil war?
LikeLike
@jefe: Many do believe she is a rented negro/sellout and that she’s old and just out of touch with the plight of black people in America who are poor and disenfranchised.
LikeLike
These ninjas weren’t ready plain and simple. The LGBT & Latino activists come with money because they know politicians are guns for hire. Donald Trump would run on an anti-racist, anti-prison industrial complex platform if you fattened his pockets. There’s no way around it, time to build an economic base.
LikeLike
So do they attack her for what she says, or who she is?
Is it a case of … no matter what she says or does, she will get blasted for it.
Even a rented Negro might occasionally say something that makes sense.
LikeLike
@jefe: It could be because of what many perceive her as. I just know she’s lost credibility with many young black people today and she just isn’t relevant to them.
LikeLike
The 1994 Crime Bill that is responsible for many black men being incarcerated. Well that should be reason enough for many black people not to trust her.
LikeLike
Origin wrote:
“Yet the Haitians, who fought for their own freedom, had a sum extorted from them, while under seige from the combined forces of France and the USA, to cover the losses to France! Haiti started out in debt.” This is false.
France, under Louis XVIII wanted to invade and bring back slavery. The kingdom of Haiti under Henry Christophe built the forts and arms industry required to resist such invasion.
When French minister Malouet sent his envoys to Haiti, the two governments of that nation both refused to cede their independence to France. The main difference in their refusal was that president Alexandre Sabès Pétion made the french a counter-proposal to indemnify the former French owners of plantations, while king Henry Christophe had Malouet’s agent, Franco de Medina, arrested and published the instructions he carried with him for the reestablishment of slavery a decade after the 1804 debacle France suffered on the island! In 1824, negotiations with France broke down, but Boyer, who was now president of an expanded Haiti which included Christophe’s kingdom and what’s now the Dominican Republic, made no preparations to militarily resist France! The extraordinary thing about that fact was that it broke with the tradition set by Toussaint Louverture, who didn’t hesitate to resist a force vastly superior to the one France mustered in 1825.
The claim that France and the USA ‘extorted’ indemnity from Haiti leaves out the role of leaders such as Pétion and Boyer.
Linda wrote:
“and if you sit this election out because Hillary is the candidate, then who are you left with to make decision about Your life and the Life of black and brown people?” Er, the usual gang of idiots?
“Rhetorical question, because the alternative to not voting for Hilary, is to have the Republicans take control again…” Yes. How can you tell them apart?
“and remember, Which Party almost destroyed the country in 2008 and are Strong Advocates for black people being Incarcerated and to have their civil rights trampled on because they like the Gestapo state we are living in?
It was the Republicans who put “Stand Your Ground” in Florida that allowed Trayvon to be shot and killed by a useless POS.” Of course, you forget that the Democrats went along with every bit of nonsense the Republicans proposed. Hilary voted for Bush’s wars and her husband’s legacy is mass incarceration of blacks. Funny how every four years, sane people forget the facts and start dreaming about things that never existed and convince themselves that politicians will be different this time! I have one name for you, Woodrow Wilson. W E B Du Bois and other respectable black leaders made asses of themselves campaigning for him only to have him endorse repressive racist practices.
LikeLike
This is the list that BLM has published as “demands”
•We demand an end to all forms of discrimination and the full recognition of our human rights.
•We demand an immediate end to police brutality and the murder of Black people and all oppressed people.
•We demand full, living wage employment for our people.
•We demand decent housing fit for the shelter of human beings and an end to gentrification.
•We demand an end to the school to prison pipeline & quality education for all.
•We demand freedom from mass incarceration and an end to the prison industrial complex.
•We demand a racial justice agenda from the White House that is inclusive of our shared fate as Black men, women, trans and gender-nonconforming people. Not My Brother’s Keeper, but Our Children’s Keeper.
•We demand access to affordable healthy food for our neighborhoods.
•We demand an aggressive attack against all laws, policies, and entities that disenfranchise any community from expressing themselves at the ballot.
•We demand a public education system that teaches the rich history of Black people and celebrates the contributions we have made to this country and the world.
•We demand the release of all U.S. political prisoners.
•We demand an end to the military industrial complex that incentivizes private corporations to profit off of the death and destruction of Black and Brown communities across the globe.
LikeLike
^So how do you translate those demands into laws, allocation of resources, the way systems operate?
LikeLike
I agree with much of what has been said on this thread. One point I’d like to make about the capitalist/communist debate is that both economic systems can coexist with white supremacy and in fact do. I believe that the millions killed and the oppressions created by both economic systems happened because their was a State with a monopoly on violence sponsoring those economics. The question isn’t which system is superior over the other but rather the right of people to assemble themselves into whatever communities they see fit. And that these communities can exist without interference from the State, religions or racists.
LikeLike
@Jefe
“Even a rented Negro might occasionally say something that makes sense.”—True, but actions speak louder than words.
LikeLike
I am simply not ready to trust any politician. Not to be funny, but they all are a bunch of snakes.
LikeLike
jefe said:
I’m a Brit in the UK, so my knowledge of NAACP is no doubt very limited. I do know that it was set up partly by whites. I don’t know if that affects anything.
Whether or not NAACP should be one of the main interest groups “trying to shape and advocate public policy” isn’t for me to say. The kind of thing I described earlier would be controlled directly by true, localised, grass-roots, direct democracy. People would have a direct, democratic say in its campaigns and activities. I don’t know to what, if any, extent NAACP is thus organised.
As for multiple advocacy group, I think that they are essential – especially when there is a need to take into account the variety of needs and conditions across a country the size of the US.
@ Michael Jon Barker:
Thanks for that list: I hadn’t seen it. Seems like a reasonable starting point.
LikeLike
@Shanalr
Learn the ways of the snake and make the snake serve your interests. What makes politicians tick? Money and Power. That’s why I was talking about Machiavelli: Use the system against itself. Get the bigger snakes to eat the smaller snakes then get the smaller snakes to gang up on the bigger ones. The oppression of black people is political and the only way we can win this fight is through politics in spite of the slithering politicians.
LikeLike
Mary,
don’t feel any kind of way… I understand your dilemma. It’s hard to choose, when your choices are between “crap vs crap with cheese”
Believe it or not, I used to like Donald Trump but then he opened his mouth about the whole Obama birth certificate issue, I lost all respect for him.
but I will say, he is smart like a fox. He is forcing his will on both the media and the Republican party because
All those butt hurt white boys, who think they are losing their country, are looking to him to as their John Wayne.
LikeLike
I can’t stand this devil! This woman can’t be trusted. She’s worse than her husband. I hate this Nazi lesbian!
LikeLike
@Linda: “crap versus crap with cheese ” That’s exactly what our selections are.
LikeLike
villagewriter @ Learn the ways of the snake and make the snake serve your interests. What makes politicians tick? Money and Power. The oppression of black people is political and the only way we can win this fight is through politics in spite of the slithering politicians.
Linda says,
I agree with you — making changes is about money and power.
The BLM and young black people want a massive revolutionary change but they don’t have any money or power to bargain with (like Oprah)
what are BLM/ young black people offering to the white power structure in exchange for getting their demands to be met?
in business, there has to be a “win-win” situation for all parties involved, with both sides losing a little something in the process.
Hoping that the white power structure will change things out of “the goodness of their hearts”, is not a plan — where is the checkmate that is needed to bring the house down if demands are not met??
Yelling and shouting does not effect change because as as history shows, white society is Deaf to the voices and pain of black and brown people, until that noise starts affecting their (white) pockets or their egos.
or if they feel like being Paternal and rewarding black people for “good behavior” like they did in South Carolina over the Confederate flag issue.
older black generations, like Rosa Parks and others (who young people are calling rented negros), used their financial strength to bargain with:
black people stopped riding the bus en masse and this caused the State government to lose Money — this is how they got the attention of the white power structure
that’s how you effect change — you hit the powers-that-be in the financial pocket. Young black people have financial power as a group (did you see how much money Straight Out of Compton made in 1 weekend)
Money is what white power structures cares about, because they dam sure don’t care about black or brown lives.
LikeLike
I see Statism founded within the Eurocentric justice system with its emphasis on justice, equality and democracy as hallow claims of egalitarianism. I believe it more accurately reflects the terms of servitude targeted at specific communities as a way of managing resources and people for the benefit of State white supremacy .
I want to touch upon some of Kiwi’s suggestions and give my take on how to deconstruct the infrastructure of white supremacy.
1) End the War on Drugs.
Agree. Prohibition causes violence. During the alcohol prohibition years their was much violence and killing between gangs but those events were never framed as “white on white” crime. Racist point to “black on black” crime as some kind of genetic predisposition and liberals like to blame guns and want more “community policing” rather then dealing with the structural privileges that protect the police. Europe focuses on rehabilitation of drug users and less on incarceration. Those countries with the strictest drug laws also have higher rates of drug related deaths.
2) Require police to wear body cameras.
Agree. Require the police to live where they work. Take away their structural privileges. If a police office gets charged with murder the police unions will spend tens of thousands of dollars on the best legal help money can buy. The police should be accountable to the same laws as are the citizens that they police.
3) Give the Department of Justice more authority in investigating police departments.
It depends upon who the Attorney general is and where the political ramifications would lead. Another way to look at it is you would have federal (white supremacist) investigating state (white supremacist).
4) Increase gun control.
I disagree with that. More gun control empowers the police not the public. It justifies “stop and frisk” and targets non white communities.
“The standard form of gun control means writing more criminal laws, creating new crimes, and therefore creating more criminals or more reasons for police to suspect people of crimes. More than that, it means creating yet more pretexts for a militarized police, full of racial and class prejudice, to overpolice.”
“From SWAT to stop-and-frisk to mass incarceration to parole monitoring, the police manage a panoply of programs that subject these populations to multiple layers of coercion and control. As a consequence, more than 7 million Americans are subject to some form of correctional control, an extremely disproportionate number of whom are poor and minority.”
http://www.salon.com/2015/06/24/gun_controls_racist_reality_the_liberal_argument_against_giving_police_more_power/
The two reasons the police ask to search your vehicle during a traffic stop are weapons and drugs.
I see black ownership of firearms as a part of black empowerment.
5) Reform the criminal justice system.
How do you reform a system that views criminal justice through the lens of race?
Its the Statism created by white supremacy that makes up the justice systems not just here but everywhere on the planet. It is one of the foundations of white supremacy and why 20 years after apartheid ended, South Africa imprisons more citizens and has increased incarcerations times up to 1000%. Democracy is just another word for your participatory servitude.
Common law is natural law in spirit but it’s application is compensatory as opposed to punitive. Customary law is about restitution for the victim while Western law becomes the victim and focuses on retribution and fines. Customary law is controlled by the community while statutory law violates natural rights, is controlled by the State, and allows very little legal room for interpretation. When the State becomes the victim then every violation whether its a mundane traffic stop or horrendous murder structurally empowers white supremacy.
Much of what Kiwi writes I have found quite insightful and is right on. What we do disagree is not meant to be disrespectful.
LikeLike
@Linda
Exactly. There is no time white people will voluntarily offer to solve black people’s problems. The only way we will get respect is by demanding respect. Make it hard for a racist cop to get away with murder, make it hard for a POC politician to only employ respectability politics. Let us create our own space where we can help our own climb the ladder instead of waiting for white people to accept us; they are human beings they only look after their own interests. Black Americans are beautiful, talented and have great economic power; use that advantage and lets see whether Fox News will dare bark at you.
LikeLike
Look at the Jews people; not even Donald Trump can challenge them. Why? Because of money and power (Money=Power).
LikeLike
This is the biggest bunch of bullshit I’ve heard in my life.
We have to explain why black people shouldn’t be killed by the police or we can’t sell it to America or Hillary Clinton?
Haven’t we been sold enough?
Hillary just said the same things all white people say- in judgmental and patronizing tones – when they want black people to shut the hell up and go away. Like you would tell a two-year-old:
*sickeningly sweet voice like you’re speaking to a toddler* Well if you can’t use your words, then go away.”
Uh, I think they’ve said it. Black Lives Matter. Stop fucking killing us. White people in power and seeking power – like political candidates – need to speak up for the cause and once in seats of power – do what they can to change the status quo.
But hey, you have to explain that to white people again and again – because if you don’t they lose interest quickly – if they cared at all.
Caught flat-footed? More like insulted beyond belief – by someone who’s a major presidential contender.
LikeLike
@Villagewriter and Linda
Well said.
LikeLike
Abagond, they were not caught flat footed.
BlackLivesMatter is simple.
Stop murdering Black people.
LikeLike
A comprehensive package of urgent policy solutions by #BlackLivesMatter
http://www.joincampaignzero.org/solutions/#solutionsoverview
LikeLike
Didn’t the BLM use the BPP exact demands for their own? That is what I have seen (You Tube from BLM movement people) and read online.
LikeLike
Join Campaign Zero that Glen posted has excellent recommendations.
LikeLike
@ Glenn Robinson
“Stop murdering Black people” is a demand, but not truly a solution.
LikeLike
@LOM
Contrary to belief it started in 2012 with Trayvon. It just gain traction with Mike Brown.
http://blacklivesmatter.com/about/
LikeLike
The Join Campaign Zero that Glen posted is more in line with what we need to be seeing.
Even BLM needs to translate their demands into specific policy and legal changes and to articulate that clearly to voters and politicians.
LikeLike
@gro jo
“The claim that France and the USA ‘extorted’ indemnity from Haiti leaves out the role of leaders such as Pétion and Boyer. ”
extort:
obtain (something) by force, threats, or other unfair means.
Who obtained something and how was it obtained? I’m not sure why you are nitpicking over details of “negotiations” as if that negates the result.
LikeLike
@King
““Stop murdering Black people” is a demand, but not truly a solution.”
Right. The next question should be “How do we get them too stop?” Simply asking won’t do the trick.
LikeLike
^^^ Exactly.
LikeLike
You hate Hillary Clinton? Why do you hate her? What has she ever done to you? This seems personal.
LikeLike
@LOM
No problem.
LikeLike
Origin, I’m tired of reading about how a bankrupt France forced Haiti to pay indemnity. You call established facts “nitpicking”, nonsense, do you have any facts to refute what I wrote? If you do I’d gladly revise anything I wrote. I don’t think that traitors should get a pass by claiming that they had no other choice but capitulation. Real leaders would have built up war capacity and fought the enemy until victorious or defeated. This is off topic, but since Abagond saw fit to let you make this reply, I should be allowed this comment.
LikeLike
Communism / Capitalism debate
– Those Who think that pure Communism/Socialism works have paid no attention to the last century of history.
– Those who think that pure Capitalism works have paid no attention to the history of the Robber Baron Industrialists of the 19th Century.
It has always been the case that a mixture of Capitalism and Socialism (although imperfect) each work to temper the extremes and shortcomings of the other.
LikeLike
LOM said
“The most-repeated demands I have heard (and, on my blog, made) are for the installation of body cameras and civilian review boards.”
Both of those “solutions” don’t address the structural privileges within police departments and do nothing to stop
I’m all for body cameras but police lie and body camera footage can manipulated like the “glitch” in the Sandra Bland dash cam video. Video results that have made a difference have come from private citizens filming police and exposing their criminal activities.
Civilian review boards are suppose to be neutral third party observers but those appointments can be politically connected or the review boards are limited to only offering recommendations. The review board that is suppose to oversee Ferguson has been described as “weak and ineffective”.
In Los Angels we have the police commission made up of five civilian volunteers that acts as a kind of review board. It looks to me like more an honorary position then anything else.
http://www.lapdonline.org/police_commission/content_basic_view/900
The Law enforcement “bill of rights” needs to be abolished and the police need to be held accountable for their criminal conduct.
Their “Bill of rights” has these protections now.
•allow officers to wait 48 hours or more before being interrogated after an incident
•prevent investigators from pursuing other cases of misconduct revealed during an investigation
•prevent an officer’s name or picture from being released to the public
•prohibit civilians from having the power to discipline, subpoena or interrogate police officers
•state that the Police Chief has the sole authority to discipline police officers
•enable officers to appeal a disciplinary decision to a hearing board of other police officers
•prevent an officer from being investigated for an incident that happened 100 or more days prior
•allow an officer to choose not to take a lie detector test without being punished, require the civilian who is accusing that officer of misconduct to pass a lie detector first, or prevent the officer’s test results from being considered as evidence of misconduct
LikeLike
In the end, you kind of do have to change the majority of hearts. What Hillary seems to be saying is that you CAN legislate morality after all. But if people don’t agree with laws, then they generally just find ways around them. Look at Prohibition! Certainly laws must be changed but the real battle is in the heart.
LikeLike
Let’s say that the police bill of rights is rescinded and then 60% choose to quit the force (maybe a good thing that THEY are gone, but …). Then, what would be the interim solution?
Does that mean we get by with half the police or we pay police twice as much (they already do not have enough money if they have to survive by issuing ticket quotas and imposing fines).
I am not saying that the police bill of rights needs to be revisited and redone, but do we have to make provisions for the contingencies?
LikeLike
@Jefe
I think America is over policed in most areas. I don’t think that if half the police officers vanished the country would slid into kaos.
In fact in some places where police presence feels like an ocupation their might be celebrations in the streets.
In might opon the door for communities to get directly involved with managing their own affairs without relying on the police.
What’s lacking is black access to anything that remotely resembles justice. The criminal justice sysytem is rigged against non whites so that vacuum leads to violence as people take the law into their own hands. Their are no peace makers, no mediators that POC can turn to within their comunities to resolve conflicts. They are dependant on the police and the justice system that already has cross hairs directed at them.
My thinking is if you take away their privilages that will make them more honest and less likely to abuse their power if they know their actions will lead to real consequences.
The first point about waiting 48 houes before issuing their police report allows them to “get their stories straight” amongst themselves and review any video that might be out their. Their bill of rights allows them to lie and manipulate the evidence in their favor. The media largely goes along with this and rarely questions official police statements.
LikeLike
@Michael Barker, So replace at least half the police with community peace and order boards? That is who should be called, for example, in the case of a domestic dispute?
Indeed, one of the complaints from the police is how they are asked to do social work, something that they do not receive much training for.
Have non-police “walk the beat”? Isn’t that essentially what neighborhood watch is? Look how Trayvon Martin fared in that scenario.
How about taking away police guns? Say, they are not allowed to bring guns to issue traffic violations or any other offense that does not involve firearms, e.g., drug possession. In many countries, police do not routinely carry guns all the time.
Only thing, it looks like a large percentage of unarmed blacks were killed with tasers, or even without weapons (eg, Eric Garner or Freddie Gray).
Me personally, I feel that police should not have the power to police the police. That should be done by an independent civil review board, which has the power to override the police chief in disciplining officers. And police should not have the power to tamper with the evidence before it is presented to the board. So, yes, that 48 hour delay business has got to go.
And the disenfranchisement of voting rights is simply terrible. That has corruption and bias written all over it. I can’t help but think that one of the aims of being tough on crime is to disenfranchise voters.
LikeLike
@gro jo.
I actually couldnt care less what irritates you or what you find to be nonsensical. I was only addressing the fact that you took issue with the word “extortion” yet your account of the events lead to that same conclusion. Whether you personally agree with the decisions made under the circumstances is irrelevant to whether it was extortion or not. You, yourself, said the French were threating to reintroduce slavery. Therefore your details only prove my point. How’s that for nonsensical?
Your post was nitpicking because it invalidated nothing I said yet you responded as if the details you provided rendered my statement inaccurate. You are just opinionated about how Haiti should have responded. You can be as opinionated as you like but that doesn’t change accepted definitions. A businessman in an area controlled by gangs might opt to pay “protection money” instead of risking harm to himself or his family by refusing but it’s still extortion. In fact, that’s what makes it extortion: the credible threat and the target’s capitulatory response.
LikeLike
Origin, just say you don’t know what you’re talking about and be done with it. The facts remain as I’ve described them, nothing you wrote contradicted me. Extortion is when you are forced to do something against your will, when you volunteer to do it as in this case, IT AIN’T EXTORTION BUT TREACHERY TO YOUR PEOPLE.
“Your post was nitpicking because it invalidated nothing I said yet you responded as if the details you provided rendered my statement inaccurate.” Are you joking? Your statement was inaccurate because it left out the salient fact that the indemnity was suggested by Pétion, paid by Boyer and rejected by Christophe out of hand. Your victim’s tale that there was no choice, is just that, a tall tale. I won’t waste any more time with you on this subject.
LikeLike
@gro jo.
Where did I try to contradict you? Do you have reading comprehension issues? I said your details were extraneous because they didn’t affect the point I was making on iota yet you behaved as if you were correcting me. Haiti paid protection money as a result of Franco-American aggression after their revolution. I said it. You said it. I’m not sure what you’re going on about. It’s as if you’re arguing just for the sake of it.
I’m done.
LikeLike
Someone sticks an AR-15 at gro jo’s head, he offers his wallet, reports it to police, they say no crime was committed since he should have fought back.
Karma.
LikeLike
Lordy, how old are you? I state the truth, I’m not into victimology based on lies, unlike you. Facts are facts, I praise those who deserve it and damn the rest. Got that? “…claiming your unabashed admiration for the Haitian Revolution, and now you’re blaming the Haitians for their fate?” The inconsistency is in the eye of the beholder Lordy, My admiration for those who fought for freedom remains undiminished, but I execrate those who sold out. In other words, I’m for the revolution and against the counter-revolution that ushered in an era of submission to white supremacy, starting with paying indemnity and refusing to defend the people against their enemies. I hope you aren’t too confused by my stance. Your original confusion stems from your inability to differentiate among blacks, since they are all the same to you. Your buddy, Origin seems to suffer from the same failing.
LikeLike
Origin, Origin, I swore I’d ignore you after my last response to you, but the idiocy of your analogy forced me to violate that vow. “Someone sticks an AR-15 at gro jo’s head, he offers his wallet, reports it to police, they say no crime was committed since he should have fought back.”
1) France under Charles X was a very unstable country, the last thing they wanted was a war that threatened to re-ignite the memories of the French Revolution.
2) Unlike me against your friend with the AR-15, Haiti had built several forts to defend against such aggression. Haiti’s best known tourist attraction, The Citadelle Laferrière is the best known of the lot.
3) How come a Haiti split into a northern kingdom and a southern republic were able to resist France’s harassment, yet a Haiti that was two-thirds as large, since it covered the entire island was unable (unwilling?) to do the same? In 1822, Haiti and France clashed at Samana Bay, and France backed down.
4) Your analogy breaks down because, in the interaction between states, their are no cops to report anything to. Better luck next time.
I hate to leave people wallowing in ignorance, so I’ve included this link for your edification.
LikeLike
“yet a Haiti that was two-thirds as large” should have read: yet a Haiti that was two-thirds larger, instead of two-thirds as large.
LikeLike
Lordy, what’s with the “He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named” crap? Are you having flashbacks to your misspent childhood reading Harry Potter again?
So, you wanted proof that “Your original confusion stems from your inability to differentiate among blacks, since they are all the same to you.” You proved my point with the following claim: “Let’s be a little consistent! If descendants of slaves who are still suffering the economic effects deserve reparations, so did the French who were genocidally exterminated by the N@zi Dessalines after the expulsion of the armies of He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named.” Your claim, taken seriously, condemns the entire white race to extermination for the atrocities committed by members of that race. By the way, Dessalines only did to the whites what Leclerc wanted to do to the blacks, using him as his instrument of destruction, and what Richepanse did in Guadeloupe as their boss, and your idol, commended them to do.
LikeLike
Lordy, stop, you are way too funny, I’m having a hard time hating a guy as naive as you appear to be. What’s wrong with hypocrisy? I readily cop to it. I have no problem with what Dessalines did because it benefited me and my family, just as you have no problem with what Boney and his henchmen did in Guadeloupe, because you, as a white person, benefited from it. End of story, so stop the morally superior crap, it has no effect on me.
LikeLike
OFF TOPIC: Haiti.
LikeLike
“Also, while events in St-Domingue and Guadeloupe were unfolding, the British Tories were making my Irish ancestors eat dirt. So stuff that. ” If your ancestors were as annoying as you are, I’d say the Tories had a point.
LikeLike
I’ve got nothing against the Irish per se since three of my relatives are half Irish. What I dislike about you and people like you is your pretense to be better than you are. Yes, I hate hypocrisy in others but not myself.
LikeLike
Kiwi, who cares what you think other than yourself? I own up to my biases, while people like you and Lordy don’t. I spent my time arguing with Origin on what extortion means because people on this forum tend to confuse their wishes with facts. You are one of the main offenders, as you’ve demonstrated with you comments on Mao. You should learn to mind your business, since you have nothing to contribute on the point of contention between me and Origin or Lordy.
LikeLike
#BlackLivesMatter is more than just a hashtag. It is a movement that must demand significant changes to society from top to bottom on how it treats blacks. But one thing must be clear, a list of what we want must be compiled, because it’s more than just police killings and overincarceration of communities. Racism exists in virtually every level of society and even if we were to remedy police killings of innocent unarmed black folks, society will find other ways to oppress them. Black lives not only matter, but they are also precious.
LikeLike
@LOM
“Where were your strenuous objections to them not minding their business in that discussion?”—-Why should be considering this thread here is not about him and it is not about you.
You were a live example of that thread. Makes perfect sense why.
LikeLike
Gro Jo said:
“Your original confusion stems from your inability to differentiate among blacks, since they are all the same to you.”
LOM said “Prove it.”
On another thread you equated lions to “black humans”. On this thread you called a black man a N@zi who had fought to free blacks from slavery and founded a country for black people. You equate the oppression of the Irish in history on the same level as the oppression of non whites today. You call the massacre of 5000 white invaders a Holocaust yet if the Irish had killed 5000 of their oppressors I bet you’d call that Justice and a liberation.
You deny that white supremacy is behind the genocide of millions of indigenous people the planet as well as deny that white supremacy is behind the kidnap, rape and slavery of non whites in history. You don’t believe that white supremacy has any relevance today and that everything falls between conservative and liberal. You don’t believe its possible to be ideologically liberal and a racist yet here you arte proving it again.
LikeLike
Why is LOM here? Is it because he can relate to the POC experience (highly unlikely)? Is it because he wants to support the POC and understand their plight? I doubt it because from his comments he seems to think he doesn’t need to understand it because he feels he knows the problems the POC should fight against instead. So, I think Lord of Mirkwood is probably bored at home and wants a platform where he can share the latest things he has grasped from the internet or reminisce about the history books he used to enjoy.
LikeLike
Jefe asks;
“So replace at least half the police with community peace and order boards? That is who should be called, for example, in the case of a domestic dispute?”
I don’t have a clear answer on how or in what forms a community would organize itself today. Communities were originally far more close knit and locale churches played a much larger part in directing social services before the State stepped in and took those sorts of services over.
In Texas the New Black Panther Party as well as the Indigenous Peoples Liberation Party take advantage of white centric gun laws and patrol their neighborhoods. If they are able to gain the trust of the neighborhoods they patrol then social services could evolve out of that.
I think the question within a lot of black folks minds is where they go from here after a post Obama presidency. Very little was accomplished under Obama and the killing of blacks increased while he was in office.
Marissa Johnson of BLM says she’s done working within the system and a few posters within this blog think developing their own black centric infrastructures is the direction the black community needs to go. I think legislative goals can still be pursued and pressure against the system can still continue while simultaneously working towards a self sustainable community.
It may be that the New Black Panther Party or something similar needs involve itself in the political system and put candidates on locale ballots.
LikeLike
@villagewriter
I don’t even to bother asking why anymore.
LikeLike
I feel the same way as Pumpkin about BLM strategy. Also, Clinton is right on about what she said. BLM needs to take her words to heart.
LikeLike
Oh, okay! Thanks for the article link, Pumpkin. Looks like they are on it and I feel much better about that.
LikeLike
The post calling the kettle black. Interesting.
LikeLike
Pot*
LikeLike
Mirkwood.
I see you have written me a rather long response. I don’t want to derail this thread any more then it all ready is. I will eventually respond on the open thread.
LikeLike
@Mirkwood
Germany paid billions in reparations to Isreal and Nazi war criminals were hunted down and brought to justice. Germany was forced to do the right thing but the long term effects healed a national wound and brought about collective closure for the German people.
In contrast Americans deny reparations even though a strong moral argument can be made for reparations today. It’s this denial that leads to constant deflection and the hidden wound continues to blister. It’s this collective denial that allows racism to continue and why you can’t call historical events like slavery “in the past” and civil rights closure when no attempt has been made to recognize the causation caused by the actions of white people in their pursuits of aggression.
LikeLike
But the reparations paid by Germany were paid directly by the generation that were active during the Third Reich to the harmed individuals or their children. Not by a group that identifies as the descendents of the perpetrators to people who identify as the descendents of the victims (in case of slavery).
If Germany had to pay further reparations today as demanded by some in Italy and Greece, I and most Germans would be strongly opposed to it.
LikeLike
@kortoffel
It seems the majority of reparations were paid directly to the State of Isreal that acted as a kind of “heir” to those Jews killed by Germany.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reparations_Agreement_between_Israel_and_West_Germany
Part.of my point is the effects of slavery, followed by Jim Crow and today mass incarceration creates the current causation.
Until whites recognize their racism, their role in history as well as their direct actions today, nothing changes. Reparations admits the problem, attempts to end it and only through implementation can any kind of real closure occure.
LikeLike
@ gro jo @ Lord of Mirkwood
Haiti is off topic. Deleted your comments on that topic.
LikeLike
@ Michael Baker
You’re right. But in hinsight I think that was a questionable solution, though politically necessary,
“Part.of my point is the effects of slavery, followed by Jim Crow and today mass incarceration creates the current causation.”
No argument there. I just don’t like the reparations idea and i’m strongly opposed of using the German case as a precedent for wordl-wide reparations.
I fear the topic-hammer is coming down soon, so we might continue the discussion elsewhere.
LikeLike
Kartoffel said,
“I fear the topic-hammer is coming down soon, so we might continue the discussion elsewhere.” Agreed.
.
LikeLike
@ Lord of Mirkwood
I will bring that comment back so that you can take out the Haiti part and make it a new comment. Then I will delete the old one. Tell me when you are done (or that you have decided against making a new comment). Thank you.
LikeLike
Kartoffel and Michael Jon Barker,
I don’t want to prolong but I really want to put some clarification on the topic of black Americans and the allocation of resources offered to the former slaves and their descendants.
my point — Jim Crow is not the distant past — the people affected are still Alive today. Jim Crow is a slang term for legal Apartheid/Segregation, which took effect right after slavery ended.
The first law passed to begin dismantling Jim Crow Apartheid: 1954
Apartheid/Segregation legally ended in the southern USA: 1965
1965 — that is many people’s life time, millions of people are still alive today who lived during that time. Children born to these people are still alive and where/are directly affected
Promises were made to former black slaves and black people, and no financial compensation was received for their free labour
many white people gained profit or where compensated for their loss of free labour after slavery ended
LikeLike
Here are some dates to just bring it all into perspective:
Beginning of slavery for life in the US colonies: 1640
Law stating children born to African women are slaves for life : 1662
End of Slavery in the USA: June 19th, 1865
(when Union army arrived in Texas, the last state to hold out on freeing the slaves)
Legal/Financial Remedy by US government:
1) 1862_White slave owners in northern States were financially compensated between $100 to $300 dollars for each slave they “lost”
The newly released black slaves received 0.00 Zero dollars.
(President Lincoln offered $100 dollars to any slave that agreed to leave America.)
2) General Sherman’s Special Field Orders, No. 15 — promised to divide 400,000 acres of land for 18,000 of the newly freed black slaves in the south. The land was on the coast of South Carolina, Georgia and Florida.
After Abe Lincoln was assassinated, his acting President Andrew Johnson overturned the Order and took the land away in the fall of 1865
Beginning/ End of illegal debt peonage for former slaves: 1863-1942
former black slaves who did not leave the plantations, where charged “rent” and were assessed “fees” by their former owners. On paper, they received wages, which were taken away by white owners or employers to pay “debts”
Legal/Financial Remedy by US government:
Franklin D. Roosevelt’s ended peonage in 1942 and prosecuted guilty white “owners” and companies.
LikeLike
Linda said,
“my point — Jim Crow is not the distant past — the people affected are still Alive today. Jim Crow is a slang term for legal Apartheid/Segregation, which took effect right after slavery ended.”
Agreed. I was trying to compress in one sentence what you have explained in a couple of paragraphs.
LikeLike
@King
“She can’t be trusted, mark my words”
I echo that sentiment. In the interview, I think she made it clear that she won’t remind racists that they are racist and part of the problem, but at the same time, she’s still figuring out how to change the disparities that obviously exist. It couldn’t have been a more perfect political response while at the same time amounting to doing absolutely nothing about the problem.
It shows that Democrats pay lip service to blacks while doing nothing for them, and is a good reason why black Americans should ditch the Democrat party altogether.
LikeLike
Mirkwood
“The Irish have been oppressed by the English since 1169: 846 years.
Slavery in America existed from 1619 to 1865: 246 years.
Racism in America has existed since the late 1600s: 350-ish years.”
Your playing the oppression Olympics. The question isn’t who had it worse but rather what is relevant today.The point is the Irish aren’t oppressed today while non whites are. You are deflecting away from the real racism non whites deal with when you point to the Irish. Maybe your attempting to “share in the oppression of black people” so to speak but their is no way you can relate to the real oppression non whites experience everyday.
On a personal note I can trace my linage back nine generations to Ulster Ireland. My Irish ancestors arrived in 1734 and weren’t oppressed in America. In fact they became the oppressors.
I said “You deny that white supremacy is behind the genocide of millions of indigenous people the planet as well as deny that white supremacy is behind the kidnap, rape and slavery of non whites in history. You don’t believe that white supremacy has any relevance today and that everything falls between conservative and liberal. You don’t believe its possible to be ideologically liberal and a racist yet here you are proving it again.”
You answered “Here is the problem…CAPITALISM”.
Again that’s a deflection. Rather then deal with your denial that white supremacy underlines everything within our society you point to capitalism as the evil culprit. I will agree that this modern variant of capitalism combined with white centric statism is parasitical and ultimately unsustainable. But if it were replaced with real socialism (Nationalized banks, oil, industries ect) the racism within the public as well as the structural and institutional racism within the State would still exist.
You then write a historical story book essay based on truth, myth and imagination from a white person’s point of view. It’s too tedious to parse.
I have a short story too.
Their has always been a 1% ruling things. The seven ancient wonders of the world were built by slaves for an elite. The Lighthouse of Alexandria was dedicated to the “savior gods” who looked surprisingly like Alexandrians.
Their has always been this anthropocentric reflection between gods and man, between race and religion.
Early Christianity was geocentric in its theology. The sun revolved around the Earth, God had given man dominion over the planet, we were made in Gods image and that God was a jealous God. The early Christians saw themselves as Gods chosen people who had replaced the Israelites and they had a messianic mission to go forth and conquer the world for Christ. So God became a white God and all others were savages. Eventually this messianic supremacy would be replaced with scientific supremacy and its from these roots that white supremacy became the dominant ideology behind various world views.
“However, a series of progressive presidents came into the White House. Teddy Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson drastically improved labor conditions, but did little to stop Jim Crow. Then FDR, Truman, Kennedy, Johnson…a string of progressive presidents occupied the White House, smashing segregation (at least, the legal variety), at first cautiously and then boldly. However, the end of Jim Crow did not mean the end of capitalism. Wall Street still exercises undue power.”
It wasn’t that Roosevelt and Wison did little to stop Jim Crow, they actively promoted it. One of the first things Wilson did was segregate the White House bathrooms. While its true they improved labor conditions they did so at the expense of black people. They were about capturing the white populist vote and that meant jobs for white people. Your progressive hero’s were just as racist as the people they governed. Harry Truman in his younger years was a member of the KKK.
Jim Crow may have ended on paper but non whites today cant get justice in any meaningful way. The criminal justice system views citizens through the lens of race the same way that police departments do. The expansion of the prison industrial complex reversed any gains made in civil rights. The result is a caste system designed to keep large segments of the population form participating within their communities by permanent denial of civil rights.
Your buddy Sanders probably wont do much about the prison industrial complex because it was public service union jobs that lobbied to have them built and currently maintain them.
LikeLike
@Linda
Technically, Loving v. Virginia (1967) is regarded as the end of legal segregation.
I suppose we could argue that the Fair Housing Act (1968) was designed to end segregation, but perhaps that belongs more under Affirmative Action, or something to address de facto, rather than de jure segregation.
I might also argue that Brown v. Board (1954) was not the first measure to address de jure segregation. It was a process that started at least since WWII of which Brown v. Board was just one event among many. For example, restrictive covenants were ruled unconstitutional in 1948.
Otherwise, thank you for your time line.
Indeed Jim Crow is still within the collective memory of maybe 30% of the USA – all baby boomers were born during Jim Crow.
LikeLike
Bernie isn’t a Socialist, and neither are you. You are a Liberal-Progressive who wants a larger slice of American Capitalism’s bloody pie, and Bernie Sanders is the man who’s going to serve it to you.
(http://youtu.be/G0pB8-M1wD8)
LikeLike
Mirkwood.
“Yeah, of course your Ulster PROTESTANT ancestors came here and just managed to blend right in.”
So you agree that not all of the Irish were oppressed.
“so I’d say the oppression of the Irish is very much relevant today.”
Not in America. The occupation in Northern Ireland doesn’t appear to interfere with the economic lively hoods of the Irish who live their. If you look at income distribution Northern Ireland is doing better then Scotland and many places in England.
London £27,868
South East England £21,109
Northern Ireland £19,603
East Anglia £19,469
Scotland £19,282
North West England £19,236
West Midlands £18,801
South West England £18,629
Yorkshire & the Humber £18,614
East Midlands £18,321
Wales £17,651
North East England £17,594
If you look at the occupation of Ferguson Mo. their are major income disparities, police killings and a parasitical class targeting the black community.
You are still deflecting away from the real racism non whites deal with when you point to the Irish.
So you believe that Harry Truman had no idea the KKK was a racist organization before he joined it. lmao It’s telling he left because he didn’t like whites discriminating against each other but he makes no mention of black lynching’s and Jim crow.
Woodrow Wilson along with other presidents were members of the KKK. It was Wilson who said that “segregation was an act of kindness”. The first movie that played in the White House was “Birth of the Nation” made by his close friend Thomas Dixon.
The economic reforms the progressives pushed were political movements that created economic rents for the benefit of white people specifically. Occupational licensing reduced the number of people who could do certain business and this was used to restrict the number of blacks from competing against whites. The minimum wage was used against blacks as a way to keep “undesirable groups” from gaining employment. “A minimum wage was seen to operate eugenically through two channels: by deterring prospective immigrants and also by removing from employment the “unemployable” who, thus identified, could be, segregated in rural communities or sterilized.” (Sindny Webb, Journal of Political economy, 1912) Something called the Flexner Standard was implemented in 1910 “for better trained Doctors, who would be educated at University’s instead of for profit medical schools”. The number of black medical colleges were reduced by two thirds with the passage of this law. Funds for public education were funneled to white schools with minimal funding for schools in black area’s.
I have pasted part of a PDF below that is called “Retrospectives Eugenics and Economics in the Progressive Era.” By Thomas C. Leonard.
“In using eugenics to justify exclusionary immigration legislation, the race-suicide theorists offered a model to economists advocating labor reforms, notably those affiliated with the American Association for Labor Legislation, the organization of academic economists that Orloff and Skocpol (1984, p. 726) call the “leading association of U.S. social reform advocates in the Progressive Era.”
“Progressive economists, like their neoclassical critics, believed that binding minimum wages would cause job losses. However, the progressive economists also believed that the job loss induced by minimum wages was a social benefit, as performed the eugenic service ridding the labor force of the “unemployable.” Sidney and Beatrice Webb (1897 [1920], p. 785) put it plainly: “With regard to certain sections of the population [the “unemployable”], this unemployment is not a mark of social disease, but actually of social health.” “Of all ways of dealing with these unfortunate parasites,” Sidney Webb (1912, p. 992) opined in the Journal of Political Economy, “the most ruinous to the community is to allow them to unrestrainedly compete as wage earners.” A minimum wage was seen to operate eugenically through two channels: by deterring prospective immigrants (Henderson, 1900) and also by removing from employment the “unemployable,” who, thus identified, could be, for example, segregated in rural communities or sterilized.”
“Columbia’s Henry Rogers Seager, a leading progressive economist who served as president of the AEA in 1922, provides an example. Worthy wage-earners, Seager (1913a, p. 12) argued, need protection from the “wearing competition of the casual worker and the drifter” and from the other “unemployable” who unfairly drag down the wages of more deserving workers (1913b, pp. 82–83). The minimum wage protects deserving workers from the competition of the unfit by making it illegal to work for less. Seager (1913a, p. 9) wrote: “The operation of the minimum wage requirement would merely extend the definition of defectives to embrace all individuals, who even after having received special training, remain incapable of adequate self-support.” Seager (p. 10) made clear what should happen to those who, even after remedial training, could not earn the legal minimum: “If we are to maintain a race that is to be made of up of capable, efficient and independent individuals and family groups we must courageously cut off lines of heredity that have been proved to be undesirable by isolation or sterilization . . . .”
“Better that the state should support the inefficient wholly and prevent the multiplication of the breed than subsidize incompetence and unthrift, enabling them to bring forth more of their kind.” A. B. Wolfe (1917, p. 278), an American progressive economist who would later become president of the AEA in 1943, also argued for the eugenic virtues of removing from employment those who “are a burden on society.”
In his “Races and Immigrants”, the University of Wisconsin economist and social reformer John R. Commons argued that wage competition not only lowers wages, it also selects for the unfit races. “The competition has no respect for the superior races,” said Commons (1907, p. 151), “the race with lowest necessities displaces others.” Because race rather than productivity determined living standards, Commons could populate his low-wage-races category with the industrious and lazy alike. African Americans were, for Commons (p. 136), “indolent and fickle,” which explained why, Commons argued, slavery was required: “The negro could not possibly have found a place in American industry had he come as a free man . . .”
“Fear and dislike of immigrants certainly were not new in the Progressive Era. But leading professional economists were among the first to provide scientific respectability for immigration restriction on racial grounds. They justified race- based immigration restriction as a remedy for “race suicide,” a Progressive Era term for the process by which racially superior stock (“natives”) is outbred by a more prolific, but racially inferior stock (immigrants). ”
“The term “race suicide” is often attributed to Edward A. Ross (1901a, p. 88), who believed that “the higher race quietly and unmurmuringly eliminates itself rather than endure individually the bitter competition it has failed to ward off by collective action.” Ross was no outlier. He was a founding member of the American Economic Association, a pioneering sociologist and a leading public intellectual who boasted that his books sold in the hundreds of thousands. Ross’s coinage gained enough currency to be used by Theodore Roosevelt (1907, p. 550), who called race suicide the “greatest problem of civilization,” and regularly returned to the theme of “the elimination instead of the survival of the fittest.” In that same year, more than 40 years after the American Civil War, Ross (1907, p. 715) wrote: “The theory that races are virtually equal in capacity leads to such monumental follies as lining the valleys of the South with the bones of half a million picked whites in order to improve the conditions of four million unpicked blacks.”
I’ll deal with Sanders/Clinton in another post.
LikeLike
“The prison industrial complex, which I indeed despise, was not created by the will of the American people. It was created by and for the billionaires on Wall Street. They are the only people who benefit from racism.”
The police and prison guard unions lobbied representatives which allocated tax dollars to build the industrial prison complex over the last 30 years. This is easy to prove, just use google.
Their are plenty of public service jobs at stake that depend upon institutional racism so that they can make a living.
“His campaign is financed solely by himself and fundraisers, not by the billionaires.”
“Bernie Sanders is also the only candidate who is going to smash them; he also just recently promised to drastically cut drug laws and get retroactive sentence readjustment for nonviolent offenders.”
This will be one promise he will have a hard time keeping since if he makes the nomination the majority of his funding will come from unions including those who lock people up.
http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/pacs.php?cid=N00000528&cycle=Career
“He also supports community policing, so law enforcement looks less like an occupying army”
Unless he plans on taking away “the police bill of rights” and other union protections keeping them out of fatigues isn’t going to change much. Again if he won’t take wall street money its got to come from somewhere and that means unions.
Taleoflions properly pointed out what real socialism is. Countries like Cuba and Argentina who are socialist also have racism and a white hierarchy is in place.. When I said “and its from these roots that white supremacy became the dominant ideology behind various world views” that was what I was referring to. White supremacy transcends political and economic ideology.
My prior comment was long but was an attempt to show you the roots of white supremacy within the last 100 years and how it got systemically hard wired into our society. The PDF that I posted from (“Retrospectives Eugenics and Economics in the Progressive Era.” By Thomas C. Leonard.) is about 18 pages long and I suggest you read it. It’s one of many sources that show how Jim Crow continued to grow within our society. Whenever a black business or community became successful laws were passed to shut it down. The history of unions in the U.S. was largely about keeping jobs for white people and were racist and inclusive.
LikeLike
I wonder how many of these books the English, French and Moroccans stole…
LikeLike
“Feel the Bern!” Lordy, you are inadvertently funny. As a supporter of the Palestinian right to self-determination how do you reconcile your enthusiasm for Bern and his support for Israel’s burn and slash policy in Palestine? Let me guess, you are using the same process of compartmentalization you used for Boney. Am I right?
LikeLike
Pretty sure bernie is jewish not sure if zionist
LikeLike
Asked and answered…
http://m.jpost.com/Diaspora/Where-does-Bernie-Sanders-the-Jewish-candidate-for-president-stand-on-Israel-412448#article=6017MTE3MTA0NjIxODRGMDJDNUQ3OUNGMjNBMjAzNjJCRjA=
Warning: standard campaign rhetoric
LikeLike
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2014/09/05/hillary_clinton_henry_kissinger_pals.html
tell me you didn’t see this coming (from me) wait for it…
back to balfour 2016
LikeLike
blm – appeals to emotion (heart) without specific policy demands
flaw of slogans – black lives matter – easily countered by all
lives mater instead of
police accountability or police accountability to black people
never mind the inherent limitation of slogans
btw i don’t follow or even have a twitter account because it seems
too excessive ,trivial and unnecessary – we have free
email,facebook,blogs and youtube ;but we really need to constantly
communicate with only 128 characters esp to follow what every
primarily entertainment celebrity has to say?! – I’m good (as they
say in the hood) meaning I really don’t need it.
back to blm or as abagond helped it -black lives matter um ah oh
yeah – too; hey how about that one – blm black lives matter too
also as to policy change demands how about – ending the war on
drugs which is just code for a war on the poor and poc
and enables the pic
its a policy demand demand that if taken up and implemented would
have major effects throughout society however as racism is a
system the system would respond to restore its dominance so
ultimately we need to come up we counter systemic solutions
perhaps.
about Hillary Clinton
I really don’t get the antagonism displayed by some here including
abagond,hate her,don;’t trust her; I feel the same about her as
most any politician including Obama,sanders etc ,they are going to lie as
expediency and self interest dictate and will sign off on some
killing/murder as part of their job.
the big issue everyone seems to be ignoring is that this country
has never had a female president before ,hello women only got the
vote in 1929 decades after black men and in 2008 a choice was made
between a woman and a black male and we know who won that one
right.
now its time for a female president period.
bernie sanders ,I don’t care how progressive he claims to be ,he
is not a poc or a female ,just another old very white male.
like biden thinking about running ,why ,what could yet another
white male have to offer?
which brings up chump I mean trump
I like how a lot of establishment commentators (mainly white and
male) claim to not understand his popularity,
cause just coming out and saying hey we white males think we are
entitled to always dominate and be in charge,and
we really hate that we had to tolerate a black male in “our”
rightful position and now you want to follow up with a female ,ah
hell na.
well guess what ,its long over due so stfu and accept what you
should have accepted hundreds if not thousands of years ago,we all
would have been and will be better off.
maybe….
LikeLike
I say again, I don’t really trust Hillary… on a LOT of levels.
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/features/6613428/Secrets-of-MI6-spy-found-dead-in-bag-revealed.html
LikeLike
@king
and
is that the best you can do?
you sound like a media meme
and you addressed none of my points
but then not saying anything is also a big part of current establishment media.
LikeLike
[…] The same thing happened when the national media decided to pay attention to the issues in Baltimore. It was a protest movement that was at least months in the making and ignored – then national media showed up on the scene and quickly the discussion became about ‘rioters’ and ‘people who destroy their own neighborhood‘ and not about the killing of a man in police custody and a history of abuse and fear in a community. It is easy to see where the distrust may stem from on a number of levels. This is perhaps also a moment of learning on how, when and where journalists are legally allowed to function. It is a maturation of a movement which will likely/hopefully make us all think about a host of issue these young people are bringing to the fore, and some they may also be navigating for the first time. One additional moment that ties in with this is when Hillary Clinton CHOSE to finally address and meet with Black Lives Matter activists – she chos…. […]
LikeLike
^I just watched the video of the BLM protester interrupting Clinton. It doesn’t look like a nail in the coffin for Clinton. It looks like a situation that can be handled and played off.
Clinton’s response so far:
http://time.com/4238230/hillary-clinton-black-lives-matter-superpredator/
LikeLike
[…] When Hillary Clinton met Black Lives Matter […]
LikeLike
Alicia Garza will not be supporting Hillary Clinton.
http://breakingbrown.com/2016/06/black-lives-matters-alicia-garza-wont-supporting-hillary-clinton-general-election/
LikeLiked by 1 person
http://www.tennessean.com/story/news/politics/2016/06/27/tennessee-lawmakers-launch-blue-lives-matter-effort/86450416/
LikeLike
This post should be called, When Hillary Clinton schooled BLM. Love her or hate her, she would be a far better commander and chief than the Nazi we got now.
LikeLike