AN AFRICAN VOICE WITH NATIVE TONE

How to debunk cultural white supremacy

2011-08-05T13:08:00.000-02:00

I have concluded that ALL white skinned people support in some manner the world wide system of white supremacy, they just pick and choose what degree and what level. For example, some white woman was recently held captive in Somalia and now she wants to return to help with the famine. On the surface this sounds benign but again it goes to show the humbleness, forgiveness, and generosity of white skinned people while all the while their political-economic systems helped create the situation in Somalia and other parts of Africa. This white woman may not consciously acknowledge her role in white supremacy, but it’s there to hide its aggression and intent.

Then you have the so called “white supremacist” whose role it is to divert the meaning of white supremacy away from the social-economic-religious- political systems that support it. For example Stormfront preaches that their goal IS white supremacy. I don’t understand that because their goal has already been reached. Look at who controls the resources of the world, the European Nationals, England, France, Germany, Russia, Australia, the United States, ALL white skinned nations. Therefore I can only conclude that the supporters of Stormfront are either seeking separation from non whites or there purpose is to keep up the deception and division.

In light of my thoughts about white supremacy I’ve concluded in order to combat this global plague, that robs non whites of their spiritual/cultural efficacy, is to fight fire with fire. No not the fire of an automatic weapon, that fight will be too costly and no one will win. We must fight white supremacy with its counter part, the concept of Ma’at. Ma’at challenges white supremacist notions on all fronts, social, political, religious, economic, physical and psychological. It basically debunks the Europeans notions of cultural white supremacy with Truth, Justice, Balance, Harmony, Order, Propriety and Reciprocity. European nationalism can not exist if these values are ingrained and upheld in society as is cultural white supremacy today.

Many may think this an impossible task but it isn’t if implemented over time. In the black community our biggest challenge is to remove the black mind from monotheistic religions and back to spirituality because only with spirituality minus the religious essence of a creator god, can we accept with sincerity Ma’at as a way of life.

WHY CAN'T WE LIVE TOGETHER?

2010-08-01T14:21:00.001-02:00

My America the Beautiful

My country tears from me
What happened to democracy?
Of thee I sing
Never finalized far from realized
From mountain to country side
Lost in ambiguity

My country tears from me
What happened to liberty?
Which I never knew
Sit slogans aside one great big lie
White immoral pride
Their freedom to rings

My country tears from me
What happened to morality?
Hung from trees
Smelling in the breeze
Freedom’s song died
Wrong is right, right is might
Dirt for prosperity

My country tears form me
Land where my fathers died
Land that killed my pride
Where white supremacy resides
1608 till 0’10
Of Tis I sing
Of thee I sing

Shabaka 7/10

“Simply, we are all too professional to allow disagreements between BP and any other organization to affect our behaviors," Ryan Urik, a BP well safety adviser working on the Development Driller II, which is drilling a backup relief well, said in an e-mail last week.- From article discussing BP et.al. sealing the Deepwater Well.”

The above excerpt taken from an AP article “Congressman: too much dispersant used in oil spill”, by Josef Hebert is my attempt to show two opposing cultural expression and why people like Lincoln, Jefferson and others have thought that African people and European people can not live equally in the same society.

Throughout history there have been conflicts between people of the African phenotype and those of the Europeans. History shows, from the Assyrians, through the Greek, Roman, and Arab invasions of Africa, it has taken pains to obfuscate these conflicts as being cultural, and the reasons why are for another topic. Further, modern history has compressed these conflicts into “racial” ones based simply on how one looks. They were all European types because they needed the African type to have no substantial role in history. They wanted the African phenotype removed to make it distasteful to humanity in both substance and form. To do this culture was removed (because there’s undeniable beauty in all cultures) and replaced with ideas of a “Race” of Africans (Black Race) based on phenotype, which made it easier to demonize because you can see it, make it what you want. However that became problematic because the human beings taste is eclectic, so no phenotype is universality displeasing. It must have been something deeper to promote this idea.

This essay tries to reduce that “something deeper” down to culture, not race, and how cultures think, or in other words, share their Memes over centuries. (Cultural Memes may be incorrect, but it’s more acceptable today than a genetic trait).

The statement in the excerpt that deals with how the three companies are “too professional” to allow disagreement between them is telling of how European cultural Memes are used to foster, for non Europeans, yet hide, for Europeans, the ideas of “race.” BP, Halliburton, and Transoceans are European run companies. They are a microcosm of European world organizational structure. When a serious threat appears, no matter their own disagreement, they will work together because they are “too professional” not to.

Let juxtaposition that against how Africans run/control their countries, or if Black controlled Corporations, how they nearly always need European counsel. There are no two African countries that can work together for any length of time. So far, there are always conflicts and arguments as to how they “feel” about how things should run. To further my point, what do you think African Americans mean when they ask, “do you feel me?” African Americans and Africans will kill because they “feel” someone has disrespected them or they “feel” they don’t have respect from others of a different ethnic group.

To condense the two ideas it boils down to one group is “too professional” and the other “feeling” in their dealing within societies. I suggest that this is basically cultural, but it is made to seem more racial. This is important, because if it were accepted as mostly racial, then that would mean that this concept could be manipulated by social means to comply with phenotypes. That would mean that African people could accept that feeling (emotion) is basically who they are and cognition is foreign or not as important. Europeans would accept that cognition is mostly who they are and feeling is foreign or not as important. That’s why BP, Halliburton and Transoceanic can work together even if they have disagreement. They place cognition over feelings. (Emotion)

This has major implications in society. If African people are stereotyped in the media, educational institutions, and in their own communities as their personal feeling (emotion) being more important than cognition (thinking), they will internalize that feeling is predominately who they are and if they feel like doing something, whether it’s becoming a doctor or a drug dealer act accordingly. The bottom line becomes their individual socialization. But most likely their socialization is the media, educational institutions, and their community, which is mostly controlled by Europeans (over the years the power for shaping children’s ideas has diminished within the family structure, especially in the isolated Black northern “inner” cities) and the European can’t “feel” them, only “think” them, and the African is punished because he than has difficulty living with the European cognitive mode, negating his “feeling” (emotional) mode causing cognitive dissonance.

Why is this in the first place? How can I say such things?

The white man’s burden is the black man’s curse. European culture must suffer the African cultural ideas and the African cultural idea must suffer the attempts of its removal.

Plato expressed the European cultural idea that logic is far superior to [base] emotion.
However the African cultural idea was born out of discussion about life, while the European cultural idea was born out of how to sustain life, strife. This is due mostly to environment. The African cultural idea developed out of Natures bounty and didn’t have to concern itself with daily means of survival. It had time to use equally both the cognitive mind and the emotional mind, balancing feelings with cognition. The European cultural mind had to plot, scheme, deceive, kill to survive, things that had to suppress “emotion.”

Upon contact, it is obvious that they both couldn’t live in the same space, one had to subject the other. Giving their epistemology, which do you think prevailed? This conflict has been ongoing since contact. The ancient (BCE) diffusion of the worldwide African idea needed to be diminished, if not removed, so the European cultural idea (CE) could flourish satisfying it’s natural need for the dominance of cognition over emotion (feelings.)

This conflict, this never ending quest to remove the essential African idea that many people of African descent still carry in their ancestral memory today. This attempt to make it racial instead of cultural thereby promoting the idea that the African phenotype is predominately an “emotional” creature obfuscating the historical evidence that they are both, is why the two cultures cannot live together unless the African cultural idea submits itself making them less human.

Shabaka Tecumseh 8/1/10

How can I talk about racism?

2010-04-17T10:47:00.004-02:00

This is the most difficult part of most people coming to terms with my thinking. Knowing there are everyday white people who have mundane jobs trying to make ends meet and knowing that there are a great many poor white people. How can I talk about racism in light of this and the existence of our black bourgeois and the election of President Obama? How can discussions about the existence of racism be valid?

The answers are complex. However I think the most prominent, and also the most covert, are racial attitudes based in the history of racism. Ideas of place and power rooted in fear and cultural memes. Ideas that are the foundation of this country and ideas that have been built to support its economic and social structures. Ideas of the supremacy of European phenotype and the inferiority of the African phenotype, all on some sliding scale controlled by the European cultural establishment. For example, and with few exceptions, the black Harvard and Princeton grads go to the top of the list with the next tier being the black fraternity and sorority members. They tout what they have learned, given the credential of approval, and moved up the social ladder to” spread the word.” They take their children to museums that show the greatness of the European conquest and how superior their arts and sciences. They encourage the masses of blacks to do the same and debased African thought and culture if not overtly, then covertly by their mere presence and place.

With this social structure in place, even the poor white people are able to maintain a superior social attitude. Those “blacks” credited with being our best and brightest are striving to achieve the given social status of the economically poor white. That’s why Obama can invite a police sergeant to the white house for a beer after he just dissed a Harvard professor (and Obama friend) then everything is OK because white folks feel better. Their cultural power, as expressed through their social order, is not threatened. How do you heal this? How do you get the European phenotype to even acknowledge this social/cultural disorder as a problem when it’s not to their advantage to do so? In fact it may be dangerous to do so because of the violence it may invoke.

However I know that the order of things today stifles this country. It keeps one group comfortable with their privilege, and in turn keeps other groups unable to seriously deal with their social/cultural inferiority complexes, both situations exacerbating a negative environment which hampers productivity and creativeness.

But why do I concern myself with such things, I’m not a black Harvard grad or frat member.

Note: I hope President Obama sincerely felt that inviting the police sergeant to the white house was a gesture of racial healing without any culturally induced notions of white supremacist influence. Albeit hard to accept that premise given his education and surroundings.

A REMEMBRANCE

2010-04-07T00:41:00.002-02:00

I had four aunts. I remember as a young pre teen these beautiful, tall, slender, yet not small, brown women. I remember going in the bathroom and seeing their silk nylons hanging from some made up stick my grandmother used to whip our asses when we didn‘t listen. I remember sneaking peeks as they were getting dressed to go to work or out on a Saturday night. I remember getting a warm feeling in my pre pubetic groin watching them put on their silk stockings, red fingernails clicking the hooks over the elastic white garter to hold up the black rim hose.

I marveled as they took their time pulling up the shear man made cover over those shapely legs, they seemed to admire their bodies and automatically knew and understand the chemistry that made them woman. Not subservient, not weak, but what Nature intended when it split the hermaphroditic human animal into two entities for better survival, one of testosterone and the other estrogen.

Today as I was riding on the train, two black bodies in military uniform caught my eye. I stared through the window because my brain didn’t agree with my eye. For several minutes I wondered, but then I saw the outline of what appeared to be breast or a flak jacket beneath the camouflage, I settled on breast. As the train pulled out of the station, I reflected on the relationships and attitudes of black, white, and in general, “western” women of today and my aunts of yesterday. Then I really wondered if Nature was able to keep the separation it worked so long and hard to create or was it losing out to anything goes, all that’s good, white feminism, strong black woman material pleasure, all in the name of progress?

CULTURAL PSYCHOPATHS

2010-04-06T00:36:00.004-02:00

psy·cho·path (sī'kə-pāth') n. A person with an antisocial personality disorder, manifested in aggressive, perverted, criminal, or amoral behavior without empathy or remorse

One reason European cultural thought and behavior must be deconstructed and adjusted, if not eliminated, is because of its psychopathic nature. First we must agree that a CULTURE can have a psychopathic essence. By that I mean that a cultural world view can have a psychopathic nature/foundation. For example here's an expression of that foundation. When the European devised organizations like "Greenpeace" and take on projects like "Save the whales", I contend that their deep seeded motivation is guided by the realization that if the whales go extinct, how far are we behind?

I'm not saying that this is "wrong" or crazy, but what I'm saying is that Euro created organizations like "Greenpeace" don't come into existence BECAUSE of the shear misguided anti nature ideology of European culture, but because of the shared ideological existence of it in the first place. This can be extended to other cultural forms that European cultural thought creates like democracy, freedom, capitalism, religion, from linear ideas of progress, to control of some unknowable future, they all share no remorse or show empathy for their victims, only rhetorical critiques of their behaviors or promises to do better (if they are caught)..

The anti nature stance of European culture has been in existence since the dawn of their history. Where was "Greenpeace?" The Japanese and Inuit ate whale meat for centuries, but commercial exploitation reached its zenith in the early 19th century when the European entered the market. Even today Greenpeace attacks the effects and not the cause of destruction, therefore becoming, in many ways, complacent to the amoral behavior. They can't empathize or even be remorseful of the Europeans cultures behaviors, just rhetorically critical. See world savior and world conqueror are two sides of the same coin.

This example can be extended to the European culture's aggressive criminal behavior towards Blacks, First Peoples, etc. (albeit because of euro cultural imperialism, most of these "conquered" cultures now share many of the same views as the conqueror). But for me the saddest part is that euro liberal and other groups are not only NOT attacking the cause of the destruction, but by not doing so, they are killing "us" as well as themselves, the ultimate psychopathic behavior, yet they still show no remorse or empathy, just ideas of "progress."

"It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society."-Jiddu

CULTURAL ANTI MATTER

2008-01-16T15:39:00.000-02:00

“Simply put, antimatter is a fundamental particle of regular matter with its electrical charge reversed. The common proton has an antimatter counterpart called the antiproton. It has the same mass but an opposite charge. The electron's counterpart is called a positron.”-Robert Britt, Senior Science Writer, Space.Com http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/antimatter_sun_030929.html

I’ve often wondered if the Universe is full of appositions like matter and antimatter, light and darkness, and cultural apposition? What if the same principals of apposition applied to animals? I’d say to take a quick look, let's take the most obvious in the animal world, humans. We have basically two phenotypes and two cultural world views that appear to be in apposition. We have the quintessential “Northern” European phenotype and world view and the quintessential “West” African phenotype and world view. The obvious physical features of blond hair vs. black hair, thin noses and lips vs. thick noses and lips, melanin deficient skin vs. melanin enriched skin, etc. are surface appositions. But what about the obscure, the ones that goes against the dominate culture's essence? The ones they say don't exist because it would throw unwanted scrunity on them?

Here we have to look at cultural histories or behaviors to find the answers. Here we see that the Northern European culture has distaste for Nature because they try to control it via their techno-mechanical order by one example, creating things “artificial.” (Look in your kitchen cabinet or on television with programs like Nip/Tuck, mechanical dance moves, heavy metal, or European cultural greed). Then in apposition you have the African culture that historically was intone with nature through its rhythmic, synchronistic creations. (Look at African dance, song, dress, and pre-contact worldview)

So what does all this mean to me? First of all it tells me that we have a problem because neither culture understands its role in the universe. Second, it tells me that both of the cultures are necessary to satisfy, what I believe, is the Universe’s prime objective, and that is the quest for balance. However, one culture tries to control Nature, so there’s little hope of it coming to the realization or terms with its role in universal balance on it's own, and the other culture is so psychologically dominated and oppressed that it’s too busy trying to find ways of survival to realize its role in the balance scheme.

I truly believe that European culture essence is out of balance with its techno-material order. It has gone too long unchecked. I further believe that the African cultural essence, if it doesn’t realize its role in Universal balance, it may be too late to stop the other culture from totally destroying it and thereby themselves.

This brings me to my personal notes. This is why I despise White Supremacy and “Negrotism.” Neither serves the purpose for the advancement of our species. White Supremacy is a notion in cultural dominance and “Negrotism” is a notion in cultural submissiveness. Neither seeks balance.

If we are to become a viable species, we need to find our balance in the Universe. We need to learn to live with Nature (of which humans are an intricate part) as well as protect ourselves from Nature without trying to over ride it with an artificial technical material order. If so we will deter destructive wars and acts of unnecessary aggression, while focusing on our own survival as human beings. I think if we don’t realize that appositions need not destroy, but can amalgamate to create a “new universal harmony” and with the proper understanding or our role as matter and anti matter we will make it. Otherwise?

"When the matter and antimatter came into contact they annihilated, and only the residual amount of matter was left to form our current universe," Share says.

Ole Bamba in America

2008-01-06T10:28:00.000-02:00

Well Ole Bamba won the Iowa democratic primary. That was something in America for a Black man to win a primary in an almost 100% white state. However my experience with American politics after the 1960’s has been suspect at least. I know that the old elite have always been behind world politics, but in America a new phenomena has taken place. The world elite partnered with the neo-money class and the neo-money class allows the religious powerbrokers more freedom to spew their ideology. This tightens the grip on world domination because all of those groups are headed by Europeans and are determined to keep their hegemony in tact.

So how in the hell does Ole Bamba come into play with his dark skinned half African self? When I look behind the game, I’ve developed a theory of hegemony that can have perhaps two outcomes.

First, given the 2000-2004 electoral faux pas, the idea of a democratic process has suffered. With the elections in Florida and Ohio and the electronic voting machine revelations, the process is in question. With this election cycle there’s a chance to superficially restore to the American political process some semblance of legitimacy. In walks Ole Bama. The process would now appear to work if a half-“Black American” (hypo descent rule would make him all Negro) was elected as the Democratic Presidential Nominee. He would have to beat out a field of all white males and one woman. That would show the world (and put off some American anarchist), how believing in the American systems of democracy, one could achieve social justice in their own country. Would Ole Bamba offer some serious political capital in this presidential race?

Second, I question how far do the powers behind Ole Bamba intend for him to go? Will they allow him to get the nomination and then run him against a humdrum opponent like Giuliani, who wouldn’t have a snowball’s chance in hell against any legitimate white candidate? Then when they fix the “too close to call” election, not too many people will question why a Black man in America lost, we all know there are some “throwback racist,” mainly in the south, in America. Still the process would appear to work for the rest of the world and the elite-money-religious triad would continue have their candidate in office.

Finally, Ole Bamba is safe. If for some reason their scheme doesn’t work, they still have a candidate that will not rock their boat. He may be like the female cop who now holds a traditional male job occupation. She must show that she’s worthy and also get approval of her peers and benefactors. Ole Bamba may turn out to be more aggressive in support of the status quo under the banner of doing his job.

The bottom line is “race” will play a part in America for years to come. It’s a great tool for control and manipulation. It appeals to the emotion, and in television’s Disneyland, emotion trumps reason and critical thinking every time. So it should be interesting and fun to watch how the triad will play the American public this time around. BTW, if you want an example of how control is maintained, no matter the outcome of elections, look at the current Democratic Congress.

Now that you have the world, What....

2007-11-05T09:02:00.000-02:00

Often you hear from those in power that the world is unsafe. Let me be the first to tell you, they are correct. But how did it get that way? How did the “human” species evolve from taking care of their own clan to telling groups of people called countries which weapons they can have to defend themselves and which ones they can’t? Who elected those dictator countries Chief? That’s the point of this essay. No one, they took the role using violence and deceit and that’s why the world is not safe. It comes down to those who live on this planet with white skin have a tremendous cultural ego. They think they are the smartest, the bravest, and the one chosen by “god” to rule. If that weren’t true, then they surmise, they wouldn’t be in the position they are presently enjoying.

However that summation is woefully inaccurate. The bravest, hardly when they take undue advantage of the weakest people on the planet and can only adhere to the demands of those who truly where brave enough to acquire weapons without their permission. The smartest folk, hardly. After years of starting wars, deceit, and manipulation to acquire the resources for institutions to change the color of knowledge, they brought into their own propaganda of being the creator of all things good. That doesn’t make them the smartest, it makes them the most violent, the winners at making war on people with less weaponry, and as my one half of my ancestors said, speaking with folk tongue. As far as being chosen by god, I suppose if you create god, I’m sure he’ll chose you to lead. See during one to those “campaigns” of conquest, they took the African idea of “god” being Nature and made it human and of course, in their own cultural image.

Do you remember the song, “Now that you have love, what are you gonna do with it?” I ask the white skinned and their pretenders, now that you have pretty much acquired world domination, what are you gonna do with it? If history is the answer, more clandestine adventures against people of color, more deceit, and more expansion, politically, culturally, and economically because that’s all they know or care to know. After all, they think they are the smartest, the bravest, and the ones chosen by god and it’s not their fault that the world is unsafe; they are here to save it.

GATEKEEPERS

2007-10-19T10:26:00.000-02:00

You know what I’m beginning to think? I’m beginning to think that when Black women get hired for middle management jobs, they have a clandestine job description and that is to oversee the control of black men in the white man’s socio-economic world. I think this has profound implications on Black male-female relations and also reveals a pathological history steeped in white supremacy, and as someone coined, Post Traumatic Slave Syndromes. I’m careful to note that this is not all black women, it is usually the ones who are very ambitious, mid 30-mid 40’s, southern, Christian, fatherless, and overweight and if they are with a man he’s either white or a weak black man.

My African centered female friend took offense to my assessment by injecting the role of Black men in the employment scenario, so I’ll imagine what the other Black women will think of this “critique.” It should be noted that this critique is focused just on Black women in low to middle management positions in Euro-companies. Although there are many concomitant issues regarding Black men, that’s not my focus for this essay. I write this because I think it’s an important topic in our community, if proved correct. Black women are the culture bearers of what’s left of the African culture in America. And if my assessment is at all correct, think of the implications for the Black community at large, let alone young Black men, their sons.

Finally, if my critique is correct, what can we do, if anything, to correct this abnormality? As the Black condition stands in America today, I say nothing. How can Black women, who are absent Black men because of white supremacy’s impact on their social economic condition, take care of the children without working? How can they keep a job if they don’t do what’s expected of them, i.e.: Gatekeepers?

I think this is another reason for Reparations. I don’t think Euro culture can change in time to allow Black culture to proliferate in its natural state. By that I mean to allow Black people to first find then subscribe to their African culture essence, which is in many cases, the antithesis to Euro culture thought and behavior. Europeans will develop such cognitive dissonance, uneasiness and paranoia that they will attack. Our only chance is to live where the African cultural essence is no threat even though neo colonialism may exist. Again this is not written to be divisive, but to bring to the forefront a problem if it exists at all. If not, then this is just another doom and gloom essay.A

LIKE HELL HE IS

2007-10-07T11:25:00.000-02:00

Bush, Texas at odds over death case

By MARK SHERMAN, Associated Press Writer 1 hour, 52 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - To put it bluntly, Texas wants President Bush to get out of the way of the state's plan to execute a Mexican for the brutal killing of two teenage girls.
Bush, who presided over 152 executions as governor of Texas, wants to halt the execution of Jose Ernesto Medellin in what has become a confusing test of presidential power that the Supreme Court, which hears the case this week, ultimately will sort out
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Governor Bush doesn’t have the same advisors as President Bush. What do I mean by that? When I write that racism had to end in the United States, not because of some benevolent ideas about equal justice for its citizens of color but because internationally, racism had to end if America was to expand its commercial enterprises. How could the U.S. do business with countries that have the resources, which are people of color countries, and still preach “democracy” when there were none for certain sections of its own citizenry? Overt racism’s demise was politically expedient.

As governor, George Bush didn’t have to deal on the international stage. As president he does. His wealthy contributors and advisor elite need NAFTA and eventually “dollarization” to maintain its current economic supremacy. It can’t do that if Mexico’s “sovereignty” is ignored. Mexico must feel that it has some rights over its citizens and without it, the people may perceive themselves as a colony of the U.S.

Therefore, like racism before it, the U.S. government, along with the controlling power elite, must again pretend that they care about people of color. What’s so sad is that people of color will believe it.

Voice in the Wind

2007-10-07T09:24:00.000-02:00

Sometimes I feel so alone. One voice, with few echoes in a world that’s so far doesn’t look promising. One voice that constantly preaches caution against European cultural aggression. One voice that is silenced against the volume of media, materialism, and cultural mayhem. Yesterday I spoke with a young person in a coffee shop. He and I agreed that a successful revolution is theoretically improbable in the U.S. He thinks this because his idea of revolution is violent and people will not participate in mass until things have deteriorated where they have no choice or no more stake.

I believe he’s correct, but I also think any revolution will not be possible because those who have the most to lose, the cultural elite, are too fluid. In the past, the cultural elite were confined by time and space. Today, with the advent of computers and financial liquidity, those restraints are all but lifted. If America falls apart, they can move their holdings to a place like Australia. They can live in the relative safety of anonymity in some exclusive European enclave or stay on the move for that matter. Therefore, any physical revolution will only succeed in the death and destruction of the masses, while the elite will allow it to happen, in fact, encourage it because it will continue the illusion that this type of revolution can change the power dynamics.

Further I believe that there was only one true revolution in human history. That revolution took place, and is still taking place, as a gradual process of ideological shift. In plain and simple language it is the changing of the ideological guard from an African to a European cultural world view. I believe to this point in history the reason why this revolution was not as obvious or as deteriorating as it is today is because parts of both world views could co-exist to some extent. But now that the European cultural world view is at it crescendo, it becomes painfully obvious of how it has brought chaos and human nature’s destructiveness into play specifically his greed and need for power and control.

As a note, I’m not saying the African world view is perfect. I don’t have that kind of insight. I’m sure there are aspects that are not conducive for the growth and development of the human spirit, but since it is spiritually based, I think it’s better than what we have. I think with this base, parts of the European cultural idea would present a better solution for the planet. However the cultural elite, which depends on monotheism to keep the masses away from spirituality, rules the day.

So I think any true revolution will have to be ideologically spiritually based. One the cultural elite can’t escape no matter how fluid or autonomous. The masses must not pick up a gun, but an idea. The masses should embrace an idea that we can all live and share the planet in our differences and our sameness because of our connectedness to Nature. But first we must alter the prevailing European cultural idea to fit the needs of the world, a tall order in light of China’s material revolution and Bush’s visit to Australia.

Freedom American Style

2007-10-04T13:01:00.000-02:00

Each day I hear on some media outlet how America is fighting for its freedom. Riding in my truck this morning I had the opportunity to think about our freedom and what it means to me. I thought that yes, I’m free. I’m free to be exploited by people whose world view is predominated by the need for power and control. Freedom in the true sense of the word is impossible under this system. How can I be free when theoretically I even pay for the air I breathe? Every waking moment is spent on some form of making or spending money to live and to live I must breath. So how free am I?

During my mental sojourn in my car this morning I also came by a sign that had three Christian crosses and under it the caption read, “Get Connected.” After having my thoughts about freedom, to read this just added more mental stress. Get connected to what, to some sky god? How will that help me live, be free? Hell if I did go to some church, I’d have to pay for that too. But even more troubling is that instead of getting connected, religion pulled the plug. Freedom mean choice and religion only gives you one reasonable choice. Believe in what they believe or be unreasonable and go to hell. What kind of freedom is that and can you believe people grew up with this stuff?

So what’s the answer? The only one I could come up with given my limited intelligence is that we gotta tell those folks who live to make money to fuck off. We gotta turn off the television, ignore the commercials, stop idolizing corporate America and instead learn how to talk to our friends and family. We gotta stop giving in to our mammalian brain and develop our cortex. We gotta stop being lead by the insecure towards or lower animal self. But man what a tall order. It’s much, much easier to absorb pleasure than to struggle with reflection.

So as I drive along in my almost new truck, I suppose I must stop being reflective and just enjoy the moment. Maybe if I stop thinking about shit like this and look at some pretty young girl in a halter top I’d be more normal and freer. At least that’s how the theory goes…

MARCH'IN

2007-09-21T21:16:00.000-02:00

Black folks are the march’in-ness mofos on the planet. Hell we started march'in in the 1920’s with the first March on Movements. Then in the 1930’s to the 1940’s A. Phillip Randolph got white folks all rallied up when he threaten to have 100,000 Negros March on Washington which finally happened in 63 with Martin Luther King and the March on Washington. Then we had the March to Selma in 65, we marched right on to the Million Man March in 95, and we’ve been march'in ever since. Between the Reverends Jackson and Sharpton alone, Black folks have worn out some serious shoe leather and that would include Sharpton's 07 March for decent rap lyrics.

Are we tired yet?

When I watched those young folks march'in in Jena I just couldn’t take it any more. What the hell is wrong with black folk, nine fuckin decades of march'in? Is that all we can think of doing, jump’in behind some Reverend to march for some "injustice" in a system that built to be unjust? Is march'in a reaction to black cognitive dissonance or a weekday substitute for Sunday communal worship? What the fuck?

Does anyone else find this march’in business absurd or even obscene?

Here’s one idea. Instead of march’in why don’t we concentrate on getting the hell outta here and leave Amerikkka to the new flavor, the Mexicans? Why don’t we concentrate on Reparations as one voice and take our expertise to a country that has a black government, even if it’s neo-colonial? There we may have some problems, but I don’t think they’ll try to socio-economic-politico lynch you because you are non white, or want to feel liberation. I believe that would take a lot of stress off our black behinds.

Again I ask, are we tired yet?

In this “new age Amerikka” except for time periods, can you tell me the fundamental similarities between the two events listed below

Scottsboro Boys

The case of the Scottsboro Boys arose in Scottsboro, Alabama during the 1930s, when nine black youths, ranging in age from sixteen to twenty, were accused of raping two white women, one of whom would later recant. The trials, in which the youths were convicted and sentenced to death by all-white juries despite the weak and contradictory testimonies of the witnesses, are regarded as one of the worst travesties of justice perpetrated against blacks in the post-Reconstruction South.
The case quickly became an international cause célèbre and the boys were represented by the American Communist Party's legal defense organization. The death sentences, originally scheduled to be carried out quickly, were postponed pending appeals that took the case all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, where the sentences were overturned. Despite the fact that one of the women later denied being raped, the retrials resulted in convictions. All of the defendants were eventually acquitted, paroled, or pardoned (besides one who escaped), some after serving years in prison.

Jena Six

Jena Six refers to a group of six black teenagers who have been arrested and charged with crimes related to their alleged involvement in the assault of a white teenager in Jena, Louisiana, on December 4, 2006. The incident is one of many racially charged events that have occurred in the town since the hanging of nooses on the "white tree" on the Jena High School campus. The nooses initially caused racial tempers to flare, as for many it recalled the history of lynching in the South, though some have come to believe that it was just a prank with no racist intent. Critics of how the case was handled, including civil rights activists Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, have said that the arrests and subsequent charges were racially motivated.[1] Some residents of the town - both white and black - have expressed the view that the current problem is more the fault of outsiders using racial politics to influence the justice system. Additionally, U.S. Attorney Donald Washington has expressed the opinion that although discipline was mishandled by the school, he has found no reason to believe that there was unfair judicial action.[2]

Haven’t we figured it out yet? White supremacy will always affect us as long as we are here. Somewhere, somehow, this racial/cultural bullshit will find its way out of the sewer. See I think O.J. and Black America have a lot in common, both will be hounded to maintain their perceived inferiority until we are completely psychologically crushed.

WHY I RANT

2007-09-15T09:00:00.000-02:00

This will be one of my shortest blog entries. It has to do with my ranting about white supremacy, my aversion to religion, and my condemnation of Negros. Quite simply put, white folks will align with other white folks who they see as powerful for their perceived benefit whether they are racist or not. Religion is a lie that divides people form themselves and each other. Negros are Black folk main gatekeepers to our own cultural and self realization.

If ever there’s a group that can halt the mass extinction of ALL human consciousness and free thought from those who wish to destroy it for their socio-political-economic gain, it’s so called Black people because many of us are in essence not European and subjected to their particular cultural brainwashing. However we can never accomplish such leadership roles unless first we understand and separate ourselves from ideas and methods of white supremacy. Second, shed religious ideology so we can heal as a person and a people. Third, rid ourselves of our gatekeepers.

This is why I rant on and on about religion and xtianity in particular, because most Blacks are xtian and also about social ideas like materialism, individualism, and homosexuality, etc., because they support ideas of European cultural thought and behavior; which deter us from realizing our own cultural awareness which is needed to accomplish what I’ve already expressed above.

This is why I rant and it appears to no avail because folks just don’t want to hear it and in view of their survival is not popular. However I’m older and it appears I’ll not hear the echoes of my voice from the grave.

WHO'S HOMO POLITICUS?

2007-09-10T10:46:00.000-02:00

Homo politicus: brain function of liberals, conservatives differs

by Marlowe Hood Sun Sep 9, 1:33 PM ET

“PARIS (AFP) - The brain neurons of liberals and conservatives fire differently when confronted with tough choices, suggesting that some political divides may be hard-wired, according a study released Sunday.

Aristotle may have been more on the mark than he realized when he said that man is by nature a political animal.Dozens of previous studies have established a strong link between political persuasion and certain personality traits.Conservatives tend to crave order and structure in their lives, and are more consistent in the way they make decisions. Liberals, by contrast, show a higher tolerance for ambiguity and complexity, and adapt more easily to unexpected circumstances.

The affinity between political views and "cognitive style" has also been shown to be heritable, handed down from parents to children, said the study, published in the British journal Nature Neuroscience.”

Interesting, but how does this affect African people? For example in African societies (before islam and christianity), decisions were people based, meaning that decisions were made for the good of the person instead of the European’s view of a “political cognitive style." It made no difference whether one had more tolerance for ambiguity and complexity, and could adapt more easily to unexpected circumstances or crave order and structure. In African cultures, decisions were not seen as part of art, science, or style.

However I would agree it is “human nature” to desire order and structure but not crave it. But the question remains what does order and structure look like for us? Is it a group of people called a government that engages in “political intrigue” for their own (which is often their so called state) interest or as in African societies, which try to accomplish fairness based on subjective (spiritual) justice and the individual's interest that also leads to the cohesiveness of the group and promotion of the social order?

When we read articles like the one above, we must be very careful not to offend our ancestral memory because that can very well cause us more cognitive dissidence. Such dissidence could further promote white supremacy by having us believe that this thinking and behavior is universal, therefore, no other thinking or behavior is valid, or even exists for that matter, unless it’s akin to Aristotle’s view. Unfortunately even the view that’s deep in your African soul, which can’t escape the education and media control, is subjected to living in European America and is considered invalid.

Question: What good is a Black political president for Black people? (or a better country for that matter?)

ANOTHER GARVEY IDEA AND NOT STEVE...

2007-09-10T07:45:00.000-02:00

I like to take this time to expand on the idea of one Marcus Mosiah Garvey. First, I truly believe that the descendants of Africans in America are a key to the survival of African culture everywhere. However we must first understand what role we must play in this cultural drama.

When we look around we should realize that every other cultural-being has some historical geographical ancestral root someplace on the planet except African (Black) Americans. Our historical geographical ancestral root is recognized by many of us as being in the soil of the American south. But “historically” the America south belongs to the so called “Indians” and later, after conquest, the European. We’ve never be able to claim this land as an African or Black land and god forbide we claim Africa. Therefore, we have no place. (In my estimation too many of us don’t care or see the importance of place in our cultural lives, and other Blacks don’t understand the European cultural mind set about sharing ever with their own, never mind non-white skinned people.)

In my estimation the reason we don’t have “place” is because of enslavement. I’m sure some people can argue that on some level, but come on now, look around. I’m equally sure some can argue that the European didn’t destroy or change (a process that continues today) into its own image ever culture it contacted, but again, look around.

I think for the sake of the European cultural health and well being, as well as their cultural karma, they should seriously start rectifying their negative historical impact on people of color; in this case Africans. One way is to pay Reparations for the descendants of Africans enslaved in America.

I also think for the sake of African culture everywhere and for the health and well being of African peoples, they should take Reparations, or money owed, and those of deep African consciousness, should build a viable society elsewhere without the interference of the European. (If they can, for once in their cultural lives, stop fluckin with folks covertly or overtly) Those who don’t want to leave, stay.

I think this is not unreasonable. For example, I researched my own family background and found out that even after Blacks were freed, they still where subjected to neo-enslavement. For example in Virginia free blacks needed to register, watched closely, and at any time could (and did) be forcibly removed from a county if a white saw them as “unfit.” They were charged with crimes and many found innocent, but still had to enter into a type of servitude to pay court and other cost. Don't get me started on the enslaved. So it’s not unreasonable for white society to compensate a group, free or enslaved, crippled for 200 plus years in a myriad of ways by that very white society, to act, not in their self interest, and do the right thing for once.

Times have changed, but not so much people. It's time people change too. Marcus Mosiah Garvey still lives.

WHAT DO BLACK WOMEN WANT?

2007-09-04T09:14:00.000-02:00

I’m at it again, thinking too damn much about ridiculous stuff. One of the things that puzzle me today is what do Black women want? Do they want a Black phenotype for a man? Do they want a *Negro for a man? What do they want?

Do they want a Black man that gives up his own spiritual and sometimes physical self to maintain a credit score or his own ego? Do they want a rebellious "thug" that strikes a blow for what he believes is his freedom and independence (expressing his male patriarchal self) while in too many cases destroys his own community and self? Do they want a Black man that is afraid of how the White man can shut down his resources therefore will submit to degenerate behavior? Do they want a Black tricksters like a Don King, the slick talking "studs," the (in)famous Reverends, Obama, etc. all who pretend they have things under control but have really struck a clandestine deal with white folk both in real time and/or through cultural indoctrination? What do they want? Do black women ever ask, what is a Black man in America?

I believe if Black women want a real Black man, Black mothers should tell their Black boys (and girls) that they “love Black men” as a whole. Black men, who survived the homosexual onslaught (whites trying to make them feel powerless as men) and are of clear conscious, should teach Black boys that to experience their “feminine” nature in youth is just that, NATURE, and patriarchal dominance is unnatural. It doesn’t mean they are feminine and they don't have to act like a "girl" if they don't feel like an alpha male.

Seriously, in the face of our history and exposure to white cultural supremacy, I don’t know what Black women want or expect. I don’t know what we, as Black men, can give(except sex) that would act to satisfy them given the standards set by free white men. Then again, we must remember that Black women have been exposed to white supremacy too and what they want may be seen from an altered cultural state of mind and they don't really want what's left of the black man in America..but for many, that's all they have. Well that's not entirely true, they can always fall back on jesus...

hey maybe they want a black man like this..on his knees:

September 4, 2007

Vick attends church, works with young boys

The Associated Press
6:37 AM EDT, September 4, 2007
Article tools
E-mail Share

CHESAPEAKE - Fallen NFL star Michael Vick is trying to show that he is making good on his assertion that he's turned his life over to God after pleading guilty to a federal dogfighting charge last week.

*A Negro is an African transformed by removal of his African essences into a black-white man after centuries of exposure to white supremacist systems and refuses to try to reconnect. This is also not unusual of Continental Africans exposed to colonialism.

**This essay is not complete. The topic is too got damn complex.

Modern Crusades

2007-09-02T01:21:00.000-02:00

When I read about the war in Iraq and the general treatment of Muslim, I think I'm suppose to get the feeling that the fuel for the “War on Terror” is a rift between the Muslims and the Christians. This is not new, there have been many Crusades or rifts between the 11th and 14th centuries and all of them were fought to increase the wealth of the church and the king with a public undertone of religion.

So what makes these present day “Crusades” of Desert Storm and Iraqi Freedom any different? None really except the methodology of selling gives a loud public voice to the Christian right and today we have the creation of the State of Israel. These two things are instrumental today in helping disguise the age old battles for control of the world’s wealth by the old guard social and financial European elite.

Modern technology has further altered the perceptions of the modern Crusades. With the advent of television and instant communications that reach the remotest of areas in the world (the areas with the natural resources they want), the need for disguising the Crusades is even greater. The modern Crusades must never seem like a power grab for resources by the European and Euro-Americans, but appear to the world as a war of ideology, a religious conflict against “Radical Islam” and the forces of "Good."

But I ask you this. What if the Muslim ideology became the dominate cultural ideology in the world? That would mean more prayer and less television. That would mean less casual sex, violence and rock and roll and more conservative behavior which translates into less folks being in prisons resulting in no prison industrial complex. Also it would mean less drug money. It would mean less advertising dollars, less things to sell, fewer things to buy, and those who control the consumer markets would have to live on a fixed income. One quick example would be women’s dresses. The people who controlled the hijab and burqa markets would be the shit, the only game in town. Producing these two types of women's dress would require no marketing techniques, no advertising, no billboards, just basic black cotton with a scarf. Liquor and cigarette sales would be a felony. Western decadence would go off the shelves and those that make money selling cures for unhappiness, loneliness and insecurity would be out of work. And the key for keeping things that way is Muslim justice and it don’t play. Jail my azz..you loose a hand or worst!

Mind you I wouldn't want to live under the “Laws of Islam.” They are just as hypocritical as living in European culture, but for the European capitalist, Islam is more than a religious threat, it’s a threat to their pocketbooks and their lifestyle, their power and control and desire to organize the world in their image.

Understanding this tells me why the United States is in Iraq. It tells me why the U.S. supports Israel. It tells me a lot and more importantly it tells me that very little has to do with the idea of a Jesus or Muhammad which is why the masses support this nonsense. The need for power and control by the church and the kings is the force behind this Crusades and every one that marched to the so called “Middle East.”

Lastly, one of the things that finally got the "progressive liberals" on HuffPost piss off and me kicked off was my opposition to Mia Farrow's assessment of Darfur. It was the last anti-European cultural view straw for them. I suggested it's a religious conflict and the liberals didn't want to see it that way. They are hiding European cultural aggression as usual. The christian are proselytizing in an country that's run by an Arab government. The government armed the Janjaweed to stop the proselytizing and in doing so, struck out at non Arabs and Arabs that are sympathetic to Christians in the Darfur region. It's just an extension of the modern crusades.

NEW LEADER OR NEW OVERSEER?

2007-08-30T08:17:00.000-02:00

Ever since I can remember Black folks have either had or talked about having a leader. I suppose this tradition comes from the enslaved needing a particular spokesperson to champion their cause. But what about a white leader, a white leader that champions white causes? I’m sure that has not been a problem, white folks have elected their leader every four years. It’s called the presidential elections. I know most folks will say, how can that be when the president represents ALL the people? Well, when you look at things from an unclouded perspective, you’ll see that the president, no matter his political party, represents white folks and oversees the rest of us.

Enter Barack Obama. Here we have, what I believe, is the first really “serious” non white contender to be the voice of white folks. I believe a large number of liberal, progressive, and even some mild conservative whites can stomach Obama as the spokesperson for them. They see it as a win, win. They finally have a “safe” non white person who can champion their values because in part of his white mother and also it can finally, ostensibly, take the stench off of America’s past as having only white men as their leader. This will superficially play well in San Francisco and Baghdad.

Speaking of Baghdad, I spoke to a W.D. Mohammed Muslim the other day and he’s hot for Barack. He thinks that Obama will speak for him and his Muslim community. He told me Obama was their friend. To me that makes no sense what so ever. How does he think Obama can get elected if the majority of voters, who just happen to be white, think he’s a friend to the Muslims community, especially the Black Muslim community, hell what about the Khazar Jews and campaign contributions?

I don’t think Obama will be the spokesperson for the white folk or overseer for the rest of us. I don’t think the majority of white men (and women) can stomach getting up in the morning, turning on the T.V., and seeing their leader in blackface. It would be too uncomfortable and create a serious cognitive dissidence in their psyche of both the loss of white supremacy and should I laugh. Maybe in about 50 years when America has a more balanced electorate and fair voting machines, will there be a non-white white spokesperson. I don’t think Obama will make it this time. Even with his half European self, I’m sure he’s considered as just a more “polished” Rev. Jesse or Rev. Al., another hypocritical symbol of America’s non racist core.

White folks will have a new leader next year and we’ll have a new overseer, but he won’t be in blackface but more than likely wearing a skirt.

Observations

2007-08-27T18:43:00.000-02:00

This was taken from a news article on Yahoo News:

"But in a step toward implementing the deal, U.S. and Iraqi officials announced that coalition forces would increase the number of detainees released during the Islamic holy month of Ramadan, which begins next month."

Why does the American press feel comfortable writing about this sort of thing? Is it because they know that liberal, conservative, or progressive europeans may not approve of the pretense and methods used for going into iraq, but they understand white supremacy and will do nothing about such cultural arrogance....

Dark skinned people fill the jails worldwide...

Here's another from Yahoo News talking about those who are satisfied with their jobs:

"The poll also showed an ethnic trend in job satisfaction, with more than half the white people polled saying they were very happy in their work, compared with 46 percent of Hispanics and 40 percent of African Americans."

OK but what's the size of the sample? Was it 40 percent of 25 African Americans polled compared to 10,000 white people polled?

Here they go hiding again in front of your eyes....

WHY REPARATIONS

2007-08-21T07:06:00.000-02:00

I feel that reparations are in order. Yes, I really do. The reason: white America has wasted my life. Yep, they did it, not me. When whites accuse me of wasting my own life and I should have some accountability for my behavior, they compare me to white folk. Well, the ballgame wasn’t the same for me and such accusations just relieve them of their culpability in my condition. See, you can’t compare apples to oranges and get answers only using apples will give you.

Since the inception of these United States, people who look like me have had to endure, not just economic manipulation at all levels, but also socio-psychological manipulation as well and all under the threat of physical damage, which includes the criminal justice system. Not one white person can make such a claim, not even Timothy McVey.

This is why they wasted my life. I had to spend a lifetime of walking around white people instead of using the time to better my life free of racial, cultural and social stress. In order to have some type of economic security, I spent a lifetime of psychological debasement making them comfortable with the ill mannered way they treated me.

Many white folks (and some blacks) say that I don’t deserve reparations because slavery was so long ago and neither the slave nor the massa lives today. Well from my vantage point and history can back me up, the massa just moved off the plantation and settled up north. From there they could better control the “free slaves” with discriminatory laws, racist policy, and a unified code of conduct, all used to waste my life while making them look benevolent to the world.

So I (and those who look like me) deserve reparations to repair the damage for their wasting my life. And since whites can’t exhume my ancestors to pay them for wasting their lives, me, as their heir, (and similar to whites inheriting land, equity, and comparative easily gained fortunes from their dead ancestors) should inherit the reparation payment for my ancestor’s misery. They should pay me so I could leave here and live out what’s left of my life in some relative comfort, free of making white folks comfortable and not waste my time dealing with their pathology and working on my own.

They should be tired; I sure as hell know I am.

WE ARE BY DEFAULT

2007-07-27T08:32:00.000-02:00

"On March 6, 1857, Chief Justice Roger B. Taney, of the United States Supreme Court, expressed an opinion whose remnants still foul the air of America today. He stated, “But the public history of every European nation displays it in a manner too plain to be mistaken. They had for more than a century before been regarded as beings of an inferior race, and altogether unfit to associate with the white races, either in social or political relations; and so far inferior that they had no rights which the white man was bound to respect, and that the negro might justly and lawfully be reduced to slavery for his benefit."-Internet article

Here Justice Taney exhibited the “soul” of the white man which hasn’t been questioned to this day. When he said, the history of EVERY European nation, he made no mistake in pointing out that America was a European nation. While the white abolitionist of the day seized upon the latter part of his comments regarding white men respecting the rights of blacks, they never questioned Taney’s assertion that America was a European nation. They didn’t because they were of European descent and it would follow that if you where not European, then you where by default not a full member of this nation and your full rights could be truncated in private.

Today, white “Americans” hide their association with America being a European nation because politically and economically it’s not good to make the inferior, feel inferior. They speak with cohesiveness, but act with white nationalism. The recent Supreme Court decisions regarding race and education speaks volumes to support this claim. Further the criminal justice system reflects iron plantations filled with black bodies. The cities are engaged in urban removal of “undesirable” blacks while being replaced with “refugees or hard working” immigrants. The bottom line is that people who come to America from their own nations are treated with more respect than the descendants of the enslaved. This is because the descendents of the enslaved had no nation in 1857 and no nation in 2007 to garner respect, except the European nation of Taney.

When blacks realize this undisputed fact, then perhaps we’ll see that reparations are in order and we should leave this European nation. Even if we settle in a “black” nation that is presently controlled by neo colonialist, we still wouldn’t have to deal with racial prejudice on the national level. We would have other issues, but the one that attacks your “place” in the world and by extension your sense of belonging, wouldn’t be one of them.

POOR AND OPPRESSED?

2007-07-22T07:17:00.000-02:00

Many People Of Color fight racism and discrimination for years but I think they have very little will to not fight the foundation of their oppression or to delve deeper into what they have and haven’t internalized. This may be obvious to many, but I’d like to give examples of what I mean.

I’ve taken two different “ordinary” news articles that we read each day in the newspapers or watch on television.

First:

Reuters:
Lot 403--Painting offered for song goes for bomb

By Jeremy Lovell Wed Jul 18, 1:22 PM ET
"It entered the auction as an 18th century painting by an unknown artist worth a few hundred pounds, but emerged as a suspected early work by Renaissance master Titian possibly worth several million."

Second:

LOCAL NEWS FOR NORTHWEST ARKANSAS
Overseas Anglican Conservatives Strengthen U.S. Presence

NEW YORK -- "More conservative Anglican leaders from overseas are building up a presence in the United States to counter the liberal-leaning U.S. Episcopal Church on its home turf.

The Anglican Church of Uganda plans to appoint a former Episcopal priest as an assistant bishop to oversee its American congregations. The Rev. John Guernsey of Virginia will be consecrated Sept. 2 in Uganda, according to the Most. Rev. Henry Orombi, head of the Ugandan province. The date of his installation in the United States has not been released.

Separately, the Most Rev. Benjamin Nzimbi of the Anglican Church of Kenya plans an Aug. 30 consecration of Canon Bill Atwood to oversee breakaway U.S. parishes that have affiliated with the Kenyan church."

In my mind these two examples typify how People Of Color are inundated with racism and its progenitor, world wide white supremacy. From a black perspective, I’d ask myself questions when I read “news” article like these. As to the first article I’d ask, how many non European paintings are hailed as “masters?” Second, I’d ask, why such a high price when “beauty (art) is in the eye of the beholder” and these paintings don’t appeal to the ENTIRE world? And third, what gives Europeans the right to determine what is and is not a “master” work of art?

As to the second article, I’d ask, why do Africans need an “Anglican” god to propagate and what’s wrong with their ancestor’s gods? When they refer to “overseas” in the context of an English church, why do they point to Africa? What is the Anglican church doing in Uganda and why do the Ugandans accept an English church which is one from their “former” colonizers?

These examples have deep implications for People Of Color and especially People of African descent. In the larger context, they go to the heart of white world rule of non white people. When these types of notions are taken for granted and not challenged, it’s akin to non whites conceding their psychological independence to Europeans without a single shot being fired. Its Carter G. Woodson speaking from the grave, “The thought of the inferiority of the Negro is drilled into him in almost every class he enters and in almost every book he studies and when you control a man's thinking you do not have to worry about his actions.”

I suppose these are also examples of why I speak so harshly of Black people. I am hurt and disappointed that they won’t even try to not think in the terms their oppressors give them. I’m not asking that they quit their jobs, kill whitey, or pick up a gun; I’m wondering why they won’t think ancestral African first. Why do they insist on embracing, like the Ugandans, a foreign god? Why don’t they openly challenge the notion that European art, or Education for that matter, (look at how many of us send our children to Euro dominated schools and Universities) is the “master” form to be emulated?

I suppose I’m writing this because I care and because if we don’t embrace ourselves, we are doomed as a People and as a culture; while never relieving the white man of his burden and staying mentally poor and oppressed.

Who are the real terrorist?

2007-07-14T08:31:00.000-02:00

“In addition, the report disclosed government plans to build a new database to assess the risk posed by people identified as potential or suspected terrorists. The chairman of the Senate committee that oversees the Justice Department said the database was "ripe for abuse." –Associated Press

The white “ruling” class and their supporters have yet to realize they don’t sell insurance for karma. Wrong is wrong and no matter what their rhetoric, the universe knows the nature of all its children and this particular child has always felt that they where more powerful than Nature, above the laws. They felt it was only a matter of “time” before they would control the heavens and earth. But they forget, a few “pesky” details need to be acknowledged like, time is their own social construction and Nature doesn’t have such restraints. So which one will last longer, The White Ruling Class or Nature as the ozone depletes, the planet warms, and the water is being polluted?

The white ruling class and their supporters not only want to expand into and control the heavens and earth, which is the same mind set that transfers into our daily lives. They bomb, lock up, manipulate, lie to, kill, for control over other cultures, as well as their own citizens for their resources and labor. This is the same as trying to exert control over Nature with their spiritless technology. They use propaganda to justify their abuses while flipping the script to cover them up. One such flip is this government data base for terrorist. Given the number of Americans in prison, have no health care, their basic Constitutional rights eroded in the name of “national security,” domestic spying, Patriot Acts, job lost to corporate outsourcing, a government and Executive Branch that’s above Congress and the idea of “the people”, while robbing the National Treasury to pay for the greedy oil barons and corporate wars, begs the question, who are the real “terrorist?”

I wish folks would take off the propaganda blinders of “freedom and democracy” and take a look. The white ruling class and their supporters are doomed because they can’t control the one thing they should, the hypocrisy Nature put in their souls. They refuse to realize there’s no insurance policy for bad karma.

WHITE FOLKS POLITICS

2007-06-26T11:49:00.001-02:00

As a casual observer of politics in America, I don’t understand something. Recently both liberals and conservative disparage G.W. Bush. They call him names and wish he were gone. I saw that nasal throated blond Coulter wish that “nincompoop” gone.
She also said that both the democrats and the republicans are reaching across the aisle to show bi-partisanship. I’m confused. I thought people were upset with the whole GOP and not just their current leaders. I thought the country was upset because of the war and not just the politics of the war. I thought the country was trying to attain some sense of “righteousness” and denounce imperialism. It seems that again I put too much faith in white folk’s ability to live in the world and not own it.

Bottom line I think there is no way in hell, given the idea of the current congress regarding the great healing of “bi-partisanship” that the American public can support current capitalist interest and not support war, racism, imperialism and cultural aggression. The question in my mind then becomes, who is least affected by this support? I don’t think the answer will be the poor, the undereducated, the underemployed and those who are susceptible to racial/cultural discrimination. Those groups will be most affected by this new “bi-partisanship.” Those groups make up the majority of Americans. My second question would be, why do so many whites support the GOP? Here I can only speculate that the racial propaganda machine works well to appeal to the European’s sense of power for control, their sense of unity to maintain that power for control and I believe this is an unwritten code of support among all liberal-progressive, conservative-neo-con white folk.

I think if this is true, white politics can never include a substantial number of non-whites as power brokers even if they carry the banner of capitalist-imperialism. That would jeopardize the majority power base and then even white unity will be thrown into question. In other words, non whites have no real future in America. A few will always be incorporated or assimilated on a higher social economic level for propaganda purposes. However the majority will always be tow-the-line foot stools for a "white culture" that needs someone who is creative and smart to contribute mightily, for less money and no recognition, someone there to make whites feel superior.

Even with all these advantages and privileges for white folks, I still don’t understand the need and acceptance for “bipartisanship” as the current leaders in both parties steal the country from the majority of whites. I don’t understand how the Supreme Court can side with this administration on blatant Constitutional violations and the majority of white folks just let it happen. The only explanation I can conjure is that the "Third Reich" has found a new home and like the “good German people” of the 1930’s, the "good American people" are exercising their cultural aggression and political control is the venue to accomplish their goals. I really think Blacks need Reparations so we can leave and build elsewhere even if we chose a black country steeped in neo-colonialism and leave white folks politics to white folks.

HILLARY'S GUARANTEE

2007-06-24T21:02:00.000-02:00

Who are the good?
those who decimated dark cultures
in the name of civilization?
those who took Native’s land
because they didn’t farm?
Or was it those who enslaved millions of Africans
in the name of jesus?
Just who are the good?
How about those who stole Hawaii,
killed Filipinos for profit
turned China into an opium den?
Stripped the poor from their banana lands
in Central America
Or spread killer democracy in Iraq
With shock and awe
Maybe it’s the one's who tout freedom
From the pulpit of white supremacy
the gun pointed at your head
but the Taliban still can’t be
the Taliban
Or Hamas a democracy
no matter how fuck up they are
Perhaps it’s those
who point fingers at the oppressed
For acting like the oppressed
after oppressing them
Yes, just who are the good?
Maybe the one's who must put the world
in some rational order, their order
Could the faces of the good
Be the faces of deceit?
living high on the hog
Where ever they want
making better bombs and
taller walls
So good they can define
good at will and
for them there’s no
evil unless they say so...
and they have historically said
to this day evil is dark

If Hillary wins the nomination for President, I think she would be smart to ask Obama if he’d play brides maid. It would be a smart move because it would almost guarantee she would at least survive her first term in office. Since the Vice President is only a heart beat away from the top job, she’s safe. These white folks may play around and elect a white woman, after all she’s the mother of white men, and in many cases shares and gives them their “values,” but a black man, even if he does have a white mother and is a negro to boot, is still too risky in the minds of “true Americans.” When I think about it, living in America is a serious joke. I believe the majority of people who are raised here on “good old American values,” both white and non white, are lacking. The white ones haven’t fully realized that the maintenance of white supremacist systems will eventually choke the hell out of them, and the non whites haven’t fully realized that they are victims’ of white supremacy on all levels and themselves help maintain it, leading to their own oppression.

So here we have it, Hillary and Obama running for President, American democracy in action. A white woman and a black man both trapped in a European cultural idea. Both Candidates laboring under the standard universal concepts that structured the world for European cultural dominance, ideas of power and progress (which demeans non Europeans because they are assured by the European cultural/military army to have neither) that leads to cultural imperialism. Ideas that the world must be put in some “rational order” (which pretty much negates spirituality and harmony) whether they do it under one true god doctrine or the one true democracy rhetoric it makes no difference. It also makes no difference the color of the skin or gender that leads the army.

I hope one can see why I see this as a serious joke because when you come right down to it, it doesn’t matter which one wins. It could even be a white male republican. All that really matters is that the conservative television propaganda machine and the liberal internet keep the “good old American values” good and real for them. And Obama, if elected, has the possibility of being shot, everything is still “normal.” Hooray for Hillary.

SPIRITUAL BEINGS VS. RELIGIOUS ONES

2007-05-27T21:59:00.000-02:00

I was watching this internet video about the Creation Museum in Kentucky and two things struck me as odd. The first was the depiction of a white Adam and Eve, but that's not unusual for the dominate culture to portray their creation progenitor in their own image even though the story took place in a tropical environment. It's also not odd to have the colonized mind either accept it or not question the validity of their premise. But number two really got me. That's when the commenter said something to the effect that, without god, man would have no reason not to kill even though he may be moral. From my point of view, this statement could only come from a religious mind or an unenlightened one and really brought home why the European cultural idea is most destructive.

Spiritually, I believe man should naturally want to achieve what is considered “good,” it's that often ignored little voice that Nature put inside of us all. I believe it would make sense that the concept of good would be that which perpetuates the species and not destroy it. If man did destroy "the good" then he'd have to admit to himself he was insane and this is what the guy at the museum couldn't comprehend. He rationalized man needed god. With this in mind, the appositional concept of the bad is also necessary for man to understand what is good and to naturally try to keep his world in balance between the two. This is where the religious or unenlightened mind fails. The religious or unenlightened mind allows for the bad or evil to subjugate the good so far out of balance it destroys life. It allows it because god becomes the good and not man and as long as religion pushes this idea that man has no reason to control his ability to destroy, evil will dominate.

The European concept could not (or didn’t want to) understand that man is a spiritual being. That he was born with the capacity for both good and bad. However his spiritual quest, his spiritual soul, since he is part and parcel of nature, is to achieve the good which is, as I stated, to perpetuate the species and not destroy those things that help do it. If European culture promoted this idea, many of the systems, as we know them, would not exist. Capitalism would not exist because it’s destructive of Nature and the environment. Individualism would not exist because it’s destructive of community. Racism would not exist because it’s destructive of society. Religion would not exist because it’s destructive of man’s innate spirituality (voice)and let's not forget the sacred cow Democracy which is really a mechanism for oligarchy control and destroys freedom. If the European’s cultural idea hadn't prevailed, these concepts would be rejected out of hand.

So I do wonder about that person in the Museum, Europeans and Christians to boot. I wonder if they are really good people, are able to hear and heed the natural inner voice of man, or do they need god to be their good because their Nature or Natural Soul is too corrupted? Finally, all of this makes those who subscribe to the European cultural idea unaccountable, except to something celestrial of which we really have no empirical evidence of its existence. It also makes them accountable to just themselves. What a wonderful world, you can be religious and be forgiven for murder and live unburdened. However human spirituality is rejected because then, if you murder, there's no escaping the ultimate punishment, living with your conscious mind telling you that you are insane and not a normal human because then you understand!

CAN I FIGHT TOO?

2007-05-25T10:53:00.000-02:00

Jesse’s at it again. This time he’s fighting for inclusion of Africans on the MLK memorial. I think this is a good fight, and I can’t speak for Jesse, but I’m tired. Hell, I want to fight for the Democratic nomination. I want to fight for no more U.S. imperialism. I want to fight to squash NAFTA and to save the planet, or I want to have the freedom to be secure in not fighting for anything, just knowing my basic interest will always be protected over other cultures. I want these things to be my focus like those of the “privilege” class. I’m tired of fighting for the “rights” of Africans to participate in the society. I’m tired of fighting systematic white supremacy that underhandedly kills our community and progeny. These battles surely help kill my spirit and I’m sure those of other Africans by creating a repudiation of things white.

Far too many blacks choose to ignore, embrace or “act dumb” towards the culture of white supremacy rather than fight it by recognizing and then casting off foreign ideologies that are harmful to African unity. Their only “sane” choice (which is recommended by white supremacist systems) is to be one of the three big “O’s”, Obama, Oprah or Oreo. Wait! There’s another choice and that’s to be like Tyler Perry and dress for success, as a black female of course, and we KNOW, there’s no fight in him unless it’s towards me.

Until I’ve achieved parity in America where I can fight for “white” causes without having to be distracted by those pesky “Black” ones, I’ll pick and chose very carefully. I’ll fight for those “black” causes that dismantle white supremacy; those which are not popular because they are protected by white civic and business interest and reach into the heart of what is and has been wrong with America. Those Causes that cause too much truth bringing out the guilt and shame that is white America. Causes that make white America realize they aren’t as good as they’d like to think and never having been; causes that show the weaknesses of being a “black success” in a white colony. But then again, maybe I should fight Jesse and Al’s type of fight. I’d be more popular and perhaps more wealthy instead of having society often making me feel like Don Quixote’s donkey.

THOUGHTS THEN AND NOW

2007-05-06T16:22:00.000-02:00

When I was a teenager living in Washington, D.C., I’d be in my room thinking about the challenges my black relatives faced in a white world that just destroyed Emmett Till. I’d wonder why my aunts and uncles were so poor and financially hapless. Why it seemed all the black men were drunks and/or unemployed. I knew something was wrong because when I went downtown, I saw a lot of white men and women working. I wondered why my mother was a file clerk and her supervisor, a white woman, was her superior even though they had the same education. Yes even in 1957, I knew something was wrong and my gut told me that this institutional and personal racism would someday choke white folks to death.

Now fast forward to 2007. I was watching CNN telling us how some “Middle Easterners” living in the West who has ancestral ties to Pakistan and Afghanistan can easily come to the United States on their Western passports. The broadcast went on to say that this is really a danger from al-Qaeda. How these “homegrown terrorist” can strike America, as they did England at any time.

What does all this mean? Is it just another propaganda tactic of fear, nothing at all, or is it both a tactic and a real danger? I believe it’s the latter. I believe that not unlike the systems put in place to hamper my non white ancestral relatives from achieving their real and full potential and those systems inhibited a viable tangible and non tangible (psychological) asset transfer to the present generations, those who have ties to ancestral Pakistan and Afghanistan have similar feelings towards the same European systems put in place for the same purpose of maintenance of their hegemony into the present.

But so what? In 1957 when I felt that white racism would someday choke those who believed in it, benefited from it, and stood silently by, I didn’t expect those possible consequences to have such a broad based impact. If there are “homegrown” attacks on the United States, there’s good possibility that such reciprocity would surely engulf so many innocent people as well. It would indiscriminately affect the white racist and their systems, the white social justice worker working towards some type of parity, and non white people as well. It would not only strike a blow to dismantle white supremacist systems, but the systematic infrastructure of the country upon which I depend. IMO that ain’t all good.

What’s the answer? I have no idea. The situation is so complex that it appears if it is ever to straighten itself; we must all start from scratch. But then again, that’s no guarantee anything would fundamentally change because of the human ego and the cultural influence European culture has had on all of us which begs the question, is the human need for power and control universal?

I don’t know how all this will play but I do know that something is playing similar to my ’57 tune. I just hope that in spite of the human struggles, that we’ll finally move towards a more just world society and white supremacy, along with its bedfellow corporate hegemony, fade into a sensible secular world humanism.

LIVE AND LET LIVE

2007-05-04T21:07:00.000-02:00

What with this live and let live business? See I’m expected to let live but it doesn’t apply to other folk as long as they are part of the gang. For example, I’m sitting at an outdoor coffee shop enjoying the day nothing on my mind except the sun and the young girls in the oh too tight jeans. With each sip of latte the day seems to get better until……

Two voices at the next table, one white and the other black begin talking about the power of prayer…they continue with how their lord is so great and how the bible is the know all to end all…

Being the “serious” Afro centric atheist historian* that I am, the conversation killed my spirit. It conjured up every ill that beset Africans and our culture when we arrived on these shores. It laid bear the pain of native peoples struggle with death and destruction at the hands of the white Christian expansionist. It brought to mind how this impotent Jesus laid ruin to a black people on their knees, professing a faithless faith, blinding them to mature and conscious examination, while singing submissive songs and throwing their hands in the air. Transformed Africans, trying to get in touch with their ancient African natural affinity using an unnatural idea and not being able to recognize or accept the difference. In so many words, it ruined my sunshine, it didn’t allow me to live.

I called a friend who is suppose to be “enlightened” and they told me, today we aren’t going there. My only question is how can one ignore ignorance any day? I want to live and let live, but I haven’t figured out the trick in a world that kills my spirit. If I could just indulge myself in illusion, in materialism, in mindless tasks, in being sexy or perhaps a ball game, then maybe I’d be able to participate in the live and let live ideal. I’d be able to join the masses and grow old while learning to live with my insanity. Learning to trick myself into ignoring ignorance and become bitterer or more unconscious each day for doing so. My how I envy black people who can rationalize the dynamics of the European cultural “norm.”

*Meaning that I don't believe in any "human form or creator" god head entity like Jesus, Allah, Jehovah, etc.

THE CULTURAL SIGNIFICANCE OF SERIAL KILLERS

2007-03-25T02:19:00.000-02:00

You know what I’d like to know? I’d like to know if serial killers were a part of African social culture before contact. If you want to get the ire of a European up, just mention that there’s something unique to his culture that’s not part of a non white culture. Heaven forbid if it’s something that openly supports white supremacy. Not only will he freak, call you a historical revisionist, scholastically challenged, hell; he’ll even lay the reverse racist trip on you.

I get this all the time from Europeans when we discuss with them that homosexuality was a foreign idea to African culture. That since African culture was Nature based; homosexuality doesn’t fit their Ying-Yang or their concept of the Ankh. To counter, they’ll cite monkeys and giraffes as having homosexual encounters, even fish and toads. They must keep trying to make the world think that their behavior is universal behavior except when members of a non Western culture are being over criminalized or uncivilized, then that can be a “particular behavior” to that cultural group. In fact, it can lead to a rational reason for their conquest or destruction.

So we really need to get the academics cracking on this one. We need to do the research to find out if societal serial killers are truly a Western phenomenon and like a litany of other behaviors, see if they are transferred through the dominant culture’s social systems to other members of the society. See, if we find out that this behavior is born of European cultural society, and then maybe we have our first real crack in their shrouded cultural imperialism. Not only that, this realization can be a solid first step leading to their cultural healing as well, and judging from their history, as well as Iraq and Afghanistan, it can come none too soon.

Here are a few articles about Africans and serial killings.

“Following repeated cases of serial killing over the last decade, South Africa is now a world leader in the psychological profiling of multiple murderers. South Africa has one of the highest murder rates in the world, with more than 55 killings per 100,000 people last year. That compares with levels of around six per 100,000 in the United States, and under three per 100,000 in the UK."

Interesting that I could only find serial killers in South Africa, even in Zimbabwe, where black oppression was just as great, I didn’t find any.

The rest of Africa=0 except for those at war for one reason or another.

So I’d say the cultural significance of social serial killers would be that since serial killers are a product of power for control, which is the European’s cultural modus operandi; while the African’s culture was Nature based, then maybe there are other cultural behaviors that we should examine to determine if they are Nature based (African) or Power for Controlled based (European) and how they affect each of us.

What is Wrong With Us?

2007-03-23T14:48:00.000-02:00

I truly don’t completely understand Negros.* They complain about the treatment they get from European culture yet they embrace it like there’s no tomorrow. I can understand why white folks ask the question, “What do they want?” Hell, I’d like to know too. What I really think is for some subconsciously and others consciously, is to be white themselves but their color reminds them daily that that can't be, so they try so very fucking hard to put “whiteness” into a black body. Futile, and pretty damn stupid to boot.

What if I drew a picture would that help? Here’s the definition of the Western Cultural World.

Classical definition of the Western world: Most of the depicted countries in blue were predominately influenced by Graeco-Roman culture and Christian and Enlightenment ideals and/or shaped by strong Western European immigration and settlement

The most significant points would be that there are NO blue countries (outside of Europe) on the above map that have black or non white people in charge after they were killed off or colonized. (I’d argue that still includes South Africa). Black people aren’t Greeks (well except the Negros who run around with Greek letters tattooed on their bodies and minds). Black people didn’t participate in the European’s “Enlightenment,” albeit some “intellectual” Black ideas were factored in. Black people didn’t develop the West’s Christian religion, but Black concepts about Nature were desecrated to make Jesus their reality and then we sure as hell plugged into it.

What I’m pointing to here is, Black folks adopted and adapted themselves to the Western Cultural World, and we are NOT HISTORICALLY WESTERN PEOPLE. Since this is true, what the fuck is going on? Why are we so intent on being “Western”? Are we crazy trying to put a round peg in a square hole while the real Western People stay organized and laugh their heads off at how silly we are?

Why isn’t this clear? Why don’t Black people (Africans included) want to embrace African cultural thought? Could it be that our ancestors’ culture has been so adulterated by Western and Arab influences that it has become too odious even for us? Why can’t we put as much effort into revitalizing and building what is truly ours as we do in trying to buy the latest and greatest widget? White supremacy, white media, white nothing controls that decision, only our own minds. So what the fuck is wrong with us? I’d say we don’t want the pain and heartache of reality and for that, I’d say we don’t truly love our children.

* Negros are historical African people who have been assimilated, adapted, or adopted into European or other non African culture without consideration of their historical African cultural essence before contact. Although many Negroes (and Africans) have varying degress of European (or Arab) ancestry, they still shouldn't ignore their African cultural base, especially if they feel different levels of alienation in this culture. For example, not unlike the Mexican who ignores his Indigenous self.

WHO DON'T FIT N?

2007-03-20T09:26:00.000-02:00

This morning I was riding down some strip mall highway in Delaware and came to a traffic light. I looked over at the driver next to me and saw this 40ish looking black man. He was wearing sun glasses, a cowboy hat, clean shaven and I think he had a bald head. He appeared to be what I'd consider an all around clean cut Negro. He was driving one of those cars that are suppose to go fast, the ones built low to the ground with a tailpipe the size of a basketball. What really caught my eye was in his back window he had written in bold red letters, U.S. Army Retired. I thought he looked a little young, but then again that’s from where I sit. He also had the usual stickers on his car, Support Our Troops and the MIA black ribbon. I thought to myself, any conscious, non-Christian, African centered African in America would say, there’s one lost Negro.

But at the next light some thing else meandered in. I looked in the mirror at my aged face, locked hair, and unemployable black ass and asked, who’s the lost one here? It occurred to me, if we were the same age etc., who’d likely get more respect from most people? Who’d make people feel more comfortable, who would they fear? All things being equal, who’d likely be hired first? Who would get the social kudos? In all likelihood, whose opinion would be made more serious, appropriate? Not mine, I’d be considered “militant, a nationalist, a trouble maker, esoteric,” at best, or just plain crazy at worst.

Why is that? Why would someone who really wishes (and works at it) that Black people become self-sufficient, independent, and respected, be least respected by Black people? On the other hand, judging from appearance and bumper stickers, some one who has a 98% chance of being Christian and adamantly supports those who support systems that locks up too many Black men, discriminates against Blacks in employment and other services, develops negative social stereotypes, controls their voice, while both historically and contemporarily demeaning things black, get more respect from, not just White folk, but Black folk as well? Why would they fit in among Blacks and I’d be considered the one lost, out of touch?

It makes me want to give up. It makes me wonder if it’s just smarter to be critically lazy and culturally dependent. Hell, is it psychologically easier to just surrender your spirit to some mystical god within national borders? Is it mentally healthy to just confine your thinking to American Idol? What advantage is there to not fitting in? Bottom line, maybe dude knew something I didn’t and in fact, I am the crazy one.

What's Real?

2007-03-18T17:07:00.000-02:00

Here’s a flight of fancy for you that I’m sure not too many people think about. I’ve often railed against European culture because I think it’s extremely destructive to the planet and Black people, who have a different kind of power and knowledge stored in their ancestral genes that can alter its destructive course, if they know the course. Black people and People of Color must stop taking for granted that European cultural thought is the know all to end all.

I find it fascination how we go about our daily lives and never make the connection between ideas that are particular to European cultural thought and behavior and ones that are not. We take for granted that their ideas are common to all cultures and people. For example, look at how much emphasis and importance non Europeans place on things artificial without even knowing it.

Accepting the artificial as a replacement for Nature is in itself destructive thought and behavior. It subverts what is Natural to benefit European cultural greed and subsequent rape of the planet. By placing emphasis on the artificial, shows contempt for Nature. As an example, why do we need to save trees when we have plastics? Global warming is a myth, just a theory. How can “non progressive” Black laborers be useful in the information age when we have computers? In order to make others accept the thought that the artificial is universally normal, they must be made to first embrace the most important European concept next to god, and that’s the idea of Progress. The idea of Progress is just another component of European cultural imperialism. Understand, not natural evolutionary Progress per se, but the idea that Progress is necessary for our survival, that we would somehow parish if we didn’t “Progress.”

The other component that is necessary for the artificial to subvert Nature is materialism. What is artificially created must make money for the capitalist. Both Capitalism (Not trade or barter) and Progress, as a cultural way of life, is unique to the Europeans’ cultural world view. If we drew a line (as in linear thought), each time we created something new and artificial, what was functional or subsequent is discarded, thus becoming a pollutant or more resources used to deplete the planet, all for profit. That’s European Progress, resource depletion and pollution in creation of the “artificial.”

Today we have “artificial” sweeteners, hair, breast, limbs, medicines, emotions, personality, intelligence, etc. and coming soon, humans. The idea of overcoming Nature or that Nature is somehow our enemy because it has the power to destroy the European is a reoccurring theme in European cultural thought and behavior. As mention in other essays, the core of European thought and behavior is power for control over others which includes Nature. Creating things artificial is the realization of that thought. Embracing as conventional, concepts of Progress, Capitalism, and Power over Nature, will prove to be deadly.

UP, UP, AND AWAY...

2007-03-13T11:49:00.000-02:00

One reason I advocate that conscious Blacks leave America and build a viable community elsewhere is because if we need to go head to head with the “dominate” society for a fair share of resources, we’d lose big time. But I don’t think that would happen. The primary reason is because we don’t have enough conscious compatriots who feel being black is important. Further, many don’t even know what being CULTURALLY Black entails except having a dark hue. (See NAACP “Image” Awards).

If we wanted to seriously challenge white supremacy so we could stop complaining about our condition and how bad white folks are, Blacks would have to be a tight group and focused on black advancement. (Blacks, are those who are aligned with and descendants of Africans in America.) But that has increasingly grown into impossibility since the first water hoses in 1959. Integration, public schooling, sharing of the same god with your oppressor, no self sustaining economic base to protect our children, and historical cultural debasement, which finally lead to our doing it to ourselves, (see hip hop, etc.) has made sure we stay on the bottom rung of social progress. These factors, in the age of information, (we don’t control the information or the education of our youth) are in place to assure white supremacy stays king.

When Black people try to attain levels of consciousness and teach others, our voice is silenced in so many ways by whites and their black gatekeepers. You know the black ones we revere as having “made” it, but never think how they “made” it. The ones we think are down with “blackness”, but are allowed a voice that echoes white supremacy; the ones whose connections to white supremacy are well hidden. For example, and this is by far not the only one, can you imagine a black person on a morning talk show with a huge Black audience clowning around, acting “black” (whatever the debasement de jure maybe), offering comic relief, talking about who’s fucking whom or who’s running around with whom, and NEVER discussing issues that are truly germane to our upward mobility AS A PEOPLE? Reason, they’d lose market share because blacks are not interested in “political black stuff” on a daily basis. So we clamor to this country ass fools side. This is white supremacy at work.

We really need to stop! We really need to get in the game regardless of the consequences. We really need to demand reparations and leave. It may not be comfortable where we go, but if we are diligent and open to the blacks already there, it will be our chance to build our society. We need reparations to give us the resources to build because if there wasn’t enslavement, subsequent discrimination, and Jim Crow, we wouldn’t need them at all. We need reparations because wherever we go, we’ll be the “outsiders” and we need our own economic base. We must bring something viable to the table. Those of us, who can’t leave the white man’s tyranny, his decadence, his god, or his white supremacy, stay!

BLACK LIKE ME?

2007-03-12T16:07:00.000-02:00

From ASCD.org

Somehow I get disturbed when I read black folks telling other black folks to show them their Blacker than me card, like it’s a “get out of jail free” card or something. I understand the inference, but on a deeper level, it wouldn’t be such a bad idea to have one. But the obvious problem would be what are the criteria for being so called, “Black”?

From the mind of Shabaka, being limited by having lightly melanin skin that other blacks have to sometimes asked, “Are you Black,” let me put it to you this way. Black is a color. Race is a social construct. Neither has any NATURAL connection to ones genetic blood line. The only things that come close are culture and ancestry. So right away, if we are to be honest and clear thinking, one can’t be “Blacker” than anyone because color and race are really meaningless. One can be more melanin challenged, but that’s a consequence of natural genetics and they are tricky little bastards. However giving agency to culture and ancestry is not tricky if one can accept facts on their face value and not propaganda.

Now that I have hopefully brought into question the notion of color and race being a criteria for owning a “Blacker than thou Card, let me address the only things left, culture and ancestry.

Culture is formed by a particular group living for a long time in a particular environment. In my view there are different levels of culture. I’d call them in descending order, pop culture, nominal culture, and deep culture. Pop culture is the most fluid. It borders on fad. Nominal culture is that which is dictated by a dominant society and enforced as the standard. Deep culture is the culture that’s coded into ones world view. Examples of each would be Hip Hop, the Ballet, and Communalism.

The aspect of culture that is most difficult to detect is its Deep Culture. In scientific terms, it would be akin to detecting the evolutionary biology of our brain.* If humans can give agency to the traits from our early evolution, why can’t some of those traits be cultural as the following essay suggest.

"The Reptilian Brain. The archipallium or primitive (reptilian) brain, or "Basal Brian", called by MacLean the "R-complex", includes the brain stem and the cerebellum, is the oldest brain. It consists of the structures of the brain stem - medulla, pons, cerebellum, mesencephalon, the oldest basal nuclei - the globus pallidus and the olfactory bulbs. In animals such as reptiles, the brain stem and cerebellum dominate. For this reason it is commonly referred to as the "reptilian brain". It has the same type of archaic behavioural programs as snakes and lizards. It is rigid, obsessive, compulsive, ritualistic and paranoid, it is "filled with ancestral memories". It keeps repeating the same behaviours over and over again, never learning from past mistakes (corresponding to what Sri Aurobindo calls the mechanical Mind). This brain controls muscles, balance and autonomic functions, such as breathing and heartbeat. This part of the brain is active, even in deep sleep.

The Limbic System (Paleomammalian brain) . In 1952 MacLean first coined the name "limbic system" for the middle part of the brain. It can also be termed the paleopallium or intermediate (old mammalian) brain. It corresponds to the brain of most mammals, and especially the earlier ones. The old mammalian brain residing in the limbic system is concerned with emotions and instincts, feeding, fighting, fleeing, and sexual behaviour. As MacLean observes, everything in this emotional system is either "agreeable or disagreeable". Survival depends on avoidance of pain and repetition of pleasure.When this part of the brain is stimulated with a mild electrical current various emotions (fear, joy, rage, pleasure and pain etc) are produced. No emotion has been found to reside in one place for very long. But the Limbic system as a whole appears to be the primary seat of emotion, attention, and affective (emotion-charged) memories. Physiologically, it includes the the hypothalamus, hippocampus, and amygdala. It helps determine valence (e.g., whether you feel positive or negative toward something, in Buddhism referred to as vedena - "feeling") and salience (e.g., what gets your attention); unpredictability, and creative behavior. It has vast interconnections with the neocortex, so that brain functions are not either purely limbic or purely cortical but a mixture of both.

MacLean claims to have found in the Limbic system a physical basis for the dogmatic and paranoid tendency, the biological basis for the tendency of thinking to be subordinate feeling, to rationalize desires. He sees a great danger in all this limbic system power. As he understands it, this lowly mammalian brain of the limbic system tends to be the seat of our value judgments, instead of the more advanced neocortex. It decides whether our higher brain has a "good" idea or not, whether it feels true and right.

The Neocortex, cerebrum, the cortex, or an alternative term, neopallium, also known as the superior or rational (neomammalian) brain, comprises almost the whole of the hemispheres (made up of a more recent type of cortex, called neocortex) and some subcortical neuronal groups. It corresponds to the brain of the primate mammals and, consequently, the human species. The higher cognitive functions which distinguish Man from the animals are in the cortex. MacLean refers to the cortex as "the mother of invention and father of abstract thought". In Man the neocortex takes up two thirds of the total brain mass.

Although all animals also have a neocortex, it is relatively small, with few or no folds (indicating surface area and complexity and development). A mouse without a cortex can act in fairly normal way (at least to superficial appearance), whereas a human without a cortex is a vegetable.The cortex is divided into left and right hemispheres, the famous left and right brain. The left half of the cortex controls the right side of the body and the right side of the brain the left side of the body. Also, the right brain is more spatial, abstract, musical and artistic, while the left brain more linear, rational, and verbal."

Let’s say that within the Limbic System which controls the emotions, and instincts, feeding, fighting, fleeing, and sexual behavior one particular type of cultural human being took from their environment those Deep Cultural Structures (Nobles) that suited their world view and developed their societies around them. For example, the African who culturally matured in a “relaxed” warm hospitable environment where Nature provided for their needs would have time to focus on and develop their emotions, not worry about feeding themselves thus limiting fighting and also have time to enjoy their sexuality in accordance with what they were close with and respected, Nature. They would develop a sense of community and sharing as well as embrace connectivity because they needed the group to survive within Nature's bounty. The spoken Word was law. Group think!

On the other hand, the European, who culturally matured in a “hostile,” cold ice age environment would have little time to deal with their emotions (in fact they would be a hindrance for their survival), have a difficult time finding resources to feed themselves therefore fighting and weapon development for resource acquisition and control would be a prominent part of their cultural world view. Their sexuality would be confined to the warmth of their caves and because of the confinement would probably increase the opportunity for sexual “experimentation” for inter-group and/or inter-gender relationships. Therefore, they would be more aggressive, protective of their space/resources, xenophobic, technocratic, replace Nature with things artificial and develop deceptive practices for manipulation of the Word for their protection. All leading to Individual think, or at best later, the small controllable “nuclear family thinking”

Similar to the carry over from our early cerebral biological development, I’d say the humans cultural development was also coded and evolved from the environment to create such behaviors. That would mean that today, if we could find out which person would embrace which code of the aforementioned behaviors, than we could very well issue an “African or European” cultural card, depending on their embraced of their ancestral Deep Cultural Structures.

As I see it, the only hindrance to correct coding would be hypocrisy or deceit. For instance, one person from either cultural group, if they wanted to claim African status, could feign “Group think,” when their ultimate goal is to achieve individual advantage. This may be because it’s a part of their ancestral cultural thought and behavior or their own has been hidden and they have adopted another through the adaptation to foreign ideology. For those of us who can't get beyond the idea of skin color or the concept of race, this doesn’t negate the fact that we can issue a “Blacker than me” card once we learn to identify our own cultural behavior and through observation issue them to those who more closely follow their ancestral Deep Cultural Structures which ever one they may be or which ever culture they claim.

Footnote: In this reality, an Asian could be more African than a modern day African if the African has adapted, adopted, as well as practiced, another cultural thought and behavior. Remember Africans, in so called "prehistory," laid the foundation for many of today’s world cultures.

NO WARPATH FOR ME...

2007-03-08T15:37:00.000-02:00

If anyone should read my blog intro and then my blog, you’ll see that my focus is within the African community and not my Native community. There’s very good reason for that decision. I suppose the most important one is that I don’t look like Tonto or Sitting Bull. See the stereotypical imagine of the “Indian” is burned into the minds of the world’s public as those of so called “Asian” ancestry. However if history is ever to be truth, you’ll see that they weren’t the only group that inhabited this land mass long before the Vikings or Columbus. But that’s white supremacy for ya.

Another reason I don’t focus on my Native ancestry is because to be considered "Indian" in America one has to be recognized by the very people that tried to kill them all off through war, disease, cultural compromise, and miscegenation. My ancestral memory and common sense tells me something is wrong that picture. It tells me what can only be left are a very confused group of “Indians”. In my opinion, their original Cultural Spirit, (similar to the Negro) has been devastated and traumatized by the onslaught of white supremacy. Plus many of the “tribes” that are “recognized” by the government are chocked full of the ancestors of those very whites. The few “pure bloods and half bloods” along with other conscious Indigenous Peoples are mostly on the “Reservations” or locked in Black bodies in the cities.

Lastly the recent decisions of the tribal counsels of the Seminole and Cherokee “tribes” to penalize or expel their "black" members clinched it for me. They are doing what has been repeated over and over historically. After contact with the whites, they either run away from the black or are subjected to genocide. Look at S.E. Asia, look at the Pacific, South America, even the pre-Columbian United States, the African is GONE!

The essay below was taken from Wikipedia. It’s historically the story of the African (WTF is a “negrito?”) and the European which is still being played out in contemporary subtle and not so subtle ways in the streets of our cities, the African Bush and our media driven living rooms.

“The Andamanese is a collective term to describe the peoples who are the aboriginal inhabitants of the Andaman Islands, located in the Bay of Bengal. The term includes the Great Andamanese, Jarawa, Onge, Sentinelese and the extinct Jangil. Anthropologically they are usually classified as Negritos, represented also by the Semang of Malaysia and the Aeta of the Philippines. They have lived on the Andaman Islands for at least 14,000 years and had very little contact with external societies for nearly all this period. This comparatively long-lasting isolation and separation from external influences is perhaps unequalled, except perhaps by the aboriginal inhabitants of Tasmania.
However, this changed in the mid-1800s after the British established penal colonies. Increasing numbers of Indian and Karen settlers arrived, encroaching on former territories of the Andamanese. This proved disastrous for many of the tribes - with no resistance to common diseases, they quickly succumbed to epidemics of pneumonia, measles and influenza. At the time of first contact with the British there were an estimated 5,000 Great Andamanese; today only 41 remain.
Today only the Sentinelese, who live exclusively on North Sentinel Island, have been able to completely maintain their independent state, resisting attempts to contact them. The Jarawa have also managed to remain substantially apart from the later colonisers and settlers; other Andamanese groups have had more extensive contacts, resulting in drastic reductions in territory and numbers, with several peoples becoming extinct altogether.
Until the 19th century, their habit of killing all shipwrecked foreigners and the remoteness of their islands prevented modification of their culture or language. Cultivation was unknown to them, and they lived off of hunting indigenous pigs, fishing, and gathering. Their only weapons were the bow, fishing nets and harpoons. Besides the aboriginal people of Tasmania [1], the Andamanese were the only people who in the 19th century knew no method of making fire, carefully preserving embers in hollowed-out trees from fires caused by lightning strikes”.

So given the situation of these so called “Indians” attitude towards the descendants of their own black ancestry, there’ll be no going on the warpath for me. I’ll just continue to recognize myself without the “approval” of this racist government and commune with the Spirits of my ancestors.

Cultural Pedophilia

2007-03-07T12:46:00.000-02:00

Some of the things that I think about are pretty bizarre. Just this morning I was looking at a link to Belize and wondering what it would be like to live in a “Black country.” Then I saw it. The head of State is Queen Elizabeth. I said damn, is there no shame for Black folks? Then a more rational thought penetrated. I asked myself how Belize, or any other “Black country,” can survive as a totally self sufficient entity in a world dominated by white supremacy? It appears they gotta play the game or wait for someone like the Chinese to change things, no efficacy.

Now I’m gonna talk about pedophiles. I told you my thinking was bizarre. I think pedophiles are sick cowards. They take advantage of weak children who don’t understand the implications of being physically and or sexually violated. They take advantage of those who don’t have the where with all, physical or mental mindset as the pedophile in order to demand an equal relationship or they don’t have the resources to defend themselves and therefore are manipulated and abused. Pedophiles assess their targets and do prey on who they perceive as weak.

That leads me to ask, Is there such a thing as a cultural pedophile? Are there cultures that were/are “childlike” when it comes to military, social, and economic violence? Are there cultures that were able to be divided and manipulated by pedophile cultures based on some cultural pedophilia unity code, like a belief system? Are there cultures who just believed that they had friends, but it turned out that those “friends” were just pedophiles raping them for their resources?

Could it be that those raped “childlike” cultures grew up thinking that they were supposed to be raped and abused because they were somehow unworthy? Could it be that under threat of violence, or a more covert action like isolation that their aggressors used “propaganda machines” to make the raped think what the rapist did was “normal” thought and behavior? I think the science of psychology (and the Nazis) has a term for this kind of phenomenon.

When children are the victims of pedophilia, they need counseling. They need to understand what happened to them and it wasn’t their fault. They need to understand that they were basically helpless when they were children. Could cultures need the same type of treatment? I wonder if Belize understands the dynamics of my idea of cultural pedophilia? I wonder if the pedophiles themselves realize that they are pedophiles and will remain as long as they don’t allow Belize, or any other cultural victim to heal, to seek counseling. (If the victim realizes they need it, which is another essay).

One such healing process for those who were culturally raped in the United States is Reparations. However my question is do the victims understand what REALLY happened to them? Can the victims create a condition that allows them to be culturally self- aware? Do the perpetrators realize that in the face of “globalization” that as many culturally self sufficient, healthy, viable groups a nation can have working together, will only make that nation stronger? Simply because different ideas and ways of doing things will give the country a renewed energy. But I’ve always said, America will choke on its racism, so if Reparations are granted, then those of conscious should leave and build elsewhere. Believe it or not Belize would be a good start if they could ever start thinking that they should save themselves instead of asking god to save the Queen or waiting for the Chinese to come to the rescue.

Whose Social Contract Anyway?

2007-03-06T11:33:00.000-02:00

What’s a Social Contract when only one party is obligated to respect it? This has been the dilemma of black people in the United States from its inception. African culture is Nature’s culture, yet we are expected to forgo our ancestral connection to Nature to live in peace and unity with those whose ancestral culture downplays Nature’s role in human existence and elevates their idea of “Reason.” We are “forced” to live among a People who have some deep cultural need to embrace the concepts of Hobbes, Locke, and Rousseau; a People whose cultural world view accommodates a Social Contract as necessary to create a power hierarchy and thereby can make laws that ignore Natural instincts or other cultural people; a People who have used that hierarchy to oppressed non Europeans for their social-economic-political gain under their social contract based on their “Reason” being the primary ideal.

What are we to do when the ancestral European idea of living in a so called State of Nature, is in conflict with their cultural idea of Reason? We are a communal people, a so called “soulful” people which is Nature based. (Some of that base is still apparent even in underlying aberrant things that we created like “hip hop” or participate in like computer dating and sex) Dubois expressed similar feeling when he talked about two souls, two irreconcilable strivings living in one body. However I believe he didn’t go deep enough as to why the Negros “striving” to live peacefully and in unity with the European is still a problem today. Their Social Contract doesn’t take into account our ancestral world view because they see our native ancestral cultural longings as “primitive, childish, and in many instances, when juxtapositioned against "reason," the results can be criminal.” (See television) I find it interesting that when Europeans succumb to their "Natural instincts" and display aberrant behavior, if at all possible, it is either explained, questioned, excused, or ignored with "reason." Examples: school shootings and infanticide.

Since we don’t have the power to change or seriously incorporate our deep seeded cultural views/thoughts into the prevailing European cultural thought, we must, to our own detriment, remain a divided people. Our other choices are just as dire. We must leave or culturally die in America if things say the same. (This is a good case for Reparations).

I know many who read this will think this is malarkey. However if one can see the point I’m trying to make (please excuse the writing, this is complex), they will also see this is the cutting edge of what holds together ideas of white supremacy. This is what the European elite and intelligencia hide because if it is truly understood, it can be liberating and not just for descendants of African people. It will allow for the masses, both European and Non Euro to examine their Social Contracts with their civic systems and perhaps even write a new one that doesn’t demean Nature’s People.

From Wikipedia:
The theory of the social contract is based on the assumption that we as human beings live in a state of nature which is not ideal. In order to move away from these conditions, we may enter into a contract with each other, allowing us to live in peace and unity. The theory of the social contract can be seen as a justification for the formation of the state. All members within a society are assumed to agree to the terms of the social contract by their choice to stay within the society without violating the contract; such a violation would signify a problematic attempt to return to the state of nature. It has been often noted, indeed, that social contract theories relied on a specific anthropological conception of humankind as either "good" or "evil". Thomas Hobbes (1651), John Locke (1689), and Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1762) are the most famous philosophers of contractarianism, which is the theoretical groundwork of democracy. It is also one of a few competing theoretical groundworks of liberalism, but Rousseau's social contract is often seen as conflicting with classical liberalism which stresses individualism and rejects subordination of individual liberty to the "general will" of the community.[1] There is also an example of it in Plato's writings of Socrates in Crito when Socrates refuses to escape from jail and remains to fulfill his death sentence.

RELIGION AS A TOOL

2007-02-28T13:04:00.000-02:00

to be whole
i must examine my
soul but
to see me
I must look
through you
a misted mirror
obscured by
lies, hypocrisy,
your history
reflecting a
culturally rabid
picador
cloned in the
image of your god
bellowing i’m saved
cause my mama's mama
said so

So many Black folk are quick to defend Christianity and Islam based on things like Jesus’ skin color, the meaning of faith, what did god say or didn’t say, and which religion is the true religion. However, in my conversations with black Christians and Muslim, they seem to never consider the deeper psychological impact of religion on culture. For some strange reason, they don’t think it important.

When the enslaved Africans arrived in the “New World,” very few, if any, were Christian. The main exposure, at this time, for West Africans to Christianity would have been the Roman presence in so called North Africa. Many were Muslim because of the 7th Century onslaught of Islam, but an even greater number practiced their ancestor’s traditional religions. Given this fact, one could ask, why the descendants of these Africans don’t practice their ancestor’s religions and even more telling, is it important?

Reading academic responses to these questions, in my opinion, are mostly apologetic. They will pose that Africans were Christian when they arrived. They’ll suggest that the African’s ancestral religion was Islam. They’ll say that Christianity is originally African (Coptic Church) or make some latent connections that the Africans adapted Islam and Christianity to their "similar" traditional belief systems. I’m sure there are others, but the attempt at rationalization is obvious and ongoing.

When examining Christianity and Islam (which are two side of the same coin), you’ll see that on a deeper level, they don’t fit the African’s ancestral belief systems, but are in complete apposition to them. If this is true, and I believe it is, one could ask, what does it matter? My first response would be why didn’t the Africans, after untold millenniums on the planet, develop a belief system essentially Christian or Muslim instead of having to "adapt" it to theirs? My quick answer would be it was repulsive to their deep cultural structures. It was not in their cosmological view.

I base my conclusions on several concepts. First, that the African worldview was rooted in Natural phenomena. They saw their deities throughout Nature, not confined to a particular area of Nature or the Universe, like the sky or a "heaven". Although some had a “Chief god”, it wasn’t a solitary omnipotent god like Allah or Jehovah (Jesus) and the African “god” didn’t make man, especially in “his image.” Man was a force, a part of Nature and therefore had his or her own efficacy. This is why Islam and Christianity can not be an African religion. It may have similarities in some unimportant concepts, but the essences of the African view, connecting the human with Nature, is antithetical to the Indo-European religious systems. Indo-European religions purposely DISCONNECT man from his own spirit! The societal decadence that the religions preach against are in fact perpetuated by the religions own basic philosophy because society is do disconnected.

This is critical because it changed the entire dynamic between the human being and their world. It allowed for complex manipulation on many levels. When the African absorbed Christianity (*Judeo-Christianity) and/or Islam, it removed the power from the human entity to the sky god (or those who had special access to him). No longer could the human feel the power of his spirit and how it interacted with the environment or his community. Now his spirit and behavior was prescribed by words in a book that in reality didn’t apply to everyone and if the word was disobeyed, asking for forgiveness made things right. The human had no real responsibility for his actions like genocide or enslavement or his inactions like fostering equality. He was said to be born in sin therefore he needed guidance from the outside not from within. He became a child with a father in Rome, England, Mecca, or Virginia Beach. He internalized his own helplessness and this allowed him to lose spiritual, not religious, direction and balance to succumb to excessive materialism and decadence. It allowed for his humanity to be subdued.

Today the descendants of the African and many Africans themselves are lost. They are absorbed into their new religions through conquest, missionaries, and the media. Even though the Judeo-Christian and Muslim religions give pause to their own creators, the European and the Arab, they still fit their cultural essence, a cultural essence of power for control, of man over Nature (or other non Europeans), in the image of their god. Western religions will continually try to combat, what they perceive as terrorism, un-Americanism, a threat to freedom, or just plain primitive unenlightened beliefs from a true African worldview.

The Africans and their descendants power is not in technology or religion, but in the Spirit and if they want that elusive “Black cultural unity”, I believe it can only be possible if they allow a cultural spiritual hegemony, based on an African worldview, man in harmony with Nature, to prevail. However it appears by the number of Blacks who embrace those religions, they are no longer able to contact, connect, and use their severed Spirit to balance the negative (not necessarily bad) influences on their worldview. They instead pray and ask for guidance outside of themselves. They only cursory consider they can’t get true spiritual guidance or truth from their “black” religious leaders because of materialism and ignorance. As a result they (we) muddle along dying culturally and spiritually while African spiritual opposing ideology is gaining strength, even among us and our balance is lost.

(*The Abyssinians, who where the descendants of the last (with the Nubians, also the first) African "Egyptian" dynasties, was influenced by ideas of “monotheism” since the time Akhenaton had the whispers in his ear turned from the African way. Therefore, when the Romans brought the Abyssinian Africans Christianity, they easily blended it into what we know today as the Coptic Church. Dr. Clarke said that the thrust of the Greeks into the heart of Africa was its final walk in the sun, I say it began when we lost our way and our Gods.)

MLK DAY FROM AN OLDER MAN'S EYES

2007-01-15T21:22:00.000-02:00

What does Martin Luther King Day mean to me? Well first of all it allows me to reflect. Reflect on the day I was in bed with my young beautiful wife and the news came over the television that Dr. King had been shot. I remember the tears filling my eyes, not just for Dr. King, but for this country. You see, I was around when John, Malcolm, and Dr. King were assassinated and unbeknown to me at the time, I’d feel that sadness 60 days later with Bobby.

This day reminds me that there is an element in this country that will stop at nothing to maintain control. It reminds me that this element will not let ideas of white supremacy fade. This day reminds me of how we have been socialized to support our own oppression. This day reminds me of how naïve we were in 1968.

Not to distract from Dr. King’s legacy or his courage, there’s been no equal since that time, but we must also understand that Dr. King only changed what the elite needed changed for their worldwide business and ideological interest. They needed an America that would be perceived by the world as “racially and religiously" tolerant to promote its ideals of democracy, freedom and an open society. This was necessary so the populace of other countries could demand “an open society” and thereby allowing American interest to get a cultural and later economic foothold in their society.

However at home it was the same old story baked in a different oven. The elite were covertly undermining any real racial progress in the United States with their carrot and stick edits and law enforcement that allowed the free flow of narcotics into select black communities while promoting a rhetorical War on Drugs. They further allowed the slow escalation of the exportation of jobs and developed the double whammy of decadent (negative black) media images that they could exploit and promote for white unity through black disunity. For example, Good Times, The Jefferson’s, What’s Happening, Different Strokes, etc. all promoted the image of the black as clownish and childlike and the contrast was a rational, reasonable, white society. This elite white supremacist interest needed the American public to buy into their rhetorical systems so it could be marketed at home and abroad like a cheap trick and Dr. King was, in my humble opinion, the unsuspecting catalyst.

In the final analysis I’d say the symbolism of this day, MLK Day, had its moments of hope and optimism in 1968, but upon deeper inspection, I believe Martin died to keep faith in a dream that would culminate into a nightmare.

Why fight it?

2007-01-03T00:54:00.000-02:00

Sometimes I wonder why I even bother to write about events and their affect on the black world because the Europeans are doing their best to organize the world in their image This is very similar to that other person we've heard so much about lately, God. Given this, I suppose Christian Nations like the United States, France, Germany, England, etc. can accept what they are doing.

I recently sent emails talking about the Social Security Agreement between the U.S. and Mexico. My friend M, who's a lawyer, tells me that treaties supersede laws, so if “the people” wanted to curtail Social Security funds going to Mexican workers what could the Congress or anyone do except rescind the treaty, and that ain't likely. To appease the public, the congress will probably holler and scream while ending up doing nothing except passing an after the fact law, but remember treaties supersede laws.

It appears that there’s nothing anyone can do to stop the eventual organization of American States from becoming a reality. Our European leaders under the guise of “Americans” are already readying the chips for the tracking passports that will alter the need for borders. We already have NAFTA and other trade and economic pacts with Canada, Mexico and Central America with many South American countries having a different role. Soon we'll be one enormous state needing some type of totalitarian control to keep it organized and "orderly." What's so sad is, good people will welcome it.

Then we have the European Union organizing on the other side of the ocean. I'm sure before it's said and done, they'll even have certain African countries in their "Union."

What about Asia? After the Japanese and the Chinese, having tasted greed and good ole white boys’ capitalism, they'll be pounding on the door of the Euro organizing committees begging to monitor their sphere of influence. India is already on board big time.

However everything doesn’t go smoothly. I suppose it would help when the Euro organizers go after resources of other countries in the world that aren't "on board,” it would be helpful to know who the "good' guys are and the "bad" guys are. I think Christianity will be helpful in this sense and the resources that are controlled by other Christian countries, like those in South America and Russia region, make them communist or something like that. That way we can deal with those "rogue" states, communist, leftist, Islamic extremist, savages, etc. because only the good guys, us, believe in Jesus and have the right vision.

But you know what. In Nature there’s always an apposition because the Laws of Nature seeks balance and those laws are the ONLY ones that supersede treaties. There will always be a country, a group, which will oppose the Euro organizers. However, the European mind is just too slick. Like I said, they'll use and welcome that opposition so they can paint them as all those things I mentioned while recruiting new troops in the process to fight these “evils” and the “War on Terror” until the world is won.

Man can you see how deep the European thought is ingrained in the minds of people? They need power and they need control and most people of the world are willingly going along with it. They need the world to be in lock step with their ideology, to adhere to some mathematical formula instead of some natural phenomenon so they can understand it. Although most of the world understands natural phenomena, the European has t the world believing they need that formula too or else they are uncivilized or something of the sort. The natural rhythms of the drums are nice for a momentary diversion, but when they are getting down to business, for the European mind, only a symphony will do. Only the spirit of the European mind, which created their early myths of bringing order out of chaos, will play on their real life world stage. This is how they see the world and this is how the world will be, even if they have to blow the damm thing up.

THE DAILY SHOW

2006-12-26T11:53:00.000-02:00

dispassion
clouded eyes
hopeless hope
listening to
hip hop
powerful religious
dope
Fascist needles
Filled Black Death
Pointed at me
Muttering fearful
Shibboleths
Why do I care?

Everything’s for sale
Mind, body, soul,
Even
Stories yet to be told
Tomorrow’s quest
Today’s dreams
empty sorrow
regret
It’s obvious to me
plain to see
Lost black minds are
America's irreversible
tragedy

Shabaka 08/23/04

On certain occasions, when I’m bored, I may turn on the television. Tonight was one of those evenings. I watched the Daily Show with John Stewart. I understand he has had people like John Edwards, Bill Clinton, and now John Kerry on his show. I thought to myself, this is “liberal” television? I wondered how Blacks and other people of color felt. See, this is one of my main criticisms of people of color who defend white behavior, white “liberals.” Personally, I don’t appreciate being marginalized by conservatives or liberals. The Daily Show, to my limited knowledge, at most has had maybe one or two people of color on the show. They may have had a black or two, but never one who was able to articulate alternative views from a black or non white perspective which is afforded to whites and Jews.

It amazes me how people of color can dismiss so easily the “conspiracy theory” that whites work together for our “containment” whether psychological or physical. Here you have the most “liberal” white show on television and you can’t tell me they can’t find at least one non white person per month, per six months, who is a non athlete or entertainer to interview. They allow social Eurocentric commentary all day long, why not Asian centered, African centered, Indigenous centered? Of course they can find serious non white scholars and thinkers, but they adhere to that unspoken code that People of Color have nothing to offer unless they are singers, dancers or play ball. When they have something "non white" to say, it can only be of entertainment value and marketable only as such.

I'm fairly sure non whites, in the opinions of the Daily show writers and producers, are not center stage material unless we are touting or supporting some white socially cultural accepted or "universal" view. This gives the impression that whites facts and opinions are more important, or put another way, that white ideas and views are “supreme,” and just think, they scream and make "fun" of David Duke as being a "white supremacist.

If this is true, and I believe it is, nearly all whites are neo-colonist. We know about the neocons, but I’d say even the liberal/progressives fill the bill. But try explaining that to the average god fearing Black person or Christian Asian. They are either too preoccupied, fearful, stupid, or just don’t give a damm. They will let you know, in no uncertain terms, that they ain’t giving up their mortgage to live in some apartment or their new car to ride the bus. No down grades in this fight for “liberation.” Materialism is America, so fuck the Daily show and social consciousness. It’s a known fact, who think along these lines become crazy losers.

But I bet you this. Just before it’s all said and done and you are alone with your thoughts. Just before the final sleep, nothing, not car, bank account, house, all the “fun” and material attention you’ve had, the people you’ve loved, places you’ve been, nothing that you’ve done in life will really matter just that moment alone with yourself.

I have a question. When you speak with your spirit for the final time on this plane, how will it answer? Will it let you know that your whole life was a lie because you didn’t fight the indignation of not having non white views on the Daily Show?

HR2662 MY VIEW

2006-11-16T10:17:00.000-02:00

Usually I’m skeptical of any bill sponsored by or promoted by the Republican Party. However, when the Republican Congress blocked HR2662, a bill backed by the Anti Defamation League, I tended to agree with them. The reason was that Senator Kennedy already had a bill, S625, which, in my opinion, doesn’t go as far as HR2662. S625 added CRIMES motivated by sex, sexual orientation, and disability to a list of offenses already covered under a 1968 federal law. However, if I understand it correctly, HR2662 would make it a hate crime to make NEGATIVE COMMENTS in public against or directly to Jews, women, homosexuals, transvestites, female impersonators, persons confused about their gender, pedophiles, witches, warlocks, Satanists and anybody else that petitions to be included as a group on the list.

I believe HR2662 is more politically motivated by a special interest group and this could serious hamper open discussion of race and usher in another control lever on free speech. I think the new Democratic Congress should really let this one go, but if history is any indication, it will pass because of the strong Jewish lobby.

BTW, the word “nigger” will not be protected under HR2662 because black people themselves have made it acceptable to use the word in public discourse. It appears that this is another example of Black peoples’ internalized self destruction.

IS HE A MURTHA-FUCKER?

2006-11-13T11:39:00.000-02:00

I was reading some of the liberal/Progressive Democratic blogs and they are happy. Pelosi will be the new House speaker and she wants Murtha to be Majority Leader. The bloggers are still happy.

I have a different take. Murtha is an imperialist. He has nothing against war or killing for a country’s “ideology,” of which religion is a part. In fact, he revels in it as long as it makes sense to him. The Iraqi War was never a mistake for most white folk, including Murtha; the problem came with the justification. Their hypocrisy came loose and for that, Europeans are punishing Bush and Co. See, in European culture, when one’s hypocrisy is exposed and can’t be ignored, they gotta go. It blows the cover of European culture’s ideological white nationalism.

But this hypocrisy is not just reserved for white Europeans. It has also infected their cousins, the Arabs. The Iraqi War is a mess, not just because the white Europeans’ are a majority of Christian imperialists, but their sister religion, Islam, is split between Sunni and Shiites. Not only are the American Christians entrenched in violence in Iraq, the Sunnis and Shiites are going at it like crazy.

So when we look at this situation under deeper cover, we see that religious ideology has a lot to do with this conflict, because which ever ideology prevails, be it Islam or Christianity, who ever owns the prevailing religious ideology, will own the country and it’s resources.

My naïve solution to solve the problem is to get rid of religion. But we all know that this solution is next to impossible for the next 1000 years or so. The reason is that both Christianity and Islam are both right. They are right about the others’ religion and this validates their position, according to them. A Muslim will say Christianity is false and they would be correct, thereby validating to their followers that Islam must be correct. The same goes for the Christians. It’s a false deductive argument. The premise is true, the inference is invalid, and therefore the conclusion is false. The logic, blank religion (others) is a false religion, but that doesn’t make blank (their) religion valid, ergo the conclusion is false.

So what’s the answer? Since we can’t get rid of religion any time soon, I’d say hold Pelosi and Murtha to a higher standard until the human species realizes that it’s putting everything on the planet in danger with its reasoning, even the priest and pundits of religion. I’d bet if the whales and dolphins could communicate with us so we could understand one another, they’d say, “You’ll some stupid muthra-fuckers.”

And if the truth be told, we've all been played by the likes of that muthra-fucker. Iraq will be divided, the oil shared among the elite warhawks and their appointed croonies and the people, as usual, are dead and/or screwed.

AMERICA'S TEAM?

2006-11-02T15:37:00.000-02:00

Well it's fall and the leaves are saying goodbye to their summer host. People are also asking, “Are you ready for some football?” Although for many football is a distraction from the daily hustle for the material, it's also an icon of pop culture. For example, the Dallas Cowboys have been christened, “America’s Team.” For the life of me I have no idea why, but I do question the selection. Mainly I question, why in the world does “America’s Team” have to come from the South? Given the history of the South, like its succession from the Union, Slavery, Lynching, Black Codes, Jim Crow, etc., all this has me really perplexed. Why couldn’t “America’s Team” be from a northern city like New York, Philly, or Minnesota?

If the Dallas Cowboys are a symbol of what America is about, and America chooses a symbolic team from the region of the country that has an abysmal record of patriotism, racial compassion, and "progessiveness", what does embracing that symbol tell you? (Hell, maybe if it were the Stars and Bars the question could be more easily answered by some) I know it tells me that those who truly support the Cowboys as “America’s Team” are pissed that the South lost the Civil War, Slavery ended, and they ain’t too keen on the way race relations progressed in this country.

With the above assessment, there’s something more disturbing. Why African American’s would join the cheering section for the Cowboys being “America’s Team?” I can understand that they may be from Dallas or even the South, but does that give them an excuse to ignore history? Do they place the importance of a football team's symbol above the historical struggles of their ancestors? Not being from the South, I’ll ask, is there something that was in the water when they were growing up that makes them think this way? Or even more troubling, not think about it at all?

But who am I to convince folks why America should pick a more "neutral" team as its representative? I just know this football season, as with every season since 1960, I’ll root for the Redskins to beat the Cowboys. See, I have so many reasons and no illusions why I should take that position. First, I’m from D.C. (the most northern of southern cities), second, I have Indigenous and African Blood, and third I question, why in the world would a non white person, especially one whose ancestors were enslaved, cheer on a team that symbolically represents the “colloquialisms” for the slaughter of a people for their land and belief system? All this leads me to believe we should take a hint from the falling leaves and say good-bye to the host of "America's Team," your Dallas Cowboys.

BLACK MAN'S INTERRACIAL ROMANCE

2006-11-01T10:44:00.000-02:00

I’m an advocate of same culture relationships. I didn’t come by this conclusion easily. I had to live it to understand it. The main reason is not because of some “racial” idea of superiority or maintenance of skin color, but for the preservation and restoration of cultural ideas, along with the desire to not be controlled by an ideology that is not to my “spiritual” likening.

When I said I didn’t come by this conclusion easily, I meant that I have been involved in some serious “interracial” relationships. I even married a white woman, but I will admit that decision was not based entirely on emotions. Hell, there was even a time when white women where harder to kick than my cocaine and cigarette habit (I suppose that’s why they call coke, white lady), but I was able to rid my mind of all three, although I still have urges for the latter two.

I hope my attitude will not be interpreted as racist or even separatist. That’s not my intent because I do like many white folk. However, I’d like them better if the prevailing racial stereotypes concomitant with America’s historical and contemporary social attitudes weren’t present. And this is one reason why interracial relationships should be put on hold for blacks and whites. I say blacks and whites because other cultures suffer the ills of white supremacy too.

No matter how much I cared for, made love to, got involved with white women, in the back of their minds, I was still the cultural other and they were still white women. It showed in many ways that I chose to ignore. For example, when something appeared on T.V. that portrayed a black person in a negative light, she would look at me with linking eyes making me feel somehow unworthy and even if it was in my own mind, living in this culture promotes such aberrations. When we discussed racial issues, she just couldn’t get the essence of European culture and behavior towards non whites and she had the weight of the world to support her position. She just couldn’t understand white supremacy in its totality and at the time, neither did I. I say neither did I because I got off fucking the white skinned, white man’s woman, that image that was burned in my brain from birth.

In my humble opinion, this is why black/white interracial unions are dangerous for black culture. It trivializes the black and promotes the white. It’s just another avenue to demean the “African-ness” in black people to the point where it means nothing, has no value, therefore can be expendable. And judging from our behavior, we are true to course in expediting our own, first cultural, and perhaps later, physical expendability.

In my final analysis, the only thing that I see as a saving grace, so we won’t go the way of the Blacks in Argentina and other Central and South American countries is to separate. We should build our own cultural ideals with our own world views based on a revised historical cultural essence, then, when we are culturally strong and economically secure, intermingle with the European culture. At that point we can marry, live with, cohabitate with whites and not lose the most important thing a human being can possess, his cultural self esteem and self determination.

MY BIO..BLOG STYLE

2006-09-24T01:17:00.000-02:00

I decided to write my bio after seeing Star Parker’s. Hell, she’s got nothing on me.

Here goes:

I was born in Washington, D.C. around the corner from Daddy Grace’s church. I grew up in a house with an over extended family, a tin tub for baths, a coal bin for heat, and a wooden two seat out house that smelled like gassed shit 24-7. We had potatoes nearly every meal and pork shoulder on Saturdays because ham was too expensive. Despite it all, I think we were content. In school I was a smart curious student, outspoken and even then had a social conscious (At 14 years old, I remember seeing Emitt Till's body then declaring war on racist America), but didn’t excel in anything academic. I suppose I got caught up in the ghetto's non promotional educational syndrome, because there weren’t any college grads among my immediate family or aunts and uncles. But I thought I was good looking, so I chased the girls.

Thanks to assistant principal Bobby Boyd, I made it out of high school, barely, and attended Central State University for two years. I withdrew because I was beginning to mature and felt I needed to stop being a spoiled non directional negro living off my struggling mother, so I cashed in my Naval Reserve chit and went to the Vietnam War.

Vietnam changed my life forever. Not in the way it changed most young military men, it changed me because I found out who hated me more than the Southeast Asians. This was a watershed period in my life and would instill a determination and fire in me like nothing I’d experience in this lifetime. See, I refused to let those who wished to grow a colonial dick, do so at my expense. I rebelled and refused “negrodization” to the point where I was told I couldn’t reenlist and this, mind you, was during war time.

I did get married during this time and had my son. I remember that was a very proud time in my life, but also a scary one. How could a confused person like me raise a child and have family? I knew I had problems conforming to the white man’s world. Not that I wanted to kill them like they did Emitt or anything that radical, I just wanted to be a Black man with his own voice. (Something a Black woman can never completely understand) But we all know if you don’t fit their profile, they lock the door to the food, point their little white blaming finger at you knowing well you’ve been historically “conditioned” to fail under their contemporary concomitant systems of white supremacy. If one has any insight, they would know their only out as a black person, if they want to live in debt and have the "prestige" of living similar to white Americans, is to bend over and get the colonial white dick as an extra helping while pretending you are just another man in America. The alternative is to go bum or gangsta.

Gangsta it was. I robbed warehouses, sold drugs, ran women, dabbled in stolen securities, and strapped down with a 357 magnum. In my unconcious state I felt I was finally a man (even though I only had a ghetto voice) until I got my ass thrown in the penitentiary and became a field “nigger” for the all white federal bureau of prisons. But even then, I struck a small blow for my manhood, I organized a food strike when the head of the prison system was visiting and that embarrassed the warden. No one ever told I lead the strike, honor among the criminally insane I suppose.

When I was released I decided that I would not go to prison again. It was most humiliating and talk about an experience that makes you psychologically impotent. So I used what little business skill I had acquired from previous legitimate ventures and tried the import-export business. I traveled to Africa and there I realized that Black folks world wide were in serious trouble. After a few years of back and forth, this didn’t work out either and I was going on 50 years old and still no solid “normal” life. I did the only thing a black, out of work, no skills, ex felony, could do, I went back to finish college.

The only major that tweaked my curiosity was Ethnic Studies. It seemed this was what I needed to help me understand and sort all those conflicting emotions I acquired living in America under white rule. Man, was I not disappointed, this was a thrilling journey. When I graduated from Cal-State, I had cracked the door, but needed more. San Francisco State’s Masters program became my heaven and hell. It all fell into place. I understood what had happen to me, my family, my friends, my ancestors, and my people. I can only say I wish every Black person or non white person could take the journey, the one that will drive you to the depths of depression because you come away seeing so clearly.

While I was in San Francisco State, I got a job teaching believe it or not. Yes, I became a felony public school teacher. This was not a good match in the white man’s colony. A brass balled Black man with a degree in Black Studies and a history of resisting colonialism. I lasted for ten years, hiding, teaching the “unteachable,” the throw away children until they finally caught on. One day the Human Resources Manager sat me down and told me that I wasn’t the person he’d hired. I told him he was mistaken. I was let go.

So Ms. Parker ain’t got nothing on me. All she did was exercise her already preprogrammed negressness and as expected was paid and promoted by the colonial masters to show other negros of their choosing how they too can be successful if they do as they’re told and suppress their true voice (if they could ever find it) and bend over. Nothing new with her bio….

THERE'S JUST NO BALANCE..

2006-06-12T10:11:00.000-02:00

When I was a younger man, I held out hope that the Democratic party of JFK would bring some balance to America's racial problems. Looking at the state of Black America today, it never happened. It appears no matter which one of the two political parties are in power, they always cater to America's white supremacy first and ideas of balance is just a rhetorical reality for non whites. Even in 2006, look at the largely Democrat Kos convention, do you see "balanced" participation in skin color, and god forbid, cultural attitudes?

I believe we are at the point where America must seriously deal with its conveniently ignored domestic racial issues because its international "racial" position demands it. We've reached the point of no return. When and if the progressive democrats get into office, they must stop leaving issues of Black, Brown and Yellow America to so called "minority leaders" who only parrot and get paid. They have no real power or cultural insight to really solve America's racial/cultural problems. The ugly truth is they have been educated by their neo colonial European leaders as part of the problem.

What is the answer? I have no definite clue. I just know there's no balance and doubt within a historical context, if there ever can be. Maybe the answer for White America is the road it appears to be taking today, rid the country of its "color/cultural problem" through different avenues of assimilation, prison, drugs, Aids, homosexuality, suicide/mentacide, etc., then tie it to capitalism which benefits all segments of the populace, even the shrinking "new negro" middle income class. Unfortunately doing this, as opposed to implementing concrete balance or legislating tougher programs like reparations, seems to be more appealing to the masses. As it is, I can see that the new generations of young non-white men are in far greater danger than I during JFK's time.

In my limited view, this is also serious for the white middle class. We all have to live here, we just can't move ourselves or money around like the elite. If America becomes a gang infested, inter war torn, dog eat dog racial hell hole, all people of serious good will must work together and solve the problems (without the religious right or their counterparts hypocritical idiocy) and perhaps use those tougher programs, if necessary. There seems to be a direct correlation between our Black population culturally dying and America, at approximately the same rate, falling into disarray. All this while the racist are still practicing white supremacy and our liberal Progressives-Democrats are behind the scenes mostly being closet supporters.

Maybe, just maybe, Jefferson and Lincoln were right and Europeans and Africans must come to some basic truisms about themselves. One being, Blacks and Whites can't co-exist while keeping their Natural cultural essence, it's too appositional. IF this is the case, then the aspirations of the JFK generation were misguided and we need a new course in the new millennium. We either need to separate or totally amalgamate. Of the two, separation is less difficult and makes more sense because amalgamation means genocide of both cultures and I believe the one with the power will never allow such, as well they should'nt. After all, cultural is not an idea that's subjected to a dialectic, but balance most certainly is.

LET'S WRAP IN THE RED, WHITE & BLUE TOO

2006-05-02T09:38:00.000-02:00

“Illegal immigrants stepped out of the shadows and poured into the streets, marching in waves of red, white and blue as part of a nationwide show of economic clout designed to prove their value to their adopted homeland and pressure Congress for reforms.”

Above is the opening by line in a May 2, Associated Press article. Further down, the article mentions how these illegal immigrants have some economic clout. "This country needs us. We are the strong arms that do all the tough jobs," said Donna Maria Mostache, a 43-year-old cook and illegal immigrant.”

I wonder if all the African Americans in East Oakland, Richmond, North Philadelphia, S.E. D.C., and from all the "other side" of the tracks pour out into the streets, wrap themselves in a wave of red, white, and blue, would that be enough to get us paid for when we were the “strong arms that did all the tough jobs?” Would we get paid for all the free slave labor we supplied “this country,” for over 400 years, making it the land of milk and honey for the “illegal immigrants?”

I realize the prevailing attitude in America is, what have you done for us lately, but those African Americans in the “hood” would have a hard time answering that question today because we’ve been too busy fending off the residual effects of white supremacy and the lost service and construction jobs to “illegal immigrants.” (See the black men out of work statistics and the increase in drug dealing)

I also know that the American way is hard work equals reward and that if you want to work, you can find a job. I’m sure, but would it pay enough to support a family or self respect? Psychologically, as a historically unpaid slave laborer whose ancestors started in such a deep hole, would one be able to mentally sustain near slave wages today? One popular retort is, why not get an education? I often ask, would the system of white supremacy support a 90% black educated work force? What if you are "too black?" What would all the displaced white folks do?

There is a segment of the African American population that is economically doing as well as many whites, and this is commendable. They are the police, the managers, bus drivers, the school teachers, etc. Most are in limiting positions, many as “gatekeepers,” hardly decision makers or entrepreneurs. Further, when riding the metro of any major city, you’ll not see black men in any numbers coming or going to work (Take this informal survey); they are on the corner or in jail. Many of their former jobs are being done for less money by “illegal immigrants.” This has reached the point where now so many are “mental” or drugged out; they can’t hold a job, broken.

What’s the answer? I have none that would gather a consensus. I could only come up with reparations. Pay monetary reparations to those African Americans who wish to leave and make a life elsewhere. America should settle the score of its ancestor’s greed. Those blacks who want to stay, figure out some tax or other economic scheme that will compensate them. Those who are in prison and can’t shake the criminal stigma, keep them locked away. Look, this is mostly about economic control. America is about business, I'm sure they understand that one problem should be fixed before you tackle another, that is, IF this is viewed as a problem. If so, do the right thing with America's "former" enslaved, then if America wishes, make “illegal immigrants” legal and pay them what you will (unlike our black ancestors), to be “the strong arms that do the tough jobs.” Con mucho gusto.

LIVING WITH WHITE RULE

2006-04-29T12:19:00.000-02:00

I wonder if white folk ever considered the mixed signals they send to blacks? They probably don’t, after all they are white, but never mind, I’m going to look at it anyway.

First, we have the overt white racist who insists that black folks are only needed in a limited way, if at all, in America. They let it be known that “this is a white man's country” and blacks are a burden who collect welfare or other social services. Black’s can’t be patriots within the scope of their idea of patriotism, like they say, “This is a white man’s country.”

Then we have the conservative white whose values have some hollowed meaning dating back to the days of the covered wagon. They preach that blacks should pick themselves up by their bootstraps and to do anything less is unacceptable, lazy, and un-American. They never seriously address historical and contemporary reasons why blacks in general are in such poor social-economic shape. They are quick to point out how their ancestors came from “humble” beginnings, as if the system of white supremacy never existed. They truly believe that affirmative action for whites was, and is not, a reality.

Next, we have the liberal white. They and the next group are the most hypocritical. They subscribe to ideals such as multiculturalism and diversity, but do nothing to challenge the fundamental ideas of white supremacy. For example, they write commentary about the ills and inequality of the society, but don’t allow voice to non whites who seek fundamental changes in the way America does business. If an Afrocentric attempts to introduce ideas of Egypt being an African civilization in the public schools, the liberals will encourage the conservatives and racist to attack him as un-American or racist. However, they will openly admit whites committed genocide against the Native Americans, because it changes nothing.

The progressive white is the most interesting. They are the true intelligentsia of the white establishment. They seek change, but only from one group of whites to the next, them. They want “integration,” but on their terms. They will support black issues as long as it doesn’t conflict with their policy. One of their greatest weapons is to ignore challenge, but appear to settle issues “diplomatically and intellectually.” They, in most instances, set the agenda for the liberals.

The last group I’d call Americans, who happen to be white. They comprise about one-half of 0.01% of 240,000,000 whites. These people fight their own indoctrination into white supremacy. They speak with verve and honesty against racism and discrimination. They are dedicated to true equality and have no objections to incorporating meaningful dialogue from anyone who can make this country a better place. They are not “color blind,” nor hypocritical. They will address the systematic evils of white supremacy, and if possible, change it.

This is the mine field blacks must wade through living with white rule in America. Can you imagine dealing with the whimsical mix and match of white attitudes? With all these various signals, is there any wonder why blacks can’t, “get it together?”

YES, I DID IT!

2006-04-29T04:05:00.000-02:00

Something has been troubling me all these years. I’ve been walking around as a felon, but I don’t feel like a felon. By that I mean I don’t want to break any laws or hurt anyone, in fact, before I achieved my felon status, I didn’t feel that way either. What I felt was anger, disrespect, frustration and that hasn’t really changed. In retrospect, I've had the opportunity to evaluate my life using the experience and knowledge of my years to come to some conclusions , see, hindsight is 20/20.

This investigation is not to make excuses. I broke the law more than once, but concomitantly, is that all there is to being a felon, breaking the law and getting caught? Does that make you a bad person for the rest of your life?

As with most things in America, the criminal justice system is racist. When I was a young black man, this didn’t resonate with me because usually youth are not deep thinkers. I couldn’t deconstruct what the essence of this system was intended to do to blacks, nor did I have anyone to do it for me. It was hidden. However today, it’s clear. (For this essay, I will use young black men as my example, but to different degrees this system affects all non whites and is limiting in economic ways, to poor whites.)

Young black men, because of historical reasons, are usually born poor in America. As in any former colonial system where the descendants of the colonial masters are still in power, the descendants of the colonized are relegated to a systematic “minority” status. There are several means to maintain this status, with the criminal justice system being a primary mechanism. It’s role must be functional, but also concealed as much as possible.

How does it work? Space does not allow for finite details, but I will try to present an overview. Young men across the board are aggressive and desire power. In a material society, this aggression and need for power is translated into possessions. If you are poor, acquisition and power are difficult, if you are black, even more so. This difficulty which translates into nihilism is disseminated through historical and contemporary cultural symbols, such as family environment, media, and formal education. Without a historical and economic support structure to guide and include young blacks, anger, disrespect and frustration becomes the motivating factor for behavior. Prudent decision making is stifled.

As a consequence, young black men try to take the road they conclude is of least resistance, for instance, they may pursue sports or the hip hop culture. If not successful, (or in some cases if they are successful), they often become dispirited with their social/economic status and having no historical cultural foundation of their own, strike out at the “majority culture” by breaking their laws.

When they are caught, if the first offence is not serious or seen as potentially harmful to the “larger public,” the young black man is shown “leniency.” Those who run this system understand that the social conditions of young black men, as described above, will more than likely return them to the system.

Showing “leniency” in this manner, hides the real intent of the system. It makes others think the system is fair and just, when it is not. For example, when in the system, the disparity in sentencing for blacks, the guidelines for offenses committed by racial groups, and the availability of personal contacts and money, all put young blacks at a disadvantage. Even the public perception of who is a criminal works against blacks.

The American system in general is constructed to limit black competition for jobs and resources. However, the prison industrial complex has been found to increase jobs and resources for whites through prison industries and related services. The increased prison population translates into revenue for poor white communities, making black bodies again profitable, similar to enslavement. (social commentary).

As with my case, carrying the label of “felon” for life also decreases the opportunity to compete. The stigma alone gives people who wish to maintain the system of white supremacy and covert/overt racism, the opportunity to dismiss and discriminate against you without conscious. The system therefore remains safe from blacks (or other "minorities") making any meaningful impact on or altering its inner workings. Young black men continue to be angry, disrespected, and frustrated while still being incarcerated in large numbers. When released they continue to carry the stigma of felon and the criminal justice system continues to be encouraging. The system allows people, both black and white, to say without conviction, it works.

I wrote this with the hope that some young black person will read it and realize how their life is being "set up" for failure, if they are not aware and careful. Although people say, "You have a choice to not break the law," and they are 100% correct, but they should also understand; what you don't know, really don't know, can hurt you. "Set ups" are meant to blindside the unsuspecting.

"Fla. Teen Gets 30 Years for Gun Possession"

FORT LAUDERDALE, Fla. - Lionel Tate was sentenced Thursday to 30 years in prison for violating probation, the latest legal twist for the teenager convicted of murdering a 6-year-old girl in what his attorneys initially claimed was a pro wrestling move.

In the latest case, Tate had faced 10 to 30 years in prison on charges of violating his probation by having a gun and robbing a pizza delivery man last year.

The judge on Thursday let him withdraw his guilty plea in the May 2005 robbery but still sentenced him on the gun charge. The robbery trial is set for Sept. 18.

Even defense attorney H. Dohn Williams didn't understand why Tate would want to go to trial on the robbery charge, given that a conviction could bring a life sentence in addition to the 30 years for the probation violation.

Tate could have simply received 30 years total for both charges under the deal.

"He continues to get bad advice from meddling third parties," Williams said outside court.

Williams said Tate's mother, Florida Highway Patrol trooper Kathleen Grossett-Tate, has told him he could win an appeal on the probation violation conviction, win his robbery case and leave jail in a year. She left court without commenting.

Brave New World...Maybe?

2006-04-28T14:47:00.000-02:00

Has anyone ever considered that we are maybe the third civilization to inhabit this planet? Just like people believe in reincarnation of the individual soul, perhaps there’s some reincarnation of a “civilization's” soul. This reincarnation of civilizations demands that it keeps coming back until we get it right. But the catch with many of us is, we are too stupid to ever get it right. Each time we build a civilization, we really don’t evolve ourselves.

If we look at the bible as basically a flawed history book, we don’t know if or when the first world was destroyed (maybe by earthquake or wind), but we do know the next world was done in by water. Now, if we are living in the third civilization, then it’s predicted to be done in by fire. Remember, we knew this long ago before we invented the nuclear bomb.

But what do we stupid humans do? We continue to build more deadly weapons while most unfailingly continue to embrace our primitive animal instincts of xenophobia, greed, and power for control. We also continue to be at odds with Nature and insist that we are not animals, while remaining fixed on the evolutionary scale. Point and case, many doubt evolutionary phenomenon.

Now we face the prospect of an escalated war with our abundant "fiery" nuclear weapons and none of the major players involved are really thinking about the past civilizations outcomes. But even more frightening for us humans is, perhaps the power of the Universe’s reincarnation machine is tired of our stupidity. This time when we do our destruction act, there will probably be no reincarnation. Maybe we’ll scorch the planet so badly that we’ll destroy the human DNA print to the point of no return. Consequently, this will be Nature’s way of trying another organism to take our place.

Something to think about, huh? Hell, I stay up at night concerned about stuff like this. But for the real players in this game, I think they'd better consider some of this stuff very seriously.

THESE EYES

2006-04-17T21:03:00.000-02:00

I can say without a doubt one knows when they are growing old. During my time from youngster to young man, I watch the ending of the careers of Joe Louis and Sugar Ray Robinson. I watch Jim Brown, Muhammad Ali and Bill Russell come and go; I watched the black athelete rein supreme, proud in his physical prowess, warrior’s icons to our young.

I could also imagine how demoralizing and frightening this must have been for our white brethren being in the presence of such physical domination. It would seem so because each year, with each white sport commentator, there was always a white hope. Max Schmeling, Jake Lamotta, Frank Gifford, Jerry Quarry, John Havlicek, all good, but not quite up to the task, no matter the hype.

But now, when I look through these eyes that had witnessed such splendid African American male potency, they reveal a different tale. Age and living not only took its toll on me, but in a large degree the pride of black manhood. I no longer see the images of those magnificent athletes. What I see is black self-degradation and a systematic removal of American blacks from athletics. This is all happening in conjunction with the feminizing of Black males in the media and general public. Our warriors have gone because their images have gone.

Concomitantly, our young men have become scavengers. They prey on the weak of their own community while the new ideal of manhood is the blond blue eyed “buffed” soldier, “Sir, Yes sir.” Since it appears black men have succumb to the pressures of white supremacy and racism, is it just a matter of time before their complete transition to oblivion? Will the names of Joe Louis, Sugar Ray, Jim Brown and the others repose in African American museums like the testimonials to Sitting Bull, Geronimo, and Crazy Horse?

With rare exception, when I watch young black men in action, never mind the venue, these eyes see them junking their souls for glitter. Yo dawg, it’ hard out here for a pimp when he tryin to get this money for da rent “you ain’t knowin”…

TMB (TEXT ME BACK)

2006-04-14T11:59:00.000-02:00

WTF is this world coming too? I have been writing about how European culture has influenced the way we think and shape our world. How its incessant march to sterility and artificialness is being accepted as universal and welcomed behavior. Yes, we are touching each other less and less. I mean not only physically, but intellectually too. For instance, not too long ago there was a time when we actually took the time to spell out what we wanted to say. However today, we can have complete conversations with a bunch of letters whose meaning you can find on some obscure online “Webopedia.”

So what? Why is that even important to mention? I’ll tell you why. A while back a friend of mine told me that I should use my full name instead of the universally accepted “nickname.” They said it allows other people to recognize you, your human being-ness, instead of just being a quick thought. One would write hello William, instead of hi Bill. Those extra syllables takes time to spell out. It allows for recognition of my being, it makes me more of a person instead of coming from some cookie-cutter quick fix mold.

Today, we can have an entire conversation on a 2X2 inch screen. We can really show how much we care and have the time for those we profess to care about and love. HI. HRU? WRUD? AYEC GBTM WAN2TLK F2F AEAP B4N G2R ILU. Yeah, that makes one feel real important and loved. But over time, like everything else in this insipid rushed culture, we become desensitized and it just goes into the cool, hip, “normal” bin.

Now this may seem trivial to most, but it’s just another sign of where we are going. In twenty years don’t look back and blame some “big brother” or anyone else but ourselves for the world we inherit, if we inherit one at all. When we wake up in a rushed, no touching, cold, sterile, prozac world, just look back on today. Remember that we could have made the choice to take the time to write. We could’ve taken the time to recognize and touch one another with words and deeds; to recognized our human-ness. But hey TMWFI TNSTAAFL :-<>

THE HUGEST MISTAKE WESTERN MAN HAS MADE THIS MILLENNIUM

2006-01-27T17:52:00.000-02:00

The recent legitimate victory by Hamas using the “democratic” process has been denounced by the proponents of democracy, can you imagine that? This is bad news when the United States threatens to withhold funds because Hamas won a free democratic election. It’s a cloudy day when Europeans refuse to sanction such elections as credible.

The problem, as I see it, is not that these countries are allowing hypocrisy to rule the day, but because the average person looking at the world from some "third world" enclave can see the duplicity. The pretense has been pulled off and the emperor stands before his subjects naked covered in oil while the whispers start in the streets. Even our own troops, who are fighting and dying in Iraqi to bring “democracy,” will be affected by this revelation in ways yet imaginable. Selected double standard democracy will not do. A democracy that’s dictated by the West for the political purposes of the west will only bring disaster to the west when exposed as a means to their hegemony.

Yes Houston, we have a problem and the eagle got its wings clipped. Unless the bird of freedom can now land and allow itself to heal, there’s no telling where this foolishness will end. Unless the Western ideal can adopt a new flavor of legitimacy by making sincere efforts to walk the earth instead of looking down upon it as puppet master, it ain’t gonna be safe for anyone. It is possible with this reaction to Hamas the whole world will now try to extinguish the muted lights of democracy that sprung up over the last several hundred years, then what will the West do? We don’t have that many troops.

109th Congress and Republican Nationalism

2006-01-04T15:33:00.000-02:00

With the recent scandals rocketing through Congress, I can’t help but reflect on why we have this Republican Congress in the first place. How could we allow this imbalance when in the past we have been careful in most instances to have the Congress and the Executive in both parties. However as money becomes more of an election determinate, the political will of the people will erode.

It is also possible race and class is a necessary catalyst. What do I mean by that? A simple answer would be that both race and class are needed to support our systems of capitalism and politics. Few folks, both “liberal” or “conservative” will own up to this fact. For example, the Republican Party is overwhelmingly white therefore it is perceived to protect white interest. If they are ideologically in disfavor with a majority of voters, they can do three things. One, enjoy positive media propaganda from republican media outlets, two, use their republican business contacts to influence elections outcomes and three, appeal to their fundamentalist white republican Christian base. If these practices are called into question nothing really happens because they control avenues of capital and information. See white people are reluctant to break from the party that is perceived to protect their interest and side with “minorities“, two, the media “back pages,” ignores or “spins” the incidents and three, the republican party protects god and the power of the church and America is basically a white "Christian nation." This is why they are essentially nationalistic with race as the glue that holds it together.

A working definition of nationalism is, “the doctrine that nations should act independently (rather than collectively) to attain their goals.” The republican party has become a “nation” within a “nation” and it is obvious that they fit the remainder of the definition. The democrats can’t breathe in congress and G.W. does what he wants with impunity.

America, if it cares to look, will have a first hand glimpse of what republican nationalism can and can’t achieve. Corruption and division it can, unity it can’t. “Republican nationalism” isolates forces that offers checks and balances to the one sided goals of corporate interest and religious tyranny. It can stifle progressive movements and foster national nihilism. It can bring greed to a new low and promote cultural arrogance. It is not healthy for the country, and we will see what America is made of in the 110th Congress.

FAITH OR SURVIVAL?

2005-07-24T12:22:00.000-02:00

When I turned off the computer and went to the kitchen to get my morning cup of coffee, I reflected on what I had done. I was on a message board and as usual, lambasting the church. Just when the final drop of java hit the chafe, I asked myself, why did I do that? The answer, after focused contemplation, came streaming forth.

In the antebellum period the church was useful as an organizing tool, apparatus for the dissemination of information, and educational facility. The focus of Black church folk was the abolishment of enslavement, a very noble cause. The underlying impetus for this cause was “faith.”

Black people went to church, prayed, sang, and then went downstairs to plot, plan and learn. They had purpose and this purpose became a unify force to end enslavement for all blacks. I believe this was the major reason whites opposed the black church. Some say teaching Blacks to read was the issue, I say it could have been, but for a slave, it would make sense that if they could read, they could follow written instructions and be more productive. I believe whites were afraid of the church becoming something other than a pacifying social institution as they intended and that’s why they opposed Black becoming Christians.

Today the church is just the opposite. It became what whites had intended it to be. The focus of the church today is on “faith,” not as an underlying impetus for change or amelioration, but as the main character in our lives that can’t formulate our own particular world view. When you feed faith to a group of people who have been systematically deprived of the riches of the land, you feed them a belief without a plan to change their condition. That’s why I believe Black folks have studiedly gone downhill after the civil rights movement, no group goal. The goal of the civil rights movement, similar to the abolition of enslavement in the antebellum, was integration into the main stream society. The church again played a major role. The people went to church on Sunday and after church went into the basement to plan for Monday. Again this was a unifying force and “faith” again was the underlying impetus.

When the integration fight was won, the church, with all due respects, took the credit. However in this play there were other organizations that white folks couldn’t recognize as important that played even greater roles, if not equally important ones as the church and the NAACP. Organizations like the Black Panthers, The Young Lords, N.O. I., U.S., SNCC, and other “people’s liberation movements,” reminded America of other, not so kinder and gentler possibilities as non-violence.

However with the church in the forefront, they now had the responsibility to implement the next step in Black advancement. However they had a major problem. The next step would be Black liberation and that would mean a break with or major fight with their new integrated Christian brethren. That would mean that Jesus’ tenets of, we are all brothers, turn the other cheek, ideals of love for your fellow man, men are not different, we need to work together, would come into conflict. Liberation demanded nothing less than parity on all levels and this should have been the last great battle.

Since the church was now stuck, they had no choice but the make “faith” it’s primary impetus because that’s all they had left. They had no cause to plan for, no fight against real injustice, just the obvious racism and no education program that was historically our own. Integration was the goal and integration they got. So on Sunday’s after church, instead of retiring to the basement to plan for our next great Black movement, liberation, they held bible study and planned for church fundraising committees one of which is to build a bigger and better church for the group as a symbol of their “success” and importance.

At this stage of Black advancement, or lack thereof, in America the church is virtually useless. My beloved cousin said it well. She goes to church on Sunday to hear her preacher because he’s an excellent speaker. He gives her “hope” which is synonymous with “faith.” He doesn’t give her any viable plan to help pull Black folks together so we can eventually take care of our own, take care of our grandchildren or the 50% unemployed in New York. No plan, just beautiful words of faith to give her and each member some individual hope.

Let me clarify something for those who think I’m being racist or separatist. Let it be known that I firmly believe that Black total liberation is good for the country. This country needs an injection of new ideas and a new spirituality. I believe that if our minds were truly liberated, the church after Sunday’s service would retire to the basement and make plans for a better America, not on faith, but as in the past, on Black folk’s collective work, planning, education and creation of their own legitimate world view.

IS IT ON BULL OR JUST BULL?

2005-05-16T17:06:00.000-02:00

Author Harry Frankfurt just wrote a book called "On Bull." From what I’ve gathered the 67-page book is about hypocrisy in the American culture. Although it focused more on American popular culture, I’m sure it applied to both almost equally. With that in mind, I was wondering:

Perhaps someone can clear something up for me. I am seriously confused about the difference between white supremacy and the crying out by "good" white people against U.S. imperialism. My major confusion starts when I look at history. The overwhelming majority of people who did things in the world of note (according to his-story) are all white people, both the "good" ones and the "bad" ones, however I must admit, they were mostly men. For example, the Caesars (except for one), the kings and queens of Europe, the so-called “great” generals, Alexander, Constantine, Hitler, Patton, the inventors, Guggenheim, Di Vince, Galileo, the religious icons, the Popes, (except for two), Martin Luther, Billy Graham, the “explorers” Columbus, Magellan, De Leon, etc. etc., etc. Further, when I look at all the heads of state of the most powerful countries in the world today, they are again white men, (except for their one token).

I wonder why in the last two thousand years or so why hasn't a non-white country produced a great world leader? Why in the last two thousand years or so hasn't anyone but white people (except their token) controlled the world resources, created and presently sit on the so-called, G-7/8 of the world richest nations? Why is it that they control the “world” bank, the "International"Monetary Fund, and the greatest weaponry in the world, while screaming to high heaven if a non-white country wants to build them? Why is it that the great majority of the countries controlled by whites (except their token and in the age of Islam) waged wars/conquest/saviorships and "exploration/exploitation" outside their state boundaries? Why was the focus on most countries that had no history of a relationship with whites, only resources?

Given the history of white skinned peoples, what separates world imperialism/conquest/saviors from world white supremacy? I see nothing, do you? What’s more telling is why don’t they admit the truth as to their goals and intentions? I remember a saying from a movie I once saw, it was “The Usual Suspects.” The one line that resonated with me was, “The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was to convince people he didn’t exist.”

I would appreciate any clarification of the difference between U.S. imperialism and world wide white supremacy under U.S. leadership because maybe this is one major issue of B.S. that On Bull needed to address, if the sincere white people of the world want to have a more just one. See in my "unimportant" non-European mind, you can't really fix a problem until those working on it know the scope of the problem and are able to confront it in its entirety.

IS THE DOWN LOW REALLY LOW DOWN?

2005-05-07T17:46:00.000-02:00

I was talking with my friend on the phone last night. She mentioned how black men were spreading AIDS in the community by being “bi-sexual.” But since she lived in the Bay Area, she more or less whispered it to me over the phone.

This took me back nine years to my Ethnic Studies graduate power point presentation. We had to address a problem in our community and focus on the resultant issues directly affecting the Black Community. My friend Anthony and I chose to do one on how homosexuality affected Black families. Predictably since we attended San Francisco State University, this was also received with a jaundice eye.

The point we were making with this presentation was that the foundation of the Black Community, the family, was under attack. See our idea of family, from an African perspective, which I believe is Nature’s perspective, is the "old fashioned" one of a male and a female procreating. Not some type of “artificial” conception be it in a test tube or insemination. My premise for this being “natural” is that nothing else in nature, except white Europeans, creates "artificial life" and presents this creation as a “universal” trait of man. Frankenstein was not black, yellow or brown.

Of course our presentation caught the attention of our Dean who happened to be “gay.” It appears it also made our African-centered professor upset because the dean was his friend and colleague. Needless to say, I would pay for that later.

The motivation for our choice has historical significance for the Black Community. Briefly, many Africans on the continent believe, in spite of European inspired protest, that homosexuality is NOT an African cultural tradition. However if one studies the history of the Scythians, Greeks, Romans, and other early European cultures, they find Europeans can’t make such claims. Put this in context with the many other cultural ideas that Europeans have presented to the world as “universal” ideas, I tend to believe the Africans.

With that said, we look at the contemporary events in the Black Community. We see that our prisons are crammed with young black men. We see that they are sexually assaulted as a sort of rights of passage by other black men who have been programmed to destroy things black. You see that economically, young black men are coerced into homosexuality because they have no idea of their ancestral spirit which could allow them to repeal this economic-psychological onslaught. You also see young black men in corporate white America accepting homosexuality as showing they are no threat to the white system. Finally, you see young black men going through an educational/social system that strips them of their Black cultural manhood, which in turn opens the door for all kinds of concepts.

As mentioned before, the above “pressures” on the Black man reaches into the very core of our cultural survival, the black family. For me, many of our cultural interactions with European culture are a form of imposed consensual cultural genocide, one that this society chooses to see as benign or non- threatening. Another reason is that the white community can take the homosexuality hit. They don’t need as many “male” bodies to protect their supremacy or foster their cultural legitimacy. They have their technology holding the hordes at bay. However Blacks are faced, on a global level, with high levels of imprisonment, economic depravation, disease, proportional drug addiction, historical ignorance, fear, and mistrust. Now we have an AIDS attack on our entire weakened community mobilized by one of our greatest drives, sex, supposedly the black man’s salvation.

So I ask, Is the Down Low really Low Down? I would say emphatically yes. I’ve never experienced sex with a man, but there must be something to it since it is so popular. But in my mind, that’s not what makes it “low down.” What makes it low down is that it has the potential to spreads AIDS to innocent people, wrecking havoc in our community. Even more realistically, it gives our women the disease, possibly passing it on to our children. Another mention is that the “down low” further exacerbates our communal problem because in many instances because of lack, it forces our women into homosexuality.

My final analysis is that if our young men want to lay with other men, leave our women alone. (Given the circumstances, I am sorry to say if our women can’t find a black man, try a man from another culture.) Gay black men don’t need to prove their lost “manhood” to anyone, if by consent, it’s gone. Finally, I wish our young men would stop raping other young men in prison. These are sicknesses that must be stopped if we are to get back to sanity. In fact, I wish my professors weren’t so hard on us nine years ago when the down low was further down.

LET'S DANCE.

2005-05-03T14:12:00.000-02:00

Just weeks after the Sept. 11 attacks, the Pentagon issued a sweeping defense strategy detailing a new vision for winning swift wars against global terrorist networks and outlaw regimes. One year later, the White House unveiled its "National Security Strategy," which discussed using the U.S. military to launch preemptive wars and snuff out threats before they materialized - a strategy that would later be known as "The Bush Doctrine."

Now, with nearly 140,000 U.S. troops in Iraq two years after the fall of Baghdad, along with commitments in Afghanistan and for the global war on terrorism, many Pentagon officials admit that the bloody insurgency in Iraq has tempered that vision of what the U.S. military can and cannot do."-from Truthout..

This is insanity but accepted as a "sane" rationale. I remember when I was teenager and would go to house parties. We'd all be in the basement fast and slow dancing. The rhythms would emanate from every young body in the room and it looked like a universal communion based in natural rhythms. Later, I would go home and watch TV. I would tune into "American Bandstand" to look at the white kids dance. I saw uncoordinated bodies that begged to find some continuity with nature and the universe. I would see little white feet hopping around and bodies doing something I just didn't understand instead of sliding and gliding like those basement dancers to the sounds of ancestral memories.

Today I watch the grandsons and granddaughters of those basement dancers. To me they look like mechanical windmills in some bizarre dance with some phantom impulses coming from who knows where. They sometimes hop around and contort their bodies in jerks and synchronous motions like some spastic child crying for attention. And they enjoy it thinking they have pushed dancing to another level.

By now I'm sure you are probably asking what in the hell does this have to do with war plans, global terrorist and the "Bush Doctrine." It has a great deal to do with them. Just like the Bush Doctrine is in place to bring "western continuity" to the world, so were the dancers on American Bandstand with regard to dancing. They knew that they looked and probably felt strange as well as out of place when watching the basement dancers, so they began to change the idea of what is rhythm. The Bush Doctrine attempts to do the same thing, change the idea of cultural sovereignty.

The ideas of capitalism, western democracy, religions, laws and political systems don't/didn't fit most cultures whose history was steeped in some form of cultural socialism (dance). That would make the Bush Doctrine's dancers "hoppers" on the world stage instead of sliders and gliders in tune with the majority of the world's cultural rhythms. Those European cultural ideologist, like the ones on the Bush Doctrine's "American Bandstand," throughout history couldn't learn to synchronize with nature, so they changed the essence of human rhythm and natural synchronization. It took them centuries as witnessed by the invasions of Scythia, Greece, Rome, Crusaders, England, France, Germany, etc., etc., etc.,. on the "rhythmic" dancers of the world.

Believe it or not, I can understand the need for the hoppers of the world to change the dance, to bring another idea of rhythm to the world. What I don't understand is why does the world allow it to happen? What is it that prevents the world from understand that "hopping" is not in tune with nature's rhythm, but with some dance from someplace even I don't understand? Why does the world keep trying to understand this spastic drummer and adopt their style? Why doesn't the world just ignore their paternalistic desire to mechanize nature and let them keep trying to learn the glide and slide?

The answers are complex, but the primary reason is the world doesn't understand why they only learned to hop instead of slide and glide. The world just can't understand that the hopper's drummer never fully developed the depth or ability to drum, however he did understand how to hit the damm thing and make "big" noises.

The kids today have no idea the importance of dancing to universal rhythms. The world has no idea of how important it is to evolve their culture from their ancestral memory. The world has no idea how important it is to learn to dance with different styles, but the same rhythms?

Road to Techno-Speak

2005-04-16T17:36:00.000-02:00

Do you remember when people talked with each other? When they walked down the street and looked into faces and spoke? Do you remember when people cared about people problems and not just for self aggrandizement? Well, those days are just about gone and anyone who has any insight needn’t ask why. It begins at the beginning.

America sends its children off to school each morning with the hope that they will someday evolve into this well rounded human being. A human being that will not only be self sufficient, but hopefully make some meaningful contribution towards the welfare of humankind. If that’s the parent’s goal, then its best to keep them home.

Education today is not a human centered endeavor, therefore; when the mold is being shaped in schools it becomes truncated. I say this because post-secondary education has devolved into three basic categories. Math, Science and Special Education.

The “special interest” in society, mostly business interest, have decided that technology and capitalism are society's saviors. They feel the science of technology is needed to attempt to solve problems like global warming and environmental pollution that doing business has caused. Business also emphasizes science to try to curtail fears of disease and dying while pharmaceutical companies rake gigantic profits. Math is needed to maintain the ideals of capitalism and world-wide supremacy through the use of technology and its concomitant idea of progress. Society then needs the combination of the two to create weapons of mass destruction/control and also expand itself to places like Mars.

The third prong, special education, is for those children who had no particular interest in Math or Science. They usually find technology basically boring, unless it has entertainment value. They are the children that didn’t make the math-science cut in the early grades and tracked into a kind of social anonymity. They are mostly those “right brain” children, the ones who like to talk, have music jumping around in their heads and dream. A great many of the children “No Child Left Behind,” is leaving behind.

The marriage between academia and business with ideas of “world leadership” as its bride’s maid, creates a milieu of “societal darlings” that fit the capitalist script. Special Education children are left looking inside. With the nature of humans needing some type of recognition, not to mention financial rewards, in a society that creates anonymity, allows buying into the techno-scientific culture very easy. The focus, rewards, and accolades goes to those who can best memorized texts and regurgitate them hopefully with a different spin. Creativity in the realm of human development becomes obfuscated. People become limited in their desire to have eclectic “human-centered” conversations because they are programmed to indulge in and appreciate techno-speak. Interpersonal relationships are often carried out in the ambiguity of chat rooms and cyber space. One can even go to war or have sex while participating in the ultimate human degradations of killing or sexual objectification while on line.

As I mentioned earlier, anyone with insight needn’t ask why. However even with insight, I still ask why. I ask why parents send their children off to molding factories known as schools without understanding there total implications. I ask why parents can’t grasp that society is getting worst, and making the connection that creative human interactions through a varied curriculum are all but overlooked in schools in favor of the push for math and science geniuses. But given the rash of violence in schools, it seems that gun toting has become a substitute for creative interaction. Why can’t parents figure out that no matter how much math and science their children learn or become techno savvy, it is basically useless because education must be for the life’s amelioration, not its alienation.

Education should be well rounded to include and have equal appreciation in our society for the arts, legitimate open social sciences, cultural and physical education. Each must share a universal prestige placing math and science in the venue of students who have that aptitude and placing the arts, social sciences, cultural and physical education in the venue of students with those aptitudes. I believe this will also lessen the need for “special education” classes. I would further suspect that if society doesn’t abandon this very slippery slope towards almost total technological dependence, it will experience simultaneous human interpersonal erosion. I think American society or any society can’t afford such and should really examine its sacred cow education by starting at the beginning.

My European Origin Theory

2005-04-09T18:44:00.000-02:00

My European Origin Theory

One theory on the origin of the European: The story that Africans migrated to Europe then due to climatic change mutated from black people to white people due to a vitamin “D” deficiency for me is suspect. I challenge this theory because of the following: This “migration” supposedly took place approximately 40,000 years ago. It would then follow that this “mutation” had to postdate 40,000 years ago. Upon investigation, I found that there are two types of mutations which would directly affect this occurrence, 1. Germinal (A cell from which other cells are derived, especially a dividing cell in the embryonic neural tube) and 2. Somatic (Any cell of a plant or an animal other than a germ cell. Also called body cell). Mutations due to a vitamin deficiency would be classified as Somatic Mutations.

Somatic means that the mutation takes place in the body and not in the sexual cells (Germinal) and ends when the host dies and is not passed on to the next generation.

“Whatever the effect, the ultimate fate of that somatic mutation is to disappear when the cell in which it occurred, or its owner, dies. Germline mutations, in contrast, will be found in every cell descended from the zygote to which that mutant gamete contributed. If an adult is successfully produced, every one of its cells will contain the mutation. Included among these will be the next generation of gametes, so if the owner is able to become a parent, that mutation will pass down to yet another generation.” http://users.rcn.com/jkimball.ma.ultranet/BiologyPages/M/Mutations.html

Somatic mutations need time to evolve and 40,000 years is not enough time for this type of mutation to occur in a body cell without the aid of some type of out side phenomena. Therefore, within this given time any vitamin deficiency would be unable to affect the cells of the body turning them from black to white.

“The effect of natural selection on gene frequencies can be quantified. Let us assume a population containing36% homozygous dominants (AA)48% heterozygotes (Aa) and*16% homozygous recessives (aa)*The gene frequencies in this population arep = 0.6 and q = 0.4The heterozygotes are just as successful at reproducing themselves as the homozygous dominants, but the homozygous recessives are only 80% as successful. That is, for every 100 AA (or Aa) individuals that reproduce successfully only 80 of the aa individuals succeed in doing so. The fitness (w) of the recessive phenotype is thus 80% or 0.8."

What does that mean? I would say one very early migration of the African, perhaps Neanderthal, became isolated during one of the many glacial periods. Due to limited female and nutritional resources, they had to revert to inter-breeding. This inbreeding over time caused a permanent mutation in their germinal cells, thus passing this mutation into their somatic cells. Evolution allowed the mutation of the Y chromosome to change those things that were least needed in the colder climates, one being Melanin, creating the mm gene pool in the Neanderthal.

During another warming period, another migration out of Africa traveled to Europe. (Grimaldi?) They also became a victim of a glacial cooling period and due to limited female and nutritional resources, inter-bred with the Neanderthal and also bred among them selves creating the mutation from mm to pm genes in the Y chromosome. This perhaps caused a permanent mutation in their germinal cells to pm genes. The small “p” gene affected mostly phenotype. Melanin was no longer dominate because of climatic conditions.

I would further assume about 8,000 years ago a third migration left Africa and migrated to Europe. During this period due to both early exploration and later conquest, interbreeding took place and introduced into the gene pool of Europe the “Pm” gene. I would surmise because of new technology at the time, which allowed for faster insemination of genes into the population, at least 36% of the modern day Europeans carry this gene.

My conclusions for the origin of the European are as follows:

(mm) (16%) Carrying chromosomes this gene in Y chromosomes.
(pm) (48%) Carrying chromosome of this gene in Y chromosomes. (affecting mostly Phenotype)
(Pm) (36%) Carrying chromosome of this gene in Y chromosones. (reintroduction of Melanin on a very limited scale.)

This is only MY theory and really needs further investigation.

References:
http://www.ndsu.nodak.edu/instruct/mcclean/plsc431/mutation/mutation2.htm

http://users.rcn.com/jkimball.ma.ultranet/BiologyPages/M/Mutations.html

http://users.rcn.com/jkimball.ma.ultranet/BiologyPages/H/Hardy_Weinberg.html#Calculating_the_Effect_of_Natural_Selection_on_Gene_Frequencies

http://www.raceandhistory.com/Science/europeanmen.htm

“Interbreeding was a mainstay of human evolution well before 100,000 years ago, Templeton contends. The evolutionary trees that he devised indicate that four nuclear DNA sites first arose approximately 600,000 years ago, he says. Of the remaining six DNA regions in his study, four of them appeared between 500,000 and 200,000 years ago. A major migration of people from Africa to Asia occurred between 840,000 and 420,000 years ago, Templeton estimates. A second large out-of-Africa migration followed at around 100,000 years ago. If that event had resulted in the replacement of non-African groups, it would have erased genetic evidence of the older expansion, he asserts, "This new analysis is complicated, but it makes the most sense of any genetic study of evolution that I've seen," comments anthropologist John H. Relethford of the State University of New York at Oneonta. He agrees with Templeton that human origins lie mostly but not completely in Africa and that dispersed populations interbred.”

http://www.phschool.com/science/science_news/articles/dna_diaspora.html

A NEW KIND OF SANDMAN, INTELLIGENT DESIGN

2005-03-30T14:02:00.000-02:00

The new found power of the religious right is constantly trying to improve upon itself. The latest “fad” is their theory of “Intelligent Design.” As many of us know this idea is based on some intelligent being or entity creating life. They say it’s not God, but we know better. This concept is just a veiled attempt to further propagate what they consider their religious profundity.

I understand that the vast majority of those who wish to believe in Intelligent Design are really seeking some answers to what has been passed down through religious doctrine as, man being born in sin and the idea of salvation because God has a special place in his heart for us, therefore he has to be anthropomorphic. If you don't believe me ask Adam or Eve. But how would those right to lifers, religious pundits or Intelligent Design theorist explain the fact that there could be silicon based life? Why didn't the Intelligent Designer make Sandmen too?

I ask that questions because I wonder why, whoever their Intelligent Designer was, didn’t make silicon-based life as well as carbon based- life? Silicon is abundant in the universe. Without a doubt he had to know how if what they purport is true and he/she had the where with all to create us. But seriously, that wouldn’t fit their religo-socio-politico objectives. Can you image their Intelligent Designer being made of sand? How could we experience "salvation" from a Sand God? Can you imagine this Intelligent Designer making sandmen? Although silicon-based life is a slight possibility, it is still a possibility and no match for any Intelligent Designer to create. An article in Inside/Out suggest:

“Biologists have noted the proximity of carbon and silicon in the periodic table. Both elements are in Group 4 of the periodic table. NB Modern chemists now refer to these elements as Group 14. Elements in the same Group of the periodic table have very similar properties. In fact our cells have difficulty in distinguishing between calcium and strontium, both in Group 2 of the periodic table. Some scientists have supposed that it might be possible for some kind of life form to develop using silicon instead of carbon as the basis for life. Such organisms might have evolved on other planets in remote solar systems under very different conditions or even in the fiercely hot magma beneath the Earth’s crust. http://insideout.rigb.org/ri/elements/big_questions.html”

I really wonder if Phillip Johnson and his fellow theorist foresaw the hijacking of their ideas by the religious right? I also wonder why religious folks are always “back-door-in” scientific discovery. For example, there were no dinosaurs, the earth is only 6,000 years old, evolution is false, and there was a flood that consumed all the earth. Science has just about discounted these notions but the Intelligent Design camps are still trying to come up with a rationale for their power base quest. I suppose the field of academic scholarship is too demanding for them. And I would suspect those that know evolution is the answer, the temptation of money and power is too great to turn down.

The sad part is that our own social evolution is stifled because their God or Designer of the Universe must have human likeness and qualities or else we could never begin to conceive of him conceiving us. We humans must have a special relationship both positive and negative with him and/or the Intelligent Designer. He belongs to only us and protects only us in the entire Universe. This must be true or else Silicon people would inhabit Venus or Mars. See their Intelligent Designer could never offer the Sand People equal status. By George he couldn't even conceive of creating them so what chance would they have? No more than a snowball’s chance in Hatie’s I'm sure. Ummm, Snow Ball people, I wonder? But one thing is for sure, they wouldn't evolve and thereby bolster the Intelligent Designer theory and send the evolutionist running for cover.

GORILLAS IN THE MIST AND THE VALLEY TOO!

2005-03-25T19:52:00.000-02:00

Did you know that there are tours to the mountains of Rwanda to view the Gorillas in the Mist? Certain people pay thousands of dollars to hike up a mountain to view these powerful primates indigenous only to Africa.

But I’m lucky. I don’t have to travel to Rwanda to see a Gorilla in its “natural” state. I can view a gorilla any time I want in the Valley of the Sun as long as it's basketball season. A gorilla that’s just as big and blacker than any in Africa. Yep, sure can. All I need to do is attend a Phoenix Suns basketball game. There it is, the symbol of the most physical intimidating primate on the globe, the Gorilla. The Great Ape is the premiere symbol of black Africa and an accepted symbol of pure brute strength. It's also the mascot of the Phoenix Suns basketball team. But let me jump ahead for a moment to remember something I read about the development of more powerful bullets. It was said that these bullets were necessary because the conventional projectile at the time wasn’t powerful enough to stop an enraged black man on drugs. Today, I suppose these weapons are needed to stop someone like a "physically powerful" Rodney King or any black man on enhancement drugs, that is if he's not Barry Bonds. Of course this is only one historical stereotypical idea of the black man having the strength of a gorilla. But enough of this, I digress.

When I turn on the T.V. and watch the NBA Phoenix Suns run up and down the court, my attention focuses on those black men whose ancestry was the home of the gorilla, the African American. I pay close attention to how the white players are far removed from the image of their NBA team mascot. For example,who would even accuse a Steve Nash or Tom Chambers of being a black Africa? Plus they certainly don't conjure up images of any association with a powerful black gorilla. Also If you ever really listened to the white announcers, they will tell you that Nash and the other white players are more “heady” than physically dominate. They don’t do 360 degree through your legs behind your head slam dunks and pound their chest when they show their proficiency of the game.

So the onus of this gorilla mascot being the symbol of the stereotypical powerful brute, the black man, is obvious to me. What is not obvious is the connection between a gorilla and a basketball team in Arizona. It's also interesting that this symbol belongs to a basketball team that represents a state that was a confederate territory, has never signed the ERA and was the last state in the Nation to ratify the Martin Luther King holiday. It also doesn’t escape me that NBA black players comprise about 80% of the league. So this symbol can also become universal to a lot of teams who employ men whose ancestry is the home of the “mighty” gorilla.

I must admit that there’s something comforting in knowing that the Phoenix Suns chose this mascot. It is a comforting reminder that if you are black, you can’t be comfortable, no matter the rhetoric. It is also comforting to know that I can save thousands of dollars because I don’t have to travel to the mountains of Rwanda to see the gorillas, but I may have to if I wanted to see the mist.

HERE'S LOOKING AT ZEUS

2005-03-20T16:33:00.000-02:00

Several years ago I dated this European woman. I liked her because she was different and the quintessential European. As an example, I would have my desk cluttered with papers and this would drive her crazy. So much so that she would file every paper when my back was turned. I told her that I didn't need that because I knew where everything was and in my mind everything had its proper place. There was no chaos in my view.

At the time I had no idea her actions were the result of not seeing the world as I did. I thought she was, as we call them, a neat freak. However, as I became more "enlightened" by studying European thought and behavior, I found that this wasn't necessarily so. I was mistaken because I didn't understand the influence of being "raised"in a culture and picking up the ideas and values of that culture.

If you've ever studied Greek mythology, I'm sure you've come across their Creation myth. I can imagine elders of the Doric tribe sitting by the fire building on their ideas of creation giving it a flavor that fits their cultural spirit. First in the myth was chaos and the gods continuing struggle to bring order to their world. The strife begins with the castration of father Uranus, (heaven) by his son Cronos. Later Cronos was overthrown by his son, Zeus. One of the gods, Prometheus, deserted the other Titans to side with Zeus. After warring with the Titans and Zeus was victorious, he allowed Prometheus to create Man out of mud and Athena to breath life into the clay creation. Prometheus loved Man more than the gods and to preserve Man's place tricked Zeus. Zeus became angry and punished both Man and Prometheus. He punished Man by having the first woman created, Pandora, who had a deceptive heart and lying tongue (poor Eve). Pandora was given a jar by Zeus and was told not to open it. She disobeyed and out came all the plagues of man, suffering, evil, sorrow, misfortune, but at the bottom of the jar there was one good thing, "hope"(faith). Zeus punished Prometheus by chaining him to a rock in the Caucasus Mountains where he was tormented day and night.

Although this story was derived from another culture's creation myth which showed the opposite, from order came chaos, this one is unique because it lays the foundation of what is happening today in the Western world. In the United States there are people who view the world in chaos. Typical of their ancient creation myths, there must be war to end strife and bring order to the world. In fact, if you look at the history of the West, you'll see Zeus' pattern of fighting or warring to bring order. (Or more poignantly, a different way of seeing the world, similar to my experience with my aforementioned girlfriend). A look at the history of Western cultures, the Assyrians, Persians, Greeks, Romans, Spanish, English, French, Italians, Germans, and now the United States all acted out the myth. They felt they were ordained by Zeus, or whatever the god of the day, to shape the world into their idea of order. They had a mandate to finally defeat chaos and bring democracy and/or freedom (order) by making the world "safe" albeit using bigger swords, cannons, and bombs.

This idea of bringing order to chaos can also affect a society. Those followers of the ancient myth can use Zeusian or godly beliefs to oppress a society that they feel is in chaos, like achieving an Orwellian 1984, instead of using bombs, they use the thought police. Those of us who understand that you can't bring order through violence, only more chaos, are silenced. But what can you do when those who developed the major weapons and resources for the purpose of "righting" the world, can't see it any other way? Their world view from ancient times can't be wrong.

The only solution I can see is that those people who believe in the ancient myth, take a long hard look at their behavior. For those who can understand what this essay is saying, I would suggest they use their resources to let chaos exist for those culture's that can function in what the West sees as chaos. I hope they will understand that you don't need to own the resources of the world so you can be more powerful to change the world in your image.

This is not an impossible task, but it will take a dramatic departure from what Greek mythology has taught the people of "Western" cultures. For those who can make the transition, I say let those that can't stay on "Mount Olympus" and dictate the affairs of those who still believe in war as a solution to force their ideas of order on the world. For the rest of us, I say we should get started with the business of humanity. We should use the many resources we have to do business with each other and the rest of the world. There are many in the world who understands that the road we are on is insanity and will gladly do business with corporations and individuals outside of those on Mount Olympus. People who want to trade goods, services and ideas. People whose chaos is their own and don't wish to impose their idea of order. By the way, my lady-friend finally got the idea and let my chaos be.

US. AND THE SUPREME COURT

2005-03-13T17:19:00.000-02:00

I woke up this morning in my 6X13 room still hell bent on leaving this hypocritical country. I can't speak for others, but I really get so very tired of the lies and deceit. I suppose so many folks are able to cope because they just ignore them and for a minute or two they go away.

I have often said that a percentage of the white American populace to date, has always protect its perceived self interest over any moral issues pertaining to non-whites and the poor. The most popular method of accomplishing this and still think one is "fair," is to support a system that is upheld as "legitimate" and dilute yourself into believing it. For example, IF the democratic process functions as it should, then voting is a workable methodology. Majority rules! I've researched the past Presidential appointments to the Supreme Court from 1953 to 2001. Democrats have made six (6) appointments and the Republicans fifteen (15). ( After J.F. Kennedy only four appointments and of those only two remain) It appears that in the years when these "Justices" are likely to leave the Court, the populace votes Republican. I would imagine an example of why would be the 2000 election.

In the next four years there maybe at least three new appointments, maybe four to the Court. The historic trend continues with the sitting president, G.W. Bush, a Republican, having the chance to appoint justices more favorable to his agenda and those who support him by manipulating the laws of the land "legitimately" in the favor of the elite corporate-complex and the religious "right."

If you noticed the "if" in the second paragraph is capitalized and underlined. It boggles the mind to think that such a disparity in appointments is just by chance or coincidence and the pubic will vote a particular party into office each and every year since 1953 that has the opportunity to control the Court. We have long suspected that this country is controlled by money and not ideals. The Republican party represents money. The law represents methods of manipulating and channeling money. It would make sense that the Court must stay in the hands of the money interest. It would therefore follow that voting must not be left to chance and the fifteen to six ratio I think makes a good case for no chances.

I don't know for sure the future of the United States, but I do know that if this trend isn't curbed, the country will implode. It will implode because of the disparity in wealth, the shrinking resources, the global position of the United States and the desire to impose a hypocritical moral value on the population.
But historically, no one listens and G.W. will make his appointments as planned and I will continue to try to find a reasonable way out of here.

REFLECTIONS OF AN INTEGRATION I KNEW

2005-03-12T18:43:00.000-02:00

As I grow older, I can reflect on social and technological developments over a span of some 50 plus years. I remember no matter my income; I was restricted to my community. I remember big tube radios, the Lone Ranger, Inner Sanctum, and Jack Benny. I remember the first commercial jet airliner. I remember when color T.V. came to market. I remember the first transistor radio and Texas Instrument’s first hand held calculator. I remember Vietnam and the “Summer of Love.” I remember Malcolm, Kuame, Dr. King, and Ali. I also remember when the prisons were 20% Black and 80% White. I remember when drugs were an abomination in my community. I remember when guns were all but non-existent. Now I see a systematic and calculated reversal in the Black community. One so slick that it has the victims blaming the victims, the victims killing the victims, and the victims believing they are victims because they can’t do any better.

This almost complete reversal of social attitudes and conditions in the Black community has taken place right under my nose just like all the other “remembrances.” Except now these conditions were culminating into devastating results for Black people. For example, “According to Todd Clear, the negative labor market effects of mass incarceration on black communities are probably minor "compared to the economic relocation of resources" from Black to white communities that mass incarceration entails. As Clear explains in cool and candid terms, "Each prisoner represents an economic asset that has been removed from that community and placed elsewhere. As an economic being, the person would spend money at or near his or her area of residence-typically, an inner city. Imprisonment displaces that economic activity: Instead of buying snacks in a local deli, the prisoner makes those purchases in a prison commissary. The removal may represent a loss of economic value to the home community, but it is a boon to the prison community. Each prisoner represents as much as $25,000 in income for the community in which the prison is located, not to mention the value of constructing the prison facility in the first place. This can be a massive transfer of value: A young male worth a few thousand dollars of support to children and local purchases is transformed into a $25,000 financial asset to a rural prison community. The economy of the rural community is artificially amplified, the local city economy artificially deflated."

Looking back before I helped to integrate my high school, I wonder how we Blacks would have faired if we didn’t accept integration. From my perspective integration only forced competition among the ex-enslaved Blacks while whites knew full well there was only room for a very limited number of those ex-enslaved. Those few allowed in the house because their "attitudes" were politically correct, received the positons assigned to them. However, I wonder if left alone could we have built our own communities comparable to other ethnic groups in this country. I wonder what would have happened if we hadn’t forgotten that we were then, as now, Black bodies for America’s economic and political aspirations. I wonder if it’s too late for our young men and women to realize, or even want to realize, that they should use their skills to help develop Africa. If so I'm convinced their reflections, although prehaps more technologically sophisticated, will never allow them to stand witness to what I’ve seen. Perhaps in Africa they can fulfill our deferred promise of America and build those communities without having to look over their shoulders for integration or incarceration schemes.

http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Prison_System/Race_Prison_Poverty.html

WRONG BELIEF, NO JOB HERE

2005-03-03T22:22:00.000-02:00

“WASHINGTON - Religious groups participating in federal job-training programs could hire employees based on their religious beliefs under a jobs bill that narrowly passed the House Wednesday.”-Associated Press

Americans must make up their minds, if they haven’t already. Do they want a country that is having its resources consolidated into the hands of a wealthy few and then leaving the shrinking middle class and habitually poor in the hands of “faith-based” organizations? Are they creating a religious welfare state, one that has concepts of knowing what is and how to be the “good” to those growing numbers of angry citizens that lack jobs and resources? Are they creating a state that is religiously chic? One that dictates, if you are not in the “fold,” you are out in the cold.

Historically government has not been the friend of people of color in the United States. We all know how the First Peoples’ no longer have any choice land or real sovereignty. (Blacks know about such historical decisions as The Three Fifths Clause, Dred Scott, Plessy and Bakke.) But most importantly they don’t have real religious freedom. The Native American Rights Fund states, "Even today, the freedom of Native Americans to practice their traditional religions continues to be questioned in the courts and discounted in federal legislation. In the past few decades, issues such as access to religious sites, the use of peyote in religious ceremonies, the process of obtaining eagle feathers for religious uses, and Native American prisoners’ access to religious articles and practitioners have all raised questions about the U.S. government’s true commitment to protecting religious freedom for all people in the U.S., including Native Americans.”

Isn’t it interesting that Black Americans are in many ways the most religious (Overwhelming Christian) people in America? Some 82 percent of blacks (versus 67 percent of whites) are church members; 82 percent of blacks (versus 55 percent of whites) say that religion is "very important in their life"; and 86 percent of blacks (versus 60 percent of whites) believe that religion "can answer all or most of today’s problems." (John J. Dilulio Director, White House Faith Based Community Programs).

On the contrary, statistics taken from the Sentencing Project show that the rate of imprisonment for black men (those who go to prison are probably the least educated, poorest, and the less likely to consistantly participate in religious rituals or european cultural values) in 1996 was 8.5 times that of white men: black men were confined in prison at a rate of 3,098 per 100,000 compared to a white rate of 370. Even more strikingly, in the past ten years the black men’s rate increased ten times the white men’s increase. (However almost all will likely admit to being a Christian before incarceration)

From my perspective, why not just cut to the chase and say if you are different then us "faith based moral people,", you can’t make it here. If you aren’t what the Christian leadership thinks is a good Christian, a "like white" Christian, a "moral" person in their eyes, then you either land in jail or probably not have you or your ancestor's religion protected or respected. Forget about finding gainful employment, after all, most non-corporate community jobs will be controlled by faith based community projects and go to the "believers" while high level corporate jobs, being highly competitive, going to those who have the “right” education and eventually, the right religious beliefs too.

I am thrown back to Nazi Germany. If you weren’t on the same page as the Nazi’s and didn't share Nazi values, you were rounded up and eventually isolated and discriminated against. As Representative Bobby Scott, D-Virginia., said, The provision would "shift the weight of the federal government from supporting the victim of discrimination to supporting some so-called right to discriminate with federal funds. That is a profound change in civil rights protection."

“If you aren’t with us, you’re against us”- George W. Bush.

I sincerely hope the Senate doesn't let this country slip any further into darkness.

http://www.dailystar.com/dailystar/news/63867.php

LET OTHER TRUTHS BE HEARD

2005-02-26T18:29:00.000-02:00

Supporters of keeping the monument on the Capitol grounds say the traditions of Western law are rooted in the Ten Commandments. America can't scrub the role of religion from its history, said Kelly Shackelford of the Liberty Legal Institute, which defends religious freedoms and First Amendment rights and filed briefs in support of keeping the monument.

"What they're really advocating on the other side is a religious cleansing from our history," Shackelford said. "It should be treated with respect as our part of history, not some new form of pornography that has to be banned from our public arena." -Taken from the article; Top Court to Weigh Ten Commandments.

I couldn't agree more that "America can't scrub the role of religion from its history" and it would be insane to do so. After all, it is American history and it is valid. But wait. Why does the connection between America's religious history and how that history is dissected and interpreted only valid when the proponents of the religion set the standards? If the religion is not presented in a favorable light, or not by "agreed upon" interpretations by those who control the religion, trouble. (I wonder if those religious folks can accept or seriously entertain the possibility that there may be a historical connection between the 42 tenets of Maat and the Ten Commandments?)

I would think anything as powerful and so well promoted as the only way to live a life, should be examined from all angles without repercussions. If religion is truth based, then there should be nothing to hide and scrunity should be encouraged, after all isn't one's religion that important? There should be no need for advertisements of the religious faith blasted all over the country, it should stand on its own merits. For those who believe, it is the truth and truth has a way of finding its way to the surface, one way or the other.

I often wonder if those pious people among the theocracy that promote, "the only way to live is their way to live" and what they believe, would be so inclined to just be silent and let their truth do the work? By this time everyone on the planet knows their story. I wonder if they will ever stop trying to acquire political power/clout, media control, and the White House to silence or intimidate opposing views? Can they forget or ignore the torments by the religious zealots like, the 250 years of the Crusades, The Inquisitions, The Salem Witch Hunts, etc., not to mention other atrocities done in the name of God, like, the taking of the Western Hemisphere from Indigenous Peoples and the slave trade.

Now if they could do this, and their views survive, then there very well may be something to what they believe.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=558&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;ncid=703&e=10&u=/ap/20050226/ap_on_go_su_co/scotus_ten_commandments

IMPORTANCE OF NEW ARRIVALS

2005-02-24T23:45:00.000-02:00

As a student of history and also a non-white citizen of the United States, I have learned to be extra cautious when the U.S. takes an interest in non-white peoples. Recently, I read in the Associated Press that more Africans are arriving in the U.S. today than during the Middle Passage. Well, I found that very interesting. Again, my knowing the history of the African slave trade, the Antebellum, Jim Crow, Segregation and the constant discrimination and isolation, even into contemporary times, would not only make me wonder, but an Einstein too.

The most striking contradiction is that this influx of “new” Blacks coincided with the massive incarceration of the Blacks already here. When I thought about this, I of course imagined the most sinister of plots. It was like the only thing they thought could be done with the “garbage” they created, whether “criminal or dissident,” was to discard it in the trash bins of society’s jails or isolation boxes. Then, they could start with Blacks who have no history of U.S. maltreatments, enslavements or debasements. Therefore they could keep their insidious history hidden from themselves and the world.

I must give credit to the majority group in the U.S. They know how to plan for the future and they know how to apply lessons learned from experience. For example, when I lived in California and then in Arizona, I found that many Mexican Americans voted to keep those “immigrants” Mexicans from crossing the border. It seems that those Mexicans who already had theirs in the U.S. didn’t want any competition from the new arrivals for the crumbs.

One consequence could be that Africans (Americans) already in America will resist the new arrivals because they feel their crumb pile threatened. They could feel they may lose some “points” from all their past suffering in this country. This may create friction between the two Africans. The majority culture may favor the new arrivals.

A more devious consequence has to do with reparations. Once the “new” arrivals have been assimilated in the country, the white majority will have a strong “Black” voice that can yell loud and clear, “We blacks don’t deserve reparations,” and by this time the new arrivals will be legitimate African-Americans. This ploy can diminish the sting of past enslavement, dilute the call for reparations, and place in the forefront a number of Blacks who can soothe white guilt thereby supporting their hypocrisy.

In my mind the final benefit for whites would be the new arrivals will demonstrate less anger toward the majority community. After placing most of the contemporary “angry” blacks in prisons, drug invested communities, and suicidal-homicidal situations, whites know that there is a good chance they will disappear within a few generations. Concomitantly, they don’t have to worry about the ten percent black “intelligentsia” because they have mortgages. The new arrivals can be the replacements players for the now dwindling ninety-percent.

When I read back through this I can understand why I made my opening statements. See, the new arrivals more than likely will eliminate much of the need for paranoia in today's Black community to.

Intelligent Design?

2005-02-19T17:35:00.000-02:00

I read in the Tucson Weekly an article entitled, “Evolution Revolution,” by Deidre Pike. What I got out of the article was there is yet another challenge to evolution and the Christian fundamentalist would like to have this idea of intelligent design taught as part of a school’s science curriculum.

When I read the article, my first thought was, what is the difference between this idea of the universe being created by an intelligent designer and it being created by the biblical God? From what I understand as the difference, the intelligent design idea, as Dembski expressed, “[Is that] the search for a designer goes deeper than science-and involves the way humans view the world.”

Ok, sort of, but do all humans on the planet view the world as being created by a God or an intelligent designer? I think not, but again, this type of myopic thinking could be cultural arrogance or ignorance. But with my very limited knowledge, let me try examining this even further. When one studies evolution there is no “search” as Dembski theorized for phenomenon, and science has not suggested that the earth, and its inhabitants, “human beings, have any real significance in the universe. So does it really matter how “humans see the world?” But just open your eyes and the universe is laid before you. One sees trees, rocks, clouds, stars, major galaxies, millions of phenomena with a plethora of proof the natural world exists, but not one single piece of proof, except in the minds of humans, that some intelligent designer created it.

If I were a person who needed to subdue and control Nature like some on the planet think they must do, then I think I would be more apt to think in terms of an “intelligent designer.” If Nature is the force and process that produce and control all the phenomena of the material world, and I would add “spiritual world,” as a human being who thrived on power, dominance and resource control, I would feel powerless in the wake of Nature because I couldn’t see myself in control. I would just be an actor with these unknown natural forces directing me. I find myself fearing there is no “logical” human order to phenomena, but needing an escapegoat for my destructive behavior towards Nature. What better scapegoat then using this intelligent designer?

How do I overcome this feeling of powerlessness? I make the director-designer a thinking entity. Then within the world view of those particular destructive humans, order and logic would be restored. There is now a point of reference. Since we know humans are able to do what we define as thinking, then this Creator, director or designer, must have human qualities. If this designer has human qualities than perhaps one day humans with a certain world view can be a director or a designer, with no bounds. This world view would allow those who believe in a thinking, logical, intelligent designer, feel more comfortable because they are not at the mercy of forces they know nothing about or can’t control.

Karl Marx once said that religion is the opium of the masses. I would say religion is just a tool to explain why the masses must be controlled. The masses can understand a thinking creator or designer, but would feel hopeless in a destructive world such as ours with only natural forces as their guide. After all who can trust Nature? Contrarily, if the masses could understand that these natural forces have always been their guide, even before the advent of religion, then the theocracy and their explanations would be useless. Again enter the intelligent designer.

Christian fundamentalist ideology has a deep seeded need to express itself, even in a limited manner. Their ideology must be accepted or it has grave social and psychological implications for those who "believe." Since the biblical story is now pretty much ineffective, intelligent design lets them keep what they consider power and legitimacy, it becomes their viable alternative. I can think of no better creation story then one that most humans can share some common ground with, yet still have no requirement for truth. That's the intelligent design theory. There’s not one human on the planet that couldn't understand a thinking and creating designer. But how does our insignificant position in the universe justify that thoughts through design or whatever, as perceived and expressed by humans, must lead to some intelligent designer creatating the universe?

From The Talk.Origins Archives: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/cosmo.html
“Evolutionists have successfully refuted the usual argument for design that is grounded on the intricacy of biological life. They have convincingly demonstrated, to any rational person, that complexity sufficient for life could readily have emerged naturally in the primeval chemical stew. However, the processes of biological evolution on earth still depended on the pre-existence, billions of years ago, of the particles and "laws" of physics.
For example, consider the calculation by astronomer Fred Hoyle, often referred to by creationists, that the odds against DNA assembling by chance are 1040,000 to one (Hoyle, 1981). This is true, but highly misleading. DNA did not assemble purely by chance. It assembled by a combination of chance and the laws of physics.
Without the laws of physics as we know them, life on earth as we know it would not have evolved in the short span of six billion years. The nuclear force was needed to bind protons and neutrons in the nuclei of atoms; electromagnetism was needed to keep atoms and molecules together; and gravity was needed to keep the resulting ingredients for life stuck to the surface of the earth.
These forces must have been in operation within seconds of the start of the big bang, 10-15 billion years ago, to allow for the formation of protons and neutrons out of quarks and their storage in stable hydrogen and deuterium atoms. Free neutrons disintegrate in minutes. To be able to hang around for billions of years so that they could later join with protons in making chemical elements in stars, neutrons had to be bound in deuterons and other light nuclei where energetics prevented their decay.
Gravity was needed to gather atoms together into stars and to compress stellar cores, raising the core temperatures to tens of millions of degrees. These high temperatures made nuclear reactions possible, and over billions of years the elements of the chemical periodic table were synthesized as the by-product.”

I’m sure the intelligent design theory is just another smoke screen for biblical creationism. To the evolutionist I say, what if what we see (universe) has always been, no beginning and no end? After all isn't time a human construct? What if the universe is being "recycled" through contraction (gravity) and expansion (nuclear force-big band)? Circularity and evolutionary. What if to understand creation humans must transfer it into human thought as needing a creator or an intelligent designer? Wouldn't that make humans the intelligent designer?

AVIAN TROOPERS

2005-02-12T16:31:00.000-02:00

Yesterday I was walking down the street and I saw two quails eating some bread crumbs someone had left for them. I didn’t want to frighten them so I took the long way around. But when I came parallel to their eating spot, one bird stopped eating and ran towards me like a true avian trooper while the other didn’t miss a crumb. I thought this brave guardian must be the male.

Then as usual I started relating this experience with other animal behavior on the planet. I saw that this behavior was not too different from the human animal and his ideas about protecting the female and by extension, the family. Of course I had to put this into the context of cultural behaviors. My epiphany brought me to my own past. I don’t remember any of the men, father, uncles, family friends, really working. They had menial jobs like driving taxis, janitorial work and numbers running, after all this was in the early 1950’s, but nothing considered, “professional.” Looking back, I wondered how their females felt. I got a glimpse of this watching my avian friends.

The basic function of the man in a patriarchal society is to protect those who depend on him for said protection. No Black man then or now is allowed to fully fulfill this basic function whether he is a “professional” or a businessman. Even the successful black businessman is not immune because he has some type of bank note from a white banker and must show some caution, although not as much as the working professional.

So where does that leave the black female who just wants to have her and her child eat while their back is being protected? I would say “loving,” but with one foot out the door.

There are so many forces that come into play when a black man wants to protect his partner. There is always the threat that the white establishment will tire of him and his income will become poverty level. There is the chance that he is under so much pressure to be a non-entity in the outside world, that he takes this frustration out on his family. Then there is the chance that he internalizes his lack to express his manhood, making the female either no longer tolerating his yielding disposition, thereby losing respect, however still needing to eat, or; she finds other avenues of escapism, but the end result is the familiar bonds dissolve.

“One wonders how long a man can maintain enthusiasm for thrift, diligence,
and hard work when the rewards so earned are denied and when the goods so
earned are stolen.”-Black Rage

How can the black female feel secure with the black man? I would say this is a near impossible situation for the long term under present conditions. Factor in that today’s relationships also cross “racial” and “gender” boundaries, that condition makes black male-female situations more acute. All this is then packaged into the idea of a “progressive” society further leaving the black female’s back exposed to many abstract dangers. Subsequently, when she does eat, she eats a ton because there’s no telling when the knife of white supremacy will be thrust into her because her natural mate is able to continuously watch her back safely. To this I say, too bad we aren't quails.

My Friend M

2005-01-28T13:38:00.000-02:00

While talking on the phone last night with my friend in New York, let’s call him “M,” he was expressing his despair about the election. See, he had gone to Ohio to work on the Kerry campaign and was so optimistic about John’s chances. When he lost the election, M was not a happy camper because he was totally involved with W’s defeat. He sold T-shirts on the streets of New York for the Democratic Party. He did all the things that the sixties generation did in past elections, however as we all know, to no avail.

M is truly depressed. I think he feels like there’s no direction except down the tubes. He, like many others in post election Bush country, are fearful, sadden, desperate, and angry. But using my usual backwater analysis of the situation, I came up with the following.

The democrats have nothing to engage the public except to be defensive about the many republican initiatives and proposals. Republicans set the agenda and the debate. They use America’s arsenal of corporate, media, and military tools to sway opinion and to get down and dirty when ever necessary. Democrats are left like a ship without a rudder, a voice without sound because they have no message except from a defensive posture parroting cognitive logical functions. They just can’t find their piece of dirt to stand aground. So how does this relate to “M?” First let me say that I’ve known M for over thirty years. He is my friend and my brother. He is white, Jewish and as we now know, a democrat.

I’ve often suggested to M that there are basically two types of people in American politics. What I’d call the cognitive logical and the cognitive emotional. The cognitive logical, as I’m sure you’ve guessed, are predominately members of the Republican Party. The cognitive emotional are mostly democrats. The Republican Party is strictly a party formulated for power through control, and achieves those goals through cognitive logical functions. The democrats are a party that tries to engage the masses thereby embracing eclectic ideas of how to share power and control, however minimally. Their functions are cognitive emotional. When one lives in a culture that thrives and exalts materialism, the Republican Party will always dictate policy for they are single minded and rooted in the cognitive logical. For example, how more "logical" can one be but to support God and Country?

Cognitive emotional people often lose focus on using resources for strict power and control purposes. Although it doesn’t seem “logical,” I believe the democrats should play to their strength and set the agenda by framing policy around the cognitive emotional and stay that course. There is no way the Democrats can subvert the Republican's "logical hold" on God or Country. But Democrats feel they must respond to the agenda of the Republican Party or they are out of the mainstream which is mostly materialistic rhetoric whether, logical or illogical.

Again, that’s a ploy of the cognitive logical and the cognitive emotional can never win that battle. After all it makes logical sense and contributes to a sense of power to be and remain the number one Country in the world, with the number one God, who knows the only and best way to live. How can the cognitive emotional opposed such an agenda? How can they justify this cognitive emotional sentiment to a country built on self indulgence and greed? How can they convice the populance that giving to some remote “rip off” social program, some undeserving gay socialist, or fund an abortion clinic which may support this abstract idea of human rights, the "logical thing to do?

Eventually M will accept that the cognitive emotional are really in the majority, no matter how the cognitive logical paint the picture. He should understand that if what we thought was sanity is to return, we must speak in terms of our cognitive emotional being. Never mind that the cognitive logical are busy honing their logical skills for the manipulation of phenomena, simple put, democrats must allow policy to be balanced between the soul and the head.

I hope M understands this and perhaps he won’t be so depressed because his feelings are from his soul which in this day and time makes him seem out of touch. In fact, I believe all democrats need to connect to their soul, their cognitive emotional. Perhaps that would remind them that real truth comes from the soul, which allows us to feel something is right. Conversely, when we formulate truth within our minds, especially when resources are involved, policy becomes corrupt and we by extension become corrupt. The cognitive emotional should use their soul to speak truth, then, manipulation through unbalanced cognitive logical means, must take a back seat to human reality.

Manipulation understands well we are still, above all else, part and parcel of this planet. This is why the Republicans use so much negative energy to stay in control, to garner power. They have no emotional truth. They are masterful at manipulating mindful things with their cognitive logical rhetoric and behavior. But it should be clear to the democrats, they can’t manipulate the cognitive emotional unless they ALLOW themselves to be manipulated. Truth is the foundation of our human being-ness. M and the Democratic Party should understand this simple fact and appeal to our humanness. Then his depression will melt away.

POWER OF THE INVISIBLE SYSTEM

2005-01-25T13:18:00.001-02:00

So many of us complain about the "System." What is the "System?" I've always wanted to know because any "System" that needs to maintain power by suppression of its citizens won't last long. History is replete with examples, Assyria, Greece, Rome, Byzantine, all dirt and dust. So before it goes, I want to know what it is. Is it a bunch of guys with Cuban cigars sitting around making plans on how much of other people's resources they can acquire without regard to how they acquire them? Is it a few people who pay other people to promote and support their position as head of the "System?" Or is it an attitude? Is the System an idea? What if the system is a thought that things must be done one way? What if it’s like a ideological snowball rolling down a hill and it catches everyone in its path. It catches those who make profit their goal, those who support them, and those who suffer under their socio-politico-economic power. It catches all, the rich, weak, and poor. I think that's it. "The system" is a big white snowball that allows no escape.

I believe no one can stop this rolling behemoth called "the system" even if they wanted too. One question would be, if someone did, who would be among the first to stand in front of this mass to try to slow its roll and risk having what they have gobbled up? We have many people standing on the sidelines throwing sticks and stones, but no one directly in its path. Other questions are, Is this snowball an idea gone bad? What will happen if the snowball keeps rolling? My thoughts are, that it will eventually feed upon itself and need to find other "economic ideological food." Perhaps the Chinese or some other stealth nation will start their own piss color snowball financed by those who created the first snowball. Those folks who only know how to create monopolizing spiritless balls called capitalism that morphs into a cannibalistic “system.” Then it will once again become this all encompassing cold mass rolling downhill until it finally reaches the edge of that final cliff and tumble into the inevitable hell fire.

Do Liberal Whites Want To Keep America White?

2005-01-23T16:32:00.000-02:00

I have viewed so many talk shows and read so many comments on the net, etc. regarding how to change the world for the better. I hear the voices of the "liberal" and "conservative"(whatever that means) whites and "conservative" blacks speaking each and every day. They speak about "democracy," "freedom," "liberty," "the good and the evil." However there is one obvious voice missing. That voice is the "liberal" black voice. The voice that doesn't echo either liberal or conservative white or conservative black views. That voice that relates to the truly disenfranchised people of color in the United States and the world.

For this reason I asked the question, Do liberal whites wish to keep America white? I won't even attempt to ask why conservative whites and blacks don't want to acknowledge the liberal black voice, that's pretty clear. They don't respect that voice. But the "liberal" whites who want a better world for all, a more just world and a world that is pluralistic and equitable, come on, they should embrace the liberal black voice.

What is this "liberal" black voice I write about? I would say it's the voice of Diop, Clarke, Yoseh-Ben, Carruthers, Wilson, Ani and so many others. On liberal talk shows, in liberal chat rooms, in liberal universities, in liberal daily life, why are these voices excluded when they too speak of a better, and more just world?

I believe these voices are not acknowledge in this culture by both liberal and conservative whites because it wants, not to just change the way whites do business, ie: deconstruction of the social-economic-political American/European matrix, but to blend another cultural element that is difficult for the European mind to appreciate or respect. However does that mean it is invalid? Does it mean it has no agency? Does that mean it can't contribute to accomplishing the implied common goal of our human existence? Does that mean it can't seriously contribute to making this a better world?

I think so. I think if liberal whites allowed these black liberal voices to be heard in their circles, the fallout from the dialog and creativity would seriously open up new avenues of thought. I think the inclusion of the black liberal voice will challenge the American socio-economic-political system as never before, thereby bringing into the discussion more than just the "colonial" parties. However this can only be accomplished if the "liberal" whites choose to truly examine their own self interest and ideology. They should be able to accept views that may not be favorable to their conventional wisdom or present worldview. They should be seriously willing to join the world and not just objectify it through their own perspective for their own gain. They must understand they are not boundless.